4.8 Article

Dietary Galactooligosaccharides Supplementation as a Gut Microbiota-Regulating Approach to Lower Early Life Arsenic Exposure

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 57, 期 48, 页码 19463-19472

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.3c07168

关键词

oral bioavailability; arsenic; prebiotics; gut microflora; Akkermansiamuciniphila

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study suggests that supplementation with GOS may regulate the gut microbiota and reduce early life arsenic exposure. Compared to the control group, mice treated with GOS showed significantly lower arsenic concentrations in their blood, liver, and kidneys, and an increase in Akkermansia and Psychrobacter in the gut.
Prebiotics may stimulate beneficial gut microorganisms. However, it remains unclear whether they can lower the oral bioavailability of early life arsenic (As) exposure via regulating gut microbiota and altering As biotransformation along the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. In this study, weanling mice were exposed to arsenate (iAs(V)) via diet (7.5 mu g As g(-1)) amended with fructooligosaccharides (FOS), galactooligosaccharides (GOS), and inulin individually at 1% and 5% (w/w). Compared to As exposure control mice, As concentrations in mouse blood, liver, and kidneys and As urinary excretion factor (UEF) were reduced by 43.7%-74.1% when treated with 5% GOS. The decrease corresponded to a significant proliferation of Akkermansia and Psychrobacter, reduced percentage of inorganic arsenite (iAs(III)) and iAs(V) by 47.4% and 65.4%, and increased proportion of DMA(V) in intestinal contents by 101% in the guts of mice treated with 5% GOS compared to the As control group. In contrast, FOS and inulin either at l% or 5% did not reduce As concentration in mouse blood, liver, and kidneys or As UEF. These results suggest that GOS supplementation may be a gut microbiota-regulating approach to lower early life As exposure via stimulating the growth of Akkermansia and Psychrobacter and enhancing As methylation in the GI tract.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据