| Literature DB >> 29124388 |
Lorenza Conterno1, Francesca Martinelli1, Matteo Tamburini1, Francesca Fava2, Andrea Mancini2, Maddalena Sordo2, Massimo Pindo3, Stefan Martens2, Domenico Masuero2, Urska Vrhovsek2, Claudia Dal Lago4, Gabriele Ferrario4, Mario Morandini1, Kieran Tuohy5.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Olive pomace is a major waste product of olive oil production but remains rich in polyphenols and fibres. We measured the potential of an olive pomace-enriched biscuit formulation delivering 17.1 ± 4.01 mg/100 g of hydroxytyrosol and its derivatives, to modulate the composition and metabolic activity of the human gut microbiota.Entities:
Keywords: Metabolomic; Olive product; Polyphenols; Prebiotic; Tyrosol glucoside; Tyrosol group
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29124388 PMCID: PMC6424929 DOI: 10.1007/s00394-017-1572-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur J Nutr ISSN: 1436-6207 Impact factor: 5.614
Fig. 1Schematic representation of study design. *At the end of the study because of antibiotic usage or non-compliance for consumption of the product, two people were excluded from the olive-enriched product (OEP) group and one from the control group
Food supplements’ nutritional value (g/100 g, mean ± standard deviation) (a) and polyphenol composition (μg/g) (b)
| OPE (g/100 g) | Ctrl (g/100 g) | |
|---|---|---|
| A | ||
| Carbohydrates | 49.2 (± 1.04) | 70.9 (± 2.19) |
| Lipids | 18.5 (± 0.40) | 8.1 (± 2.40) |
| Proteins | 16.1 (± 4.39) | 10.9 (± 0.92) |
| Dietary fibre | 13.3 (± 0.17) | 3.4 (± 0.35) |
| Salt | 0.7 (± 0.2) | 0.7 (± 0.2) |
Values below the limit of quantification are not shown
Anthropometric and clinical parameters, mean (± standard deviation), before (T0) and after (T1) dietary intervention with olive-enriched product (OEP) or control (Ctrl)
| Dietary supplement | Dietary supplement | ANOVA | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OEP | Ctrl | ||||
| T0 | T1 | T0 | T1 | ||
| SYS (mmHg) | 120 (± 11.4) | 122 (± 12.4) | 122 (± 15.0) | 121 (± 17.2) | 0.416 |
| DIA (mmHg) | 78 (± 7.4) | 78 (± 7.7) | 78 (± 9.7) | 77 (± 9.8) | 0.586 |
| WM (cm) | 84 (± 11.9) | 84 (± 11.) | 83 (± 11.7) | 82 (± 10.9) | 0.931 |
| HM (cm) | 102 (± 6.4) | 102 (± 6.3) | 102 (± 5.5) | 102 (± 5.9) | 0.944 |
| Weight (kg) | 70 (± 12.1) | 70 (± 12.1) | 71 (± 11.6) | 70 (± 11.6) | 0.974 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 24 (± 3.4) | 24 (± 3.5) | 24 (± 3.0) | 24 (± 3.0) | 0.956 |
| TC (mg/dl) | 204 (± 22.0) | 202 (± 20.7) | 217 (± 22.0) | 213 (± 26.9) | 0271 |
| HDL (mg/dl) | 64 (± 11.7) | 64 (± 11.5) | 66 (± 14.0) | 65 (± 12.8) | 0.395 |
| TC/HDL | 3.3 (± 0.7) | 3.2 (± 0.7) | 3.5 (± 0.8) | 3.4 (± 0.9) | 0.592 |
| LDL (mg/dl) | 120 (± 18.6) | 118 (± 20.4) | 129 (± 21.7) | 126 (± 24.7) | 0.378 |
| TG (mg/dl) | 92 (± 32.9) | 94 (± 36.1) | 96 (± 51.3) | 95 (± 49.0) | 0.924 |
| Apo A1 (mg/dl) | 144 (± 15.9) | 145 (± 16.5) | 145 (± 21.3) | 144 (± 17.0) | 0.636 |
| Apo B (mg/dl) | 91 (± 13.8) | 91 (± 15.3) | 95 (± 14.6) | 95 (± 17.7) | 0.920 |
| Glu (mg/dl) | 93 (± 7.0) | 93 (± 6.9) | 93 (± 10.9) | 95 (± 10.8) | 0.418 |
| Ins (mcU/ml) | 7.0 (± 5.3) | 6.1 (± 2.8) | 6.7 (± 5.1) | 6.5 (± 5.0) | 0.500 |
| CRP (mg/L) | 1.5 (± 2.7) | 1.4 (± 2.2) | 1.1 (± 1.0) | 1.2 (± 1.3) | 0.964 |
| Ox LDL (U/L) | 59.8 (± 16.7) | 57.3 (± 17.2) | 63.5 (± 17.2) | 64.3 (± 21.3) | 0.634 |
| F2 Iso (μg/24 h) | 2.20 (± 0.90) | 2.22 (± 0.84) | 2.04 (± 0.68) | 2.01 (± 0.94) | 0.739 |
p value is relative to one-way ANOVA on the difference between T0 and T1
SYS systolic pressure, DIA diastolic pressure, WM waist measure, HM hips measure, BMI body mass index, TC plasma total cholesterol, HDL plasma high-density lipoproteins, LDL plasma low-density lipoproteins, TG plasma triglycerides, Apo Apolipoproteins in plasma, Glu plasma glucose, Ins plasma insulin, CRP plasma reactive C protein, oxLDL plasma oxidized LDL, F2 Isp total 24-h urine Isoprostane F2
Fig. 2Alpha- (a) and beta-diversity (b) indexes after 16S rRNA metagenomic analysis of faecal samples collected before (T0) and after (T1) dietary intervention. Center lines show the medians; box limits indicate the 25th and 75th percentiles as determined by R software; whiskers extend 15 times the interquartile range from the 25th and 75th percentiles; outliers are represented by dots
Fig. 3Percentage relative abundance after 16S rRNA metagenomics analysis of dominant bacterial phyla in faecal samples collected before (T0) and after (T1) dietary intervention with olive-enriched product (OEP) or control product (Ctrl)
Fig. 4Difference in percentage relative abundance of relevant bacterial genera before (T0) and after (T1) dietary intervention with olive-enriched product (OEP) or control product (Ctrl). p = 0.73, p = 0.034 and p = 0.02, respectively, for Bifidobacterium, Lactobacillus and Ruminococcus genera, after comparison of the difference T1–T0 between olive-enriched product (OEP) and control product (Ctrl), according to Mann–Whitney U test. Center lines show the medians; box limits indicate the 25th and 75th percentiles as determined by R software; whiskers extend 1.5 times the interquartile range from the 25th and 75th percentiles; outliers are represented by dots
Urinary polyphenol concentration (µM) quantified by mass spectrometry and normalized according to 24-h urine volume
| Treatment time | OEP | Ctrl | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T0 | T1 | T0 | T1 | ||
| Anthranilic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 1.30 | 1.38 | 1.33 | 1.46 | 0.467 |
| SD | 0.98 | 0.94 | 0.86 | 1.39 | |
| 4-Aminobenzoic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.173 |
| SD | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.02 | |
| Vanillin (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 30.63 | 12.35 | 38.98 | 27.56 | 0.071 |
| SD | 66.66 | 21.52 | 66.17 | 60.26 | |
| Acetovanillone (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 2.66 | 2.58 | 3.13 | 2.60 | 0.435 |
| SD | 2.45 | 1.47 | 3.64 | 1.87 | |
| 2,4-DiOH-benzoic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.81 | 1.09 | 0.92 | 0.83 | < 0.001 |
| SD | 0.34 | 0.44 | 0.40 | 0.36 | |
| 3,5-DiOH-benzoic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 3.01 | 2.25 | 3.65 | 3.11 | 0.483 |
| SD | 1.93 | 1.64 | 3.32 | 2.86 | |
| 2,5-DiOH-benzoic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 2.93 | 3.26 | 2.53 | 2.26 | 0.022 |
| SD | 2.83 | 2.29 | 1.28 | 1.74 | |
| Neochlorogenic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.43 | 0.35 | 0.32 | 0.35 | 0.149 |
| SD | 0.43 | 0.31 | 0.22 | 0.25 | |
| Chlorogenic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.59 | 0.57 | 0.55 | 0.46 | 0.738 |
| SD | 0.44 | 0.51 | 0.51 | 0.41 | |
| Fertaric acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.12 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.13 | 0.475 |
| SD | 0.23 | 0.12 | 0.14 | 0.18 | |
| Mean | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.05 | |
| SD | 0.07 | 0.04 | 0.08 | 0.11 | 0.614 |
| Phloretin (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.04 | 0.02 | 0.05 | 0.03 | |
| SD | 0.07 | 0.02 | 0.09 | 0.06 | 0.214 |
| Phlorizin (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.09 | 0.07 | |
| SD | 0.16 | 0.07 | 0.21 | 0.11 | 0.368 |
| Naringenin (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.07 | 0.04 | 0.10 | 0.08 | |
| SD | 0.08 | 0.03 | 0.11 | 0.10 | 0.709 |
| Phloroglucinol (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 15.09 | 15.43 | 15.68 | 15.54 | |
| SD | 5.49 | 5.93 | 6.26 | 6.26 | 0.788 |
| 4-Hydroxybenzoic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 6.27 | 6.17 | 6.81 | 5.24 | |
| SD | 3.87 | 4.13 | 3.06 | 2.24 | 0.076 |
| Mean | 0.67 | 0.81 | 0.68 | 0.60 | |
| SD | 0.87 | 0.79 | 0.87 | 0.66 | 0.341 |
| 3-(3-Hydroxyphenyl) propanoic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 20.65 | 34.02 | 16.12 | 13.83 | |
| SD | 18.12 | 24.58 | 21.20 | 18.33 | 0.009 |
| Vanillic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 2.80 | 3.16 | 2.32 | 2.25 | |
| SD | 2.50 | 2.19 | 2.39 | 1.95 | 0.499 |
| 3,4-Dihydroxyphenyl acetic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 1.39 | 22.09 | 1.68 | 0.94 | |
| SD | 3.04 | 13.19 | 3.28 | 2.11 | < 0.001 |
| Hippuric acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 746.62 | 917.46 | 789.12 | 734.80 | |
| SD | 277.46 | 331.38 | 321.79 | 313.13 | 0.014 |
| Caffeic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.45 | 0.64 | 0.47 | 0.44 | |
| SD | 0.34 | 0.28 | 0.24 | 0.24 | 0.003 |
| Homovanillic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 20.96 | 54.41 | 21.63 | 19.62 | |
| SD | 7.36 | 21.87 | 8.12 | 8.02 | < 0.001 |
| Isoferulic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 1.45 | 1.72 | 0.59 | 0.93 | |
| SD | 3.88 | 4.62 | 0.61 | 1.76 | 0.577 |
| Mean | 2.47 | 2.35 | 1.71 | 3.07 | |
| SD | 2.62 | 2.40 | 1.17 | 6.01 | 0.901 |
| Alpha-hydroxyhippuric acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.05 | |
| SD | 0.07 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.829 |
| Urolithin A (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.26 | 0.23 | 0.49 | 0.36 | |
| SD | 0.40 | 0.58 | 1.11 | 0.86 | 0.623 |
| 3-Hydroxyphenyl acetic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 34.82 | 65.11 | 28.76 | 29.58 | |
| SD | 40.05 | 43.29 | 18.77 | 27.69 | 0.001 |
| Hydroferulic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 3.95 | 5.47 | 4.87 | 3.82 | |
| SD | 5.20 | 5.21 | 5.19 | 3.71 | 0.106 |
| Sinapic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.64 | 1.06 | 0.78 | 0.67 | |
| SD | 0.51 | 0.78 | 0.71 | 0.69 | 0.002 |
| Protocatechuic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.55 | 0.75 | 0.54 | 0.50 | |
| SD | 0.59 | 0.39 | 0.32 | 0.28 | 0.001 |
| Scopoletin (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.14 | 0.29 | 0.11 | 0.13 | |
| SD | 0.14 | 0.16 | 0.12 | 0.15 | 0.001 |
| Cryptochlorogenic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.15 | 0.14 | 0.12 | 0.14 | |
| SD | 0.20 | 0.15 | 0.15 | 0.19 | 0.880 |
| Syringic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.48 | 0.64 | 0.62 | 0.59 | |
| SD | 0.27 | 0.49 | 0.50 | 0.47 | 0.083 |
| 4-Hydroxyphenyl acetic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 109.73 | 125.51 | 96.81 | 101.87 | |
| SD | 86.90 | 65.10 | 40.88 | 57.97 | 0.290 |
Data represent the mean and standard deviation (SD) at the beginning (T0) and at the end (T1) of dietary intervention with olive-enriched product (OEP) or control product (Ctrl), and the relative p value after factorial ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction. Cinnamic acid, caftaric acid, cis-piceide, luteolin, hesperidin, catechin, epicatechin, procyanidin B1, procyanidin B2 + B4, procyanidin B3, quercetin-3-Rha, kaempferol-3-Glc, kaempferol-3-rutinoside, dihydrokaempferol, quercetin-3-glucuronide, kaempferol-3-glucuronide, arbutin, p-coumaric acid, o-coumaric acid, gallic acid, ellagic acid, pyrocatechol, urolithin B, epigallocatechin gallate, epicatechin gallate, quercetin-3-Glc + quercetin-3-gal, isorhamnetin-3-Glc, rutin, salidroside are not shown, since the levels fell below limit of quantification
Plasma polyphenol concentration (µM) quantified by mass spectrometry
| Treatment time | OEP | Ctrl | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T0 | T1 | T0 | T1 | ||
| Anthranilic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.013 | 0.018 | 0.016 | 0.016 | 0.709 |
| SD | 0.012 | 0.023 | 0.015 | 0.015 | |
| Vanillin (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.092 | 0.087 | 0.078 | 0.065 | 0.614 |
| SD | 0.090 | 0.058 | 0.042 | 0.030 | |
| 2,4-DiOH-benzoic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.007 | 0.005 | 0.891 |
| SD | 0.009 | 0.011 | 0.013 | 0.008 | |
| Phlorizin (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.006 | 0.009 | 0.005 | 0.021 | 0.974 |
| SD | 0.008 | 0.028 | 0.007 | 0.080 | |
| Pyrogallol (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.182 | 0.157 | 0.238 | 0.235 | 0.738 |
| SD | 0.319 | 0.357 | 0.584 | 0.465 | |
| 4-Hydroxybenzoic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.217 | 0.046 | 0.274 | 0.094 | 0.798 |
| SD | 0.303 | 0.086 | 0.301 | 0.166 | |
| 3-(3-Hydroxyphenyl propanoic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 1.449 | 1.614 | 2.286 | 1.735 | 0.551 |
| SD | 0.784 | 1.292 | 3.646 | 1.098 | |
| Vanillic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.041 | 0.033 | 0.041 | 0.055 | 0.689 |
| SD | 0.028 | 0.020 | 0.025 | 0.099 | |
| 3,4-Dihydroxyphenyl acetic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.010 | 0.651 | 0.006 | 0.021 | < 0.001 |
| SD | 0.032 | 0.493 | 0.031 | 0.062 | |
| Hippuric acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 11.200 | 14.524 | 13.034 | 14.003 | 0.355 |
| SD | 7.438 | 9.166 | 10.503 | 11.230 | |
| Caffeic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.024 | 0.018 | 0.013 | 0.015 | 0.651 |
| SD | 0.045 | 0.023 | 0.016 | 0.018 | |
| Homovanillic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.093 | 0.217 | 0.069 | 0.090 | 0.003 |
| SD | 0.075 | 0.135 | 0.061 | 0.057 | |
| Syringic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 0.015 | 0.007 | 0.012 | 0.032 | 0.093 |
| SD | 0.021 | 0.014 | 0.016 | 0.109 | |
| 4-Hydroxyphenyl acetic acid (µM) | |||||
| Mean | 2.327 | 1.449 | 1.140 | 1.232 | 0.525 |
| SD | 5.450 | 1.521 | 1.131 | 1.209 | 0.709 |
Data represent the mean and standard deviation (SD) at the beginning (T0) and at the end (T1) of dietary intervention with olive-enriched product (OEP) or control product (Ctrl), and the relative p value after factorial ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction
Chlorogenic acid, cis-piceide, quercetin-3-Rha, quercetin-3-glucuronide, kaempferol-3-glucuronide, t-ferulic acid, ellagic acid, protocatechuic acid, cryptochlorogenic acid, quercetin-3-Glc + quercetin-3-gal, hydroxytyrosol and tyrosol are not shown, since the levels fell below limit of quantification
Total urine polyphenols that appeared significantly different between male (M) and female (F) volunteers at the end of intervention (T1) with olive-enriched product (OEP)
| Treatment time | OEP | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | |||
| Gender | M | F | |
| 3,5-DiOH-benzoic acid (µM) | |||
| Mean | 2.89 | 1.80 | 0.007 |
| SD | 1.44 | 1.65 | |
| Mean | 0.04 | 0.02 | 0.021 |
| SD | 0.04 | 0.04 | |
| Naringenin (µM) | |||
| Mean | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.015 |
| SD | 0.03 | 0.03 | |
| 4-Hydroxybenzoic acid (µM) | |||
| Mean | 6.68 | 5.81 | 0.023 |
| SD | 2.19 | 5.12 | |
| 4-Hydroxyphenyl acetic acid (µM) | |||
| Mean | 153.66 | 105.41 | 0.036 |
| SD | 80.96 | 42.55 | |
Table shows the p values after factorial ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction. Data represent mean and standard deviation (SD) of urinary concentrations (µM), after normalization according to 24-h urine volume
Fig. 5Bacterial populations enumerated by FCM-FISH (% of total bacteria enumerated by SYBR green staining) in faecal samples collected before (T0) and after (T1) dietary intervention with olive-enriched product (OEP) or control product (Ctrl). Center lines show the medians; box limits indicate the 25th and 75th percentiles as determined by R software; whiskers extend 1.5 times the interquartile range from the 25th and 75th percentiles; outliers are represented by dots
Fig. 6Significant differences between male (M) and female (F) in percentage relative abundance of bacterial genera after dietary intervention with olive-enriched product (OEP), according to Mann–Whitney U test. Center lines show the medians; box limits indicate the 25th and 75th percentiles as determined by R software; whiskers extend 15 times the interquartile range from the 25th and 75th percentiles; outliers are represented by dots