| Literature DB >> 29373513 |
Hannah D Holscher1,2, Andrew M Taylor3, Kelly S Swanson4,5, Janet A Novotny6, David J Baer7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Almond processing has been shown to differentially impact metabolizable energy; however, the effect of food form on the gastrointestinal microbiota is under-investigated.Entities:
Keywords: fat; fermentation; fiber; microbiome; nuts
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29373513 PMCID: PMC5852702 DOI: 10.3390/nu10020126
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Baseline characteristics of the 10 male and eight female participants who consumed control or almond diets, each for three weeks.
| Characteristics | Values 1 | Range |
|---|---|---|
| Age, year | 56.7 ± 10.2 | 32.7–72.4 |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 29.7 ± 4.4 | 21.9–36.1 |
| LDL cholesterol, mg/dL | 121 ± 22.3 | 82.5–153 |
| HDL cholesterol, mg/dL | 57.9 ± 16.9 | 33.3–85.5 |
| Triglycerides, mg/dL | 102 ± 37.2 | 52.4–200 |
| Glucose, mg/dL | 94.8 ± 8.0 | 81.9–108 |
1 Values are means ± SD.
Bacterial phyla and genera of human participants at the end of the control condition as compared to the end of the almond diet conditions.
| Almond Consumption, % of Bacterial Sequences 1 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Control (0 g/Day) | Almond (42 g/Day) | ||
| Phyla and Genera | |||
| Firmicutes | 63.9 ± 1.99 | 65.6 ± 1.51 | 0.29 |
| | 4.39 ± 0.68 | 4.61 ± 0.64 | 0.47 |
| | 4.54 ± 0.54 | 4.70 ± 0.47 | 0.65 |
| | 4.65 ± 0.70 | 4.16 ± 0.59 | 0.32 |
| | 2.09 ± 0.33 | 2.25 ± 0.30 | 0.41 |
| | 1.61 ± 0.28 | 1.69 ± 0.26 | 0.61 |
| | 0.23 ± 0.29 | 0.21 ± 0.28 | 0.67 |
| | 0.47 ± 0.14 | 0.67 ± 0.13 | 0.03 |
| | 0.49 ± 0.15 | 0.71 ± 0.14 | 0.01 |
| | 0.42 ± 0.31 | 0.72 ± 0.29 | 0.05 |
| | 0.42 ± 0.08 | 0.53 ± 0.07 | 0.04 |
| | 0.17 ± 0.18 | 0.17 ± 0.16 | 0.95 |
| | 0.54 ± 0.07 | 0.57 ± 0.06 | 0.56 |
| Bacteroidetes | 25.7 ± 2.13 | 26.7 ± 1.65 | 0.57 |
| | 19.2 ± 2.15 | 20.3 ± 1.87 | 0.41 |
| | 1.31 ± 0.23 | 0.99 ± 0.20 | 0.02 |
| | 0.03 ± 0.31 | 0.03 ± 0.30 | 0.24 |
| Actinobacteria | 5.45 ± 1.05 | 3.92 ± 0.91 | 0.03 |
| | 3.68 ± 0.85 | 2.48 ± 0.76 | 0.03 |
| | 0.14 ± 0.24 | 0.13 ± 0.23 | 0.87 |
| Verrucomicrobia | 1.45 ± 0.34 | 1.10 ± 0.29 | 0.14 |
| | 1.45 ± 0.34 | 1.10 ± 0.29 | 0.14 |
| Proteobacteria | 2.34 ± 0.51 | 1.71 ± 0.39 | 0.15 |
1 Values are least-square means ± pooled SEM; n = 15–18 participants in a crossover design. 2 Values are mean log-normalized sequence abundances ± SE. Treatment effects of genera representing ≥0.5% of the total sequences were evaluated by using a mixed-model ANOVA (with fixed effects of period and treatment and a random effect of subject).
Bacterial phyla and genera of human participants at the end of the control diet period and each of the almond diet periods, each for three weeks 1.
| Almond Treatments, % of Sequences 1 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control 0 g/Day | Almond Butter 42 g/Day | Chopped Almonds 42 g/Day | Whole Roasted 42 g/Day | Whole Raw 42 g/Day | ||
| PhylaandGenera | ||||||
| Firmicutes | 63.9 ± 1.99 | 64.2 ± 1.99 | 66.2 ± 2.13 | 66.2 ± 1.99 | 66.1 ± 2.03 | 0.68 |
| | 4.39 ± 0.68 | 4.62 ± 0.68 | 4.48 ± 0.70 | 4.40 ± 0.68 | 4.94 ± 0.68 | 0.63 |
| | 4.54 ± 0.54 | 4.60 ± 0.54 | 4.51 ± 0.56 | 5.06 ± 0.54 | 4.59 ± 0.54 | 0.73 |
| | 4.65 ± 0.70 | 4.73 ± 0.69 | 3.70 ± 0.73 | 4.22 ± 0.69 | 3.88 ± 0.70 | 0.39 |
| | 2.09 ± 0.33 | 2.07 ± 0.33 | 2.36 ± 0.34 | 2.37 ± 0.33 | 2.24 ± 0.33 | 0.63 |
| | 1.61 ± 0.28 | 1.71 ± 0.28 | 1.67 ± 0.29 | 1.77 ± 0.28 | 1.58 ± 0.29 | 0.87 |
| | 0.23 ± 0.29 | 0.24 ± 0.29 | 0.23 ± 0.29 | 0.20 ± 0.29 | 0.19 ± 0.29 | 0.70 |
| | 0.47 ± 0.14 | 0.48 ± 0.14 | 0.83 ± 0.14 * | 0.73 ± 0.14 ^ | 0.73 ± 0.14 ^ | <0.01 |
| | 0.49 ± 0.15 | 0.54 ± 0.15 | 0.80 ± 0.15 * | 0.79 ± 0.15 * | 0.76 ± 0.15 ^ | 0.02 |
| | 0.42 ± 0.31 | 0.44 ± 0.31 | 0.70 ± 0.32 | 0.74 ± 0.31 | 1.03 ± 0.31 * | 0.01 |
| | 0.42 ± 0.08 | 0.52 ± 0.08 | 0.54 ± 0.09 | 0.58 ± 0.08 | 0.48 ± 0.08 | 0.24 |
| | 0.17 ± 0.18 | 0.23 ± 0.18 | 0.17 ± 0.18 | 0.18 ± 0.18 | 0.11 ± 0.18 | 0.09 |
| | 0.54 ± 0.07 | 0.54 ± 0.07 | 0.75 ± 0.07 * | 0.53 ± 0.07 | 0.51 ± 0.07 | 0.02 |
| Bacteroidetes | 25.7 ± 2.13 | 27.1 ± 2.14 | 26.5 ± 2.30 | 25.7 ± 2.14 | 27.6 ± 2.19 | 0.90 |
| | 19.2 ± 2.15 | 20.8 ± 2.15 | 20.4 ± 2.26 | 19.6 ± 2.15 | 20.6 ± 2.18 | 0.88 |
| | 1.31 ± 0.23 | 1.07 ± 0.23 | 0.89 ± 0.23 | 1.03 ± 0.23 | 0.93 ± 0.23 | 0.13 |
| | 0.03 ± 0.31 | 0.03 ± 0.31 | 0.04 ± 0.31 | 0.04 ± 0.31 | 0.03 ± 0.31 | 0.75 |
| Actinobacteria | 5.45 ± 1.05 | 4.51 ± 1.06 | 3.77 ± 1.11 | 4.09 ± 1.06 | 3.20 ± 1.07 | 0.16 |
| | 3.68 ± 0.85 | 2.68 ± 0.85 | 2.71 ± 0.89 | 2.53 ± 0.85 | 2.04 ± 0.86 | 0.19 |
| | 0.14 ± 0.24 | 0.12 ± 0.24 | 0.12 ± 0.25 | 0.16 ± 0.24 | 0.13 ± 0.24 | 0.87 |
| Verrucomicrobia | 1.45 ± 0.34 | 1.16 ± 0.34 | 1.10 ± 0.36 | 1.25 ± 0.34 | 0.87 ± 0.35 | 0.44 |
| | 1.45 ± 0.34 | 1.16 ± 0.34 | 1.10 ± 0.36 | 1.25 ± 0.34 | 0.87 ± 0.35 | 0.44 |
| Proteobacteria | 2.34 ± 0.51 | 1.93 ± 0.51 | 1.88 ± 0.55 | 1.75 ± 0.51 | 1.29 ± 0.52 | 0.45 |
1 Values are least-square means ± pooled SEM; n = 15–18 participants in a crossover design. 2 Values are mean log-normalized sequence abundances ± SE. Treatment effects of genera representing ≥0.5% of the total sequences were evaluated by using a mixed-model ANOVA with post-hoc Dunnet’s adjustments for multiple comparisons. Comparisons were made to the control condition. * p ≤ 0.05 for comparison between the respective treatment condition and control condition; ^ p ≤ 0.1 for comparison between the respective treatment condition and control condition.