| Literature DB >> 31827547 |
Takaaki Yahiro1,2, Takao Hara3, Takashi Matsumoto1, Emi Ikebe1, Nichole Fife-Koshinomi1, Zhaojun Xu4, Takahiro Hiratsuka3, Hidekatsu Iha1, Masafumi Inomata3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An alkalescent (pH 8.3) mineral water (AMW) of Hita basin, located in the northwestern part of Kyushu island in Japan, has been recognized for the unique quality of ingredients including highly concentrated silicic acid, sodium, potassium, and hydrogen carbonate. The biological effects of AMW intake were evaluated with a particular focus on its "antiobesity" properties through its modulation of the gut microbiota population.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31827547 PMCID: PMC6885775 DOI: 10.1155/2019/2710587
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Comparison of weight gaining properties between TWC and AMW groups. (a) Average weight of each experimental group from weeks 0 to 24. The blue line represents TWC and the orange line represents AMW. Values were calculated from individual measurements of body weight. (b) The average body weights of both experimental groups at week 0 were defined as 100%, and the relative ratios from weeks 1 to 24. (c) The fluctuation of body weight ratios between TWC control and AMW test groups. The values of the control groups = 100% (blue line) throughout the experiments and the relative values of AMW (orange line) are shown. The statistical significance of each criterion was evaluated by Student's t-test and indicated as p values.
Figure 2Fluctuation of weekly diet and water consumption in either TWC or AMW ingestion group. The average amount of diet consumed each week was calculated for each group of C57BL6/J mice (N = 10, kept in SPF conditions, see Section 2). Diet consumption of the control TWC (a) and the testing AMW groups (b), or water intake in TWC (c) and AMW groups (d). The statistical significance of each criterion was evaluated by ANOVA and indicated as p values.
Figure 3Effects of AMW intake on body fat fluctuation. (a) Average amounts of visceral fat (solid lines with square markers), total fat (dotted lines with circle markers), and subcutaneous fat (dotted lines with diamond markers) of the six experimental groups at week 0 = 100%, and the relative ratios at every month are shown. (b) The fluctuation of body fat ratios between TWC control and AMW test group. The values of the control groups = 100% (blue line) throughout the experiments and the relative values of AMW (orange line) are shown. The statistical significance of each criterion was evaluated by ANOVA and indicated as p values in each lower panel.
Figure 4Comparison of fluctuation in properties of gut microbiota population between TWC and AMW groups. Feces collected from ICR mice in both TWC and AMW groups were analyzed with metagenomic sequencing analysis of 16S-rRNA as indicated in Section 2. Proportions of each bacterium at the level of family identified at M0 and M6 are shown in pie charts.
Figure 5Significant shift of gut flora population in mice after continuous supplementation of TWC and AMW for 6 months. Fluctuation in the population ratio of four major families of gut flora was calculated at each time point as listed. The statistical significance of each criterion was evaluated by Mann–Whitney U test and indicated as p values.