4.4 Article

Impact of cocoa polyphenol extracts on the immune system and microbiota in two strains of young rats

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF NUTRITION
卷 112, 期 12, 页码 1944-1954

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0007114514003080

关键词

Cocoa; Immune system; Intestinal immune system; Immunoglobulins; Microbiota

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation [AGL2008-02790]
  2. Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitivity [AGL2011-24279]
  3. Generalitat de Catalunya [2013FI_B1 00140]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A diet containing 10% cocoa, a rich source of polyphenols and fibre, is able to modify intestinal immune status as well as microbiota composition. The present study was aimed at investigating whether cocoa flavonoid content is uniquely responsible for these modulatory effects of cocoa, and to establish whether these effects depend on the rat strain. To this end, 3-week-old Wistar and Brown Norway rats were fed, for 4 weeks, either a standard diet or the following three isoenergetic diets containing increasing proportions of cocoa flavonoids from different sources: one with 0.2% polyphenols (from conventional defatted cocoa), and two others with 0.4 and 0.8% polyphenols (from non-fermented cocoa, very rich in polyphenols). Serum Ig concentrations, faecal IgA levels, microbiota composition and IgA-coating bacterial proportion were evaluated at the beginning and at the end of the study. After the nutritional intervention, the composition of lymphocytes in Peyer's patches and mesenteric lymph nodes was evaluated. In some respects, the Wistar strain was more sensitive to the impact of the cocoa diets than the Brown Norway strain. After 4 weeks of dietary intervention, similar modulatory effects of the diets containing 0.2 and 0.8% polyphenols on mucosal IgA levels and microbiota composition were found, although the 0.2% diet, with a higher proportion of theobromine and fibre, had more impact, suggesting that polyphenols are not the only components involved in such effects.

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

4.4
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