Wheat Bran Cereal, Human Gut Bacteria and Subjective Wellbeing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research has shown that consumption of high fiber breakfast cereal is associated with improved subjective well-being, especially increased energy. One possible explanation of these results is through metabolism by gut bacteria and concomitant production of metabolites that influence psychological and gastrointestinal (GI) welfare. This was examined in the present study to determine whether consumption of wheat bran could modulate the composition of the GI microbiota. This human volunteer study (20 volunteers) involved the comparison of three breakfast cereals, All-Bran, Bran Flakes and Cornflakes (60 g/d). The study involved a 14-day baseline phase (no breakfast cereals) and an eight-week experimental phase. Each cereal was consumed for 14 days. A seven-day washout period (no cereals) was carried out between each successive cereal condition. Faecal samples were collected every seven days. Enumeration of predominant faecal bacterial populations (bacteroides, bifidobacteria, clostridia, lactobacilli and eubacteria) was carried out using the culture independent fluorescent in situ hybridisation (FISH) technique. Faecal short chain fatty acid content was also determined. The volunteers completed a battery of questionnaires to assess fatigue/energy, subjective mood, physical and mental health, bowel function and fiber intake. The results showed that in general there was no overall significant effect of breakfast cereal type on the faecal bacterial populations studied. There was also no major effect of breakfast type on short chain fatty acid content. The high-fiber conditions (All-Bran and Bran Flakes) were associated with less fatigue, a significant reduction in cognitive difficulties, looser stools, more motions and feeling more energised.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".