Polyphenol-Mediated Gut Microbiota Modulation: Toward Prebiotics and Further
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The genome of gut microbes encodes a collection of enzymes whose metabolic functions contribute to the bioavailability and bioactivity of unabsorbed (poly)phenols. Datasets from high throughput sequencing, metabolome measurements, and other omics have expanded the understanding of the different modes of actions by which (poly)phenols modulate the microbiome conferring health benefits to the host. Progress have been made to identify direct prebiotic effects of (poly)phenols; albeit up to date, these compounds are not recognized as prebiotics sensu stricto . Interestingly, certain probiotics strains have an enzymatic repertoire, such as tannase, α-L-rhamnosidase, and phenolic acid reductase, involved in the transformation of different (poly)phenols into bioactive phenolic metabolites. In vivo studies have demonstrated that these (poly)phenol-transforming bacteria thrive when provided with phenolic substrates. However, other taxonomically distinct gut symbionts of which a phenolic-metabolizing activity has not been demonstrated are still significantly promoted by (poly)phenols. This is the case of Akkermansia muciniphila , a so-called antiobesity bacterium, which responds positively to (poly)phenols and may be partially responsible for the health benefits formerly attributed to these molecules. We surmise that (poly)phenols broad antimicrobial action free ecological niches occupied by competing bacteria, thereby allowing the bloom of beneficial gut bacteria. This review explores the capacity of (poly)phenols to promote beneficial gut bacteria through their direct and collaborative bacterial utilization and their inhibitory action on potential pathogenic species. We propose the term duplibiotic , to describe an unabsorbed substrate modulating the gut microbiota by both antimicrobial and prebiotic modes of action. (Poly)phenol duplibiotic effect could participate in blunting metabolic disturbance and gut dysbiosis, positioning these compounds as dietary strategies with therapeutic potential.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".