Mathematical modeling of fluid dynamics in in vitro gut fermentation systems: A new tool to improve the interpretation of microbial metabolism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In vitro systems are widely employed to assess the impact of dietary compounds on the gut microbiota and their conversion into beneficial bacterial metabolites. However, the complex fluid dynamics and multi‐segmented nature of these systems can complicate the comprehensive analysis of dietary compound fate, potentially confounding physical dilution or washout with microbial catabolism. In this study, we developed fluid dynamics models based on sets of ordinary differential equations to simulate the behavior of an inert compound within two commonly used in vitro systems: the continuous two‐stage PolyFermS system and the semi‐continuous multi‐segmented SHIME® system as well as into various declinations of those systems. The models were validated by investigating the fate of blue dextran, demonstrating excellent agreement between experimental and modeling data (with r 2 values ranging from 0.996 to 0.86 for different approaches). As a proof of concept for the utility of fluid dynamics models in in vitro system, we applied generated models to interpret metabolomic data of procyanidin A2 (ProA2) generated from the addition of proanthocyanidin (PAC)‐rich cranberry extract to both the PolyFermS and SHIME® systems. The results suggested ProA2 degradation by the gut microbiota when compared to the modeling of an inert compound. Models of fluid dynamics developed in this study provide a foundation for comprehensive analysis of gut metabolic data in commonly utilized in vitro PolyFermS and SHIME® bioreactor systems and can enable a more accurate understanding of the contribution of bacterial metabolism to the variability in the concentration of target metabolites.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".