The Human Fecal Endocannabinoidome Mediator Profile Is Mainly Defined by the Fecal Microbiota and Diet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: The endocannabinoid system and its extension, the endocannabinoidome (eCBome), are involved in numerous biological processes, notably energy homeostasis, across virtually all tissues. While the circulating eCBome mediator profile is associated with dietary intakes and metabolic status, an important knowledge gap resides in the identification of the precise determinants of these mediators in the gut lumen. OBJECTIVE: We aimed at establishing the profile of eCBome mediators in human feces and investigating their association with circulating eCBome mediators, dietary intakes, metabolic status, and gut microbiota composition. METHODS: N-acyl-ethanolamines (NAEs) and 2-monoacyl-glycerols (2-MAGs) were profiled by liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry in plasma and feces of a cross-sectional cohort (n = 195) and a short-term dietary intervention trial (n = 21) with comprehensive dietary intakes and gut microbiota measures. RESULTS: Six NAEs and 7 2-MAGs were identified in fecal samples, but some, especially omega-3-derived mediators, were undetectable in the majority of samples. Fecal NAEs, and to a lower extent 2-MAGs, were positively albeit weakly correlated with the circulating levels of eCBome mediators. Fecal 2-arachidonoyl-glycerol, N-palmitoyl-ethanolamine, and N-docosahexaenoyl-ethanolamine levels were positively associated with visceral adiposity and with some parameters of the metabolic profile. Dietary intakes of foods rich in fibers were associated with lower fecal levels of several eCBome mediators, while intakes of unsaturated fatty acids were associated with fecal 2-oleoyl-glycerol and 2-linoleoyl-glycerol. Interestingly, gut microbiota diversity and composition were a strong correlate of the fecal eCBome profile. CONCLUSION: The fecal eCBome profile is associated with gut microbiota composition and dietary intakes, more than with the circulating profile. These results strengthen the hypothesis of an interrelation between the gut microbiome and eCBome signaling involved in the regulation of numerous host biological processes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".