1
|
Kidangathazhe A, Amponsah T, Maji A, Adams S, Chettoor M, Wang X, Scaria J. Synthetic vs. non-synthetic sweeteners: their differential effects on gut microbiome diversity and function. Front Microbiol 2025; 16:1531131. [PMID: 40443994 PMCID: PMC12119465 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2025.1531131] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/19/2024] [Accepted: 04/02/2025] [Indexed: 06/02/2025] Open
Abstract
The rising use of artificial sweeteners, favored for their zero-calorie content and superior sweetness, necessitates understanding their impact on the gut microbiome. This study examines the effects of five common artificial sweeteners-Acesulfame K, Rebaudioside A, Saccharin, Sucralose, and Xylitol-on gut microbiome diversity using minibioreactor arrays. Fecal samples from three healthy individuals were used to inoculate bioreactors that were subsequently supplemented with each sweetener. Over 35 days, microbial diversity and network composition were analyzed. Results revealed synthetic sweeteners like Sucralose and Saccharin significantly reduced microbial diversity, while non-synthetic sweeteners, particularly Rebaudioside A and Xylitol, were less disruptive. Acesulfame K increased diversity but disrupted network structure, suggesting potential long-term negative impacts on microbiome resilience. Sucralose enriched pathogenic families such as Enterobacteriaceae, whereas natural sweeteners promoted beneficial taxa like Lachnospiraceae. Random Matrix Theory (RMT) based analysis highlighted distinct microbial interaction patterns, with Acesulfame K causing persistent structural changes. Findings suggest non-synthetic sweeteners may be more favorable for gut health than synthetic ones, emphasizing cautious use, particularly for those with gut health concerns. This study enhances our understanding of artificial sweeteners' effects on the gut microbiome, highlighting the need for further research into their long-term health implications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alex Kidangathazhe
- Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, United States
| | - Theresah Amponsah
- Department of Biology and Microbiology, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, United States
| | - Abhijit Maji
- Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, United States
| | - Seidu Adams
- Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, United States
| | - Maria Chettoor
- Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, United States
| | - Xiuqing Wang
- Department of Biology and Microbiology, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, United States
| | - Joy Scaria
- Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, United States
- Department of Veterinary Pathobiology, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, United States
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Chen Z, Xiao C, Zhang J, Jian S, Li P, Lin J, He C, Chen Z, Qi Y, Shi J, Chen Q, Chen J, Bo H. The Impact of Diet on the Colonization of Beneficial Microbes from an Ecological Perspective. JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD CHEMISTRY 2025; 73:10069-10092. [PMID: 40234746 DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.5c02086] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/17/2025]
Abstract
With growing recognition of the pivotal role of gut microbiota in human health, probiotics have gained widespread attention for their potential to restore microbial homeostasis. However, a critical challenge persists: limited colonization efficiency among most probiotic strains compromises their therapeutic efficacy. This overview synthesizes ecological principles with cutting-edge microbiome research to elucidate the dynamic interplay between dietary components and probiotic colonization within the intestinal niche. This overview systematically analyzes: (1) stage-specific colonization mechanisms spanning microbial introduction, establishment, and proliferation; (2) nutrient-driven modulation of gut microbiota composition and function; and (3) the dual role of common dietary patterns as both facilitators and disruptors of probiotic persistence. Notably, this overview identifies key dietary strategies, including precision delivery of prebiotic fibers and polyphenol-microbiota crosstalk, that enhance niche adaptation through pH optimization, adhesion potentiation, and competitive exclusion of pathogens. Furthermore, this overview critically evaluates current limitations in probiotic research, particularly strain-specific variability and methodological constraints in simulating host-microbe-diet tripartite interactions. To bridge these gaps, this overview proposes an interdisciplinary framework integrating omics-driven strain selection, engineered delivery systems, and personalized nutrition models. Collectively, this work advances a mechanistic understanding of diet-microbiota interactions while providing actionable insights for developing targeted probiotic therapies and evidence-based dietary interventions to optimize gut ecosystem resilience.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zelin Chen
- School of Bioscience and Biopharmaceutics, Guangdong Pharmaceutical University, 510006 Guangzhou, Guangdong China
| | - Chuntao Xiao
- School of Bioscience and Biopharmaceutics, Guangdong Pharmaceutical University, 510006 Guangzhou, Guangdong China
| | - Jiantang Zhang
- School of Bioscience and Biopharmaceutics, Guangdong Pharmaceutical University, 510006 Guangzhou, Guangdong China
| | - Shiqi Jian
- School of Bioscience and Biopharmaceutics, Guangdong Pharmaceutical University, 510006 Guangzhou, Guangdong China
| | - Pinyue Li
- School of Bioscience and Biopharmaceutics, Guangdong Pharmaceutical University, 510006 Guangzhou, Guangdong China
| | - Jiayi Lin
- School of Bioscience and Biopharmaceutics, Guangdong Pharmaceutical University, 510006 Guangzhou, Guangdong China
| | - Cai He
- School of Bioscience and Biopharmaceutics, Guangdong Pharmaceutical University, 510006 Guangzhou, Guangdong China
| | - Zixia Chen
- School of Bioscience and Biopharmaceutics, Guangdong Pharmaceutical University, 510006 Guangzhou, Guangdong China
| | - Yutong Qi
- School of Bioscience and Biopharmaceutics, Guangdong Pharmaceutical University, 510006 Guangzhou, Guangdong China
| | - Jingwen Shi
- School of Bioscience and Biopharmaceutics, Guangdong Pharmaceutical University, 510006 Guangzhou, Guangdong China
| | - Qizhu Chen
- School of Bioscience and Biopharmaceutics, Guangdong Pharmaceutical University, 510006 Guangzhou, Guangdong China
| | - Jun Chen
- College of Pharmacy, Guangdong Pharmaceutical University, 510006 Guangzhou, Guangdong China
| | - Huaben Bo
- School of Bioscience and Biopharmaceutics, Guangdong Pharmaceutical University, 510006 Guangzhou, Guangdong China
| |
Collapse
|