Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33588748›Full record

ArticleBMC microbiology2021

Age-related changes of microbiota in midlife associated with reduced saccharolytic potential: an in vitro study.

Junkui Chen, Xionge Pi, Wei Liu, Qunfang Ding, Xin Wang, Weiguo Jia, Liying Zhu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC microbiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Acetate concentration correlates with MSNA in patients with resistant hypertension.Clinical autonomic research : official journal of the Clinical Autonomic Research Society · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Junkui ChenState Key Laboratory for Managing Biotic and Chemical Threats to the Quality and Safety of Agro-products, Institute of Plant Protection and Microbiology, Zhejiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Hangzhou, P. R. China.
Xionge PiState Key Laboratory for Managing Biotic and Chemical Threats to the Quality and Safety of Agro-products, Institute of Plant Protection and Microbiology, Zhejiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Hangzhou, P. R. China.
Wei LiuState Key Laboratory for Managing Biotic and Chemical Threats to the Quality and Safety of Agro-products, Institute of Plant Protection and Microbiology, Zhejiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Hangzhou, P. R. China.
Qunfang DingThe Center of Gerontology and Geriatrics, National Clinical Research Center of Geriatrics, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, P. R. China.
Xin WangState Key Laboratory for Managing Biotic and Chemical Threats to the Quality and Safety of Agro-products, Institute of Plant Protection and Microbiology, Zhejiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Hangzhou, P. R. China.
Weiguo JiaThe Center of Gerontology and Geriatrics, National Clinical Research Center of Geriatrics, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, P. R. China. jiaweiguo@wchscu.cn.
Liying ZhuState Key Laboratory for Managing Biotic and Chemical Threats to the Quality and Safety of Agro-products, Institute of Plant Protection and Microbiology, Zhejiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Hangzhou, P. R. China. zhuliying@hotmail.co.jp.ORCID 0000-0003-2337-2950
Institute of Plant Protection · CNSichuan University · CN

Funding

Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China (CN) 2017YFD0400300National Natural Science Foundation of China 31870106Zhejiang Provincial Science and Technology Department 2018C02048
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGut microbiota is critical in maintaining human health, of which diversity and abundance are subject to significantly reduce in seniors. Gut microbiota is reported to be stable across the long adulthood in general, but lack of careful examination, especially for the midlife people.

resultsTo characterize the gut microbiota in midlife, we investigated the faecal microbiota between two groups of healthy people, young, 20-39 years old, n = 15; and midlife, 40-60 years old, n = 15. Metabolic responses of the microbiota were studied through in vitro batch fermentation model. Although no difference was observed in the diversity indices between the two age groups, a wide range taxonomic changes were found in the faecal microbiota. Furthermore, substantial Bifidobacterium reduction was also found in both faecal and fermented samples. The faecal SCFAs are similar in both groups, as well as starch fermentation broth. However, after inulin fermentation, the acetate concentration and inulin degradation rate decreased while the gas production increased in midlife group, suggesting a deficiency of saccharolytic potential in midlife, especially for non-digestible carbohydrate.

conclusionsOur data demonstrate that gut microbiota begins to change as early as in midlife. The reduction in Bifidobacterium dominates the change of the microbiota composition in midlife resulting in attenuated saccharolytic capacity of inulin, possibly leading to insufficient acetate production which might be associated with healthy problems in this transition period from young to elderly.

Indexed as

AdultAge FactorsBacteriaDietary FiberFecesFermentationHumansInulinIn Vitro TechniquesMicrobiotaMiddle AgedRNA, Ribosomal, 16SDietary FiberInulinRNA, Ribosomal, 16SAcetateGas productionIn vitro fermentationMicrobiotaMidlifeSCFAs

Identifiers

PMID33588748
PMCPMC7885556
OpenAlexW3131729967

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.