ArticlePloS one2022
Intestinal effect of faba bean fractions in WD-fed mice treated with low dose of DSS.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Probiotics and Their Functional Role in Mitigating Antinutrient Effects In Vivo-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2026Pooled it
- Sustainable AGP alternatives: a systems approach to non-antibiotic growth regulators standardization, synergistic formulation and environmental safety.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Review
- Catalpol inhibits hepatic stellate cell activation by reducing the formation and changing the contents of hepatocyte-derived extracellular vesicles.Journal of cell communication and signaling · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rodent studies have shown that legumes can reduce chemical induced colonic inflammation, but the role of faba bean fractions for colon health has not been described. We have investigated the role of protein and fiber fractions of faba beans for colonic health and microbiota composition in a low-grade inflammation mice-model when incorporated in a Western diet (WD). The diet of sixty C57BL/6JRj male mice was standardized to a WD (41% fat, 43% carbohydrates) before were randomly assigned to four groups (n = 12) receiving either 1) WD with 30% of the protein replaced with faba-bean proteins, 2) WD with 7% of the fiber replaced with faba-bean fibers, 3) WD with protein and fiber fractions or 4) plain WD (n = 24). Low-grade inflammation was induced by 1% dextran sodium sulfate (DSS) given to mice for the last six days of the trial. Half (n = 12) in group 4) were given only water (controls). Prior to DSS, body weight, energy intake, glucose and insulin tolerance assays were performed. Inflammatory status in the colon was assessed by biomarkers of inflammation and qRT-PCR analyses of inflammatory related genes. Fecal microbiota composition was assessed by 16S rRNA gene sequencing. 1% DSS treatment increased levels in fecal lipocalin-2 and induced disease activity index score, but the presence of faba bean fractions in WD did not influence these indicators nor the expression level of inflammatory associated genes. However, the mice that had faba-bean proteins had a lower amount of Proteobacteria compared the group on plain WD. The Actinobacteria abundance was also lower in the group that had fiber fraction from faba-beans. Overall, outcomes indicated that in a low-grade inflammation model, replacement of protein and or fiber in a WD with faba bean fractions had marginal effects on inflammatory parameters and colonic microbiota.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.