Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Jun 17;13(6):2081.
doi: 10.3390/nu13062081.

Effects of a Diet Based on Foods from Symbiotic Agriculture on the Gut Microbiota of Subjects at Risk for Metabolic Syndrome

Affiliations

Effects of a Diet Based on Foods from Symbiotic Agriculture on the Gut Microbiota of Subjects at Risk for Metabolic Syndrome

Silvia Turroni et al. Nutrients. .

Abstract

Diet is a major driver of gut microbiota variation and plays a role in metabolic disorders, including metabolic syndrome (MS). Mycorrhized foods from symbiotic agriculture (SA) exhibit improved nutritional properties, but potential benefits have never been investigated in humans. We conducted a pilot interventional study on 60 adults with ≥ 1 risk factors for MS, of whom 33 consumed SA-derived fresh foods and 27 received probiotics over 30 days, with a 15-day follow-up. Stool, urine and blood were collected over time to explore changes in gut microbiota, metabolome, and biochemical, inflammatory and immunologic parameters; previous dietary habits were investigated through a validated food-frequency questionnaire. The baseline microbiota showed alterations typical of metabolic disorders, mainly an increase in Coriobacteriaceae and a decrease in health-associated taxa, which were partly reversed after the SA-based diet. Improvements were observed in metabolome, MS presence (two out of six subjects no longer had MS) or components. Changes were more pronounced with less healthy baseline diets. Probiotics had a marginal, not entirely favorable, effect, although one out of three subjects no longer suffered from MS. These findings suggest that improved dietary patterns can modulate the host microbiota and metabolome, counteracting the risk of developing MS.

Keywords: adult volunteers; dietary intervention; dietary patterns; gut microbiota; metabolic dysfunction; metabolic syndrome; metabolome; pilot study; symbiotic agriculture.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study timeline. Italy, 2018–2019. The time points are grouped as follows: (i) T-15 and T-7: 15 and 7 days before the intervention (Before intervention); (ii) T0: start of the intervention; T7, T15 and T30: 7, 15 and 30 days from the beginning of the intervention (Intervention); and (iii) TF7 and TF15: 7 and 15 days after the end of the intervention (Follow-up). The validated semi-quantitative European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ) was administered to collect information on consumption frequency of food items.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The gut microbiota of study subjects at risk for metabolic syndrome segregated from those of healthy Italian controls, matched by microbiota-associated confounding factors (i.e., age and gender). (A) Boxplots showing the distribution of alpha diversity, according to the inverse Simpson index, in study subjects (dark red) compared to healthy Italian controls (grey). A significantly reduced diversity was observed in the former group (p = 0.01, Wilcoxon test). (B) PCoA plot of beta diversity, based on Bray–Curtis dissimilarity between the genus-level microbial profiles. A significant separation between study subjects and healthy Italian controls was found (p = 0.001, permutation test with pseudo-F ratio). Samples are identified with colored dots as in (A). Ellipses include 95% confidence area based on the standard error of the weighted average of sample coordinates (dark red, subjects at risk for metabolic syndrome; grey, healthy controls). (C) Boxplots showing the relative abundance distribution of differentially represented genera between study subjects and healthy Italian controls (p ≤ 0.05, Wilcoxon test).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Impact on the gut microbiota of a diet with fresh foods from organic symbiotic agriculture versus probiotic supplementation. Boxplots showing the relative abundance distribution of differentially represented taxa over time, in subjects at risk for metabolic syndrome consuming fresh foods from organic symbiotic agriculture (SA-group) (A), or receiving probiotic supplementation (PROB-group) (B). The gut microbiota was profiled at baseline (T0), after 7 (T7), 15 (T15) and 30 (T30) days of intervention, and at follow-up, 7 (TF7) and 15 (TF15) days after the end of the intervention. *, p ≤ 0.05; #, 0.05 < p ≤ 0.1; Wilcoxon test.

References

    1. Lemieux I., Despres J.P. Metabolic Syndrome: Past, Present and Future. Nutrients. 2020;12:3501. doi: 10.3390/nu12113501. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dabke K., Hendrick G., Devkota S. The gut microbiome and metabolic syndrome. J. Clin. Investig. 2019;129:4050–4057. doi: 10.1172/JCI129194. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Vishram J.K., Borglykke A., Andreasen A.H., Jeppesen J., Ibsen H., Jorgensen T., Palmieri L., Giampaoli S., Donfrancesco C., Kee F., et al. Impact of age and gender on the prevalence and prognostic importance of the metabolic syndrome and its components in Europeans. The MORGAM Prospective Cohort Project. PLoS ONE. 2014;9:e107294. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0107294. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mottillo S., Filion K.B., Genest J., Joseph L., Pilote L., Poirier P., Rinfret S., Schiffrin E.L., Eisenberg M.J. The metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular risk a systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2010;56:1113–1132. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2010.05.034. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Choi I.Y., Chun S., Shin D.W., Han K., Jeon K.H., Yu J., Chae B.J., Suh M., Park Y.M. Changes in Metabolic Syndrome Status and Breast Cancer Risk: A Nationwide Cohort Study. Cancers. 2021;13:1177. doi: 10.3390/cancers13051177. - DOI - PMC - PubMed