Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T07:30:02.308Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Human gut microbiota does not ferment erythritol

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 March 2007

Eva Arrigoni*
Affiliation:
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Institute of Food Science and Nutrition, ETH-Zentrum, CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland
Fred Brouns
Affiliation:
Cerestar-Cargill R&D Center, B-1800 Vilvoorde, Belgium Nutrition & Toxicology Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
Renato Amadò
Affiliation:
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Institute of Food Science and Nutrition, ETH-Zentrum, CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland
*
*Corresponding author: Eva Arrigoni, fax +41 44 6321123, email [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Erythritol, a naturally occurring polyol, is gaining attention as a bulk sweetener for human nutrition. Industrially, it is produced from glucose by fermentation. From various studies it is known to be non-cariogenic. Moreover, it is rapidly absorbed in the small intestine and quantitatively excreted in the urine. Only about 10 % enters the colon. Earlier in vitro experiments showed that erythritol remained unfermented for a fermentation period of 12 h. In order to investigate whether fresh human intestinal microbiota is able to adapt its enzyme activities to erythritol, a 24 h lasting fermentation was carried out under well-standardised in vitro conditions. For comparison maltitol, lactulose and blank (faecal inoculum only) were incubated as well. Fermentation patterns were established by following total gas production, hydrogen accumulation, changes in pH value, SCFA production and substrate degradation. Taking all fermentation parameters into account, erythritol turned out to be completely resistant to bacterial attack within 24 h, thus excluding an adaptation within that period. Since under in vivo conditions more easily fermentable substrates enter the colon continuously, it seems very unlikely that erythritol will be fermented in vivo.

Type
Short communication
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 2005

References

Arrigoni, E, Scheiwiller, J, Brouns, F & Amadò, R (2004). In vitro fermentability of resistant starch and lactulose by faecal flora of breast- and formula-fed babies, infants, adults and elderly. Poster presented at the Vahouny –ILSI Japan International Symposium on Non-Digestible Carbohydrate,Tokyo.Google Scholar
Barry, J-L, Hoebler, C, Bonnet, C, Rival, M & David, A (1992) In vitro fermentation of indigestible carbohydrates by human faecal flora. In Internal Report to Cerestar no. 34.92.020. Nantes: INRA Station of Technology and Applied Nutrition.Google Scholar
Bernt, WO, Borzelleca, JF, Flamm, G & Munro, IC (1996) Erythritol: a review of biological and toxicological studies. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 24, S191S197.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bornet, FRJ, Blayo, A, Dauchy, F & Slama, G (1996) Plasma and urine kinetics of erythritol after oral ingestion by healthy humans. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 24, S280S285.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
European Commission's Scientific Committee on Food (2003) SCF/CS/ADD/EDUL/215 Final 24, March 2003. Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on Erythritol Brussels European Union (opinion expressed on 5 March 2003).Google Scholar
Gibson, GR, Willems, A, Reading, S & Collins, MD (1996) Fermentation of non-digestible oligosaccharides by human colonic bacteria. Proc Nutr Soc 55, 899912.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goossens, J & Röper, H (1994) Erythritol: a new sweetener. Food Sci Technol Today 8, 144149.Google Scholar
Hiele, M, Ghoos, Y, Rutgeerts, P & VanTrappen, G (1993) Metabolism of erythritol in humans: comparison with glucose and lactitol. Br J Nutr 69, 169176.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ishikawa, M, Miyashita, M, Kawashima, Y, Nakamura, T, Saitou, N & Modderman, J (1996) Effects of oral administration of erythritol on patients with diabetes. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 24, S303S308.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
ISO International Standard (1998) ISO 10504: Starch Derivates – Determination of the Composition of Glucose Syrups, Fructose Syrups, and Hydrogenated Glucose Syrups. Method Using High-performance Liquid Chromatography. ISO, Geneva.Google Scholar
Kawanabe, J, Hirasawa, M, Takeuchi, T, Oda, T & Ikeda, T (1992) Non-cariogenicity of erythritol as a substrate. Caries Res 26, 258362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lebet, V, Arrigoni, E & Amadò, R (1998) Measurement of fermentation products and substrate disappearance during incubation of dietary fibre sources with human faecal flora. Lebensmitt Wiss Technol 31, 473479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Livesey, G (2003) Health potential of polyols as sugar replacers, with emphasis on low glycaemic properties. Nutr Res Rev 16, 163191.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noda, K & Oku, T (1992) Metabolism and deposition of erythritol after oral administration to rats. J Nutr 122, 12661272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oku, T & Okazaki, M (1996) Laxative threshold of sugar alcohol erythritol in human subjects. Nutr Res 16, 577589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Storey, DM, Koutsou, GA, Lee, A, Zumbe, A, Olivier, PLe Bot, Y & Flourie, B (1998) Tolerance and breath hydrogen excretion following ingestion of maltitol incorporated at two levels into milk chocolate consumed by healthy young adults with and without fasting. J Nutr 128, 587592.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed