Randomized controlled trial2018Industry fundedOpen access

Funded in part by Almond Board of California

Almond Consumption and Processing Affects the Composition of the Gastrointestinal Microbiota of Healthy Adult Men and Women: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Holscher HD, Taylor AM, Swanson KS, Novotny JA, Baer DJ

Nutrients · 100 citations

Review labels

Author industry tiesControlled feedingIndustry fundedMechanisms only

Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.

How it was studied

Design
Randomized controlled trial (indexed by PubMed)
Studied in
People
Main outcome
Mechanisms only
Intake measured by
Food provided by researchers

Who paid for it

Funding
Industry funded
Government
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Industry group
Almond Board of California
Authors
At least one author declares a financial tie to industry

Based on 2 listed funder(s) and full-text disclosure statement.

Publication

Published
2018-01-26 · Nutrients · vol. 10 · issue 2 · p. 126
Publisher
Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute
Cited
128 citations · more than 99% of similar papers · 7.8× the field average
Impact
Top 10% most cited in its field
References
43 works
Access
Open access (journal) · CC-BY
Research areas
Nuts composition and effects · Ginger and Zingiberaceae research · Peanut Plant Research Studies
Keywords
Randomized controlled trial, Medicine, Consumption (sociology), Composition (language), Gerontology, Physiology, Food science, Internal medicine, Biology
MeSH
feces, humans, nuts, follow-up studies, cross-over studies, food handling, condiments, aged, middle aged, female, male, functional food, cooking, veillonellaceae, molecular typing, dysbiosis, gastrointestinal microbiome, prunus dulcis, eubacteriales

5 authors

From US

  • Hannah D. Holscher · correspondingUniversity of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
  • Andrew Mayall TaylorUniversity of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
  • Kelly Scott SwansonUniversity of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
  • Janet A. NovotnyBeltsville Human Nutrition Research Center
  • David J. BaerBeltsville Human Nutrition Research Center

Abstract

Background

Almond processing has been shown to differentially impact metabolizable energy; however, the effect of food form on the gastrointestinal microbiota is under-investigated.

Objective

We aimed to assess the interrelationship of almond consumption and processing on the gastrointestinal microbiota.

Design

A controlled-feeding, randomized, five-period, crossover study with washouts between diet periods was conducted in healthy adults (n = 18). Treatments included: (1) zero servings/day of almonds (control); (2) 1.5 servings (42 g)/day of whole almonds; (3) 1.5 servings/day of whole, roasted almonds; (4) 1.5 servings/day of roasted, chopped almonds; and (5) 1.5 servings/day of almond butter. Fecal samples were collected at the end of each three-week diet period.

Results

Almond consumption increased the relative abundances of Lachnospira, Roseburia, and Dialister (p ≤ 0.05). Comparisons between control and the four almond treatments revealed that chopped almonds increased Lachnospira, Roseburia, and Oscillospira compared to control (p Dialister compared to control (p = 0.007). There were no differences between almond butter and control.

Conclusions

These results reveal that almond consumption induced changes in the microbial community composition of the human gastrointestinal microbiota. Furthermore, the degree of almond processing (e.g., roasting, chopping, and grinding into butter) differentially impacted the relative abundances of bacterial genera.

Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY).

Community trust

Loading…

How much do you trust this study's findings?

0 · not at all10 · completely

Comments

Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign in

Something wrong here?

Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.

Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign in

Educational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.