Authors:
M. Chaalal Laboratoire BIOQUAL, Institut de la Nutrition, de l’Alimentation et des Technologies Agro-Alimentaires (INATAA), Université Frères Mentouri Constantine 1, Route de Ain-El-Bey 25000, Constantine, Algérie

Search for other papers by M. Chaalal in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8504-5969
,
S. Ydjedd Laboratoire de Génie Agro-Alimentaire (GENIAAL), Institut de la Nutrition, de l’Alimentation et des Technologies Agro-Alimentaires (INATAA), Université Frères Mentouri Constantine 1, Route de Ain-El-Bey 25000, Constantine, Algérie

Search for other papers by S. Ydjedd in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
L. Chemache Laboratoire LNTA, Institut de la Nutrition, de l’Alimentation et des Technologies Agro-Alimentaires (INATAA), Université Frères Mentouri Constantine 1, Route de Ain-El-Bey 25000, Constantine, Algérie

Search for other papers by L. Chemache in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
R. López-Nicolás Department of Food Science and Nutrition, Faculty of Veterinary Sciences, Regional Campus of International Excellence Campus Mare Nostrum, University of Murcia, Murcia 30071, Spain

Search for other papers by R. López-Nicolás in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
T. Sánchez-Moya Department of Food Science and Nutrition, Faculty of Veterinary Sciences, Regional Campus of International Excellence Campus Mare Nostrum, University of Murcia, Murcia 30071, Spain

Search for other papers by T. Sánchez-Moya in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
C. Frontela-Saseta Department of Food Science and Nutrition, Faculty of Veterinary Sciences, Regional Campus of International Excellence Campus Mare Nostrum, University of Murcia, Murcia 30071, Spain

Search for other papers by C. Frontela-Saseta in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
G. Ros-Berruezo Department of Food Science and Nutrition, Faculty of Veterinary Sciences, Regional Campus of International Excellence Campus Mare Nostrum, University of Murcia, Murcia 30071, Spain

Search for other papers by G. Ros-Berruezo in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
D.E. Kati Laboratoire de Biochimie Appliquée, Faculté des Sciences de la Nature et de la Vie, Université de Bejaia, Bejaia 06000, Algérie

Search for other papers by D.E. Kati in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Open access

Abstract

Carob pulp is a natural source of polyphenols, which have been shown to possess health benefits. These compounds play a crucial role in initiating, shaping, and modulating the gut microbiota. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of carob pulp phenolic extracts on nine specific groups of human gut microbiota before and after in vitro gastrointestinal digestion. The effects of pure gallic and coumaric acids were also tested. The results showed that the treated phenolic compounds exhibited inhibitory effects on the growth of most pathogenic bacteria. Gallic acid, in particular, demonstrated the most potent antimicrobial effect on Listeria monocytogenes, reducing its growth to below 5%. Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli showed a growth reduction of up to 10%. Furthermore, both phenolic acids, before and after digestion, led to a slight reduction in E. coli O157:H7 numbers. Probiotic bacteria experienced minimal decrease following exposure to phenolic extracts. However, the growth of Lactobacillus casei ssp. rhamnosus was significantly inhibited by almost 50%. Interestingly, the in vitro digestion process exhibited a stronger antibacterial effect against pathogenic bacteria compared to probiotic bacteria. These results highlight the potential of carob phenolic extracts in modulating the intestinal microbiota, thereby offering interesting prospects for the development of diet-based health strategies.

Abstract

Carob pulp is a natural source of polyphenols, which have been shown to possess health benefits. These compounds play a crucial role in initiating, shaping, and modulating the gut microbiota. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of carob pulp phenolic extracts on nine specific groups of human gut microbiota before and after in vitro gastrointestinal digestion. The effects of pure gallic and coumaric acids were also tested. The results showed that the treated phenolic compounds exhibited inhibitory effects on the growth of most pathogenic bacteria. Gallic acid, in particular, demonstrated the most potent antimicrobial effect on Listeria monocytogenes, reducing its growth to below 5%. Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli showed a growth reduction of up to 10%. Furthermore, both phenolic acids, before and after digestion, led to a slight reduction in E. coli O157:H7 numbers. Probiotic bacteria experienced minimal decrease following exposure to phenolic extracts. However, the growth of Lactobacillus casei ssp. rhamnosus was significantly inhibited by almost 50%. Interestingly, the in vitro digestion process exhibited a stronger antibacterial effect against pathogenic bacteria compared to probiotic bacteria. These results highlight the potential of carob phenolic extracts in modulating the intestinal microbiota, thereby offering interesting prospects for the development of diet-based health strategies.

1 Introduction

Polyphenols have been recognised for their potential beneficial effects on human health. Several studies have shown that the diets rich in fruit and vegetables are associated with a reduced risk of chronic diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, specific cancers, and neurodegenerative diseases (Etxeberria et al., 2013; Chaalal et al., 2016).

Carob is an essential source of phenolic compounds, which include phenolic acids, flavonoids, condensed tannins, and hydrolysable tannins. During digestion, carob phenolic extract undergoes interactions with the gut microbiota and digestive enzymes, which can lead to the transformation of some phenolics into smaller metabolites, affecting their bioavailability and potential health benefits (Ydjedd et al., 2017).

Polyphenols and their metabolites have been found to modulate the intestinal ecology by affecting the gut microbiota (Selma et al., 2020). In fact, several phenolics have been identified as potential antibacterial compounds suppressing pathogenic bacteria in the human gut (Lee et al., 2006).

The microbiome is increasingly recognised as playing a significant role in health and disease, with implications for clinical problems such as frailty in the elderly, inflammatory bowel disease, irritable bowel syndrome, colorectal cancer, and gut-derived infections (Flint et al., 2012).

In vitro digestion models used to study the modulation of the gut microbiota by polyphenol consumption are simplified systems with shorter digestion durations compared to real transit times. Additionally, these models may not fully account for the influence of complex food matrices on polyphenol metabolism and biological activity. However, the investigation of the effects of various molecules and extracts, including phenolic compounds, in vitro on gut microbiota is of great interest (Lee et al., 2006; Sousa et al., 2006; Bosscher et al., 2009; López-Nicolás et al., 2014). Building upon our previous study focused on the effects of in vitro gastrointestinal digestion on phenolic compounds of carob (Ceratonia siliqua L.) pulp extracts and their antioxidant capacity (Ydjedd et al., 2017), current research explores the interactions between phenolic compounds and intestinal microbiota in a bidirectional manner (Dias et al., 2021), as well as studies the development of the microbial world after in vitro digestion and fermentation, which contributes to the bioactivity of polyphenols (Plamada and Vodnar, 2021). Therefore, the aim of this study is to investigate the effects of digested and undigested carob phenolic extracts on selected groups of human intestinal microbiota, including probiotics, commensals, and pathogens.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Chemicals

The origin and brand of different enzymes and reagents used in this study were reported in the study of López-Nicolás et al. (2014).

2.2 Sample preparation

A quantity of 10 g of fresh carob (C. siliqua L.) pulp of the Lahlou variety (ripe stage), typically cultivated in the Bejaia area of Algeria, was added to 100 mL of acetone/water (70:30, v/v). After homogenisation, centrifugation, filtration, and lyophilisation, the dry extract was stored at 4 °C until use (Ydjedd et al., 2017).

2.3 In vitro gastrointestinal digestion

The in vitro gastrointestinal digestion method was carried out following the method described in our previous study Ydjedd et al. (2017).

2.4 Bacterial strain and culture conditions

The sources and characterisation of bacterium strains used in this study were described by López-Nicolás et al. (2014).

2.5 Effect of extracts on intestinal bacteria growth

Digested and undigested phenolic carob pulp extracts (ripe stage) were tested at concentrations of 0.6, 1.25, 2.5, 5, and 10 mg mL−1. Gallic and coumaric acids, dissolved in DMSO, were used as controls. The antimicrobial activity of all samples against selected bacterial strains was assessed following the protocol described by López-Nicolás et al. (2014).

2.6 Statistical analysis

The results were presented as mean ± standard deviation. Statistical analysis was conducted using Statistica 5.5 software (StatSoft Inc., USA). Likewise, the Principal Components Analysis (PCA) was performed using the XLSTAT software (Version 2009.1.01, Addinsoft®).

3 Results and discussions

3.1 Effect of phenolic extracts and the control on pathogenic bacteria growth

Figure 1 illustrates the effect of different phenolic carob concentrations and controls (gallic and coumaric acids) on various pathogenic bacteria growth. In general, the findings indicate that all concentrations of the digested and undigested extracts, as well as the controls, had a significant effect on bacterial growth, especially at the concentration of 10 mg mL−1. Except for Escherichia coli (EC), concentrations of 0.6, 1.25, 2.5, and 5 mg mL−1 of extracts and controls revealed no significant effect on the growth of this bacterium. From the concentration of 0.6–5 mg mL−1, the values ranged between 74.73 and 91.99% for controls and between 90.33% and 97.22% for undigested and digested extracts. At the concentration of 10 mg mL−1, the results revealed a significant inhibitory effect on EC growth, with values of 32.47, 27.32, 55.27, and 58.93% for the effect of gallic acid, coumaric acid, digested, and undigested extracts, respectively.

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.

Effect of digested and undigested phenolic extracts from carob pulp and control (gallic and coumaric acids) at different concentrations on the growth of various pathogenic bacteria

Citation: Acta Alimentaria 52, 4; 10.1556/066.2023.00172

For E. coli O157:H7, the results revealed a minimal impact of the different concentrations of extracts and controls on bacterial growth. Indeed, E. coli O157:H7 growth ranged between 88.63 and 105.18% under the effect of the controls, between 72.02 and 80.43% under the effect of undigested extracts, and between 62.99 and 84.08% for digested extract.

Concerning Enterococcus faecalis, Staphylococcus aureus, and Listeria monocytogenes the results showed that the growth of these bacteria significantly decreased with the increase of digested, undigested, and the control concentrations. Indeed, L. monocytogenes decreased from 19.44 to 3.51%, from 20.97 to 5.43%, from 33.55 to 9.06%, and from 24.78 to 6.04% under the effect of gallic acid, coumaric acid, undigested extract, and digested extract, respectively, by the increasing the concentration of extracts (digested and undigested) and the control from 0.6 to 10 mg mL−1.

Furthermore, the results revealed that increasing the control concentrations (gallic and coumaric acids) from 0.6 to 10 mg mL−1, the growth of Enterobacter sakazakii increased from 18.17 to 41.72% under the effect of gallic acid and from 13.73 to 53.65% under the effect of coumaric acid. Likewise, no significant difference was observed in E. sakazakii growth with increasing extract concentrations, with values ranging from 75.18 to 81.45% and from 64.92 to 71.98% for the effect of undigested and digested extracts, respectively.

3.2 Effect of phenolic extracts and controls on the growth of probiotic bacteria

The effects of different phenolic extracts and controls on probiotic bacteria are presented in Fig. 2. The results show a significant decrease of the growth of Lactobacillus casei ssp. rhamnosus. As the extracts' concentrations increased from 0.6 to 10 mg mL−1, the growth of bacteria decreased from 99.29 to 67.02% and from 106.51 to 91.33% for the effect of undigested and digested extracts, respectively. An increase in the growth of L. casei ssp. rhamnosus from 55.51 to 86.28% was observed with the increase in gallic acid concentration from 0.6 to 10 mg mL−1. In addition, no significant effect was observed for coumaric acid with values ranging from 71.01 to 62.10%.

Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.

Effect of digested and undigested phenolic extracts from carob pulp and controls (gallic and coumaric acids) at different concentrations on the growth of various probiotic bacteria

Citation: Acta Alimentaria 52, 4; 10.1556/066.2023.00172

Regarding Bifidobacterium longum, its growth decreased significantly from 84.66 to 77.01% for gallic acid and from 81.24 to 55.23% for undigested extracts when their concentrations increased from 0.6 to 10 mg mL−1. Furthermore, a slight decrease from 122.97 to 111.47% was observed for digested extract. Likewise, no significant difference was observed for coumaric acid with values ranging from 97.47 to 106.09%.

The results indicated also a significant decrease in Lactobacillus gasseri growth from 76.38 to 66.99%, from 89.46 to 69.58%, and from 92.27 to 70.62% when increasing the concentrations from 0.6 to 10 mg mL−1 of gallic acid, coumaric acid, and undigested extracts, respectively. A slight decrease of L. gasseri growth with values ranging from 100.27 to 96.98% was observed for the digested extract.

3.3 Correlation between the different concentration of extracts and bacteria growth

The correlation between the concentrations of the controls and extracts (digested and undigested) and the growth of selected bacteria is presented in Table 1. For the pathogenic bacteria, the results indicated a strong positive correlation between the gallic and coumaric acids concentrations and EC. O157:H7 growth with correlation values of r = 0.921 and r = 0.784, respectively. Similarly, a positive correlation was observed between the gallic and coumaric acids and E. sakazakii growth with values of r = 0.968 and r = 0.957, respectively, as well as between digested extracts and L. monocytogenes growth with a correlation value of r = 0.707. Likewise, a weak correlation was observed between gallic acid and S. aureus growth with a correlation value of r = 0.304. On the other hand, negative correlations were found between the other extracts and the tested bacteria, with correlation values ranging from r = −0.991 (between coumaric acid and S. aureus) to r = −0.349 (between undigested extract and E. sakazakii).

Table 1.

Correlation between extracts concentrations, mg mL−1 and bacteria growth, %

SubstancesPathogenic bacteria
Escherichia coliEscherichia coli O157:H7Enterococcus faecalis
Correlation coefficient (r)EquationCorrelation coefficient (r)EquationCorrelation coefficient (r)Equation
Gallic acidr = −0.941y = 6.4389x + 103.76r = 0.921y = 4,5691x + 84,029r = −0.713y = 4.7217x + 80.648
Coumaric acidr = −0.973y = 6.7118x + 99.188r = 0.784y = 1.5818x + 88.023r = −0.980y = 22.161x + 127.01
Undigestedr = −0.957y = 3.9996x + 102.39r = −0.955y = 5.6248x + 89.44r = −0.952y = 13.199x + 109.56
Digestedr = −0.847y = 3.7802x + 100.17r = −0.435y = 0.84x + 79.193r = −0.966y = 12.883x + 103.64
Staphylococcus aureusEnterobacter sakazakiiListeria monocytogenes
Gallic acidr = 0.304y = 1.2822x + 22.889r = 0.968y = 5.2822x + 14.889r = −0.958y = 4.2272x + 23.1
Coumaric acidr = −0.991y = 8.1244x + 57.25r = 0.957y = 10.289x – 2.4076r = −0.747y = 4.9599x + 33.864
Undigestedr = −0.832y = 10.998x + 82.201r = −0.349y = 0.5774x + 80.33r = −0.881y = 7.1547x + 39.591
Digestedr = −0.826y = 9.5648x + 73.051r = −0.771y = 1.3867x + 71.956r = 0.707y = 2x – 4
Probiotic bacteria
Lactobacillus casei ssp. rhamnosusBifidobacterium longumLactobacillus gasseri
Gallic acidr = 0.699y = 5.9354x + 48.698r = −0.141y = 0.5665x + 83.16r = −0.532y = 1.7142x + 80.959
Coumaric acidr = −0.482y = 2.0381x + 67.085r = −0.112y = 0.2848x + 101.67r = −0.884y = 4.4618x + 89.39
Undigestedr = −0.986y = 8.5945x + 108.3r = −0.915y = 6.2059x + 82.307r = −0.915y = 5.4651x + 101.72
Digestedr = −0.937y = 4.3785x + 113.21r = −0.636y = 2.5699x + 119.69r = −0.457y = 0.8688x + 98.411

For the probiotic bacteria, a positive correlation was observed between gallic acid and L. casei ssp. rhamnosus, with a correlation value of r = 0.699. Negative correlations were observed between the digested and undigested extracts as well as the control and the three tested bacteria, with correlation values ranging from r = −0.986 (between undigested extract concentrations and L. casei ssp. rhamnosus) to r = −0.112 (between coumaric acid and B. longum).

3.4 Principal components analysis (PCA)

Figure 3 presents the biplots of the PCA of carob phenolic extracts and controls at different concentrations (0.6, 1.25, 2.5, 5, and 10 mg mL−1). The PCA plots accounted for 89.41%, 86.24%, 89.01%, 83.90%, and 76.76% of the variability in the dataset, respectively.

Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.

Principal component analysis of the effect of carob phenolic extract (digested and undigested) and controls (gallic and coumaric acids) at different concentrations on the growth of pathogenic and probiotic bacteria. (a): 0.6 mg mL−1, (b): 1.25 mg mL−1, (c): 2.5 mg mL−1, (d): 5 mg mL−1, (e): 10 mg mL−1

Citation: Acta Alimentaria 52, 4; 10.1556/066.2023.00172

The results indicated that a concentration of 0.6 mg mL−1 of gallic and coumaric acids resulted in very low growth rates for all tested bacteria except for E.C. and E.C. O157:H7, which exhibited a high growth rate. After digestion, it became evident that the growth rate of beneficial bacteria (L. casei ssp. rhamnosus, L. gasseri, and B. longum) increased significantly. However, the growth of pathogenic bacteria such as S. aureus and E. faecalis, was slightly inhibited resulting in moderate growth rates. When the concentration of these compounds increased to 1.25 mg mL−1 and after digestion, it was observed that while the E.C. O157:H7 growth slowed down, the growth of the beneficial bacteria (L. casei ssp. rhamnosus and L. gasseri) accelerated exhibiting very high growth rates.

At higher concentrations (>2.5 mg mL−1), the results clearly demonstrated that after digestion, the three beneficial bacteria exhibited remarkably high growth rates, while the pathogenic bacteria a decline most notably for Listeria moncytogenes. These findings are very promising and suggest potential positive effects of the digested extract.

3.5 Discussions

The effects of phenolic compounds on the intestinal microbiota are attributed to their influence on the growth, metabolism, and membrane functioning of bacterial cells (Plamada and Vodnar, 2021). In this study, the carob pulp phenolic extract exhibited inhibitory effects on most pathogenic bacteria compared to probiotic bacteria. Indeed, gallic acid demonstrated the strongest antimicrobial effect on L. monocytogenes, and both phenolic compounds reduced S. aureus and E. faecalis growth. Previous studies have also highlighted the inhibitory effects of gallic acid on Gram-positive bacteria (Rua et al., 2011; López-Nicolás et al., 2014), while cinnamon, known for its richness in coumaric acid, has shown significant effects against Gram-positive bacteria such as S. aureus (Nazhand et al., 2020; Krautkramer et al., 2021). Studies on red wine polyphenols have shown changes in the E. faecalis growth (Cueva et al., 2017; Gil-Sánchez et al., 2018). Phenolic compounds have also exhibited inhibitory activity against E. sakazakii and E. coli, as reported by Requena et al. (2010). The observed differences in the growth of pathogenic bacteria, especially L. monocytogenes, could be attributed to several factors, including variations in culture preparation, differences in strain response, and environmental factors such as temperature and pH, nutrient availability, and oxygen levels. Small differences in these conditions between experiments could impact the observed growth inhibition.

Regarding probiotic bacteria, the inhibitory effects of phenolic compounds were not significant against tested lactic acid bacteria. B. longum and L. gasseri showed minimal reductions, while a limited antimicrobial effect of phenolic compounds, not exceeding 50%, was observed for L. casei ssp. rhamnosus, which is particularly sensitive to phenolic compounds (Puupponen-Pimiä et al., 2001). Generally, probiotic bacteria exhibit higher resistance to polyphenols compared to pathogenic bacteria (Parkar et al., 2008). Coumaric and gallic acid have been shown to promote the growth of bifidobacteria and lactobacilli, while phenolic acids have properties that improve the growth of probiotic bacteria and gut microbiota (Gowd et al., 2019; Liu et al., 2019; Dias et al., 2021). These findings are consistent with the observations of Pozuelo et al. (2012), who reported that a phenolic extract from red grapes or grape seeds had several advantages on L. gasseri growth.

Furthermore, it was observed that most pathogenic bacteria had increased growth rates, except for E. coli O157:H7, which experienced a slowdown in its development. On the other hand, probiotic bacteria exhibited higher growth rates. These findings align with the research conducted by Sáyago-Ayerdi et al. (2021). Moreover, another in vitro study demonstrated that the addition of red wine polyphenols exerted an antimicrobial effect on the intestinal microbiota (Barroso et al., 2014).

The in vitro digestion leads to bioconversion of phenolic compounds into smaller metabolites, such as phenolic acids. In fact, the increase in naringenin concentration after digestion of carob pulp extracts can be attributed to the transformation of apigenin into naringenin, as reported by Hanske (2009). To better understand this bioconversion, in vivo studies using animal models or human trials are necessary. These studies can provide insights into the complex interactions between phenolic compounds, gut microbiota, and host factors, which play a critical role in determining the ultimate bioactivity and health effects of these compounds.

4 Conclusions

The phenolic compounds present in carob pulp (before and after digestion) have demonstrated beneficial effects on the intestinal microbiota, specifically on both pathogenic and probiotic bacteria. In the case of pathogenic bacteria, gallic acid has shown the most effective inhibitory effect, reducing the growth of L. monocytogenes to below 5%, while S. aureus and E. coli experienced a growth reduction of up to 10% at known concentrations. Likewise, E. faecalis growth was reduced up to 30%. furthermore, E. coli O157:H7 growth was only slightly inhibited by digested and undigested extracts. On the other hand, lactic acid bacteria, which include probiotic bacteria, were generally unaffected by the phenolic compounds. As a result, the growth of probiotic bacteria was only slightly reduced, and the digestion process exhibited a more pronounced antimicrobial effect on pathogenic bacteria compared to probiotic bacteria.

Acknowledgements

The present research was performed under the financial support of the Algerian Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research in collaboration with the Human Nutrition and Food Science Research Group (NUTBRO) of the University of Murcia (Spain) (E098-02) and Ministerio de Economıa y Competitividad (Spain) through the Project ́AGL2016-78125-R.

References

  • Barroso, E., Van de Wiele, T., Jiménez-Girón, A., Muñoz-González, I., Martín-Alvarez, P.J., Moreno-Arribas, M.V., Bartolomé, B., Peláez, C., Martínez-Cuesta, M.C., and Requena, T. (2014). Lactobacillus plantarum IFPL935 impacts colonic metabolism in a simulator of the human gut microbiota during feeding with red wine polyphenols. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 98(15): 68056815.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bosscher, D., Breynaert, A., Pieters, L., and Hermans, N. (2009). Food-based strategies to modulate the composition of the microbiota and their associated health effects. Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology/Polish Physiological Society.-Kraków, 60(Suppl 6): 511.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Chaalal, M., Gavilán, E., Louaileche, H., Ruano, D., Parrado, J., and Castaño, A. (2016). Anti-inflammatory activity of phenolic extracts from different parts of prickly pear on lipopolysaccharide-stimulated N13 microglial cells. International Journal of Phytomedicine, 7: 411419.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cueva, C., Gil-Sánchez, I., Ayuda-Durán, B., González-Manzano, S., González-Paramás, A.M., Santos-Buelga, C., Bartolomé, B., and Moreno-Arribas, M.V. (2017). An integrated view of the effects of wine polyphenols and their relevant metabolites on gut and host health. Molecules, 22(1): 99.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dias, R., Pereira, C.B., Pérez-Gregorio, R., Mateus, N., and Freitas, V. (2021). Recent advances on dietary polyphenol’s potential roles in celiac disease. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 107: 213225.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Etxeberria, U., Fernández-Quintela, A., Milagro, F.I., Aguirre, L., Martínez, J.A., and Portillo, M.P. (2013). Impact of polyphenols and polyphenol-rich dietary sources on gut microbiota composition. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 61(40): 95179533.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Flint, H.J., Scott, K.P., Louis, P., and Duncan, S.H. (2012). The role of the gut microbiota in nutrition and health. Nature Reviews. Gastroenterology & Hepatology, 9(10): 577589.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gil-Sánchez, I., Cueva, C., Sanz-Buenhombre, M., Guadarrama, A., Moreno-Arribas, M.V., and Bartolomé, B. (2018). Dynamic gastrointestinal digestion of grape pomace extracts: bioaccessible phenolic metabolites and impact on human gut microbiota. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 68: 4152.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gowd, V., Karim, N., Shishir, M.R.I., Xie, L., and Chen, W. (2019). Dietary polyphenols to combat the metabolic diseases via altering gut microbiota. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 93: 8193.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hanske, L., Loh, G., Sczesny, S., Blaut, M., and Braune, A. (2009). The bioavailability of apigenin-7-glucoside is influenced by human intestinal microbiota in rats. Journal of Nutrition, 139(6): 10951102.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Krautkramer, K.A., Fan, J., and Bäckhed, F. (2021). Gut microbial metabolites as multi-kingdom intermediates. Nature Reviews Microbiology, 19: 7794.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lee, H.C., Jenner, A.M., Low, C.S., and Lee, Y.K. (2006). Effect of tea phenolics and their aromatic fecal bacterial metabolites on intestinal microbiota. Research in Microbiology, 157(9): 876884.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Liu, S., Jia, M., Chen, J., Wan, H., Dong, R., Nie, S., Xie, M., and Yu, Q. (2019). Removal of bound polyphenols and its effect on antioxidant and prebiotics properties of carrot dietary fiber. Food Hydrocolloids, 93: 284292.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • López-Nicolás, R., González-Bermúdez, C.A., Ros-Berruezo, G., and Frontela-Saseta, C. (2014). Influence of in vitro gastrointestinal digestion of fruit juices enriched with pine bark extract on intestinal microflora. Food Chemistry, 157: 1419.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Nazhand, A., Souto, E.B., Lucarini, M., Souto, S.B., Durazzo, A., and Santini, A. (2020). Ready to use therapeutical beverages: focus on functional beverages containing probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics. Beverages, 6(2): 26.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Parkar, S.G., Stevenson, D.E., and Skinner, M.A. (2008). The potential influence of fruit polyphenols on colonic microflora and human gut health. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 124(3): 295298.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Plamada, D. and Vodnar, D.C. (2021). Polyphenols – gut microbiota interrelationship: a transition to a new generation of prebiotics. Nutrients, 14(1): 137.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Pozuelo, M.J., Agis-Torres, A., Hervert-Hernández, D., López-Oliva, E.M., Muñoz-Martínez, E., Rotger, R., and Goni, I. (2012). Grape antioxidant dietary fiber stimulates Lactobacillus growth in rat cecum. Journal of Food Science, 77(2): H59H62.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Puupponen-Pimiä, R., Nohynek, L., Meier, C., Kähkönen, M., Heinonen, M., Hopia, A., and Oksman-Caldentey, K.-M. (2001). Antimicrobial properties of phenolic compounds from berries. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 90(4): 494507.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Requena, T., Monagas, M., Pozo-Bayón, M.A., Martín-Álvarez, P.J., Bartolomé, B., Del Campo, R., Ávila, M., Martínez-Cuesta, M.C., Peláez, C., and Moreno-Arribas, M.V. (2010). Perspectives of the potential implications of wine polyphenols on human oral and gut microbiota. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 21(7): 332344.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Rua, J., Fernandez-Alvarez, L., de Castro, C., Del Valle, P., de Arriaga, D., and García-Armesto, M.R. (2011). Antibacterial activity against foodborne Staphylococcus aureus and antioxidant capacity of various pure phenolic compounds. Foodborne Pathogens and Disease, 8(1): 149157.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sáyago-Ayerdi, S.G., Venema, K., Tabernero, M., Sarriá, B., Bravo, L.L., and Mateos, R. (2021). Bioconversion by gut microbiota of predigested mango (Mangifera indica L)‘Ataulfo’peel polyphenols assessed in a dynamic (TIM-2) in vitro model of the human colon. Food Research International, 139: 109963.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Selma, M.V., Tomás-Barberán, F.A., Romo-Vaquero, M., Cortés-Martín, A., and Espín, J.C. (2020). Understanding polyphenols’ health effects through the gut microbiota. In: Tomás-Barberán, F.A., González-Sarrías, A., and García-Villalba, R. (Eds.), Dietary polyphenols: their metabolism and health effects. Wiley and Sons, Inc. pp. 497531.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sousa, A., Ferreira, I.C., Calhelha, R., Andrade, P.B., Valentão, P., Seabra, R., Estevinho, L., Bento, A., and Pereira, J.A. (2006). Phenolics and antimicrobial activity of traditional stoned table olives ‘alcaparra’. Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry, 14(24): 85338538.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ydjedd, S., Bouriche, S., López-Nicolás, R., Sánchez-Moya, T., Frontela-Saseta, C., Ros-Berruezo, G., Rezgui, F., Louaileche, H., and Kati, D.-E. (2017). Effect of in vitro gastrointestinal digestion on encapsulated and nonencapsulated phenolic compounds of carob (Ceratonia siliqua L.) pulp extracts and their antioxidant capacity. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 65(4): 827835.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Barroso, E., Van de Wiele, T., Jiménez-Girón, A., Muñoz-González, I., Martín-Alvarez, P.J., Moreno-Arribas, M.V., Bartolomé, B., Peláez, C., Martínez-Cuesta, M.C., and Requena, T. (2014). Lactobacillus plantarum IFPL935 impacts colonic metabolism in a simulator of the human gut microbiota during feeding with red wine polyphenols. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 98(15): 68056815.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bosscher, D., Breynaert, A., Pieters, L., and Hermans, N. (2009). Food-based strategies to modulate the composition of the microbiota and their associated health effects. Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology/Polish Physiological Society.-Kraków, 60(Suppl 6): 511.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Chaalal, M., Gavilán, E., Louaileche, H., Ruano, D., Parrado, J., and Castaño, A. (2016). Anti-inflammatory activity of phenolic extracts from different parts of prickly pear on lipopolysaccharide-stimulated N13 microglial cells. International Journal of Phytomedicine, 7: 411419.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cueva, C., Gil-Sánchez, I., Ayuda-Durán, B., González-Manzano, S., González-Paramás, A.M., Santos-Buelga, C., Bartolomé, B., and Moreno-Arribas, M.V. (2017). An integrated view of the effects of wine polyphenols and their relevant metabolites on gut and host health. Molecules, 22(1): 99.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dias, R., Pereira, C.B., Pérez-Gregorio, R., Mateus, N., and Freitas, V. (2021). Recent advances on dietary polyphenol’s potential roles in celiac disease. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 107: 213225.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Etxeberria, U., Fernández-Quintela, A., Milagro, F.I., Aguirre, L., Martínez, J.A., and Portillo, M.P. (2013). Impact of polyphenols and polyphenol-rich dietary sources on gut microbiota composition. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 61(40): 95179533.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Flint, H.J., Scott, K.P., Louis, P., and Duncan, S.H. (2012). The role of the gut microbiota in nutrition and health. Nature Reviews. Gastroenterology & Hepatology, 9(10): 577589.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gil-Sánchez, I., Cueva, C., Sanz-Buenhombre, M., Guadarrama, A., Moreno-Arribas, M.V., and Bartolomé, B. (2018). Dynamic gastrointestinal digestion of grape pomace extracts: bioaccessible phenolic metabolites and impact on human gut microbiota. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 68: 4152.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gowd, V., Karim, N., Shishir, M.R.I., Xie, L., and Chen, W. (2019). Dietary polyphenols to combat the metabolic diseases via altering gut microbiota. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 93: 8193.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hanske, L., Loh, G., Sczesny, S., Blaut, M., and Braune, A. (2009). The bioavailability of apigenin-7-glucoside is influenced by human intestinal microbiota in rats. Journal of Nutrition, 139(6): 10951102.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Krautkramer, K.A., Fan, J., and Bäckhed, F. (2021). Gut microbial metabolites as multi-kingdom intermediates. Nature Reviews Microbiology, 19: 7794.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lee, H.C., Jenner, A.M., Low, C.S., and Lee, Y.K. (2006). Effect of tea phenolics and their aromatic fecal bacterial metabolites on intestinal microbiota. Research in Microbiology, 157(9): 876884.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Liu, S., Jia, M., Chen, J., Wan, H., Dong, R., Nie, S., Xie, M., and Yu, Q. (2019). Removal of bound polyphenols and its effect on antioxidant and prebiotics properties of carrot dietary fiber. Food Hydrocolloids, 93: 284292.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • López-Nicolás, R., González-Bermúdez, C.A., Ros-Berruezo, G., and Frontela-Saseta, C. (2014). Influence of in vitro gastrointestinal digestion of fruit juices enriched with pine bark extract on intestinal microflora. Food Chemistry, 157: 1419.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Nazhand, A., Souto, E.B., Lucarini, M., Souto, S.B., Durazzo, A., and Santini, A. (2020). Ready to use therapeutical beverages: focus on functional beverages containing probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics. Beverages, 6(2): 26.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Parkar, S.G., Stevenson, D.E., and Skinner, M.A. (2008). The potential influence of fruit polyphenols on colonic microflora and human gut health. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 124(3): 295298.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Plamada, D. and Vodnar, D.C. (2021). Polyphenols – gut microbiota interrelationship: a transition to a new generation of prebiotics. Nutrients, 14(1): 137.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Pozuelo, M.J., Agis-Torres, A., Hervert-Hernández, D., López-Oliva, E.M., Muñoz-Martínez, E., Rotger, R., and Goni, I. (2012). Grape antioxidant dietary fiber stimulates Lactobacillus growth in rat cecum. Journal of Food Science, 77(2): H59H62.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Puupponen-Pimiä, R., Nohynek, L., Meier, C., Kähkönen, M., Heinonen, M., Hopia, A., and Oksman-Caldentey, K.-M. (2001). Antimicrobial properties of phenolic compounds from berries. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 90(4): 494507.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Requena, T., Monagas, M., Pozo-Bayón, M.A., Martín-Álvarez, P.J., Bartolomé, B., Del Campo, R., Ávila, M., Martínez-Cuesta, M.C., Peláez, C., and Moreno-Arribas, M.V. (2010). Perspectives of the potential implications of wine polyphenols on human oral and gut microbiota. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 21(7): 332344.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Rua, J., Fernandez-Alvarez, L., de Castro, C., Del Valle, P., de Arriaga, D., and García-Armesto, M.R. (2011). Antibacterial activity against foodborne Staphylococcus aureus and antioxidant capacity of various pure phenolic compounds. Foodborne Pathogens and Disease, 8(1): 149157.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sáyago-Ayerdi, S.G., Venema, K., Tabernero, M., Sarriá, B., Bravo, L.L., and Mateos, R. (2021). Bioconversion by gut microbiota of predigested mango (Mangifera indica L)‘Ataulfo’peel polyphenols assessed in a dynamic (TIM-2) in vitro model of the human colon. Food Research International, 139: 109963.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Selma, M.V., Tomás-Barberán, F.A., Romo-Vaquero, M., Cortés-Martín, A., and Espín, J.C. (2020). Understanding polyphenols’ health effects through the gut microbiota. In: Tomás-Barberán, F.A., González-Sarrías, A., and García-Villalba, R. (Eds.), Dietary polyphenols: their metabolism and health effects. Wiley and Sons, Inc. pp. 497531.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sousa, A., Ferreira, I.C., Calhelha, R., Andrade, P.B., Valentão, P., Seabra, R., Estevinho, L., Bento, A., and Pereira, J.A. (2006). Phenolics and antimicrobial activity of traditional stoned table olives ‘alcaparra’. Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry, 14(24): 85338538.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ydjedd, S., Bouriche, S., López-Nicolás, R., Sánchez-Moya, T., Frontela-Saseta, C., Ros-Berruezo, G., Rezgui, F., Louaileche, H., and Kati, D.-E. (2017). Effect of in vitro gastrointestinal digestion on encapsulated and nonencapsulated phenolic compounds of carob (Ceratonia siliqua L.) pulp extracts and their antioxidant capacity. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 65(4): 827835.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Collapse
  • Expand

 

The author instruction is available in PDF.
Please, download the file from HERE.

Senior editors

Editor(s)-in-Chief: András Salgó

Co-ordinating Editor(s) Marianna Tóth-Markus

Co-editor(s): A. Halász

       Editorial Board

  • L. Abrankó (Szent István University, Gödöllő, Hungary)
  • D. Bánáti (University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary)
  • J. Baranyi (Institute of Food Research, Norwich, UK)
  • I. Bata-Vidács (Agro-Environmental Research Institute, National Agricultural Research and Innovation Centre, Budapest, Hungary)
  • F. Békés (FBFD PTY LTD, Sydney, NSW Australia)
  • Gy. Biró (National Institute for Food and Nutrition Science, Budapest, Hungary)
  • A. Blázovics (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
  • F. Capozzi (University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy)
  • M. Carcea (Research Centre for Food and Nutrition, Council for Agricultural Research and Economics Rome, Italy)
  • Zs. Cserhalmi (Food Science Research Institute, National Agricultural Research and Innovation Centre, Budapest, Hungary)
  • M. Dalla Rosa (University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy)
  • I. Dalmadi (Szent István University, Budapest, Hungary)
  • K. Demnerova (University of Chemistry and Technology, Prague, Czech Republic)
  • M. Dobozi King (Texas A&M University, Texas, USA)
  • Muying Du (Southwest University in Chongqing, Chongqing, China)
  • S. N. El (Ege University, Izmir, Turkey)
  • S. B. Engelsen (University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark)
  • E. Gelencsér (Food Science Research Institute, National Agricultural Research and Innovation Centre, Budapest, Hungary)
  • V. M. Gómez-López (Universidad Católica San Antonio de Murcia, Murcia, Spain)
  • J. Hardi (University of Osijek, Osijek, Croatia)
  • H. He (Henan Institute of Science and Technology, Xinxiang, China)
  • K. Héberger (Research Centre for Natural Sciences, ELKH, Budapest, Hungary)
  • N. Ilić (University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad, Serbia)
  • D. Knorr (Technische Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany)
  • H. Köksel (Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey)
  • K. Liburdi (Tuscia University, Viterbo, Italy)
  • M. Lindhauer (Max Rubner Institute, Detmold, Germany)
  • M.-T. Liong (Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia)
  • M. Manley (Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa)
  • M. Mézes (Szent István University, Gödöllő, Hungary)
  • Á. Németh (Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary)
  • P. Ng (Michigan State University,  Michigan, USA)
  • Q. D. Nguyen (Szent István University, Budapest, Hungary)
  • L. Nyström (ETH Zürich, Switzerland)
  • L. Perez (University of Cordoba, Cordoba, Spain)
  • V. Piironen (University of Helsinki, Finland)
  • A. Pino (University of Catania, Catania, Italy)
  • M. Rychtera (University of Chemistry and Technology, Prague, Czech Republic)
  • K. Scherf (Technical University, Munich, Germany)
  • R. Schönlechner (University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria)
  • A. Sharma (Department of Atomic Energy, Delhi, India)
  • A. Szarka (Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary)
  • M. Szeitzné Szabó (National Food Chain Safety Office, Budapest, Hungary)
  • S. Tömösközi (Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary)
  • L. Varga (University of West Hungary, Mosonmagyaróvár, Hungary)
  • R. Venskutonis (Kaunas University of Technology, Kaunas, Lithuania)
  • B. Wróblewska (Institute of Animal Reproduction and Food Research, Polish Academy of Sciences Olsztyn, Poland)

 

Acta Alimentaria
E-mail: Acta.Alimentaria@uni-mate.hu

Indexing and Abstracting Services:

  • Biological Abstracts
  • BIOSIS Previews
  • CAB Abstracts
  • CABELLS Journalytics
  • Chemical Abstracts
  • Current Contents: Agriculture, Biology and Environmental Sciences
  • Elsevier Science Navigator
  • Essential Science Indicators
  • Global Health
  • Index Veterinarius
  • Science Citation Index
  • Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch)
  • SCOPUS
  • The ISI Alerting Services

2022  
Web of Science  
Total Cites
WoS
892
Journal Impact Factor 1.1
Rank by Impact Factor

Food Science and Technology (Q4)
Nutrition and Dietetics (Q4)

Impact Factor
without
Journal Self Cites
1.1
5 Year
Impact Factor
1
Journal Citation Indicator 0.22
Rank by Journal Citation Indicator

Food Science and Technology (Q4)
Nutrition and Dietetics (Q4)

Scimago  
Scimago
H-index
32
Scimago
Journal Rank
0.231
Scimago Quartile Score

Food Science (Q3)

Scopus  
Scopus
Cite Score
1.7
Scopus
CIte Score Rank
Food Science 225/359 (37th PCTL)
Scopus
SNIP
0.408

2021  
Web of Science  
Total Cites
WoS
856
Journal Impact Factor 1,000
Rank by Impact Factor Food Science & Technology 130/143
Nutrition & Dietetics 81/90
Impact Factor
without
Journal Self Cites
0,941
5 Year
Impact Factor
1,039
Journal Citation Indicator 0,19
Rank by Journal Citation Indicator Food Science & Technology 143/164
Nutrition & Dietetics 92/109
Scimago  
Scimago
H-index
30
Scimago
Journal Rank
0,235
Scimago Quartile Score

Food Science (Q3)

Scopus  
Scopus
Cite Score
1,4
Scopus
CIte Score Rank
Food Sciences 222/338 (Q3)
Scopus
SNIP
0,387

 

2020
 
Total Cites
768
WoS
Journal
Impact Factor
0,650
Rank by
Nutrition & Dietetics 79/89 (Q4)
Impact Factor
Food Science & Technology 130/144 (Q4)
Impact Factor
0,575
without
Journal Self Cites
5 Year
0,899
Impact Factor
Journal
0,17
Citation Indicator
 
Rank by Journal
Nutrition & Dietetics 88/103 (Q4)
Citation Indicator
Food Science & Technology 142/160 (Q4)
Citable
59
Items
Total
58
Articles
Total
1
Reviews
Scimago
28
H-index
Scimago
0,237
Journal Rank
Scimago
Food Science Q3
Quartile Score
 
Scopus
248/238=1,0
Scite Score
 
Scopus
Food Science 216/310 (Q3)
Scite Score Rank
 
Scopus
0,349
SNIP
 
Days from
100
submission
 
to acceptance
 
Days from
143
acceptance
 
to publication
 
Acceptance
16%
Rate
2019  
Total Cites
WoS
522
Impact Factor 0,458
Impact Factor
without
Journal Self Cites
0,433
5 Year
Impact Factor
0,503
Immediacy
Index
0,100
Citable
Items
60
Total
Articles
59
Total
Reviews
1
Cited
Half-Life
7,8
Citing
Half-Life
9,8
Eigenfactor
Score
0,00034
Article Influence
Score
0,077
% Articles
in
Citable Items
98,33
Normalized
Eigenfactor
0,04267
Average
IF
Percentile
7,429
Scimago
H-index
27
Scimago
Journal Rank
0,212
Scopus
Scite Score
220/247=0,9
Scopus
Scite Score Rank
Food Science 215/299 (Q3)
Scopus
SNIP
0,275
Acceptance
Rate
15%

 

Acta Alimentaria
Publication Model Hybrid
Submission Fee none
Article Processing Charge 1100 EUR/article
Printed Color Illustrations 40 EUR (or 10 000 HUF) + VAT / piece
Regional discounts on country of the funding agency World Bank Lower-middle-income economies: 50%
World Bank Low-income economies: 100%
Further Discounts Editorial Board / Advisory Board members: 50%
Corresponding authors, affiliated to an EISZ member institution subscribing to the journal package of Akadémiai Kiadó: 100%
Subscription fee 2023 Online subsscription: 776 EUR / 944 USD
Print + online subscription: 896 EUR / 1090 USD
Subscription Information Online subscribers are entitled access to all back issues published by Akadémiai Kiadó for each title for the duration of the subscription, as well as Online First content for the subscribed content.
Purchase per Title Individual articles are sold on the displayed price.

Acta Alimentaria
Language English
Size B5
Year of
Foundation
1972
Volumes
per Year
1
Issues
per Year
4
Founder Magyar Tudományos Akadémia    
Founder's
Address
H-1051 Budapest, Hungary, Széchenyi István tér 9.
Publisher Akadémiai Kiadó
Publisher's
Address
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Responsible
Publisher
Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó
ISSN 0139-3006 (Print)
ISSN 1588-2535 (Online)

 

Monthly Content Usage

Abstract Views Full Text Views PDF Downloads
Sep 2023 0 0 0
Oct 2023 184 11 10
Nov 2023 236 5 7
Dec 2023 20 339 70
Jan 2024 0 335 75
Feb 2024 0 147 44
Mar 2024 0 0 0