Cited by 692Gut microbiota and healthMicrobial Metabolites in Food BiotechnologyAnimal Nutrition and Physiology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 106 of the 106 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Relevance of protein fermentation to gut health

Windey, Karen, De Preter, Vicky, Verbeke, Kristin·2012·Molecular Nutrition & Food Research

Abstract

It is generally accepted that carbohydrate fermentation results in beneficial effects for the host because of the generation of short chain fatty acids, whereas protein fermentation is considered detrimental for the host's health. Protein fermentation mainly occurs in the distal colon, when carbohydrates get depleted and results in the production of potentially toxic metabolites such as ammonia, amines, phenols and sulfides. However, the effectivity of these metabolites has been established mainly in in vitro studies. In addition, some important bowel diseases such as colorectal cancer (CRC) and ulcerative colitis appear most often in the distal colon, which is the primary site of protein fermentation. Finally, epidemiological studies revealed that diets rich in meat are associated with the prevalence of CRC, as is the case in Western society. Importantly, meat intake not only increases fermentation of proteins but also induces increased intake of fat, heme and heterocyclic amines, which may also play a role in the development of CRC. Despite these indications, the relationship between gut health and protein fermentation has not been thoroughly investigated. In this review, the existing evidence about the potential toxicity of protein fermentation from in vitro animal and human studies will be summarized.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/mnfr.201100542

Cites

106 of 106 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 106 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Benassi B., 2007, High protein‐high red meat and high carbohydrate weight loss diets do not differ in their effect on lymphocyte DNA damage using the cytokinesis‐block micronucleus cytome assay, Ann. Nutr. Metab., 51, 245

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 401–500 of 690

Metadata

Authors
Windey, K., De Preter, V., & Verbeke, K.
Affiliations
Universitair Ziekenhuis Leuven (BE)
Corresponding author
Verbeke, Kristin
Venue
Molecular Nutrition & Food Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-11-25
Volume
56
Issue
1
Pages
184-196
ISSN
  • 1613-4125 (ISSN-L)
  • 1613-4133
OpenAlex
W2101238009
Cited by
692
References
106
Citations by year
2026: 57 · 2025: 56 · 2024: 59 · 2023: 70 · 2022: 60 · 2021: 59 · 2020: 75 · 2019: 52 · 2018: 53 · 2017: 40 · 2016: 41 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 6
FWCI
1.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Molecular Nutrition & Food Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Microbial Metabolites in Food Biotechnology
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Nutrition and Physiology
Keywords
protein fermentation, gut health, distal colon, short-chain fatty acids, ammonia, amines, phenols, sulfide, colorectal cancer, ulcerative colitis, meat consumption, heme, heterocyclic amines, dietary fat, colonic metabolites
MeSH terms
Ammonia, Animals, Colon, Cresols, Diet, Fermentation, Humans, Hydrogen Sulfide, Meat, Phenols, Proteins, Colorectal Neoplasms, Gastrointestinal Tract

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review