The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A comparative in vitro evaluation of the fermentation properties of prebiotic oligosaccharides
Abstract
AIMS: Comparison of in vitro fermentation properties of commercial prebiotic oligosaccharides. METHODS AND RESULTS: Populations of predominant gut bacterial groups were monitored over 24 h of batch culture through fluorescent in-situ hybridization. Short-chain fatty acid and gas production were also measured. All prebiotics increased the numbers of bifidobacteria and most decreased clostridia. Xylo-oligosaccharides and lactulose produced the highest increases in numbers of bifidobacteria whilst fructo-oligosaccharides produced the highest populations of lactobacilli. Galacto-oligosaccharides (GOS) resulted in the largest decreases in numbers of clostridia. Short-chain fatty acid generation was highest on lactulose and GOS. Gas production was lowest on isomalto-oligosaccharides and highest on inulin. CONCLUSIONS: The oligosaccharides differed in their fermentation characteristics. Isomalto-oligosaccharides and GOS were effective at increasing numbers of bifidobacteria and lactate whilst generating the least gas. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: The study provides comparative data on the properties of commercial prebiotics, allowing targeting of dietary intervention for particular applications and blending of oligosaccharides to enhance overall functionality.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Probiotic functional foods: Survival of probiotics during processing and storage
Tripathi, M. K., & Giri, S. K. (2014) · Journal of Functional Foods · doi:10.1016/j.jff.2014.04.030 · Cited by 1,181
Benefaction of probiotics for human health: A review
George Kerry, R., Patra, J. K., Gouda, S., Park, Y., Shin, H.-S., & Das, G. (2018) · Journal of Food and Drug Analysis · doi:10.1016/j.jfda.2018.01.002 · Cited by 898
Staudacher, H. M., Lomer, M. C. E., Anderson, J. L., Barrett, J. S., Muir, J. G., Irving, P. M., & Whelan, K. (2012) · The Journal of Nutrition · doi:10.3945/jn.112.159285 · Cited by 590
SILK, D. B. A., DAVIS, A., VULEVIC, J., TZORTZIS, G., & GIBSON, G. R. (2009) · Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2036.2008.03911.x · Cited by 551
Self-citationMinor components of pulses and their potential impact on human health
Campos-Vega, R., Loarca-Piña, G., & Oomah, B. D. (2010) · Food Research International · doi:10.1016/j.foodres.2009.09.004 · Cited by 530
Metadata
- Authors
- Rycroft, C. E., Jones, M. R., Gibson, G. R., & Rastall, R. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Microbiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2001-11-23
- Volume
- 91
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 878-887
- ISSN
- 1364-5072 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2672
- OpenAlex
- W2023123334
- Cited by
- 652
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A comparative in vitro evaluation of the fermentation properties of prebiotic oligosaccharides. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2672.2001.01446.x
- The paper
- Rycroft, C. E., Jones, M. R., Gibson, G. R., & Rastall, R. A. (2001). A comparative in vitro evaluation of the fermentation properties of prebiotic oligosaccharides. Journal of Applied Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2672.2001.01446.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
