The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison of the in vitro bifidogenic properties of pectins and pectic-oligosaccharides
Abstract
AIMS: To compare the in vitro fermentation properties of pectins and oligosaccharides derived from them in pure and mixed faecal cultures. METHODS AND RESULTS: Specific growth rates of selected bacterial genera were calculated in pure culture. Bifidobacterium angulatum, B. infantis and B. adolescentis had higher growth rates on pectic oligosaccharides (POS I) derived from high methylated pectin (HMP) than on HMP and B. pseudolongum and B. adolescentis on pectic oligosaccharides (POS II) derived from low methylated pectin than on HMP. Controlled pH batch mixed faecal cultures were then carried out and a prebiotic index was calculated as a mean to compare the fermentation properties of the different substrates. In general, greater fermentation selectivity was obtained with lower degrees of methylation (PI24(-HMP) = -0.11, PI24(-LMP) = 0.033; PI24(-POS I) = 0.071 and PI24(-POS II) = 0.092). An effect of size on prebiotic potential was observed, with the oligosaccharides having more selective fermentation properties than the pectins they derived from. CONCLUSIONS: The degree of methylation plays an important role in the fermentation properties of pectins. Pectic-oligosaccharides are a better prebiotic candidate than the pectins, although their bifidogenic effect is low compared to oligofructose. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: The effect of size on prebiotic potential was demonstrated. Non-selectively fermented polysaccharides like pectin can have their bifidogenic properties improved by partial hydrolysis.
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
Cites
The indigenous gastrointestinal microflora
Berg, R. (1996) · Trends in Microbiology · doi:10.1016/0966-842x(96)10057-3 · Cited by 1,153 · cited 1×
“The human gut microflora is affected by many factors such as age, drug therapy, diet, host physiology, peristalsis, local immunity and in situ bacterial metabolism (Berg 1996).”
Background
Cited by
Effects of Dietary Fiber and Its Components on Metabolic Health
Lattimer, J. M., & Haub, M. D. (2010) · Nutrients · doi:10.3390/nu2121266 · Cited by 1,333
Nondigestible carbohydrates, butyrate, and butyrate-producing bacteria
Fu, X., Liu, Z., Zhu, C., Mou, H., & Kong, Q. (2019) · Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition · doi:10.1080/10408398.2018.1542587 · Cited by 497
Modulation of the human gut microbiota by dietary fibres occurs at the species level
Chung, W. S. F., Walker, A. W., Louis, P., Parkhill, J., Vermeiren, J., Bosscher, D., Duncan, S. H., & Flint, H. J. (2016) · BMC Biology · doi:10.1186/s12915-015-0224-3 · Cited by 409
Rios-Covian, D., Gueimonde, M., Duncan, S. H., Flint, H. J., & de los Reyes-Gavilan, C. G. (2015) · FEMS Microbiology Letters · doi:10.1093/femsle/fnv176 · Cited by 371
Hughes, S. A., Shewry, P. R., Gibson, G. R., McCleary, B. V., & Rastall, R. A. (2008) · FEMS Microbiology Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1574-6941.2008.00478.x · Cited by 276
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Olano-Martin, E., Gibson, G. R., & Rastall, R. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Microbiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2002-09
- Volume
- 93
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 505-511
- ISSN
- 1364-5072 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2672
- OpenAlex
- W2159724510
- Cited by
- 288
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 5.37
- 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: Comparison of the in vitro bifidogenic properties of pectins and pectic-oligosaccharides. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2672.2002.01719.x
- The paper
- Olano-Martin, E., Gibson, G. R., & Rastall, R. A. (2002). Comparison of the in vitro bifidogenic properties of pectins and pectic-oligosaccharides. Journal of Applied Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2672.2002.01719.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.
