Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 41

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Modulation of gut microbiota by spent coffee grounds attenuates diet-induced metabolic syndrome in rats

Bhandarkar, Nikhil S., Mouatt, Peter, Goncalves, Priscila, Thomas, Torsten, Brown, Lindsay, Panchal, Sunil K.·2020·The FASEB Journal
DOI 10.1096/fj.201902416rr
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Coffee brewing produces spent coffee grounds as waste; few studies have investigated the health benefits of these grounds. This study investigated responses to spent coffee grounds in a diet‐induced rat model of metabolic syndrome. Male Wistar rats aged 8‐9 weeks were fed either corn starch‐rich diet or high‐carbohydrate, high‐fat diet for 16 weeks, which were supplemented with 5% spent coffee grounds during the last 8 weeks. Rats fed non‐supplemented diets were used as controls. High‐carbohydrate, high‐fat diet‐fed rats developed metabolic syndrome including abdominal obesity, impaired glucose tolerance, dyslipidemia, and cardiovascular and liver damage. Body weight, abdominal fat, total body fat mass, systolic blood pressure, and concentrations of plasma triglycerides and non‐esterified fatty acids were reduced by spent coffee grounds along with improved glucose tolerance and structure and function of heart and liver. Spent coffee grounds increased the diversity of the gut microbiota and decreased the ratio of Firmicutes to Bacteroidetes. Changes in gut microbiota correlated with the reduction in obesity and improvement in glucose tolerance and systolic blood pressure. These findings indicate that intervention with spent coffee grounds may be useful for managing obesity and metabolic syndrome by altering the gut microbiota, thus increasing the value of this food waste.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1096/fj.201902416rr

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 72

  1. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.269 · DOI
  2. International Coffee Organization, Total Production by All Exporting Countries
  3. Cameron A, 2016, Coffee Ground Recovery Program Summary Report
  4. 10.1021/acs.jafc.6b04716 · DOI
  5. 10.1016/j.wasman.2017.10.042 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Kim J, 2017, Ulva biomass as a co‐substrate for stable anaerobic digestion of spent coffee grounds in continuous mode, Biores Technol, 241, 1182, 10.1016/j.biortech.2017.06.012 · DOI
  7. Ribeiro JP, 2017, Effect of industrial and domestic ash from biomass combustion, and spent coffee grounds, on soil fertility and plant growth: experiments at field conditions, Environ Sci Pollut Res, 24, 15270, 10.1007/s11356-017-9134-y · DOI
  8. Hernández Rodiguez M, 2018, Adsorption of Ni(II) on spent coffee and coffee husk based activated carbon, J Environ Chem Eng, 6, 1161, 10.1016/j.jece.2017.12.045 · DOI
  9. 10.1136/bmj.j5024 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1016/j.fct.2013.08.002 · DOI
  11. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2008.11.063 · DOI
  12. 10.1016/j.cofs.2017.01.007 · DOI
  13. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.04.064 · DOI
  14. 10.1007/s10068-017-0144-9 · DOI
  15. 10.1007/s00726-015-1951-z · DOI
  16. 10.3389/fcimb.2016.00095 · DOI
  17. 10.1097/FJC.0b013e3181feb90a · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.1016/j.jff.2019.04.003 · DOI
  19. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.11.115 · DOI
  20. 10.3945/jn.111.153577 · DOI
  21. 10.1038/srep46457 · DOI
  22. Fu XY, 2014, Effects of gastrointestinal motility on obesity, Nutr Metab, 11, 3, 10.1186/1743-7075-11-3 · DOI
  23. 10.3390/nu9111261 · DOI
  24. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btq461 · DOI · Paper page
  25. 10.1038/nmeth.2604 · DOI · Paper page
  26. 10.1111/j.2041-210X.2012.00190.x · DOI · Paper page
  27. 10.1186/s13059-014-0550-8 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Harrell FE, Hmisc: Harrell Miscellaneous. R Package Version 4.2‐0
  29. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.11.058 · DOI
  30. 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2017.03.011 · DOI
  31. 10.1016/j.wasman.2016.10.020 · DOI · Paper page
  32. 10.1155/2011/351982 · DOI · Paper page
  33. 10.1016/j.nut.2012.02.013 · DOI
  34. 10.1016/j.nutres.2018.11.002 · DOI
  35. 10.1038/ncomms15904 · DOI
  36. 10.1007/s00726-010-0774-1 · DOI
  37. 10.1038/ijo.2015.84 · DOI · Paper page
  38. 10.1007/s11154-019-09512-0 · DOI · Paper page
  39. 10.3390/ijms11062499 · DOI
  40. 10.15171/apb.2018.065 · DOI
  41. 10.2217/clp.12.8 · DOI
  42. 10.1021/acs.jafc.8b06604 · DOI
  43. 10.1016/j.foodres.2017.04.004 · DOI
  44. 10.1016/j.maturitas.2017.07.005 · DOI
  45. 10.1136/gutjnl-2018-316723 · DOI · Paper page
  46. 10.1039/C7FO00031F · DOI
  47. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2019.02.094 · DOI
  48. Sales AL, 2020, Effects of regular and decaffeinated roasted coffee (Coffea arabica and Coffea canephora) extracts and bioactive compounds on in vitro probiotic bacterial growth, Food Funct
  49. 10.1073/pnas.0504978102 · DOI · Paper page
  50. 10.1038/4441022a · DOI · Paper page
  51. 10.1016/j.chom.2008.02.015 · DOI · Paper page
  52. 10.1016/j.cell.2012.01.035 · DOI · Paper page
  53. 10.4103/1673-5374.241429 · DOI
  54. 10.2174/138920101504140825121142 · DOI
  55. 10.1093/gbe/evu050 · DOI · Paper page
  56. 10.1007/s00592-019-01312-x · DOI
  57. 10.1136/gut.34.3.386 · DOI · Paper page
  58. 10.1007/s10096-015-2355-4 · DOI
  59. 10.1038/ijo.2008.155 · DOI · Paper page
  60. 10.1371/journal.pone.0065790 · DOI
  61. 10.3389/fcimb.2015.00084 · DOI · Paper page
  62. 10.3748/wjg.v20.i4.908 · DOI
  63. 10.1073/pnas.0812600106 · DOI · Paper page
  64. 10.1017/S0007114510001303 · DOI · Paper page
  65. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2016.07.173 · DOI
  66. 10.1096/fj.07-9574LSF · DOI · Paper page
  67. Caligiuri SPB, 2014, The HYPERFlax trial for determining the anti‐HYPERtensive effects of dietary flaxseed in newly diagnosed stage 1 hypertensive patients: study protocol for a randomized, double‐blinded, controlled clinical trial, Trials, 15, 232, 10.1186/1745-6215-15-232 · DOI
  68. 10.1016/j.biortech.2013.03.052 · DOI
  69. 10.1002/abio.370200108 · DOI
  70. 10.1002/ejlt.201200239 · DOI
  71. 10.1016/j.bej.2014.06.025 · DOI
  72. 10.1007/s11356-018-2359-6 · DOI

Cited by

See all 41

Metadata

Authors
Bhandarkar, N. S., Mouatt, P., Goncalves, P., Thomas, T., Brown, L., & Panchal, S. K.
Affiliations
  • Functional Foods Research Group University of Southern Queensland Toowoomba QLD Australia
  • Southern Cross Plant Science Southern Cross University Lismore NSW Australia
  • Centre for Marine Science and Innovation & School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences University of New South Wales Sydney NSW Australia
Venue
The FASEB Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-02-10
Volume
34
Issue
3
Pages
4783-4797
ISSN
  • 0892-6638
  • 1530-6860
DOI
10.1096/fj.201902416rr
Cited by
41
References
13
Language
en
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Funders
University of Southern Queensland (SRF‐09)

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

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.