Joana Gaifem, Luís G. Gonçalves, Ricardo J. Dinis-Oliveira, Cristina Cunha, Agostinho Carvalho, Egídio Torrado, Fernando Rodrigues, Margarida Saraiva, António G. Castro, Ricardo Silvestre
Abstract
Dietary nutrients have emerged as potential therapeutic adjuncts for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) given their impact on intestinal homeostasis through the modulation of immune response, gut microbiota composition and epithelial barrier stability. Several nutrients have already been associated with a protective phenotype. Yet, there is a lack of knowledge toward the most promising ones as well as the most adequate phase of action. To unveil the most prominent therapy candidates we characterized the colon metabolic profile during colitis development. We have observed a twofold decrease in threonine levels in mice subjected to DSS-induced colitis. We then assessed the effect of threonine supplementation in the beginning of the inflammatory process (DSS + Thr) or when inflammation is already established (DSS + Thr D8). Colitis progression was similar between the treated groups and control colitic mice, yet threonine had a surprisingly detrimental effect when administered in the beginning of the disease, with mice displaying a delayed recovery when compared to control mice and mice supplemented with threonine after day 8. Although no major changes were found in their metabolic profile, DSS + Thr mice displayed altered expression in mucin-encoding genes, as well as in goblet cell counts, unveiling an impaired ability to produce mucus. Moreover, IL-22 secretion was decreased in DSS + Thr mice when compared to DSS + Thr D8 mice. Overall, these results suggest that supplementation with threonine during colitis induction impact goblet cell number and delays the recovery period. This reinforces the importance of a deeper understanding regarding threonine supplementation in IBD.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 February 2020.
All research outputs
#7,328,160
of 23,103,903 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#3,526
of 13,847 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,739
of 335,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#153
of 458 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,903 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,847 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 335,879 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 458 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
