Cargando…

Inhibitory Effects of Artificial Sweeteners on Bacterial Quorum Sensing

Despite having been tagged as safe and beneficial, recent evidence remains inconclusive regarding the status of artificial sweeteners and their putative effects on gut microbiota. Gut microorganisms are essential for the normal metabolic functions of their host. These microorganisms communicate with...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Markus, Victor, Share, Orr, Shagan, Marilou, Halpern, Barak, Bar, Tal, Kramarsky-Winter, Esti, Teralı, Kerem, Özer, Nazmi, Marks, Robert S., Kushmaro, Ariel, Golberg, Karina
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8472786/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34576027
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms22189863
_version_ 1784574824158330880
author Markus, Victor
Share, Orr
Shagan, Marilou
Halpern, Barak
Bar, Tal
Kramarsky-Winter, Esti
Teralı, Kerem
Özer, Nazmi
Marks, Robert S.
Kushmaro, Ariel
Golberg, Karina
author_facet Markus, Victor
Share, Orr
Shagan, Marilou
Halpern, Barak
Bar, Tal
Kramarsky-Winter, Esti
Teralı, Kerem
Özer, Nazmi
Marks, Robert S.
Kushmaro, Ariel
Golberg, Karina
author_sort Markus, Victor
collection PubMed
description Despite having been tagged as safe and beneficial, recent evidence remains inconclusive regarding the status of artificial sweeteners and their putative effects on gut microbiota. Gut microorganisms are essential for the normal metabolic functions of their host. These microorganisms communicate within their community and regulate group behaviors via a molecular system termed quorum sensing (QS). In the present study, we aimed to study the effects of artificial sweeteners on this bacterial communication system. Using biosensor assays, biophysical protein characterization methods, microscale thermophoresis, swarming motility assays, growth assays, as well as molecular docking, we show that aspartame, sucralose, and saccharin have significant inhibitory actions on the Gram-negative bacteria N-acyl homoserine lactone-based (AHL) communication system. Our studies indicate that these three artificial sweeteners are not bactericidal. Protein-ligand docking and interaction profiling, using LasR as a representative participating receptor for AHL, suggest that the artificial sweeteners bind to the ligand-binding pocket of the protein, possibly interfering with the proper housing of the native ligand and thus impeding protein folding. Our findings suggest that these artificial sweeteners may affect the balance of the gut microbial community via QS-inhibition. We, therefore, infer an effect of these artificial sweeteners on numerous molecular events that are at the core of intestinal microbial function, and by extension on the host metabolism.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8472786
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84727862021-09-28 Inhibitory Effects of Artificial Sweeteners on Bacterial Quorum Sensing Markus, Victor Share, Orr Shagan, Marilou Halpern, Barak Bar, Tal Kramarsky-Winter, Esti Teralı, Kerem Özer, Nazmi Marks, Robert S. Kushmaro, Ariel Golberg, Karina Int J Mol Sci Article Despite having been tagged as safe and beneficial, recent evidence remains inconclusive regarding the status of artificial sweeteners and their putative effects on gut microbiota. Gut microorganisms are essential for the normal metabolic functions of their host. These microorganisms communicate within their community and regulate group behaviors via a molecular system termed quorum sensing (QS). In the present study, we aimed to study the effects of artificial sweeteners on this bacterial communication system. Using biosensor assays, biophysical protein characterization methods, microscale thermophoresis, swarming motility assays, growth assays, as well as molecular docking, we show that aspartame, sucralose, and saccharin have significant inhibitory actions on the Gram-negative bacteria N-acyl homoserine lactone-based (AHL) communication system. Our studies indicate that these three artificial sweeteners are not bactericidal. Protein-ligand docking and interaction profiling, using LasR as a representative participating receptor for AHL, suggest that the artificial sweeteners bind to the ligand-binding pocket of the protein, possibly interfering with the proper housing of the native ligand and thus impeding protein folding. Our findings suggest that these artificial sweeteners may affect the balance of the gut microbial community via QS-inhibition. We, therefore, infer an effect of these artificial sweeteners on numerous molecular events that are at the core of intestinal microbial function, and by extension on the host metabolism. MDPI 2021-09-13 /pmc/articles/PMC8472786/ /pubmed/34576027 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms22189863 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Markus, Victor
Share, Orr
Shagan, Marilou
Halpern, Barak
Bar, Tal
Kramarsky-Winter, Esti
Teralı, Kerem
Özer, Nazmi
Marks, Robert S.
Kushmaro, Ariel
Golberg, Karina
Inhibitory Effects of Artificial Sweeteners on Bacterial Quorum Sensing
title Inhibitory Effects of Artificial Sweeteners on Bacterial Quorum Sensing
title_full Inhibitory Effects of Artificial Sweeteners on Bacterial Quorum Sensing
title_fullStr Inhibitory Effects of Artificial Sweeteners on Bacterial Quorum Sensing
title_full_unstemmed Inhibitory Effects of Artificial Sweeteners on Bacterial Quorum Sensing
title_short Inhibitory Effects of Artificial Sweeteners on Bacterial Quorum Sensing
title_sort inhibitory effects of artificial sweeteners on bacterial quorum sensing
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8472786/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34576027
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms22189863
work_keys_str_mv AT markusvictor inhibitoryeffectsofartificialsweetenersonbacterialquorumsensing
AT shareorr inhibitoryeffectsofartificialsweetenersonbacterialquorumsensing
AT shaganmarilou inhibitoryeffectsofartificialsweetenersonbacterialquorumsensing
AT halpernbarak inhibitoryeffectsofartificialsweetenersonbacterialquorumsensing
AT bartal inhibitoryeffectsofartificialsweetenersonbacterialquorumsensing
AT kramarskywinteresti inhibitoryeffectsofartificialsweetenersonbacterialquorumsensing
AT teralıkerem inhibitoryeffectsofartificialsweetenersonbacterialquorumsensing
AT ozernazmi inhibitoryeffectsofartificialsweetenersonbacterialquorumsensing
AT marksroberts inhibitoryeffectsofartificialsweetenersonbacterialquorumsensing
AT kushmaroariel inhibitoryeffectsofartificialsweetenersonbacterialquorumsensing
AT golbergkarina inhibitoryeffectsofartificialsweetenersonbacterialquorumsensing