International Journal of Food Science

International Journal of Food Science / 2019 / Article

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2019 |Article ID 9619020 | 16 pages | https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/9619020

Effect of Chronic Consumption of Sweeteners on Microbiota and Immunity in the Small Intestine of Young Mice

Academic Editor: Jaime Yanez
Received03 May 2019
Accepted24 Jul 2019
Published20 Aug 2019

Abstract

The consumption of sweeteners has increased as a measure to reduce the consumption of calories and thus combat obesity and diabetes. Sweeteners are found in a large number of products, so chronic consumption has been little explored. The objective of the study was to evaluate the effect of chronic sweetener consumption on the microbiota and immunity of the small intestine in young mice. We used 72 CD1 mice of 21 days old, divided into 3 groups: (i) No treatment, (ii) Group A (6 weeks of treatment), and (iii) Group B (12 weeks of treatment). Groups A and B were divided into 4 subgroups: Control (CL), Sucrose (Suc), Splenda® (Spl), and Svetia® (Sv). The following were determined: anthropometric parameters, percentage of lymphocytes of Peyer’s patches and lamina propria, IL-6, IL-17, leptin, resistin, C-peptide, and TNF-α. From feces, the microbiota of the small intestine was identified. The BMI was not modified; the mice preferred the consumption of Splenda® and Svetia®. The percentage of CD3+ lymphocytes in Peyer’s patches was increased. In the lamina propria, Svetia® increased the percentage of CD3+ lymphocytes, but Splenda® decreases it. The Splenda® and Svetia® subgroups elevate leptin, C-peptide, IL-6, and IL-17, with reduction of resistin. The predominant genus in all groups was Bacillus. The chronic consumption of sweeteners increases the population of lymphocytes in the mucosa of the small intestine. Maybe, Bacillus have the ability to adapt to sweeteners regardless of the origin or nutritional contribution of the same.

1. Introduction

The prevalence of overweight and obesity has increased in recent years, currently considered a public health problem that affects adolescents and children [1]. This condition is alarming due to its association with chronic noncommunicable diseases such as diabetes mellitus, hypertension, cardiovascular diseases, and cancer [2]. Derived from this situation, several strategies have been created to combat them, one of which is the substitution of sugar and high fructose corn syrup with nonnutritive sweeteners [3]. Sweeteners are additives of natural or artificial origin that mimic the sweet taste of sugar without providing energy; they stimulate sweet taste receptors with minimal amounts, having a sweetening power of 200 to 600 times more than sucrose [46]. While sweeteners have been considered metabolically inert, recent data suggest that they may have physiological effects by altering glucose metabolism and increasing appetite stimulation [7]. It has been reported that mice exposed to saccharin show preference for foods with more sugar [8]. Not only do sweeteners increase the taste for sweet, they also intervene in the feeding behavior; for example, rodents exposed to sweeteners present higher feed intake and consequently a greater weight gain [9, 10]. The consumption of saccharin, sucralose and aspartame, causes alterations in the gut microbiota in rodent models, leading to greater food intake, excessive weight gain, and alterations in blood glucose [1113].

Now, the small intestine (SI) is the place where processes of digestion and absorption of nutrients are carried out [14]. Anatomically, it contains Gut Associated Lymphoid Tissue (GALT) which interacts with the intestinal microbiota to promote multiple processes in different stages of life and thereby maintain the homeostasis of the host at that level [15]. The GALT has two compartments: lamina propria (effector site) and Peyer’s patches (inductor site) which contain T and B lymphocytes that monitor the antigens that pass through the intestinal lumen and are responsible for secreting proinflammatory (IL-1, 2, 6, 7, 17, and TNF-α) and anti-inflammatory cytokines (IL-4, 10, 13, and TGB-β) [16]. Particularly, IL-17 is considered a sentinel and protector of the mucous barrier of the intestine, since it maintains its integrity, promotes the production of antimicrobial factors and the recruitment and generation of neutrophils as the first line of defense in mucosal sites [17]. The process of microbial colonization begins in prenatal life and continues after birth; it is modulated by factors including gestational age, diet, type of breast milk, type of delivery, hygiene, and exposure to antibiotics [18]. The environment and diet during the first days of life are crucial for the acquisition of the type of microbiota in adult life and the establishment of the host-bacteria symbiosis that influences the development of the immune and neurological systems [19]. Therefore, the content of the diet at early ages of life will determine to a large extent the type of microbiota and with it the predisposition or not to suffer from any pathology.

The composition of the intestinal microbiota varies according to the site of implantation; in the small intestine we can find bacilli of the Firmicutes families and Actinobacteria; in the colon mainly Bacteroidetes, Lachnospiraceae, and Firmicutes have been identified [2022]. The gut microbiota plays a very important role in the immune response and intestinal homeostasis [23]; it participates actively in digestion by fermenting polysaccharides and producing monosaccharides and short chain fatty acids, increasing the deposition of triacylglycerides and the absorption of energy [24].

It is a fact that there are modifications at the level of the immune system of the mucous membranes and the microbiota of the small intestine depending on the age and type of diet consumed, which in turn generates changes in various metabolic parameters [25]. The effect of sweeteners in early life and how they affect the proliferation of the microbiota of the small intestine and thus the maturation of the mucosal immune system is still unknown. Therefore, in this study we considered to evaluate the effect of the chronic consumption of sweeteners on the microbiota and the immunity of the mucosa of the small intestine in recently weaned mice.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design

An experimental study was carried out with 72 CD1 21-day old mice, free of pathogens, which were fed with Rodent Laboratory Chow® 5001 croquettes [3.02 Kcal / g] (RLChow® 5001) and water ad libitum. The mice were housed in cages, 4 per group, under controlled conditions, temperature at 19 to 21°C, and light/dark cycles of 12 hours each. Animal care and experimental procedures were carried out in accordance with the standards of the Internal Regulation for the Use of Lab Animals and Ethical Investigation Committee of the Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México, UAEM (004/2018), as well as the guidelines of the Mexican Secretary of Health for the Production and Care of Lab Animals (NOM-062-ZOO-1999 Ministry of Agriculture, Mexico City, Mexico).

2.2. Study Groups

The 72 mice were distributed in groups (n = 8) according to the type and time of consumption of sweetener as described below (Figure 1):(i) Basal Group: 21-day-old mice that were sacrificed at the time of weaning and never consumed RLChow® 5001 croquettes nor water supplemented with sweetener.(ii) Control Group A (CL-A): Mice that consumed water without sweeteners for 6 weeks after weaning.(iii) Sweetener groups: Sucrose A (Sac-A), Splenda® A (Spl-A), and Svetia® A (Sv-A):Mice that consumed water supplemented with table sugar (Sucrose A) and commercial sweeteners Splenda® (Splenda® A) and Svetia® (Svetia® A), respectively, for 6 weeks after weaning.(iv) Control group B (CL-B): Mice that consumed water without sweeteners for 12 weeks after weaning.(v) Sweetener groups: Sucrose B (Sac-B), Splenda® B (Spl-B), and Svetia® B (Sv-B): mice that consumed water supplemented with table sugar (Sucrose B) and commercial sweeteners Splenda® (Splenda® B) and Svetia® (Svetia® B), respectively, for 12 weeks after weaning.

2.3. Administration of Sweeteners

The solution of sweeteners was prepared with ultrapure water at a concentration of 41.66 mg/mL Sucrose and 4.1 mg/mL of Splenda® or Svetia®, in accordance with the recommendations of Official Mexican Standard NOM-218-SSA1-2011 for nonalcoholic flavored drinks [26]. One envelope of Splenda® contains 1 g of carbohydrates, which includes dextrin, maltodextrin, and sucralose. One envelope of Svetia® contains sucrose, steviol glycoside (2.5g/100g), isomalt, and sucralose (0.6g/100g). The solution prepared with sweetener was placed daily in the water containers of each study group in morning from 8 to 13 h (5 hours per day); later it was removed to place water without sweetener for the rest of the day. The consumption of water with and without sweetener was quantified to determine the consumption preference.

2.4. Determination of the Body Mass Index (BMI)

The body mass index (BMI) was quantified weekly using the weight and length of each mouse.(i)Weight: the mice were weighed from the beginning of the study and weekly until slaughter with a Triple Beam 700/800 Series mouse scale (Ohaus® Cat. No. 2,729,439).(ii)Length: it was determined with the mice under anaesthesia (0.1 mL of sodium pentobarbital at 1%) with a tape measure from the nose to the anus.

Once the weight and length were obtained, the BMI was calculated with the following formula [27]: BMI = Weight (g)/length (cm2).

2.5. Food and Total Energy Consumption

The calculation of food consumption was determined weekly by the difference in the amount of food at the beginning of each week less the amount of food at the end of each week of the study. The total energy intake of the mice was quantified weekly, taking into account the energy intake of each sweetener: Sucrose 4 Kcal/g, Splenda® 0 Kcal/g, and Svetia® 4 Kcal/g. The total energy consumption from food and water with sweetener per week was calculated with the following formula (Equation (1)) [27]:

2.6. Water Consumption with and without Sweetener

The calculation of water consumption without sweetener was done daily by the difference in the amount of water without sweetener at the beginning of the day less the amount of water without sweetener at the end of the day.

The intake of sweetener was determined daily by the difference of the amount of water with sweetener at the beginning of the exposure less the amount of water with sweetener at the end of exposure (5 hours).

2.7. Obtaining Samples
2.7.1. Collection and Determination of Plasma Samples

The animals were euthanized by group: Basal (21 days old, without treatment); Group A, six weeks of treatment (63 days old); Group B, twelve weeks of treatment (105 days old). The animals were anesthetized with sodium pentobarbital at 1% (80 mg / kg of weight); they were bled by direct cardiac puncture (with a syringe with heparin) and sacrificed by cervical dislocation. The whole blood was centrifuged for 10 minutes at 2500 rpm to separate the two blood phases. Plasma was collected and transferred to Eppendorf tubes to quantitate leptin, resistin, C-peptide, and TNF-α. The determinations were made through Luminometry with a Luminex 201 from , with a commercial kit (Metabolic Magnetic Metabolic Pearl Panel, Cat. No. MMHMAG-44K) of Milliplex® Map, following the recommendations of the supplier.

2.7.2. Collection of Tissue Samples and Intestinal Content

After euthanasia and obtaining total blood, the small intestine (SI) of each mouse was removed, placed in 1 mL of saline phosphate buffer 1X (PBS) to keep it hydrated until it was processed. The lumen of SI was washed with 5 mL of 1X PBS, the obtained liquid was centrifuged at 4,500 rpm for 15 minutes, supernatant was discarded, and the pellet of the intestinal contents was suspended in 1 mL of physiological solution.

2.8. Isolation of Lymphocytes from the Small Intestine (Peyer’s Patches and Lamina Propria)
2.8.1. Lamina Propria

The isolation of lymphocytes from Peyer’s patches and the lamina propria of the small intestine was performed with the technique described by Reséndiz-Albor et al. [28] with brief modifications. Once the SI was dissected and washed, it was carefully cleaned to eliminate the mesentery and Peyer’s patches were extracted. Then, an iron crochet needle of 10 cm in length was inserted with a rope tied to turn the SI. The intestine was tied at one end, the crochet needle was removed, and the rope was carefully pulled while it remained submerged in cold RPMI-1640 medium (Sigma-Aldrich, USA, Cat. R6504). Each inverted intestinal segment was transferred to a 50 mL tube, containing 25 mL of RPMI medium with 60 U/mL type IV collagenase (Sigma-Aldrich, USA, cat # C5138), DTT (1.4 Dithiothreitol, Sigma-Aldrich, USA, Cat # 43819), 1% of Fetal Calf Serum (FCS), and 50 μg/ml gentamicin. The tubes were incubated horizontally for 30 minutes at 37°C in a shaking water bath at 150 rpm. The contents of each tube were then transferred to Petri dishes and 200 μl of FCS was added. The intestinal mucosa was compressed with a syringe plunger on a plastic mesh. The individual suspension of cells containing lamina propria cells was filtered through an organza mesh and then centrifuged for 10 minutes at 1500 rpm at 4°C. Cell suspensions were collected and centrifuged in a discontinuous 40%/70% Percoll gradient at 2500 rpm for 25 minutes. The cells of the interface were washed and suspended in RPMI medium.

2.8.2. Peyer’s Patches

After being separated from the small intestine, Peyer’s patches were crushed in a solution FCS/3% PBS on ice and filtered through a 300-section stainless steel cell filter to obtain lymphocytes. The cells were centrifuged for 10 minutes at 1500 rpm at 4°C.

2.9. Flow Cytometry Assays

The cell suspensions of Peyer’s patches and lamina propria were adjusted to 1 × 106 cells/mL in PBS for the cytofluorometric analysis using the technique described by Arciniega-Martínez et al., with brief modifications [29]. (i) The surface phenotype of the T cells was detected using monoclonal antibodies labeled with fluorescence: anti-CD3e/PE (Cat. No. 553063), anti-CD4/PerCP (Cat. No. 553052), and anti-CD8a/APC (Cat. No. 553035) (all from BD Biosciences). The cells were incubated for 30 minutes at room temperature. Finally, the cells were washed with PBS and fixed in paraformaldehyde at 1%. (ii) For the detection of intracellular cytokine production, lymphocytes were stimulated with a mixture containing phorbol myristate acetate, ionomycin, and Brefeldin A (Leucocyte Activation Cocktail Kit, BD Pharmingen) and incubated for 4 h at 37°C and 5% CO2. Then, antibodies to cell surface markers, anti-CD4 PerCP (Cat.No. 553052), were added and incubated as before. For intracellular staining of CD4+ T cells, fixation and permeabilization were performed using Cytofix/Cytoperm Kits (BD Pharmingen) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. These cells were incubated with anti-IL-6 APC (Cat. No. 561367) and anti-IL-17A FITC (Biolegend, Cat. No. 506907). The fluorescent signal intensity was recorded and analyzed by FACS Aria Flow Cytometer (Becton Dickinson). Events were collected from the lymphocyte gate on the FSC/SSC dot plot. 20,000 gated events were acquired from each sample using the CellQuest research software (Becton Dickinson). Data was analyzed using Summit software v4.3 (Dako, Colorado Inc.). Data from eight mice per group are reported as the mean ± standard deviation (SD).

2.10. Culture Media, Isolation, and Morphological Characterization of Bacteria

Two hundred μL of the suspension obtained from the intestinal contents was inoculated into enriched culture media: HBI, Heart Brain Infusion Agar (BD Bioxon Cat. No. 255003), and BA, Blood Agar (BD BHL Cat. No. 220150). The inoculated media were incubated at 37°C for 24 to 48 hours; the most abundant and representative strains were selected and purified. The isolated strains were classified into morphological groups according to their macroscopic characteristics such as size, shape, surface, consistency, and color.

2.11. Identification of Species

Once the groups were formed according to the morphological characteristics, 50% of the strains of each group were selected for the genetic identification of species through a sequencing analysis of the 16S rRNA gene.

2.11.1. Obtaining Biomass and DNA Extraction

To obtain biomass, the strains selected for genetic identification were inoculated by cross-stripe in HBI Agar; they were incubated at 37°C for 24 hours; the biomass was obtained by scraping and placed in 1.5 mL microtubes with 1 mL of saline solution at 0.85%. For the extraction of DNA, the Promega Wizard® Genomic commercial kit (Cat. No. A1120) was used following the manufacturer’s instructions.

2.11.2. Amplification of the 16S rRNA Gene

The 16S rRNA gene was amplified by Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR); the universal primers were used:8f: 5′-AGAGTTTGATCMTGGCTCAG-3′1492r: 5′-TACGGYTACCTTGTTACGACTT-3′

The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was carried out with the enzyme Taq polymerase (My Taq DNA Polymerase Bioline Cat. No. BIO-21105) in a Maxy Gene II Axygen Thermal Cycler (Cat. No. THERM-1001) with the following conditions: predenaturation 5 minutes at 94°C, denaturation 30 seconds at 94°C, coupling 20 seconds at 52°C, and elongation 1.5 minutes at 72°C; 34 cycles were repeated with these conditions and at the end a postelongation cycle was carried out 7 minutes at 72°C. The amplified fragments were observed on agarose gel (Pronadisa Cat. No. 8101.10) at 1% stained with ethidium bromide (BrEt, Sigma Aldrich Cat. No. E7637-1G). The amplified products of the 16S rRNA gene of selected strains were purified using the Amicon® purification kit Ultra 0.5 mL Centrifugal Filters (Millipore® Cat. No. UFC 503096) and observed in agarose gel at 1% stained with bromide ethidium to verify its quality. The purified products of the 16S rRNA gene were sent to the sequencing service of MacroGen USA Sequenciation Service, Maryland, USA.

2.11.3. Sequence Analysis of the 16S rRNA Gene

The nucleotide sequences obtained were analyzed and corrected with ChromaPro Software Version 2.1.5, of Technelysium DNA Sequencing Software [30]; the consensus sequences were obtained with the software BioEdit© Biological sequence alignment editor Version 7.2.6.1 [31] and then compared with sequences deposited in the GenBank of the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) with the Basic Local Alignment Search Tool (BLAST) at https://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. [32].

2.12. Statistical Analysis

The data on BMI and water intake and sweetener and total energy intake were analyzed using the statistical software SPSS Version 19 for Windows; its processing was carried out through the statistical analysis of variance (ANOVA). The post hoc HSD Tukey test was performed for the comparison between groups; the differences were considered statistically significant with a value of p <0.05.

3. Results

3.1. Morphometric Parameters
3.1.1. The Weight and BMI Were Not Modified with Sweetener Consumption

The mean weight of mice in the Basal group at the beginning of the sweetener supplementation was 9.27g ± 1.3. The increase in weight at 63 and 105 days old was consistent with growth and development of mice; there were no significant weight differences between the groups as shown in Table 1.


CLSUCSplenda®Svetia®
Mean±SDMean±SDMean±SDMean±SDp∗ Value

Group A (63 days old)

Weight (g)30.6 ± 2.8231.8 ± 3.132.7 ± 2.732.7 ± 2.30.360
BMI (g/cm2)0.294 ± 0.020.287 ± 0.0130.298 ± 0.0160.300 ± 0.0170.409
Food (g)157 ± 9.51149.8 ± 1.17154.3 ± 0.267149.3 ± 5.40.025∗
Energy (Kcal)474.4 ± 28.73466.8 ± 2.8466.1 ± 0.807452.4 ± 16.30.086

Group B (105 days old)

Weight (g)34.4 ± 2.436.5 ± 2.837.1 ± 2.237.3 ± 3.0460.148
BMI (g/cm2)0.276 ± 0.0130.289 ± 0.0210.289 ± 0.0140.290 ± 0.0180.277
Food (g)140.5 ± 11.4125.5 ± 5.8134.5 ± 4.2139.4 ± 10.80.007∗
Energy (Kcal)424.4 ± 34.7401.6 ± 16.8406.1 ± 12.9424.3 ± 32.60.002∗

The values represent the Mean ± Standard Deviation (SD) of morphometric, food consumption and energy. Grams (g), centimeters (cm), grams per square centimeter (g/cm2), and Body Mass Index (BMI). One-way ANOVA was performed to compare the differences between the groups; the differences were considered statistically significant with a value of p<0.05∗.

The baseline BMI was 0.195 g / cm2  ± 0.013; no differences were found in the study groups at 63 and 105 days old (Table 1).

3.2. Food Consumption and Total Energy Intake

Regarding the total energy intake and food intake, the groups of Sucrose A and Svetia® A consumed less food and therefore their total energy intake was less than the 63-day old groups; the difference was statistically significant between Control A and these study groups (Table 1). At 12 weeks of treatment, the groups of Sucrose B and Splenda® B decreased energy and food consumption, compared with the Control B group (Table 1).

3.3. Mice Prefer Water Consumption with Splenda® and Svetia® Than Water with Sucrose

The consumption of water without sweetener is reduced in the groups of Sucrose A and Splenda® A, compared with the Control A group (Table 2). This behavior continues until 105 days of treatment, since the groups of Sucrose B and Splenda® B consume little water without sweetener, contrary to the Svetia® B group that increases water consumption at this time.


CLSUCSplenda®Svetia®
Mean±SDMean±SDMean±SDMean±SDp∗ value

Group A (63 days old)

Water (mL)235 ± 23.5218 ± 6.9221 ± 0.535230 ± 7.70.053
Water with sweetener (mg/mL)---86 ± 14.1153 ± 4.396 ± 5.90.001∗

Group B (105 days old)

Water (mL)227 ± 32206 ± 7.4218 ± 11.7231 ± 6.40.042∗
Water with sweetener (mg/mL)---134 ± 4.4191 ± 4195 ± 4.40.001∗

The values represent the Mean ± Standard Deviation (SD) of water consumption with and without sweetener in milliliters. Milliliters (mL) and milligrams per milliliter (mg/mL). ANOVA was performed to compare the differences between the groups; the differences were considered statistically significant with a p value p<0.05∗.

The consumption of water with sweetener is different, since, at 6 and 12 weeks of water administration with sweetener, rodents consume a greater volume of water with Splenda® and Svetia® and reduce the consumption of water with Sucrose. It is clear that the group with Svetia® has a greater preference for water consumption with and without sweetener, but rodents consume a greater amount of Splenda®, as shown in Table 2.

3.4. Lymphocytes of Peyer’s Patches and Lamina Propria
3.4.1. After 12 Weeks of Sweetener Consumption, the Percentage of CD3+ Lymphocytes Was Increased in Peyer’s Patches

The baseline group showed an average of 21.79%  ± 0.70 of CD3+ lymphocytes. This number increases after 6 weeks of treatment, particularly in the Splenda® A group (25.15%  ± 0.54), compared to the Control A and Svetia® A groups (23.1%  ± 0.118, 23.87%  ± 0.192, respectively); the Sucrose A group reduced the percentage of CD3+ lymphocytes (22.97%  ± 0.192). At 12 weeks of treatment the percentage of CD3+ lymphocytes was increased with the consumption of all sweeteners, Sucrose B (28.68%  ± 0.476), Svetia® B (28.41%  ± 1.85), and Splenda® B (27.76%  ± 0.208), compared to the Control B group (25.88%  ± 0.262).

The Population of CD4+ Lymphocytes Was Not Modified after 12 Weeks of Consumption of Splenda® and Svetia®. The Basal group showed an average of 66.3%  ± 0.556 CD4+ lymphocytes. At 6 weeks of treatment, the Splenda® A group decreased the CD4+ population (55.74%  ± 0.535, p<0.001). The Control A group was not modified compared to the Basal Group (66.06%  ± 0.262). The groups of Sucrose A (65.94%  ± 0.861) and Svetia® A (65.77%  ± 0.406) did not show significant changes. At 12 weeks the percentage of lymphocytes from the Sucrose B group (73.03%  ± 0.123, p<0.001) decreased, compared to the Control B group (77.92%  ± 0.508), without changes in the Splenda® B groups (77.69%  ± 0.593) and Svetia® B (76.9%  ± 0.588).

The Increase of Lymphocytes in Peyer’s Patches Was Observed in CD8+ Lymphocytes after Consumption of Splenda® and Svetia®. The percentage of CD8+ lymphocytes of the basal group was 16.12%  ± 0.444. The Splenda® A group (16.8%  ± 0.374) increased its percentage and Svetia® A reduced it (14.72%  ± 0.572) after 6 weeks of treatment compared to Control A (15.48%  ± 0.182). At 12 weeks, the percentages of Splenda® B (12.93%  ± 0.08) and Svetia® B (12.7%  ± 0.396) increased significantly (p<0.001), compared with Control B (10.48%  ± 0.433) and Sucrose B (11.9%  ± 0.219).

3.4.2. Lamina Propria

The Svetia® Consumption Increased the Percentage of CD3+ Lymphocytes, at 6 and 12 Weeks; in Contrast, the Splenda® Group after 12 Weeks of Consumption Decreased the Percentage of CD3+. The percentage of CD3+ lymphocytes in the basal group was 87.95%  ± 0.315; this value decreased significantly in the Control A group (69.8%  ± 0.588) after 6 weeks of treatment. In contrast, the groups of Sucrose A (89%  ± 0.834), Splenda® A (87.72%  ± 0.508), and Svetia® A (83.77%  ± 0.508) increased the percentage of CD3+ lymphocytes at 6 weeks when compared with the Control group A. At 12 weeks of consumption, the Splenda® B group showed no change in the percentage of lymphocytes (87.39%  ± 1.0) compared to the group of 6 weeks. On the other hand, when compared to the Control B groups (94%  ± 0.545), Sucrose B (95.97%  ± 0.508) and Svetia® B (94.62%  ± 0.551) were observed to be decreased, at the same time of treatment.

The Increase of Lymphocytes in the Lamina Propria Occurs at the Expense of CD4+ in the Svetia® Group. The baseline group shows an average of 5.32%  ± 0.380 CD4+ lymphocytes. At 6 weeks of treatment the percentage was increased in the Svetia® A (12.83%  ± 0.187), Sucrose A (9.88%  ± 0.182), and Splenda® A (8.72%  ± 0.476) groups in that order, respectively. At 12 weeks, the increase was maintained only in the Svetia® B group (12%  ± 0.219, p<0.001); the rest of the groups remain unchanged (Control B: 9.2%  ± 0.358; Sucrose B: 9.2 %  ± 0.331; Splenda® B 9.16%  ± 0.401).

The Percentage of CD8+ Lymphocytes Was Found Depressed in the Splenda® and Svetia® Groups. In the CD8+ lymphocytes of the basal group an average of 40.02%  ± 0.08 was observed. This percentage doubled in the control group A (80%  ± 0.288), after 6 weeks of treatment, but was reduced in the Splenda® A groups of (77.88%  ± 0.807) and Svetia® A (78.91%  ± 0.257) with respect to Control A. This decrease was maintained until 12 weeks of treatment in the Splenda® B groups (79.13%  ± 0.518, p<0.001) and Svetia® B (78.82%  ± 0.727, p<0.001), when compared to Control B (83.63%  ± 0.412).

3.5. Hormones Profile and Cytokines

The Chronic Consumption of Splenda® and Svetia® Caused an Elevation of Leptin and C-Peptide with Reduction of Resistin. TNF-α Increased with Consumption of Svetia® but Decreased in the Splenda® and Sucrose Groups. The baseline group showed a median of 275 pg/mL of leptin, 6700 pg/mL of resistin, 595 pg/mL of C-peptide, and 40 pg/mL of TNF-α. After 6 weeks of treatment, the Sucrose A and Splenda® A groups reduced the leptin concentration and increased TNF-α. Resistin and C-peptide were elevated (p<0.001) with the consumption of Splenda® A and Svetia® A (Table 3). At 12 weeks of treatment, leptin and C-peptide were elevated in all groups. Conversely, resistin decreased in all groups (Sucrose B, Splenda® B, and Svetia® B) and, only in the groups of Sucrose B and Splenda® B, TNF-α was low, as shown in Table 3.


CLSUCSplenda®Svetia®
MedianMedianMedianMedianp∗ Value
pg/mLpg/mLpg/mLpg/mL

6 weeks of treatment

Leptin2451811874560.069
Resistin50264490877088240.004∗
Peptide-C50550868812600.009∗
TNF-α253232270.314

12 weeks of treatment

Leptin3804594464210.840
Resistin55443784467547880.149
Peptide-C6198538769020.149
TNF-α252223250.580

The values represent the Median concentration of hormones in pg/mL of mice supplemented with sweeteners. The nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test was performed to compare the differences between the groups. The differences were considered statistically significant with p<0.05 ∗.

Cytokine Profile

In the Peyer Patches, IL-6 and IL-17 Were Elevated with Splenda® and Svetia® Consumption. The percentage of cytokines IL-6 and IL-17 in the basal group was 7.9%  ± 0.016 and 1.42%  ± 0.058, respectively. At 6 weeks of treatment, IL-6 decreased its percentage in the Svetia® A, Sucrose A, and Splenda® A groups (Table 4). Conversely, IL-17 was elevated in the Splenda® A and Svetia® A groups. At 12 weeks of treatment, the percentage of IL-6 and IL-17 remained high in the Splenda® B and Svetia® B groups, compared to Control B (Table 4).


CLSUCSplenda®Svetia®
Mean±SDMean±SDMean±SDMean±SDP value∗
(%)(%)(%)(%)

6 weeks of treatment, Peyer’s patches

IL-64.59±0.0642.77±0.083.52±0.0692.47±0.1060.001∗
IL-17A1.15±0.082.94±0.0743.87±0.0583.33±0.0740.001∗

12 weeks of treatment, Peyer’s patches

IL-66.16±0.088.29±0.05311±0.1768.38±0.0530.001∗
IL-17A1.71±0.084.46±0.2355.04±0.0535.32±0.0740.001∗

6 weeks of treatment, Lamina propria

IL-69.39±0.0810.11±0.05316.01±0.17611.94±0.0530.001∗
IL-17A3.85±0.0747.41±0.0747.89±0.05811.15±0.0740.001∗

12 weeks of treatment, Lamina propria

IL-66.16±0.088.29±0.05311±0.1768.38±0.0530.001∗
IL-17A3.36±0.07412.25±0.07412.04±0.05810.17±0.080.001∗

The values represent the mean±SD of percentage of intracellular cytokines of Peyer’s patches and lamina propria in mice supplemented with sweeteners. Two-way ANOVA was performed to compare the differences between the groups. The differences were considered statistically significant with p <0.05 ∗.

In the Lamina Propria, IL-6 and IL-17 Were also Found Elevated with the Consumption of Splenda® and Svetia®. The percentage of intracellular cytokines in the basal group of the lamina propria was 7.52%  ± 0.106 for IL-6 and 2.82%  ± 0.112 for IL-17. The percentage of both cytokines increased at 6 and 12 weeks of treatment with the consumption of Splenda® and Svetia®, as shown in Table 4.

3.6. Isolation and Morphological Characterization of Bacteria

Isolated Strains. 120 strains were isolated in the culture media used: 60 representative strains from HBI Agar and 60 representative strains from Blood Agar. The 120 isolated strains were distributed in 9 groups according to the macroscopic morphological differences they presented (Table 5).


Macroscopic Characteristics
Morphological GroupSizeShapeSurfaceConsistenceColourTotal

1SmallCircular entire bordersSmoothCreamyWithe26
2LargeCircular rippled bordersSmoothDryBeige2
3MediumCircular rippled bordersSmoothCreamyBeige6
4MediumIrregular lobed bordersRugoseDryTransparent21
5MediumIrregular entire bordersSmoothCreamyTransparent9
6LargeIrregular rippled bordersRugoseCreamyBeige2
7SmallCircular entire bordersSmoothCreamyYellow21
8LargeCircular rippled bordersFlatCreamyTransparent30
9SmallPunctiform entire bordersRugoseCreamyWithe3

3.7. Species Identification

The consensus sequences of the 60 selected strains were obtained to be genetically identified (50%), with a length range of 1370 to 1530 base pairs (bp). These were compared with the sequences deposited in the NCBI GenBank. It was observed that 55 of the sequences had a percentage of similarity greater than 98% and that only 5 had a percentage of similarity of 97% (Tables 6(a) and 6(b)).

(a) Microbial species identified in the small intestine of CD1 mice without treatment (21 days of age) and after 6 weeks of treatment with sweeteners.

GroupNumber of Identified strainsKey of strainsFragment size (bp)% of Similarity in BLASTNumber Access to GenBankIdentified species

Basal6Bsl-1152799NR_075803Rothia dentocariosa strain ATCC 17931
Bsl-2139899NR_075803Rothia dentocariosa strain ATCC 17931
Bsl-3s140499AB33945Bacillus pumilus strain NBRC 12092
Bsl-4s139798AB661448Acinetobacter haemolyticus strain ATCC 17906
Bsl-5As140198AB661448Acinetobacter haemolyticus strain ATCC 17906
Bsl-6s141299NR_025412Acinetobacter schindleri strain LUH 5832

Control A4ClA-1139499NR_025228Pseudomonas koreensis strain Ps 9-14
ClA-1s139999AB661448Acinetobacter haemolyticus strain ATCC 17906
ClA-2144898NR_113350Staphylococcus xylosus strain JCM 2418
ClA-3s141897NR_113350Staphylococcus xylosus strain JCM 2418

Sucrose A10SacA-2139797M87887Bacillus subtilis strain 168
SacA-2s140199NR_113405Staphylococcus saccharolyticus strain JCM 1768
SacA-3140499NR_042147Pseudomonas cedrina subsp fulgida strain P515/12
SacA-5138598AB681259Bacillus safensis strain NBRC 100820
SacA-6140099AB680322Pseudomonas azotoformans strain NBRC 12693
SacA-7s140699NR_042338Bacillus aerius strain 24K
SacA-8s138799NR_112569Lysinibacillus fusiformis strain NBRC 15717
SacA-9s141698NR_121761Bacillus toyonensis BCT 7112
SacA-10s141099NR_113350Staphylococcus xylosus strain JCM 2418
SacA-12s139399NR_028930Stenotrophomonas rhizophila strain e-p 10

Splenda® A8SucA-1A139999NR_024817Bacillus asahii strain MA001
SucA-1s140399NR_025361Arthrobacter albus strain CF-43
SucA-2s140499NR_025723Kocuria marina strain KMM 3905
SucA-31399100NR_108906Bacillus eiseniae strain A 1-2
SucA-3s1398100NR_116578Micrococcus yunnanensis strain YIM 65004
SucA-5137698FJ357586Staphylococcus epidermidis strain BBN 1B3-02
SucA-6s139997KY818992Pseudomonas knackmussii strain FL 80
SucA-7s141598NR_112723Bacillus atrophaeus strain NBRC 15539

Svetia® A8StA-1140899AB681259Bacillus safensis strain NBRC 100820
StA -21409100NR_113350Staphylococcus xylosus strain JCM 2418
StA -1s140998NR_042338Bacillus aerius strain 24K
StA -2A140399NR_113350Staphylococcus xylosus strain JCM 2418
StA -2s140998KY174334Bacillus licheniformis strain DSM 13
StA -3139798NR_112632Bacillus circulans strain NBRC 13626
StA -3s140499NR_112723Bacillus atrophaeus strain NBRC 15539
StA -5140798NR_126178Streptococcus saliviloxodontae strain NUM 6306

Total36

(b) Microbial species identified in the small intestine of CD1 mice of 12 weeks of treatment with sweeteners.

GroupNumber of identified strainsKey of strainsFragment size (bp)% of Similarity in BLASTNumber access in GenBankIdentified Strains

Control B6CtB-1140197NR_075022Enterococcus hirae strain ATCC 9790
CtB-2140898NR_104284Bacillus muralis strain LMG 20238
CtB-2s139398AB33945Bacillus pumilus strain NBRC 12092
CtB-3139899NR_042161Bacillus ruris strain R-6760
CtB-3s139598NR_118146Lysinibacillus mangiferihumi strain M-GX 18
CtB-4s139899NR_043314Pseudomonas moraviensis strain 1B4

Sucrose B12SacB-2s140099NR_116578Micrococcus yunnanensis strain YIM 65004
SacB-2140597GU252112Bacillus megaterium strain ATCC 14581
SacB-3139699NR_074923Bacillus licheniformis strain ATCC 14580
SacB-3s1395100NR_121761Bacillus toyonensis strain BCT-7112
SacB-4140799NR_114270Rummeliibacillus stabekisii strain NBRC 104870
SacB-4s139698NR_075022Enterococcus hirae strain ATCC9790
SacB-6s139398NR_075022Enterococcus hirae strain ATCC9790
SacB-71410100NR_117562Enterococcus lactis strain BT 159
SacB-8140699NR_118381Bacillus pumilus strain SBMP2
SacB-9139699KT719422Rummeliibacillus stabekisii strain MER_TA_13
SacB-9s140799NR_121761Bacillus toyonensis strain BCT-7112
SacB-10140999NR_114270Rummeliibacillus stabekisii strain NBRC 104870

Splenda® B3SucB-1s140399KY992565Staphylococcus xylosus strain 2B
SucB-3s140699KY316471Bacillus cereus strain ZLynn1000-57
SucB-4140899MF040255Bacillus pumilus strain LMB3G14

Svetia® B3StB-1s141599NR_024668Staphylococcus lugdunensis strain ATCC43809
StB -4s141599NR_112845Oceanobacillus sojae strain Y27
StB -61402100AB681259Bacillus safensis strain NBRC 100820

Total24

We identified 14 genera and 36 different species, where the predominant genus was Bacillus with 14 species, followed by the genus Pseudomonas with 5 species and Staphylococcus with 4 species. In the analysis by genus and species of the strains by growth in the culture media used, it could be observed that the genera Rothia and Rummeliibacillus grew only in HBI Agar, while the genera Acinetobacter, Arthrobacter, Kocuria, Lysinibacillus, Micrococcus, Oceanobacillus, Stenotrophomonas, and Streptococcus only grew in Blood Agar. The remaining genera were obtained from both culture media (Table 7).


GenusSpeciesBasalControlSucroseSplenda®Svetia®
ABABABAB

AcinetobacterA. haemolyticus++-------
A. schindleri+--------

ArthrobacterA. albus-----+---

BacillusB. aerius---+---+-
B. asahii-----+---
B. atrophaeus-----+---
B. cereus------+--
B. circulans-------+-
B. eiseniae-----+---
B. licheniformis----+--+-
B. megaterium----+----
B. muralis--+------
B. pumilus+-+-+++--
B. ruris--+------
B. safensis--++--+++
B. subtilis---+-----
B. toyonensis---++----

EnterococcusE. hirae--+-+----
E. lactis----+----

KocuriaK. marina-----+---

LysinibacillusL. fusiformis---+-----
L. mangiferihumi--+------

MicrococcusM. yunnanensis----++---

OceanobacillusO. sojae--------+

PseudomonasP. azotoformans---+-----
P. cedrina subsp fulgida---+-----
P. knackmussii-----+---
P. koreensis-+-------
P. moraviensis--+------

RothiaR. dentocariosa+--------

RummeliibacillusR. stabekisii----+----

StaphylococcusS. epidermidis---+-----
S. lugdunensis--------+
S. saccharolyticus---+-----
S. xylosus-+-+-----

StenotrophomonasS. rhizophila---+-----

StreptococcusS. saliviloxodontae-------+-

The bacterial growth in the different study groups was very diverse; in the Basal group it was possible to observe only the growth of four different strains: Acinetobacter haemolyticus, Acinetobacter schindleri, Bacillus pumilus, and Rothia dentocariosa (Table 6(a)), while, in the Control A group, the presence of Acinetobacter haemolyticus, Pseudomonas koreensis, and Staphylococcus xylosus was observed. However, in the Control B group, the presence of the genus Bacillus with the species B. muralis, B. pumilus, and B. ruris predominated, followed by Enterococcus hirae, Lysinibacillus mangiferihumi, and Pseudomonas moraviensis.

In the Sucrose A group, we observed the presence of Lysinibacillus fusiformis, Pseudomonas azotoformans, and P. cedrina subsp fulgida; in the genus Staphylococcus we observed the species S. epidermidis, S. saccharolyticus, and S. xylosus, and in the genus Bacillus predominated the species B. aerius, B. safensis, B. subtilis, and B. toyonensis. On the other hand, in the Sucrose B group were present the following: Rummeliibacillus stabekisii, Micrococcus yunnanensis, Enterococcus hirae, and E. lactis; in the genus Bacillus predominated again the species B. licheniformis, B. megaterium, B. pumilus, and B. toyonensis. The Splenda® A group presented a greater diversity compared to the Splenda® B group. In the Splenda® A group, the presence of Arthrobacter albus, Kocuria marina, Micrococcus yunnanensis, and Pseudomonas knackmussii was observed and the genus Bacillus was predominant with the species B. asahii, B. atrophaeus, B. eiseniae, and B. pumilus, while, in the Splenda® B group, only the genus Bacillus was observed with the species B. cereus, B. pumilus, and B. safensis. In the Svetia® A group, the presence of Streptococcus saliviloxodontae and the genus Bacillus were observed in the species B. aerius, B. circulans, B. licheniformis, and B. safensis. On the other hand, in the Svetia® B group only the presence of Bacillus safensis, Oceanobacillus sojae, and Staphylococcus lugdunensis was observed (Tables 6(a) and 6(b)).

The genera Bacillus, Pseudomonas, and Staphylococcus were present in most of the study groups. The genus Bacillus was present in 8 study groups. B. pumilus was observed in the Basal, Control B, Sucrose B, Splenda® A, and Splenda® B groups. Bacillus safensis was present in the groups: Sucrose A, Control B, Splenda® B, Svetia® A, and Svetia® B. The genus Pseudomonas was present in 4 groups: P. koreensis in the Control A group, P. moraviensis in the Control B group, P. azotoformans and P. cedria subsp fulgida in the Sucrose A group, and P. knackmussii in the Splenda® A group. The third genus with greater presence in the study groups was Staphylococcus; in the Control A group, S. xylosus was presented, in the Sucrose A group, S. epidermidis, S. saccharolyticus, and S. xylosus were presented, and in the Svetia® B group S. lugdunensis was presented (Table 7).

4. Discussion

Currently the consumption of sweeteners is increasingly popular among the population; it is believed that the consumption of artificial nonnutritive sweeteners confers certain health benefits [33]. However, other studies, such as that by Nettleton et al., 2009 [34], suggest that the consumption of these sweeteners is associated with the increase in weight and the risk of suffering from type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2). The passage of sweeteners through the gastrointestinal tract is carried out without any modification in their own structure; this situation puts them in direct contact with the intestinal microbiota, which is responsible for regulating multiple physiological functions [35].

Sucralose can be metabolized or absorbed in a minimal proportion by the intestine of mammals, but it can exert an effect on the resident bacteria of the intestine [36]. It has also been shown that sucralose can increase the secretion of serotonin, which stimulates the peristaltic and secretory activity of the intestine [37, 38].

4.1. The Consumption of Sweeteners Reduces the Consumption of Food and Energy

The Splenda® was consumed in greater quantity at 63 days old in the study; however, at 12 weeks of treatment the Svetia® B showed the highest consumption of sweetener. It is suggested that the intensity of sweetness increases the preference of consumption of sweet flavours and increases the appetite [39, 40]. These results agree with a study in rats, which showed that these rodents preferred to consume stevia compared to saccharin or liquid without sweetener [41], since stevia is up to 300 times sweeter than sucrose [42].

In our study, the Splenda A and B and Svetia A and B groups modified the consumption of food, thus reducing energy consumption in both cases. This is opposed to the results reported by Wang et al., in 2016 [43], where they show that the consumption of sucralose increases the food intake in mice and flies mainly by two mechanisms of action, by direct stimulation to receptors with a sweet taste or, indirectly, through taste-independent neuronal mechanisms.

4.2. The Supplemented Groups Did Not Modify the BMI

The sweetener groups did not show changes in the BMI; these results are contrary to those reported in other studies. For example, Mattes and Popkin, in 2009 [44], concluded that the use of nonnutritive sweeteners increases BMI in healthy sedentary subjects. In contrast, in 2010, Yang Q [45] reported that healthy people who consumed beverages with three different sweeteners presented in the long term an increase in BMI with respect to those people who consumed liquid without sweetener. This can be explained by the time of exposure to sweeteners which were placed for a period of 5 h in the morning and consumed water without sweetener the rest of the time. The mice had access to water consumption with and without sweetener; it shows a predilection for the consumption of solution with sweetener, mainly Splenda and Stevia, but they consumed less amount of food, which justifies that the body weight was not modified and therefore the BMI. In addition, the CD1 mice are not an obesogenic strain, and reason for the BMI was not increased [46].

This contrasts with the study conducted by Abou-Donia et al., in 2008 [11]; they reported that rodents that consumed 100 mg/kg of Splenda® weight for 12 weeks had weight gain compared to rats that did not receive Splenda® or received higher doses (300, 500, and 1000 mg/kg). This suggests that the modification of body weight does not depend exclusively on the consumption of sweeteners; rather it is a multifactorial process that depends on factors such as the type of diet, the amount and type of sweetener consumed per day, and the level of physical activity.

4.3. Sweeteners, Cytokines, Immunity, and Microbiota of the Mucosa of the Small Intestine

Studies on nonnutritive sweeteners are related to the safety of their consumption and their probable long-term effects. Most focus on their systemic effect such as risk of cancer, diabetes, dental caries, hypertension, and glycaemic control, appetite, and food [47]. In this study, we looked at the perspective of the effect of sweeteners in the modification of the percentage of lymphocytes, the secretion of cytokines and how the microbiota of the small intestine is modified as a site of contact, and absorption of sweeteners.

The findings are relevant because, after 12 weeks of sweetener consumption, the percentage of CD3+CD8+ lymphocytes was increased in Peyer’s patches, after consumption of Splenda® and Svetia®. In Peyer’s patches, IL-6 and IL-17 were elevated with Splenda® and Svetia® consumption. In the lamina propria, the Svetia® consumption increased the percentage of CD3+CD4+ lymphocytes, at 6 and 12 weeks. The Splenda® group after 12 weeks of consumption decreased the percentage of CD3+ at the expense of CD8+. The percentage of CD8+ lymphocytes was found depressed in the Splenda® and Svetia® groups. In the lamina propria, IL-6 and IL-17 were also found elevated with the consumption of Splenda® and Svetia®. This is associated with elevation of leptin and C-peptide, as well as reduction of resistin, after the chronic consumption of both Splenda® and Svetia®. On the other hand, the increased TNF-α with the Svetia® may cause an increase in the inflammatory state, due to an increase in TNF-α and C-peptide. Splenda® consumption seems to improve inflammatory status, since it decreases TNF-α, but it increases leptin and C-peptide.

While the lymphocytes of Peyer’s patches and lamina propria are increased with the consumption of sweeteners, the microbiota of the small intestine is depressed substantially after 12 weeks of consumption. The gut microbiota plays a crucial role in the metabolism and immunity of the individual [48]; it cooperates with the immune system promoting signs of maturation of immune cells [34]; therefore the decrease of the microbiota can stimulate the production of lymphocytes in the mucosa of the small intestine, increasing the percentage of lymphocytes as happened in this study, as shown in Figures 2 and 3.

As is known, the composition and function of the microbiota are modulated by the type of diet consumed [35]. In this study, it can be seen how the chronic consumption of sweeteners modifies the microbiota of the small intestine.

In addition to the above, recently Uebanso et al., in 2017 [49], reported that mice supplemented with sucralose for 8 weeks at doses of 1.5 and 15 mg / kg of weight did not modify their body weight, compared with mice that did not consume sucralose. They also observed that the number of bacteria from phylum Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes was similar in all mice, but Clostridium of the XIVa group decreased in a dose-dependent manner with the consumption of sucralose.

In this study, we can see the modification of the microbiota with chronic consumption of sweeteners; in the newly weaned Basal group, we identified 6 strains corresponding to three different genera: Acinetobacter, Bacillus, and Rothia, where the genus Acinetobacter predominated, while, in the Control A group, 4 strains were identified that corresponded to the genera: Pseudomonas, Acinetobacter, and Staphylococcus, where the genus Staphylococcus had greater predominance. In contrast, in the Control B group, 6 strains were identified, which belong to the genera: Enterococcus, Bacillus, Lysinibacillus, and Pseudomonas, showing 3 different genera with respect to the Control A group, being the Bacillus genus the one that predominated at 12 weeks of supplementation (Control B).

On the other hand, the groups supplemented with sucrose showed a greater diversity of identified genera. In the group Sucrose A, 10 strains belong to the genera Bacillus, Staphylococcus, Pseudomonas, Lysinibacillus, and Stenotrophomonas, predominantly the genus Bacillus, while, in the group Sucrose B, the number of identified strains was increased to 12, which belong to the genera: Micrococcus, Bacillus, Rummeliibacillus, and Enterococcus, where the genus Bacillus predominated followed by the genus Rummeliibacillus.

In the Abou-Donia et al. study, in 2008 [11], they collected feces from rats that consumed Splenda® for 12 weeks, cultured them on selective media for aerobic and anaerobic bacteria, and found that the rats that received Splenda® at doses of 100 mg/kg of weight had a decrease of 48.9% of anaerobic bacteria, 36.9% of bifidobacteria, 39.1% of lactobacillus, and 65.7% of Bacteroides compared to rats that did not consume Splenda®. In contrast, at higher doses of Splenda® (300, 500, and 1000 mg/kg of weight) they could observe a decrease of 51.2% to 67.8% in the number of aerobic bacteria with respect to rats that did not receive Splenda®.

Our results showed that, in the Splenda® A group, 8 strains were identified from genera: Bacillus, Micrococcus, Staphylococcus, and Pseudomonas, with the Bacillus genus being the most predominant. In the case of the Splenda® B group, the number of strains identified decreased to 3, which belong to the genera Bacillus and Staphylococcus, where the genus Bacillus predominated again.

It has also been reported that certain soluble extracts of the Stevia Rebaudiana leaf can inhibit the growth of some bacteria and fungi [50]. Other researchers mention that the metabolite of Rebaudioside A, steviol, may be responsible for the antimicrobial activity of stevia; however they do not establish any mechanism by which they exercise this activity [51, 52].

Our findings show that, in the Svetia® A group, 8 strains were identified: genera Bacillus, Staphylococcus, and Streptococcus, where Bacillus predominated. On the other hand, in the Svetia® B group, a decrease was observed in the number of strains identified (3 strains), which belong to two different genera: Bacillus and Staphylococcus.

In the study conducted by Li et al., in 2014 [53], they evaluated the in vitro effect of Rebaudioside A on bacterial growth and observed that Rebaudioside A can inhibit the growth of S. Aureus and stimulate the growth of L. plantarum. These results indicate that Rebaudioside A can inhibit the growth of pathogenic microorganisms and stimulate the growth of probiotic microorganisms.

In 2015, Daly et al.[23] studied the composition of the microbiota of cecal content of pigs by pyrosequencing 16S rRNA gene and identified 25 families of bacteria that included 7 classes: Bacteroidia, Clsotridia, Bacilli, Actinobacteria, Fibrobacteria, Erysipelotrichia, and Proteobacteria, where Bacteroidia, Clostridia, and Bacilli predominated. The families that predominated of these three classes were Prevotellaceae, Porphyromonadaceae, Lachnospiraceae, Ruminococcaceae, Veillonellaceae, and Lactobacillaceae. When comparing these results with the microbiota of pigs supplemented with SUCRAM (neohesperidin dihydrochalcone and saccharin), they found a higher abundance of the populations of Ruminococcaceae, Veillonellaceae, and mainly of Lactobacillaceae; they concluded that the consumption of this high intensity sweetener significantly modified the composition of the intestinal microbiota.

Suez et al., in 2014 [36], reported that the consumption of saccharin alters the composition of the intestinal microbiota in mice inducing intolerance to glucose. These mice showed a marked dysbiosis in comparison with mice that did not consume saccharin, with an increase of bacteria belonging to the genus Bacteroides, Clostridiales, and Lactobacillus reuteri.

The fermentation of artificial sweeteners by the gut microbiota is not yet fully established, although the current reports are based on the fermentative capacity of the colon microbiota on sugars and other compounds in the diet [54]. Other studies report that steviol is fermented by bacteria present in the colon; this fermentation is mediated mainly by the genus Bacteroides producing steviol as the main metabolite [55, 56]. In general, most reports study the microbiota of the colon, but there are few reports that attempt to clarify its effect at the level of the small intestine and its relationship with the immune system.

Although the Bacteroides are the most abundant in the gut microbiota and the most studied at present for their ability to use glycans and form short chain fatty acids as a product of their fermentation [57, 58], it is necessary to establish the mechanisms of action by which the intestinal microbiota as a whole is able to degrade and metabolize nonnutritive sweeteners [59]. In the present study, the most abundant genus was Bacillus in all groups of the small intestine microbiota, being this the most important difference with the colon microbiota.

5. Conclusions

The consumption of sweeteners is not related to food intake or energy intake; the highest intake of food and energy was presented in the Control group, which had a lower water intake compared to the mice that received sweetener. The highest ingestion of sweetener is directly related to the increase in body mass index; the mice that received Svetia® ingested a greater amount of sweetener at the end of the study and presented the highest increase in BMI.

The consumption of sweeteners increases the percentage of CD3+CD8+ lymphocytes in Peyer’s patches and CD3+CD4+ in the lamina propria, in addition to modifying the composition of the intestinal microbiota. The groups supplemented with sweeteners had a greater diversity of the intestinal microbiota compared with the Control groups; the sucrose A and B groups presented a greater diversity of bacteria in terms of gender and species identified.

Despite this great diversity of genera and species identified, the genus that predominated in all study groups was the genus Bacillus, which may suggest that the genus Bacillus may have the ability to adapt to sweeteners regardless of origin or nutritional contribution of the same.

More research is needed regarding the interaction of intestinal microbiota and sweeteners; the evidence that exists today is not clear or conclusive; this study shows the modification of bacterial diversity caused by the ingestion of one or another sweetener; however, the main metabolic pathways or mechanisms of action by which the intestinal microbiota is able to degrade the different sweeteners and use the residual metabolites are still unknown.

Data Availability

The quantitative data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request, in format of SPSS data base. The qualitative DNA data were compared and deposited in the GenBank: https://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov with the access number in GenBank, located in Tables 6(a) and 6(b).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (CONACyT) for the support granted for the realization of this project as part of the academic program of the Master of Science in Health.

References

  1. A. Engin, “The definition and prevalence of obesity and metabolic syndrome,” Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, vol. 960, pp. 1–17, 2017. View at: Google Scholar
  2. M. Ng, T. Fleming, M. Robinson, and et al, “Global, regional, and national prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adults during 1980–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013,” The Lancet, vol. 384, no. 9945, pp. 766–781, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  3. A. D. Mooradian, M. Smith, and M. Tokuda, “The role of artificial and natural sweeteners in reducing the consumption of table sugar: A narrative review,” Clinical Nutrition ESPEN, vol. 18, pp. 1–8, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  4. J. M. García, M. García, F. Casado, and J. García, “Una visión actual y global de los edulcorantes. Aspectos de regulación,” Nutrición Hospitalaria, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 17–31, 2013. View at: Google Scholar
  5. American Diabetes Association, “Pharmacologic approaches to glycemic treatment: standards of medical care in diabetes-2018,” Diabetes Care, supplement 1, no. 41, pp. S73–S85, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  6. S. E. Swithers, “Artificial sweeteners are not the answer to childhood obesity,” Appetite, vol. 93, pp. 85–90, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  7. Y. Nakagawa, M. Nagasawa, S. Yamada et al., “Sweet taste receptor expressed in pancreatic beta-cells activates the calcium and cyclic AMP signaling systems and stimulates insulin secretion,” PLoS ONE, vol. 4, no. 4, Article ID e5106, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  8. T. L. Davidson, A. A. Martin, K. Clark, and S. E. Swithers, “Intake of high-intensity sweeteners alters the ability of sweet taste to signal caloric consequences: implications for the learned control of energy and body weight regulation,” The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol. 64, no. 7, pp. 1430–1441, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. S. E. Swithers, C. R. Baker, and T. L. Davidson, “General and persistent effects of high-intensity sweeteners on body weight gain and caloric compensation in rats,” Behavioral Neuroscience, vol. 123, no. 4, pp. 772–780, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  10. S. E. Swithers, A. A. Martin, K. M. Clark, A. F. Laboy, and T. Davidson, “Body weight gain in rats consuming sweetened liquids. Effects of caffeine and diet composition,” Appetite, vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 528–533, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  11. M. B. Abou-Donia, E. M. El-Masry, A. A. Abdel-Rahman, R. E. McLendon, and S. S. Schiffman, “Splenda alters gut microflora and increases intestinal P-glycoprotein and cytochrome P-450 in male rats,” Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A. Current Issues, vol. 71, no. 21, pp. 1415–1429, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  12. M. S. Palmnäs, T. E. Cowan, M. R. Bomhof et al., “Low-dose aspartame consumption differentially affects gut microbiota-host metabolic interactions in the diet-induced obese rat,” PLoS ONE, vol. 9, no. 10, Article ID e109841, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  13. T. M. Cabral, M. G. b. Pereira, A. E. z. Falchione et al., “Artificial sweeteners as a cause of obesity: weight gain mechanisms and current evidence,” Health, vol. 10, no. 05, pp. 700–717, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  14. F. H. Mourad, K. A. Barada, and N. E. Saade, “Impairment of small intestinal function in ulcerative colitis: role of enteric innervation,” Journal of Crohn's and Colitis, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 369–377, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  15. L. Dollé, H. Q. Tran, L. Etienne-Mesmin, and B. Chassaing, “Policing of gut microbiota by the adaptive immune system,” BMC Medicine, vol. 14, no. 1, p. 27, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  16. F. Russo, G. Chimienti, G. Riezzo et al., “Adipose tissue-derived biomarkers of intestinal barrier functions for the characterization of diarrhoea-predominant IBS,” Disease Markers, vol. 2018, Article ID 1827937, 10 pages, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  17. L. Abusleme and M. N. Moutsopoulos, “IL-17: overview and role in oral immunity and microbiome,” Oral Diseases, vol. 23, no. 7, pp. 854–865, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  18. E. Rutayisire, K. Huang, Y. Liu, and F. Tao, “The mode of delivery affects the diversity and colonization pattern of the gut microbiota during the first year of infants' life: A systematic review,” BMC Gastroenterology, vol. 16, no. 1, p. 86, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  19. C. L. Boulangé, A. L. Neves, J. Chilloux, J. K. Nicholson, and M. Dumas, “Impact of the gut microbiota on inflammation, obesity, and metabolic disease,” Genome Medicine, vol. 8, no. 1, article 42, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  20. A. Hakansson and G. Molin, “Gut microbiota and inflammation,” Nutrients, vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 637–682, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  21. V. Kurzweil, A. Tarangelo, P. M. Oliver, and J. Niess, “Gastrointestinal microbiota do not significantly contribute to T cell activation or GI inflammation in Ndfip1-cKO mice,” PLoS ONE, vol. 7, no. 4, Article ID e34478, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  22. M. Million, J.-C. Lagier, D. Yahav, and M. Paul, “Gut bacterial microbiota and obesity,” Clinical Microbiology and Infection, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 305–313, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  23. K. Daly, A. C. Darby, N. Hall et al., “Bacterial sensing underlies artificial sweetener-induced growth of gut Lactobacillus,” Environmental Microbiology, vol. 18, no. 7, pp. 2159–2171, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  24. Y. Sanz, A. Santacruz, and P. Gauffin, “Gut microbiota in obesity and metabolic disorders,” Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 434–441, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  25. J. Nickelson, J. C. Lawrence, J. M. Parton, A. P. Knowlden, and R. J. Mcdermott, “What proportion of preschool-aged children consume sweetened beverages?” Journal of School Health, vol. 84, no. 3, pp. 185–194, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  26. “Productos y servicios. Bebidas saborizadas no alcohólicas, sus congelados, productos concentrados para prepararlas y bebidas adicionadas con cafeína. Especificaciones y disposiciones sanitarias. Métodos de prueba,” Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-218-SSA1-2011. Diario Oficial de la Federación, 2012, http://www.salud.gob.mx/cdi/nom/compi/NOM-218-SSA1-2011.pdf . View at: Google Scholar
  27. E. L. B. Novelli, Y. S. Diniz, C. M. Galhardi et al., “Anthropometrical parameters and markers of obesity in rats,” Laboratory Animals, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 111–119, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  28. A. A. Reséndiz-Albor, H. Reina-Garfias, S. Rojas-Hernández et al., “Regionalization of pIgR expression in the mucosa of mouse small intestine,” Immunology Letters, vol. 128, no. 1, pp. 59–67, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  29. I. M. Arciniega-Martínez, R. Campos-Rodríguez, M. E. Drago-Serrano, L. E. Sánchez-Torres, T. R. Cruz-Hernández, and A. A. Reséndiz-Albor, “Modulatory effects of oral bovine lactoferrin on the IgA response at inductor and effector sites of distal small intestine from BALB/c mice,” Archivum Immunologiae et Therapia Experimentalis, vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 57–63, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  30. J. Rozas, J. C. Sánchez-Delbarrio, X. Messeguer, and R. Rozas, “DnaSP V5, DNA polymorphism analyses by the coalescent and other methods,” Bioinforma, vol. 19, no. 18, pp. 2496-2497, 2003. View at: Google Scholar
  31. T. A. Hall, “BioEdit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for Windows 95/98/NT,” Nucleic Acids Symposium, vol. 41, pp. 95–98, 1999. View at: Google Scholar
  32. M. Johnson, I. Zaretskaya, Y. Raytselis, Y. Merezhuk, S. McGinnis, and T. L. Madden, “NCBI BLAST: a better web interface,” Nucleic Acids Research, vol. 36, pp. W5–W9, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  33. C. Fitch and K. S. Keim, “Position of the academy of nutrition and dietetics: use of nutritive and nonnutritive sweeteners,” Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, vol. 112, no. 5, pp. 739–758, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  34. J. A. Nettleton, P. L. Lutsey, Y. Wang, J. A. Lima, E. D. Michos, and D. R. Jacobs, “Diet soda intake and risk of incident metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes in the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis (MESA),” Diabetes Care, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 688–694, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  35. J. C. Clemente, L. K. Ursell, L. W. Parfrey, and R. Knight, “The impact of the gut microbiota on human health: an integrative view,” Cell, vol. 148, no. 6, pp. 1258–1270, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  36. J. Suez, T. Korem, D. Zeevi et al., “Artificial sweeteners induce glucose intolerance by altering the gut microbiota,” Nature, vol. 514, no. 7521, pp. 181–186, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  37. M. Kidd, I. M. Modlin, B. I. Gustafsson, I. Drozdov, O. Hauso, and R. Pfragner, “Luminal regulation of normal and neoplastic human EC cell serotonin release is mediated by bile salts, amines, tastants, and olfactants,” American Journal of Physiology-Gastrointestinal and Liver Physiology, vol. 295, no. 2, pp. G260–G272, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  38. A. Sikander, S. V. Rana, and K. K. Prasad, “Role of serotonin in gastrointestinal motility and irritable bowel syndrome,” Clinica Chimica Acta, vol. 403, no. 1-2, pp. 47–55, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  39. R. J. Brown, M. A. de Banate, and K. I. Rother, “Artificial sweeteners: a systematic review of metabolic effects in youth,” International Journal of Pediatric Obesity, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 305–312, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  40. V. S. Malik and F. B. Hu, “Sweeteners and risk of obesity and type 2 Diabetes: the role of sugar-sweetened beverages,” Current Diabetes Reports, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 195–203, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  41. A. Sclafani, M. Bahrani, S. Zukerman, and K. Ackroff, “Stevia and saccharin preferences in rats and mice,” Chemical Senses, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 433–443, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  42. S. K. Goyal and R. K. Goyal, “Stevia (Stevia rebaudiana) a bio-sweetener: a review,” International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  43. Q.-P. Wang, Y. Q. Lin, L. Zhang et al., “Sucralose promotes food intake through NPY and a neuronal fasting response,” Cell Metabolism, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 75–90, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  44. R. D. Mattes and B. M. Popkin, “Nonnutritive sweetener consumption in humans: Effects on appetite and food intake and their putative mechanisms,” American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, vol. 89, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  45. Q. Yang, “Gain weight by 'going diet?' artificial sweeteners and the neurobiology of sugar cravings,” Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, vol. 83, no. 2, pp. 101–108, 2010. View at: Google Scholar
  46. L. S. Hsieh, J. H. Wen, L. Miyares, P. J. Lombroso, and A. Bordey, “Outbred CD1 mice are as suitable as inbred C57BL/6J mice in performing social tasks,” Neuroscience Letters, vol. 637, pp. 142–147, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  47. S. Lohner, I. Toews, and J. J. Meerpohl, “Health outcomes of non-nutritive sweeteners: analysis of the research landscape,” Nutrition Journal, vol. 16, no. 1, p. 55, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  48. N. Bokulich and M. Blaser, “A bitter aftertaste: unintended effects of artificial sweeteners on the gut microbiome,” Cell Metabolism, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 701–703, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  49. T. Uebanso, A. Ohnishi, R. Kitayama et al., “Effects of low-dose non-caloric sweetener consumption on gut microbiota in mice,” Nutrients, vol. 9, no. 6, article 662, p. E560, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  50. S. Ghosh, E. Subudhi, and S. Nayak, “Antimicrobial assay of Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni leaf extracts against 10 pathogens,” International Journal of Integrative Biology, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 27–31, 2008. View at: Google Scholar
  51. S. Jayaraman, M. Manoharan, and S. Illanchezian, “In-vitro antimicrobial and antitumor activities of Stevia rebaudiana (Asteraceae) leaf extracts,” Tropical Journal of Pharmaceutical Research, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 1143–1149, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  52. M. Debnath, “Clonal propagation and antimicrobial activity of an endemic medicinal plant Stevia rebaudiana,” Journal of Medicinal Plants Research, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 45–51, 2008. View at: Google Scholar
  53. S. Li, T. Chen, S. Dong, Y. Xiong, H. Wei, and F. Xu, “The effects of rebaudioside A on microbial diversity in mouse intestine,” Food Science and Technology Research, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 459–467, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  54. A. N. Payne, C. Chassard, and C. Lacroix, “Gut microbial adaptation to dietary consumption of fructose, artificial sweeteners and sugar alcohols: implications for host-microbe interactions contributing to obesity,” Obesity Reviews, vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 799–809, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  55. H. A. Grabitske and J. L. Slavin, “Gastrointestinal effects of low-digestible carbohydrates,” Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 327–360, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  56. L. E. Comstock, “Importance of glycans to the host-bacteroides mutualism in the mammalian intestine,” Cell Host & Microbe, vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 522–526, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  57. S. M. Bloom, V. N. Bijanki, G. M. Nava et al., “Commensal Bacteroides species induce colitis in host-genotype-specific fashion in a mouse model of inflammatory bowel disease,” Cell Host & Microbe, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 390–403, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  58. K. Daly, A. C. Darby, and S. P. Shirazi-Beechey, “Low calorie sweeteners and gut microbiota,” Physiology & Behavior, vol. 164, pp. 494–500, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  59. S. Chattopadhyay, U. Raychaudhuri, and R. Chakraborty, “Artificial sweeteners – a review,” Journal of Food Science and Technology, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 611–621, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright © 2019 B. E. Martínez-Carrillo et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


More related articles

2093 Views | 622 Downloads | 2 Citations
 PDF  Download Citation  Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder

Related articles

We are committed to sharing findings related to COVID-19 as quickly and safely as possible. Any author submitting a COVID-19 paper should notify us at help@hindawi.com to ensure their research is fast-tracked and made available on a preprint server as soon as possible. We will be providing unlimited waivers of publication charges for accepted articles related to COVID-19. Sign up here as a reviewer to help fast-track new submissions.