Next Article in Journal
Overexpression of Mitochondrial Catalase within Adipose Tissue Does Not Confer Systemic Metabolic Protection against Diet-Induced Obesity
Next Article in Special Issue
Blueberry Supplementation and Skin Health
Previous Article in Journal
Discrimination of Green Coffee (Coffea arabica and Coffea canephora) of Different Geographical Origin Based on Antioxidant Activity, High-Throughput Metabolomics, and DNA RFLP Fingerprinting
Previous Article in Special Issue
Health Benefits of Antioxidant Bioactive Compounds in the Fruits and Leaves of Lonicera caerulea L. and Aronia melanocarpa (Michx.) Elliot
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Crop, Host, and Gut Microbiome Variation Influence Precision Nutrition: An Example of Blueberries

1
School of Exercise and Nutritional Science, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA 92182, USA
2
Arkansas Children’s Nutrition Center, Department of Pediatrics, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR 72202, USA
3
Department of Nutrition Science, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA
4
Department of Food Science and Technology, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA
5
Department of Agronomy, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA
6
Department of Statistics, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA
7
Plants for Human Health Institute, Department of Food Bioprocessing and Nutrition Sciences, North Carolina State University, Kannapolis, NC 28081, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Antioxidants 2023, 12(5), 1136; https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox12051136
Submission received: 20 April 2023 / Revised: 7 May 2023 / Accepted: 11 May 2023 / Published: 22 May 2023

Abstract

:
Epidemiological studies have shown associations between polyphenol-rich fruit intake and bone health, and preclinical studies have shown that blueberries improve bone health. To determine the genotype and dose of blueberries that are effective in ameliorating age-related bone loss, a multi-institutional team of investigators performed in vitro, preclinical, and clinical studies on blueberry varieties that differed in flavonoid profiles. Principal component analysis was used to select blueberry genotypes that varied in anthocyanin profiles. Total phenolic content did not predict the bioavailability of polyphenolic compounds in rats. A range in bioavailability was observed in individual polyphenolic compounds across genotypes. Both alpha and beta diversity analyses indicated that gut microbiome profiles varied with blueberry dose in rats. Additionally, the identification of specific taxa, such as Prevotellaceae_UCG-001 and Coriobacteriales, increasing after blueberry consumption adds to the mounting evidence of their role in polyphenol metabolism. All of the sources of variation can inform blueberry breeding practices to influence precision nutrition.

1. Introduction

Precision nutrition is of great current interest and is a growing focus of nutrition research funding. The concept is aimed at predicting an individual’s response to a food or diet to make personalized dietary recommendations for optimal health and disease prevention for that individual. This contrasts with traditional dietary guidelines for public health recommendations that are framed for generally healthy people. However, evaluating individual diversity in response to diet is just one part of the complexity that is involved. Diversity occurs along the whole spectrum, from the food, beverage, or supplement being consumed to the physiology of the individual consuming the food and the spectrum of metabolites generated by that individual’s gut microbiome and host metabolizing systems.
Fruit and vegetable consumption is associated with a decreased risk of developing many chronic diseases, including obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and neurocognitive diseases [1,2,3,4]. These benefits are commonly attributed to bioactive phytochemicals produced by plants as non-nutritive, secondary metabolites that possess biological activities in humans, including antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anti-cancer, antimicrobial, and neuroprotective effects [5,6,7]. Of the thousands of phytochemicals that have been identified, some of the most promising health benefits have been linked to (poly)phenolic (hereafter referred to as polyphenolic) compounds associated with tea, cocoa, and especially berry fruits [8,9]. These include phenolic acids, stilbenoids, and flavonoids (including anthocyanins).
Blueberries (Vaccinium spp.) are a well-recognized source of dietary polyphenols. Anthocyanins account for nearly half of all polyphenols present in blueberries and give them their distinctive blue-purple color [10]. Evidence of health benefits from epidemiological studies, coupled with the abundance of polyphenols, has catalyzed further preclinical and clinical research to elucidate the mechanisms of action and substantiate knowledge on the health benefits attributed to blueberries and blueberry-rich foods.
Intervention trials support the ability of blueberries to improve markers of cardiovascular function (e.g., blood pressure, arterial blood flow, and cholesterol levels) while decreasing the risk of developing CVD [11,12]. Additionally, studies regarding neurocognition, memory, and slowing age-related cognitive decline indicate that blueberries positively influence these endpoints [13,14]. Further studies with anthocyanins have shown similar results and worked through the same mechanisms, suggesting that anthocyanins are likely one of the bioactive agents responsible for many of the health benefits observed with blueberries [15,16]. Although all blueberries are a rich source of polyphenols, there are hundreds of genotypes available to farmers and consumers, all with varying polyphenolic profiles, ranging in concentration of total polyphenolic (TP) content from 1.63 to 2.87 mg gallic acid equivalents (GAE)/g of fresh weight (FW) [17], demonstrating potential for differences in polyphenol absorption, biotransformation, and utilization. The differences observed in polyphenolic content are due to plant genetics, environmental factors, and agronomic conditions, as well as the type and extent of post-harvest storage and processing [18,19,20].
A multi-institutional team of investigators funded by the National Institutes of Health performed in vitro, preclinical, and clinical studies on blueberries that differed in polyphenolic profiles for bone health outcomes. This paper reports the results from this coalition, demonstrating the diversity of polyphenol profiles in blueberries, the bioavailability of anthocyanins from blueberries selected for their diversity in blueberry profiles, and the influence of blueberries on the gut microbiome. This work provides context for understanding the complexity involved at all stages, from plant genetics to host to the gut microbiome pathway that impacts health.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Diversity of Anthocyanin Profiles across Blueberry Genotypes

Anthocyanin profiles were available from 267 genotypes of blueberries from commercial genotypes and breeding selections at the North Carolina State University Piedmont Research Station (NCSU-PRS), Salisbury, North Carolina, USA [21]. Principal Component Analysis (PCA), a multivariate statistical technique [22], was performed on 17 anthocyanins profiled in each genotype.

2.2. Diversity of Blueberry Polyphenolic Profiles

Genotypes with sufficient diversity in their anthocyanin—and, by extension, their polyphenolic—profiles, based on selecting divergent profiles from the PCA, were selected for characterizing their polyphenolic profiles before determining the bioavailability of flavonoids among blueberry genotypes in ovariectomized rats as a model for bone loss in postmenopausal women.

2.2.1. Blueberry Material

Six genotypes from the NCSU-PRS collection: three rabbiteye genotypes (Vaccinium virgatum), including Ira, Montgomery, and Onslow, and three southern highbush genotypes (V. corybosum), including Legacy, Sampson, and SHF2B1-21:3, a clone developed by the NCSU breeding program [17], were selected. To maximize the diversity of polyphenolic profiles, four additional members of the Vaccinium genus, including bilberries (V. myrtillus, Oregon Wild Harvest, Sandy, OR, USA), cranberries (V. macrocarpon, Cranberry Network, Wisconsin Rapids, WI, USA), and lowbush blueberries (V. angustifolium) from both a single field collection of wild blueberries in Ellsworth Maine (designated as Wild Blueberries) and a commercially prepared wild blueberry composite from all major growing regions in Maine and maritime Canada designated as a Lowbush Blueberry (LB) composite (Wild Blueberry Association of North America, Old Town, ME, USA), were also analyzed. All animal studies used LB composite in the treatment arm.

2.2.2. Quantification of Individual Blueberry Phenolics

Lyophilized whole blueberries were ground into a fine powder using a spice grinder. Phenolics were then extracted, purified, and analyzed in triplicate for total phenolics via the Folin–Ciocalteu method, as described elsewhere [23,24]. Individual phenolics in purified blueberry extracts were filtered with 0.45 µm PTFE filters and 10 µL was injected into a Waters 2695 LC-MS (Milford, MA, USA) with a Waters X-Bridge BEH Shield RP18 column (2.5 µm, 2.1 × 100 mm) heated to 40 °C as previously described [23,25]. Anthocyanins were analyzed using a linear gradient at a flow rate of 0.25 mL/min, with mobile phases A (2% formic acid in water) and B (0.1% formic acid in acetonitrile) in the following ratios at 0, 15, 18, and 19 min, respectively: 90:10, 75:25, 70:30, and 90:10. Phenolic acids, stilbenoids, flavan-3-ols, and flavonols were analyzed using a linear gradient at a flow rate of 0.25 mL/min, with mobile phases A (0.4% formic acid in water) and B (0.1% formic acid in acetonitrile) in the following ratios at 0, 15, 17, and 18 min, respectively: 95:5, 65:35, 50:50, and 95:5.
Phenolics were detected and quantified using a Waters Micromass ZQ 2000 mass spectrometer, as shown in Table 1. Positive mode electrospray ionization (ESI+) was used for detection and quantitation of anthocyanins, with the following settings: source temperature 150 °C, desolvation temperature 250 °C, nitrogen desolvation gas flow rate 250 L/h, nitrogen cone gas flow rate 25 L/h, capillary voltage 2500 V, cone voltage 50 V, and extractor voltage 3 V. Negative mode ESI (ESI-) was used to detect and quantify phenolic acids, stilbenoids, flavan-3-ols, and flavonols, with the following settings: source temperature 150 °C, desolvation temperature 250 °C, nitrogen desolvation gas flow rate 400 L/h, nitrogen cone gas flow rate 60 L/h, capillary voltage 3000 V, cone voltage 40 V, and extractor voltage 5 V. Total monomeric anthocyanins were quantified using the pH differential method [26] and expressed in cyanidin-3-glucoside equivalents.

2.2.3. Statistical Analysis

Polyphenolic characterization from blueberry raw material data are presented as mg polyphenol/100 g of berries (dry weight).

2.3. Diversity of Bioavailability of Blueberry Polyphenols—Acute PK Study

All animal studies were conducted under the guidance of, and with protocols approved by, the Purdue University Animal Care and Use Committee (Protocol 1405001076). Twenty 3-month-old rats were ovariectomized (as a model for postmenopausal women) and, upon arrival, individually housed in stainless steel wire-bottom cages with a 12 h on:off light cycle and fed a chow diet and deionized water ad libitum. Rats were acclimated to their new housing and stabilized after their surgery for two months. Nine days prior to the pharmacokinetic study, rats were put on a polyphenol-free diet (modified AIN93M diet where soybean oil was replaced with corn oil) and randomized to one of the five blueberry genotype treatment groups: Montgomery, Ira, Onslow, SHF2B1-21:3, and LB composite. The study design is shown in Figure 1.
Whole, freeze-dried blueberries were milled to a ~0.5 mm particle size. TP content was used to determine the individual dose of blueberry for each rat. Each dose was normalized to provide 25 mg TP/kg of body weight (BW). Individual doses were suspended in 2 mL of ultrapure water, vortexed, and administered to the rats on the day of the pharmacokinetic study via oral gavage.
Two days prior to the study, rats were anesthetized with isofluorane (3–5%) in an anesthesia chamber and maintained under anesthesia with a mask (1.5–3% isofluorane). A silastic catheter was implanted into the right jugular vein and they were given buprenorphine (0.1 mg/kg BW) to alleviate pain prior to regaining consciousness. Rats were allowed to rest for 48 h after surgery and catheters were kept patent by flushing with heparinized saline (20 U/mL) every 12 h. Rats were fasted 8 h prior to the study and ~400 µL of whole blood was collected at baseline (prior to gavage with their respective blueberry dose) and 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, and 8 h post-gavage from the jugular catheter into lithium-heparinized tubes. Whole blood was processed to plasma by centrifugation at 4 °C and 6000 rpm for 10 min. Two aliquots of 80 µL of plasma each were combined with 20 µL of acidified saline (1% ascorbic acid (AA), w/v %), flushed with N2 gas, and stored at −80 °C until analysis. Rats were euthanized at the end of the 8 h pharmacokinetic study by carbon dioxide asphyxiation. Uterine horns were excised and weighed to confirm ovariectomy.

2.3.1. Analysis of Phenolic Metabolites from Plasma

Anthocyanin, flavonols, and flavan-3-ol metabolites were extracted from plasma via solid-phase extraction (SPE) as described by Chen et al. [27]. Briefly, samples were loaded into preconditioned SPE cartridges. The cartridges were then washed with 2 mL of 2% formic acid (FA) (aq.) for anthocyanins and 1.5 M FA (aq.) for flavonols/flavan-3-ols, followed by 1 mL 5% MeOH (% v/v). Anthocyanins were eluted with 2 mL of 2% FA MeOH (% v/v) and flavonols/flavan-3-ols were eluted with 2 mL of 0.1% FA MeOH (% v/v). Samples were dried down with N2 gas. Dried extracts were resuspended in LC mobile phases and injected into the LC-MS/MS.
Analysis of plasma anthocyanin, flavanols, and flavan-3-ol metabolites was performed as described by Chen et al. [27] using an Agilent 6400 triple quadrupole (QQQ) mass spectrometer equipped with an electrospray ionization (ESI) source under multiple reaction monitoring modes (MRM, Table 1). Briefly, separation and characterization of metabolites was achieved using an XBridge BEH Shield RP-C18 column (2.5 µm, 2.1 × 100 mm). For (+)catechin/epicatechin, quercetin, and myricetin metabolites, binary mobile phases were A: 0.1% FA (aq.) (% v/v) and B: 0.1% FA in acetonitrile (% v/v). The column was heated to 30 °C and the system flow rate was 0.3 mL/min. The binary solvent gradient was: 10% B at 0 min, 40% B at 10 min, 95% B at 11 min, and back to 10% B at 12–18 min. Fragmentor voltage was set at 135 V and collision energy was 17 eV in negative ESI for all compounds.
For anthocyanin metabolites, binary mobile phases were A: 2% FA (aq.) (% v/v) and B: 0.1% FA in acetonitrile (% v/v). The column was heated to 30 °C and the system flow rate was 0.3 mL/min. The binary solvent gradient was: 5% B at 0 min, 25% B at 15 min, 30% B at 19 min, and back to 5% B at 19–22.5 min. Fragmentor voltage was set at 135 V and collision energy was 17 eV in positive ESI for all compounds.

2.3.2. Statistical Analysis

Data from the bioavailability study were expressed as mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM). Pharmacokinetic parameter area under the curve from 0 to 8 h (AUC0–8 h) was calculated via the linear trapezoidal method using Microsoft Excel 2013 v.15. Maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and the time of the maximum plasma concentration (Tmax) were obtained from the pharmacokinetic curve. Both AUC0–8 h and Cmax were normalized by dose of parent anthocyanin, flavonol, and flavan-3-ol present within each individual dose of blueberry treatment. Statistical analyses were performed using JMP 17.0 and SAS 9.3 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA) for bioavailability and phenolic characterization, respectively. Data were analyzed via two-way ANOVA and one-way ANOVA for phenolic characterization and bioavailability, respectively. Significant differences were evaluated via the Tukey–Kramer HSD post hoc pairwise comparison test. Significance was accepted at α < 0.05.

2.4. Dietary Blueberry Effects on the Gut Microbiome—Repeat Dose, Crossover

2.4.1. Study Design

Microbiome analysis was performed on 4-month-old female ovariectomized Sprague Dawley rats (Harlan Laboratories) designed to determine the effect of blueberries on bone calcium retention as previously described [28]. Briefly, twenty 5-month-old ovariectomized Sprague Dawley rats were put on a polyphenol-free diet to determine baseline to determine baseline measures then randomized to four 10-day treatment periods on a LB composite-enriched diet (2.5%, 5%, 10% or 15% LB composite diet). Each treatment was followed by a 10-day washout period on a polyphenol-free diet. Fecal samples for microbiome analysis were collected on day 10 of each of the treatments and washout periods and stored at −80 °C until analysis.

2.4.2. Microbiota Extraction and Analysis

Fecal DNA extraction and amplicon sequencing. DNA for microbiota analysis was extracted from 160 fecal samples collected from 20 rats at the end of baseline, ethe nd of each of the 10-day blueberry treatments, and the end of each washout phase. DNA was extracted using the FastDNA SPIN Kit for Soil (MP Biomedicals) following the manufacturer’s instructions, and DNA quality and quantity were determined as previously described [29]. PCR amplification of the V3-V4 (343F: TACGGRAGGCAGCAG to 804R: CTACCRGGGTATCTAATCC) region of the 16S rRNA gene was performed as previously described [29] and sequenced using MiSeq Illumina 2 × 250 paired-end sequencing.
Sequence analysis. Sequences were analyzed using the QIIME2 pipeline [30] (version 2-2022.11). Sequences were paired, trimmed for quality, and sorted into representative sequences (amplified sequence variants, ASV) using DADA2 [31]. Representative sequences were assigned taxonomies using the q2-feature-classifier [32] trained using the SILVA dataset [33] (version 138_99). ASVs were filtered from the dataset if they represented less than 0.1% frequency of the mean sample depth, were found in only two samples, matched chloroplast or mitochondria sequences, or had non-assigned taxonomies. For an equal number of reads for alpha and beta diversity analyses, sample sets were rarified to 4300 reads. Alpha diversity was analyzed using Faith’s phylogenetic diversity (PD), Shannon, observed features, and Pielou’s evenness. Beta diversity was analyzed using both phylogenetic Unifrac distances [34] (weighted and un-weighted) and non-phylogenetic distances (Jaccard and Bray–Curtis).

2.4.3. Microbiota Statistics

For all analyses, microbiome data from baseline and washout phases were combined to represent the 0% blueberry treatment. Data were first tested for normal distribution using the Shapiro–Wilk W test. Statistical differences of alpha-diversity measurements among all groups were determined using the Kruskal–Wallis test, as well as pairwise comparisons followed by Benjamini–Hochberg FDR correction. Statistical differences among beta-diversity measures among communities were determined using 999 permutations of PERMANOVA [35] and pairwise comparisons with Benjamini–Hochberg FDR correction. PERMDISP (permutational analysis of multivariate dispersions) was performed to ensure significance was not due to dispersion differences among samples [36]. Differences were considered significant if p < 0.05. Differential abundances in taxonomy across all samples were determined using Analysis of Composition of Microbiomes (ANCOM) [37].

3. Results

3.1. Diversity of Anthocyanin Profiles across Blueberry Genotypes

Raw data available for 17 anthocyanins, measured in mg/100 g wet weight (frozen fruit) for 1086 individual plants from 267 genotypes of blueberries [17], were used for analysis to identify priority genotypes for study that represent the broader diversity of the blueberry germplasm. In this instance, measures of plants from the same genotype were averaged. The anthocyanins were cyanidin 3-O-arabiniside, cyanidin 3-O-galactoside, cyanidin 3-O-glucoside, cyanidin 6-O-glucoside, delphinidin 3-O-arabiniside, delphinidin 3-O-galactoside, delphinidin 3-O-glucoside, delphinidin 6-O-glucoside, malvidin 3-O-arabiniside, malvidin 3-O-galactoside, malvidin 6-O-galactoside, malvidin 3-O-glucoside, malvidin 6-O-glucoside, peonidin 3-O-galactoside, petunidin 3-O-arabiniside, petunidin 3-O-glucoside, and petunidin 6-O-glucoside. Anthocyanins that were not normally distributed were log-transformed.
Figure 2 is a plot of the values of the second standardized principal component versus the first standardized principal component for our 267 genotypes of blueberries. The mean and standard deviation of the total concentration of the 17 anthocyanins were 17.30 and 6.03, respectively. The correlation of the total with the first principal component was 0.93, indicating this component essentially represents the total. The five principal points are marked with a P and genotypes selected for further study were identified within a 0.2 region of each of these points. Final genotype selection also depended upon available supply to meet the design for animal and human studies.

3.2. Diversity of Blueberry Polyphenolic Profiles

Polyphenol Content of Blueberries Used in Bioavailability Studies

Using the 6 blueberry genotypes with divergent anthocyanin profiles from the PCA analysis (Figure 2) and the 4 additional members of the Vaccinium genus, total phenolic content (TP) ranged from 1951–4627 mg/100 g berry (DW) and total monomeric anthocyanins ranged from 369–1722 mg/100 g berry (DW), with bilberry and the LB composite having higher levels of phenolics and total monomeric anthocyanins than their highbush counterparts (Figure 3).
Anthocyanins were the most abundant phenolic class present in Vaccinium species, accounting for approximately half of all phenolics in blueberries (Table 2, Figure 4). Considerable variation in the amounts and proportions of different anthocyanins was present across the 10 genotypes we examined. Consistent with the higher levels of total phenolics and total monomeric anthocyanins observed in bilberry and LB composite, these same genotypes had the highest levels of anthocyanins. Bilberry had the highest levels of delphinidin and cyanidin species, and the LB composite had the highest levels of malvidin and acylated anthocyanins. Cranberry had a significantly different anthocyanin profile compared with other berries, with the highest levels of peonidin but the lowest levels of delphinidin, malvidin, and petunidin species. Glycosylation also varied among the genotypes tested, with most exhibiting substantial amounts of arabinoside and galactoside derivates. Some genotypes (e.g., Ira, Legacy, and Sampson) had very low levels of glucosidic derivatives, while other genotypes (e.g., Onslow, SHF2B1-21:3, WBB, bilberry, and LB composite) had levels of glucosidic derivatives equal to or greater than the arabinosidic and galactosidic derivatives.
The most prominent phenolics are presented in Table 3 and Table 4, with chlorogenic acid (20–755 mg/100 g berry (DW)) and quercetin (93–418 mg/100 g berry (DW)) exhibiting the highest concentrations in berries. Flavan-3-ols were present in comparatively low amounts for all genotypes. As with anthocyanins, cranberry had a very different phenolic profile than the other Vaccinium species evaluated here, with the lowest level of chlorogenic acid and the highest levels of epicatechin, quercetin-3-O-arabinoside, and myricetin-3-O-glycosides.

3.3. Diversity of Bioavailability of Blueberry Polyphenols

Bioavailability of Blueberry Metabolites

Anthocyanin metabolites detected circulating in plasma after an acute dose to OVX rats included cyanidin-3-O-glycosides (Cy-3-glcs), delphinidin-3-O-glycosides (Del-3-glcs), malvidin-3-O-glycosides (Mal-3-glcs), peonidin-3-O-glycosides (Peo-3-glcs), and petunidin-3-O-glycosides (Pet-3-glcs). The pharmacokinetic curves and pharmacokinetic parameters AUC0–8 h, Cmax, and Tmax for all berry genotypes can be found in Supplemental Figure S1 and Table S1. Of the anthocyanin metabolites, Cy-3-glcs and Mal-3-glcs from the Montgomery blueberry had significantly higher bioavailability in comparison to the other genotypes of berries (p < 0.01) (Figure 5A). For Del-3-glcs, Montgomery had significantly higher bioavailability than SHF2B1-21:3 and Onslow (p = 0.025), but was no different than Ira and LB composite. The Cmax of anthocyanins did not differ among genotypes, but when these values were normalized by dose, Cmax for Cy-3-glcs was significantly higher in Montgomery than in Ira, Onslow, and SHF2B1-21:3, reaching a maximum concentration in plasma of 24.96 ± 3.72 nM/mg of Cy-3-glcs dose (p < 0.001). Montgomery showed a higher Cmax normalized by dose for Del-3-gls and Mal-3-glcs, with 14.65 ± 2.16 nM/mg Mal-3-glcs dosed and 14.84 ± 3.55 nM/mg Del-3-glcs, than the other genotypes (p < 0.01), respectively. All anthocyanins showed a similar Tmax between 0.25–1 h, regardless of blueberry genotype (Table S1).
Bioavailability and pharmacokinetic curves for metabolites of flavan-3-ols, (+)-catechin and (-)-epicatechin, i.e., epicatechin-5-O-glucuronide (EC-glcr), catechin-5-O-glucuronide (C-glcr), 3′-O-methylepicatechin-5-glcr (MeEC-glcr) and 3′-O-methylcatechin-5-glcr (MeC-glcr) are shown in Figure 5B and Supplemental Figure S2, respectively. As shown in Supplemental Table S2, Ira reached a significantly higher plasma concentration of 0.040 ± 0.006 µM of C-glcr in comparison to LB composite, which only reached a Cmax of 0.015 ± 0.005 µM (p < 0.05). Ira, Onslow, and Montgomery showed a higher AUC0–8 h than SHF2B1-21:3 and LB composite, but when the AUC0–8 h was normalized by dose to determine bioavailability, there were no significant differences between the AUC0–8 h /dose of flavan-3-ols, regardless of blueberry genotype.
The concentration and pharmacokinetic curves for flavonols, i.e., quercetin-3-glu, are shown in Table S3 and Supplemental Figure S3. Bioavailability for Q-glcr was significantly higher in Montgomery (1.191 ± 0.342 µM × h/mg Q) than SHF2B1-21:3 and LB composite (0.355 ± 0.05 and 0.424 ± 0.051 µM × h/mg Q, respectively) (p < 0.001), but was not different compared to Onslow and Ira (Figure 5C). Although the Cmax for Q-glcr did not vary among blueberry genotypes, when normalized by dose, Montgomery reached a significantly greater Cmax of 0.66 ± 0.16 µM/mg Q than Ira, SHF2B1-21:3, and LB composite, at 0.046 ± 0.018, 0.215 ± 0.026, and 0.14 ± 0.02 µM/mg Q, respectively (p < 0.05) (Table S3). Montgomery also showed higher bioavailability of MeQ-glcr than Ira. Tmax did not differ among blueberry genotypes for Q and MeQ, while AUC0–8 h, Cmax and Tmax for Myr-glcr did (Table S3). Ira had a significantly higher bioavailability for myricetin (0.315 ± 0.038 µM × h/mg Myr) than for all other blueberry genotypes (p < 0.001) (Figure 5D). Montgomery and Onslow followed Ira with an AUC0–8 h/mg Myr of 0.168 ± 0.028 and 0.115 ± 0.005 µM/mg Myr, respectively. Both SHF2B1-21:3 and LB composite had a lower AUC0–8 h of 0.001 ± 0.0003 and 0.014 ± 0.002 µM/mg Myr, respectively (p < 0.001). Regardless of the higher content of myricetin glycosides in SHF2B1-21:3 and LB composite, when normalized by dose, they exhibited a bioavailability that was significantly (p < 0.001) lower than the other blueberry genotypes. Tmax was significantly higher for LB composite (p < 0.05).

3.4. Dietary Blueberry Effects on the Gut Microbiome

3.4.1. Gut Microbiota

In total, 8,599,413 high-quality merged sequences were obtained after processing of MiSeq Illumina sequencing results by DADA2 and filtering out low-incident and non-target reads. Per sample, there was a median of 50,996.5 reads (range: 4321–134,668). To maintain all samples, 4300 reads were chosen by rarefaction for alpha and beta diversity analyses.

3.4.2. Taxonomic Analysis

Throughout the study, composition of the microbiome was dominated by two phyla: the Firmicutes (mean 86.8 ± 6.0%) and Bacteroidota (mean 10.0 ± 4.8%). The overall Firmicutes-to-Bacteroidota ratio significantly decreased with increasing blueberry dosage (Kruskal–Wallis, p = 0.0001), as we saw in our previously reported 90-day toxicity study [28]. The highest ratios were in samples with no-blueberry diets (25.3 ± 111.1), followed by 2.5% blueberry (13.7 ± 17.2), 5% blueberry (11.8 ± 4.6), 10% blueberry (7.8 ± 4.2), and 15% blueberry (7.3 ± 2.8). Pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction indicated that ratios differed significantly between 0% blueberry and 10% (p = 0.015) and 15% (p = 0.008) blueberry, as well as between 5% blueberry and 10% (p = 0.006) and 15% (p = 0.008) blueberry.

3.4.3. Alpha Diversity

Comparisons of the of gut microbiome diversity within each sample indicated a significantly higher diversity in samples with higher blueberry treatments using the Shannon diversity metric (measure of richness and evenness) (p = 0.001) (Figure 6) and Pielou’s evenness measure (p = 2.28 × 10−10). However, no significant differences in using the richness measures (i.e., number of taxa present) were observed when using Faith’s PD or observed features. This indicates that the change in diversity results from changes in the quantities of some taxa and not changes in specific taxa composing the communities.

3.4.4. Beta Diversity

Comparison of microbial communities among the blueberry treatments also indicated significant differences using all four metrics tested (p = 0.001). The clearest distribution of samples was seen using a PCoA scatterplot of Bray–Curtis metrics (Figure 7), a measure comparing the presence, absence, and quantities of taxa present among the samples used. Samples separated along PCoA axis 1 accounted for 11.16% of variation.
Pairwise statistical comparisons indicated that 0% blueberry differed significantly from all the blueberry treatments (2.5, 5, 10, and 15%) (PERMANOVA, p = 0.001) and dispersion was not significantly different. As seen in the figure, pairwise comparisons of the 2.5 and 5% combined dosage communities and the 10 and 15% combined communities differed significantly from each other and 0% (q = 0.001), whereas in pairwise comparisons of each dose, the 2.5% blueberry treatment differed significantly from the 10 and 15% blueberry treatment, and the 5% treatment differed significantly from the 15% blueberry (figure not shown). Similar trends were found using the other beta diversity metrics tested, but the blueberry treatments separated along PCoA axis 2.

3.4.5. Differentially Abundant Taxa

ANCOM identified specific taxa contributing to the differences among communities based on blueberry dosage treatment. ANCOM identified eight taxa that differed significantly, but on examination of the volcano plot of the data (Figure S4), only four of the taxa had high W (>100) and clr (>40) values. None of these taxa have been classified at the genus level. Two are from the phylum Actinobacteriota and listed as uncultured from the order Coriobacteriales and the other incertae sedis; one is from the phylum Bacteroidota family Prevotellaceae_UCG-001, and one from the Firmicutes family Anaerovoracaceae XIII_UCG-001. Boxplots of these taxa indicated that all their abundances were higher in samples after blueberry treatments (Figure 8).

4. Discussion

Blueberry was used as a model for studying the potential impact of crop genetic diversity on the bioavailability of polyphenolic constituents and variation in the gut microbiome, two factors associated with chronic disease outcomes.

4.1. Variation in Blueberry Anthocyanin Profiles

PCA, a statistical method that considers a large number of variables, such as anthocyanin profiles, for a large number of blueberry genotypes, allowed us to identify a small number of genotypes that effectively could serve as a way to capture the broad diversity present in the germplasm in further study. The ability to refine biomedical testing to a limited array of genotypes captures the broader diversity of the collection and allows for identification of bioactives unique to individual genotypes or common functions that can be generalized across the broader germplasm. Identifying functional traits with specific genotypes can inform breeding programs toward improving the nutritional quality of blueberries overall.

4.2. Variation in Bioavailability of Polyphenolics

Phenolic content of LB composite was twice that of highbush blueberries, consistent with previous studies [18]. This is likely explained both by genetics, as well as the response to the harsher environmental conditions where lowbush blueberries are grown. However, parent compounds are rarely observed circulating in plasma, suggesting that the bioactive compounds in blueberry are the multiple metabolites produced after first-pass metabolism that will eventually reach target tissues and exert their health benefits.
The anthocyanin metabolites for cyanidin and malvidin were significantly more bioavailable from the Montgomery genotype. Consistent with anthocyanin bioavailability studies in humans [38] and rats [39,40], all anthocyanins reached a maximal plasma concentration 0.25–1 h post-dose. A small part of anthocyanin absorption may begin early in the stomach, as evidenced in this study by the high concentration of circulating anthocyanin metabolites as early as the first blood draw at 15 min post gavage, but the greatest absorption occurred through the small intestine. The rate and extent at which they are absorbed may be affected by the aglycone, sugar moiety, or acylated groups [41]. The acylation of anthocyanins highly influences their bioavailability. Charron et al. showed that nonacylated anthocyanins were 4-fold and 4.7-fold more bioavailable than the acylated anthocyanins in red cabbage and purple carrot juice, respectively [42,43]. Only 5% of Montgomery’s total anthocyanin content were acylated compared to ~9–28% acylated anthocyanins for other genotypes.
Both flavan-3-ols and flavonols varied widely across genotypes. Once normalized for dose, there were few differences in flavan-3-ol pharmacokinetics. In contrast, the rabbiteyes, Montgomery, Ira, and Onslow had the lowest total quercetin content, but had higher bioavailability for quercetin glucuronide (p < 0.05) than the other berries. For its methylated conjugate, MeQ-glcr, Ira had the lowest bioavailability (p < 0.05) of all berries. This may be due to differences in the glycosylation of quercetin across the different blueberry genotypes. The sugar moiety highly influences quercetin bioavailability as it requires cleavage for full absorption by lactase phlorizin hydrolase (LPH) or cytosolic β-glucosidase (CBG) within the enterocyte. Once the aglycone is released, quercetin is then subject to host metabolism by phase II enzymatic conjugation systems including glucuronide/sulfates/methyl groups [44]. Except for glucose, all other glycosides are poor substrates for enzymatic cleavage, limiting the release of quercetin aglycone for absorption through the small intestine. Quercetin glycosides then travel to the lower gut, where they can be metabolized by lower gut bacteria [45]; this early and late absorption can be observed in Figure S3, where quercetin exhibits a pharmacokinetic curve with double peaks for its MeQ-gclr metabolite, which is not uncommon and is consistent with previous observations. Yang et al. reported a similar phenomenon with Q-glcr displaying peaks at 2 h and 8 h post dose, which, in their study, was possibly caused by enterohepatic recirculation [46]. In our study, the peaks for MeQ-glcr occurred at 0.5 h and 1–2 h post-dose, which could have been caused by an early and more rapid passive absorption of the quercetin aglycone in comparison to the slower active absorption of quercetin glucoside.
The rabbiteye genotypes Montgomery, Ira, and Onslow have a significantly lower concentration of myricetin in comparison to the highbush and lowbush genotypes, with a 23-fold difference in concentration between Ira and SHF2B1-21:3. Although Ira and Montgomery had significantly lower content of myricetin (p < 0.05), they reached significantly higher plasma concentrations of 7- and 11-fold higher than SHF2B1-21:3 (p < 0.05), respectively. The bioavailability from Ira was higher than all genotypes (p < 0.05), followed by Montgomery and Onslow, and a very low bioavailability was observed for SHF2B1-21:3 and LB composite. As with quercetin, myricetin absorption rate may be low because its absorption might have been influenced by the type of glycosidic linkages. Although the aglycone and glycosylated forms of myricetin were not differentiated in our LC method, it is possible that the differences in myricetin bioavailability could have been due to differences in content of myricetin aglycone and the glycosylated form.

4.3. Variation in Gut Microbiome in Response to Blueberry

Both alpha and beta diversity analyses indicated there were dose-dependent effects of blueberry on the gut microbiome in this rat model of postmenopausal estrogen deficiency. The increase in alpha diversity is suggested to be related to better microbiome gut health and to cognitive function [47]. Four taxa were found to be significantly higher in blueberry treatments compared to no blueberry controls, i.e., two Actinobacteriota and listed as uncultured from the order Coriobacteriales, one from the phylum Bacteroidota family Prevotellaceae_UCG-001, and one from the Firmicutes family Anaerovoracaceae XIII_UCG-001. The taxa listed as Prevotellaceae_UCG-001 and Coriobacteriales incertae sedis were found to be significantly associated with blueberry in the OVX mouse study described by Sato et al. [48]. The Coriobacteriaceae family are thought to be to polyphenol degraders [49].
The limitations of our studies varied. In the PCA, the sample size was large, but was limited in the bioavailability studies. Alternative approaches could lead to different conclusions. In the PCA analysis, clustering of genotypes did not consider categorical characteristics, such as type or region of origin. For studying bioavailability, we opted to give the same dose of TP (25 mg/kg BW), resulting in wide differences in the amount of freeze-dried blueberry powder dosed from 189 mg to 285 mg of blueberry powder. Genotype comparisons should be made for the gut microbiome, as was performed in our previous report of a mouse study [48].

5. Conclusions

Blueberries of different genetic backgrounds contain different phenolic profiles that vary in the extent of bioavailability and metabolism of their polyphenols. PCA of 17 anthocyanins from 267 genotypes allowed selection of a few genotypes with widely differing profiles for further characterization. The high bioavailability of anthocyanins and phenolics in certain genotypes is a unique contribution of this work. Further, evidence of a gut microbiome response to blueberry dose was observed. This rich variation encountered in each system from crop to consumer to gut microbiome can be used to improve crop selection, breeding practices, and identification of lead genotypes, which may be leveraged to understand functional responses for health and develop precision nutrition practices.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/antiox12051136/s1, Supplementary Table S1: Pharmacokinetic Parameters for Anthocyanin Metabolites; Supplementary Table S2: Pharmacokinetic Parameters for Flavan-3-ol Metabo-lites; Supplementary Table S3: Pharmacokinetic Parameters for Flavan-3-ol Metabolites; Supplementary Figure S1: Plasma pharmacokinetic response of anthocyanin metabolites from different blueberry genotypes. Data represented as mean ± SEM (n = 4 rats/group); Supplementary Figure S2: Plasma pharmacokinetic response of flavan-3-ols me-tabolites from different blueberry genotypes. Data represented as mean ± SEM (n = 4 rats/group). EC-glcr, epicate-chin-5-glucuronide; C-glcr, catechin-5-glucuronide; EC-gclr, 3′-O-methylepicatechin-5-glcr; MeC-glcr, 3′-O-methylcatechin-5-glcr; Supplementary Figure S3: Plasma pharmacokinetic response of flavonol metabolites from different blueberry genotypes. Data represented as mean ± SEM (n = 4 rats/group). Q-3-glcr, querce-tin-3-glucuronide; Me-Q-glucr, methylquercetin-3-glucuronide; Myr-glucr, myricetin glucuronide; Figure S4: Vol-cano plots of taxa identified by Analysis of Composition of Microbiomes (ANCOM) as differentially abundant in different doses of blueberry diet. Taxa in the upper right side (clr >40 and W >100) of the figure are illustrated us-ing box-plots in Figure 7. X-axis represented by center log ratio (clr) and y-axis is W is number of time null hy-pothesis was rejected.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.G.F. and C.M.W.; Methodology, C.M.W., M.G.F. and G.P.M.; Software, G.P.M. and C.H.N.; Validation, M.M., D.P.C. and G.P.M.; Formal Analysis, M.M., D.P.C. and G.P.M.; Investigation, M.M., D.P.C., G.P.M. and C.H.N.; Resources, C.M.W. and M.A.L.; Data Curation, M.M., D.P.C. and G.P.M.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation, C.M.W., M.M., G.P.M. and C.H.N.; Writing—Review and Editing, C.M.W., M.G.F., M.M., D.P.C., C.H.N., G.P.M. and M.A.L.; Visualization, M.M., D.P.C., C.H.N. and G.P.M.; Supervision, C.M.W., M.G.F., C.H.N. and G.M; Project Administration, C.M.W.; Funding Acquisition, C.M.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by NIH NICCH grant number R01AT008754.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The animal study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board (or Ethics Committee) of Purdue Uni-versity (protocol code 1405001076 6-11-2014).

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data will be made available upon request to senior author. Microbiome sequence data are deposited in NCBI-SRA https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ under accession number BioProject ID: PRJNA954427. The data on composition of blueberries were collected at the North Carolina State University Piedmont Research Station (PRS), Salisbury, NC, USA (https://cals.ncsu.edu/food-bioprocessing-and-nutrition-sciences/). More information about the data and its use is available from coauthors Mary Ann Lila and Mario G. Ferruzzi.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Esposito, K.; Kastorini, C.M.; Panagiotakos, D.B.; Giugliano, D. Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes by Dietary Patterns: A Systematic Review of Prospective Studies and Meta-Analysis. Metab. Syndr. Relat. Disor. 2010, 8, 471–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Spencer, J.P.E. The impact of fruit flavonoids on memory and cognition. Br. J. Nutr. 2010, 104, S40–S47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Boeing, H.; Bechthold, A.; Bub, A.; Ellinger, S.; Haller, D.; Kroke, A.; Leschik-Bonnet, E.; Muller, M.J.; Oberritter, H.; Schulze, M.; et al. Critical review: Vegetables and fruit in the prevention of chronic diseases. Eur. J. Nutr. 2012, 51, 637–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Oyebode, O.; Gordon-Dseagu, V.; Walker, A.; Mindell, J.S. Fruit and vegetable consumption and all-cause, cancer and CVD mortality: Analysis of Health Survey for England data. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2014, 68, 856–862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Dillard, C.J.; German, J.B. Phytochemicals: Nutraceuticals and human health. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2000, 80, 1744–1756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Son, T.G.; Camandola, S.; Mattson, M.P. Hormetic Dietary Phytochemicals. Neuromol. Med. 2008, 10, 236–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Yang, J.; Xiao, Y.Y. Grape Phytochemicals and Associated Health Benefits. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2013, 53, 1202–1225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Del Rio, D.; Rodriguez-Mateos, A.; Spencer, J.P.E.; Tognolini, M.; Borges, G.; Crozier, A. Dietary (Poly)phenolics in Human Health: Structures,Bioavailability, and Evidence of Protective Effects against Chronic Diseases. Antioxid. Redox Signal. 2013, 18, 1818–1892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Di Lorenzo, C.; Colombo, F.; Biella, S.; Stockley, C.; Restani, P. Polyphenols and Human Health: The Role of Bioavailability. Nutrients 2021, 13, 273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Wu, X.L.; Beecher, G.R.; Holden, J.M.; Haytowitz, D.B.; Gebhardt, S.E.; Prior, R.L. Concentrations of anthocyaninsin common foods in the United States and estimation of normal consumption. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2006, 54, 4069–4075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Erlund, I.; Koli, R.; Alfthan, G.; Marniemi, J.; Puukka, P.; Mustonen, P.; Mattila, P.; Jula, A. Favorable effects of berry consumption on platelet function, blood pressure, and HDL cholesterol. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2008, 87, 323–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Basu, A.; Du, M.; Leyva, M.J.; Sanchez, K.; Betts, N.M.; Wu, M.Y.; Aston, C.E.; Lyons, T.J. Blueberries Decrease Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Obese Men and Women with Metabolic Syndrome. J. Nutr. 2010, 140, 1582–1587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Joseph, J.A.; Shukitt-Hale, B.; Denisova, N.A.; Bielinski, D.; Martin, A.; McEwen, J.J.; Bickford, P.C. Reversals of age-related declines in neuronal signal transduction, cognitive, and motor behavioral deficits with blueberry, spinach, or strawberry dietary supplementation. J. Neurosci. 1999, 19, 8114–8121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Krikorian, R.; Shidler, M.D.; Nash, T.A.; Kalt, W.; Vinqvist-Tymchuk, M.R.; Shukitt-Hale, B.; Joseph, J.A. Blueberry Supplementation Improves Memory in Older Adults. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2010, 58, 3996–4000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Andres-Lacueva, C.; Shukitt-Hale, B.; Galli, R.L.; Jauregui, O.; Lamuela-Raventos, R.M.; Joseph, J.A. Anthocyanins in aged blueberry-fed rats are found centrally and may enhance memory. Nutr. Neurosci. 2005, 8, 111–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Zhu, Y.N.; Xia, M.; Yang, Y.; Liu, F.Q.; Li, Z.X.; Hao, Y.T.; Mi, M.T.; Jin, T.R.; Ling, W.H. Purified Anthocyanin Supplementation Improves EndothelialFunction via NO-cGMP Activation in Hypercholesterolemic Individuals. Clin. Chem. 2011, 57, 1524–1533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Yousef, G.G.; Brown, A.F.; Funakoshi, Y.; Mbeunkui, F.; Grace, M.H.; Ballington, J.R.; Loraine, A.; Lila, M.A. Efficient quantification of the health-relevant anthocyanin and phenolic acid profiles in commercial cultivars and breeding sections of blueberries (Vaccinium spp.). J. Agric. Food Chem. 2013, 61, 4806–4815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Kalt, W.; Ryan, D.A.; Duy, J.C.; Prior, R.L.; Ehlenfeldt, M.K.; Vander Kloet, S.P. Interspecific variabion in anthocyanins, phenolics, and antioxidant capacity among genotypes of high bush and lowbush blueberries (Vaccinium section cyanococcus spp.). J. Agric. Food Chem. 2001, 49, 4761–4767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Lila, M.A. The nature-versus-nurture debate on bioactive phytochemicals: The genome versus terroir. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2006, 86, 2510–2515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Rodriguez-Mateo, A.; Cifuentes-Gomez, T.; Tabatabaee, S.; Lecras, C.; Spencer, P.E. Procyanidin, anthocyanin, and chlorogenic acid contents of highbush and lowbush blueberries. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2012, 60, 5772–5778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Yousef, G.G.; Lila, M.A.; Guzman, I.; Ballington, J.R.; Brown, A.F. Impact of Interspecific Introgression on Anthocyanin Profiles of Southern Highbush Blueberry. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 2014, 139, 99–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Joliffe, I.T. Principal Component Analysis, 2nd ed.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  23. Furrer, A.; Cladis, D.P.; Kurilich, A.; Manohara, R.; Ferruzzi, M.G. Changes in phenolic content of commercial potato varieties through industrial processing and fresh preparation. Food Chem. 2017, 218, 47–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Cladis, D.P.; Li, S.; Reddivari, L.; Cox, A.; Ferruzzi, M.G.; Weaver, C.M. A 90 day oral toxicity study of blueberry polyphenols in ovariectomized sprague-dawley rats. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2020, 139, 111254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Song, B.J.; Sapper, T.N.; Burtch, C.E.; Brimmer, K.; Goldschmidt, M.; Ferruzzi, M.G. Photo- and thermodegradation of anthocyanins from grape and purple sweet potato in model beverage systems. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2013, 61, 1364–1372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Lee, J.; Durst, R.W.; Wrolstad, R.E.; Collaborators: Eisele, T.; Giusti, M.M.; Hach, J.; Hofsommer, H.; Koswig, S.; Krueger, D.A.; Kupina, S.; et al. Determination of total monomeric anthocyanin pigment content of fruit juices, beverages, natural colorants, and wines by the pH differential method: Collaborative study. J. AOAC Int. 2005, 88, 1269–1278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Chen, T.Y.; Kritchevsky, J.; Hargett, K.; Feller, K.; Klobusnik, R.; Song, B.J.; Cooper, B.; Jouni, Z.; Ferruzzi, M.G.; Janle, E.M. Plasma bioavailability and regional brain distribution of polyphenols from apple/grape seed and bilberry extracts in a young swine model. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2015, 59, 2432–2447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Hodges, J.K.; Maiz, M.; Cao, S.; Lachcik, P.J.; Peacock, M.; McCabe, G.P.; McCabe, L.D.; Cladis, D.P.; Jackson, G.S.; Ferruzzi, M.G.; et al. Moderate Consumption of Freeze-dried Blueberry Powder Increased Net Bone Calcium Retention in Healthy Postmenopausal Women: A Randomized Crossover Trial. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. Under Review.
  29. Cladis, D.P.; Simpson, A.M.R.; Cooper, K.J.; Nakatsu, C.H.; Ferruzzi, M.G.; Weaver, C.M. Blueberry polyphenols alter gut microbiota and phenolic metabolism in rats. Food Funct. 2021, 12, 2442–2456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Bolyen, E.; Rodeout, J.R.; Dillion, M.R.; Bokulich, N.A.; Abnet, C.C.; Al-Ghalith, G.A.; Alexander, H.; Alm, E.J.; Arumugam, M.; Asnicar, F.; et al. Reproducible, interactive, scalable and extensible microbiome data science using QIIME 2. Nat. Biotechnol. 2019, 37, 852–857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Callahan, B.J.; McMurdie, P.J.; Rosen, M.J.; Han, A.W.; Johnson, A.J.A.; Holmes, S.P. DADA2: High-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nat. Methods 2016, 13, 581–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Bokulich, N.A.; Kaehler, B.D.; Rideout, J.R.; Dillon, M.; Bolyen, E.; Knight, R.; Huttley, G.A.; Caporaso, J.G. Optimizing taxonomic classification of marker-gene amplicon sequences with QIIME 2’s q2-feature-classifier plugin. Microbiome 2018, 6, 90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Yilmaz, P.; Parfrey, L.W.; Yarza, P.; Gerken, J.; Pruesse, E.; Quast, C.; Schweer, T.; Peplies, J.; Ludwig, W.; Glöckner, F.O. The SILVA and “All-species Living Tree Project (LTP)” taxonomic frameworks. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014, 42, D643–D648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Lozupone, C.; Knight, R. UniFrac: A new phylogenetic method for comparing microbial communities. Appl. Env. Microbiol. 2005, 71, 8228–8235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Anderson, M.J. A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Austral Ecol. 2001, 26, 32–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Anderson, M.J.; Ellingsen, K.E.; Mcardle, B.H. Multivariate dispersion as a measure of beta diversity. Ecol. Lett. 2006, 9, 683–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Mandal, S.; Van Treuren, W.; White, R.; Eggesbø, M.; Knight, R.; Peddada, S. Analysis of composition of microbiomes: A novel method for studying microbial composition. Microb. Ecol. Health Dis. 2015, 26, 27663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Zhong, S.; Sandhu, A.; Edirisinghe, I.; Burton-Freeman, B. Characterization of Wild Blueberry Polyphenols Bioavailability and Kinetic Profile in Plasma over 24-h Period in Human Subjects. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2017, 61, 1700405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Chen, T.Y.; Ferruzzi, M.G.; Wu, Q.-L.; Simon, J.E.; Talcott, S.T.; Wang, J.; Ho, L.; Todd, G.; Cooper, B.; Pasinetti, G.M.; et al. Influence of diabetes on plasma pharmacokinetics and brain bioavailability of grape polyphenols and their Phase II metabolites in the Zucker Diabetic Fatty Rat. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2017, 61, 1700111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Nohara, C.; Yokoyama, D.; Tanaka, W.; Sogon, T.; Sakono, M.; Sakakibara, H. Daily consumption of bilberry (Vaccinium myrtillus L.) extracts increases the absorption rate of anthocyanins in rats. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2018, 66, 7958–7964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Kurilich, A.C.; Clevidence, B.A.; Britz, S.J.; Simon, P.W.; Novotny, J.A. Plasma and urine responses are lower for acylated vs nonacylated anthocyanins from raw and cooked purple carrots. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2005, 53, 6537–6542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Charron, C.S.; Clevidence, B.A.; Britz, S.J.; Novotny, J.A. Effect of dose size on bioavailability of acylated and nonacylated anthocyanins from red cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. Var. capitata). J. Agric. Food Chem. 2007, 55, 5354–5362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Charron, C.S.; Kurilich, A.C.; Clevidence, B.A.; Simon, P.W.; Harrison, D.J.; Britz, S.J.; Baer, D.J.; Novotny, J.A. Bioavailability of anthocyanins from purple carrot juice: Effects of acylation and plant matrix. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2009, 57, 1226–1230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Terao, J. Factors modulating bioavailability of quercetin-related flavonoids and the consequences of their vascular function. Biochem. Pharmcol. 2017, 139, 15–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Erlund, I.; Kosonen, T.; Alfthan, G.; Mäenpää, J.; Perttunen, K.; Kenraali, J.; Parantainen, J.; Aro, A. Pharmacokinetics of quercetin from quercetin aglycone and rutin in healthy volunteers. Eur. J. Clin. Pharm. 2000, 56, 545–553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Yang, L.L.; Xiao, N.; Li, X.W.; Fan, Y.; Alolga, R.N.; Sun, X.Y.; Wang, S.-L.; Ping, L.; Qi, L.W. Pharmacokinetic comparison between quercetin and quercetin 3-O-β-glucuronide in rats by UHPLC-MS/MS. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 35460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Canipe III, L.G.; Sioda, M.; Cheatham, C.L. Divesity of the gut-microbiome related to cognitive behavioral outcomes in healthy older adults. Arch. Gerontol. Geriatr. 2021, 96, 104464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Sato, A.Y.; Pellegrini, G.G.; Cregor, M.; McAndrews, K.; Choi, R.B.; Maiz, M.; Johnson, O.; McCabe, L.D.; McCabe, G.P.; Ferruzzi, M.G.; et al. Skeletal protection and promotion of microbiome diversity by dietary boosting of the endogenous antioxidant response. J. Bone Min. Res. 2020, 36, 768–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Rodriquez-Daza, M.-C.; Roquim, M.; Dudonne, S.; Pilon, G.; Levy, E.; Marette, A.; Roy, D.; Desardins, Y. Berry polyphenols and fibers modulate distinct microbial metabolic functions and gut microbiota enterotype-like clustering in obese mice. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 11, 2032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Study design for determining bioavailability of polyphenolics from blueberry genotypes in rats.
Figure 1. Study design for determining bioavailability of polyphenolics from blueberry genotypes in rats.
Antioxidants 12 01136 g001
Figure 2. Principal component analysis displaying the distribution of 267 genotypes of blueberries and the principal points for selection of genotypes for further study on bioavailability.
Figure 2. Principal component analysis displaying the distribution of 267 genotypes of blueberries and the principal points for selection of genotypes for further study on bioavailability.
Antioxidants 12 01136 g002
Figure 3. Total phenolics (in gallic acid equivalents) and total monomeric anthocyanins in 10 genotypes of Vaccinium spp. berries. Total phenolics were quantified via the Folin-Ciocalteu method and significant differences between genotypes in total phenolic content are denoted by capital letters. Total monomeric anthocyanins were quantified via the pH differential method and significant differences between genotypes in total monomeric anthocyanin content are denoted by lower case letters. Data are shown as means ± SDs. Significant differences between genotypes were determined using Tukey’s HSD test (p < 0.05).
Figure 3. Total phenolics (in gallic acid equivalents) and total monomeric anthocyanins in 10 genotypes of Vaccinium spp. berries. Total phenolics were quantified via the Folin-Ciocalteu method and significant differences between genotypes in total phenolic content are denoted by capital letters. Total monomeric anthocyanins were quantified via the pH differential method and significant differences between genotypes in total monomeric anthocyanin content are denoted by lower case letters. Data are shown as means ± SDs. Significant differences between genotypes were determined using Tukey’s HSD test (p < 0.05).
Antioxidants 12 01136 g003
Figure 4. Anthocyanin content of 10 genotypes of Vaccinium spp. berries. (a) Sum of anthocyanins sharing the same aglycone and (b) sum of anthocyanins sharing the same glycosylation pattern. Data are shown as means.
Figure 4. Anthocyanin content of 10 genotypes of Vaccinium spp. berries. (a) Sum of anthocyanins sharing the same aglycone and (b) sum of anthocyanins sharing the same glycosylation pattern. Data are shown as means.
Antioxidants 12 01136 g004
Figure 5. Bioavailability of blueberry polyphenolics. (A) anthocyanin glycosides, (B) Flavan-3-ol metabolites, (C) quercetin metabolites, and (D) myricitin metabolites. AUC 0-8h was normalized by blueberry dose. Letters over the bars represent significant differences in bioavailability of poly-phenolics among groups. Letters represent significant differences in bioavailability of polyphenolics among groups.
Figure 5. Bioavailability of blueberry polyphenolics. (A) anthocyanin glycosides, (B) Flavan-3-ol metabolites, (C) quercetin metabolites, and (D) myricitin metabolites. AUC 0-8h was normalized by blueberry dose. Letters over the bars represent significant differences in bioavailability of poly-phenolics among groups. Letters represent significant differences in bioavailability of polyphenolics among groups.
Antioxidants 12 01136 g005
Figure 6. Greater diversity within bacterial communities after blueberry diets. Boxplots representing the medians and upper and lower quartile values of within sample (alpha) diversity using the Shannon diversity metric. Krustal Wallis indicates overall differences is significant (p = 0.001) among blueberry dosages and pairwise-tests with 999 permutations significant differences q < 0.05 illustrated by different letters above bars. Outliers are represented by open circles.
Figure 6. Greater diversity within bacterial communities after blueberry diets. Boxplots representing the medians and upper and lower quartile values of within sample (alpha) diversity using the Shannon diversity metric. Krustal Wallis indicates overall differences is significant (p = 0.001) among blueberry dosages and pairwise-tests with 999 permutations significant differences q < 0.05 illustrated by different letters above bars. Outliers are represented by open circles.
Antioxidants 12 01136 g006
Figure 7. Principal coordinate analysis illustrating differences unweighted Bray Curtis beta diversity metrics among bacterial communities after blueberry diets. Data points colored by blueberry dosages, 2.5 and 5% combined, 10 and 15% combined and no blueberry control. perMANOVA comparisons of samples blueberry dosage, overall differences significant p = 0.001 and all pairwise comparisons q = 0.001. Overall and pairwise permDISP comparisons not significant, indicating differences are not due to differences in variation.
Figure 7. Principal coordinate analysis illustrating differences unweighted Bray Curtis beta diversity metrics among bacterial communities after blueberry diets. Data points colored by blueberry dosages, 2.5 and 5% combined, 10 and 15% combined and no blueberry control. perMANOVA comparisons of samples blueberry dosage, overall differences significant p = 0.001 and all pairwise comparisons q = 0.001. Overall and pairwise permDISP comparisons not significant, indicating differences are not due to differences in variation.
Antioxidants 12 01136 g007
Figure 8. Differentially abundant taxa after different blueberry dosage diets identified using Analysis of Composition of Microbiomes (ANCOM) of microbial communities. Boxplot of medians and SD (standard deviations) illustrate taxa differences with ANCON W values ≥100 and clr > 40.
Figure 8. Differentially abundant taxa after different blueberry dosage diets identified using Analysis of Composition of Microbiomes (ANCOM) of microbial communities. Boxplot of medians and SD (standard deviations) illustrate taxa differences with ANCON W values ≥100 and clr > 40.
Antioxidants 12 01136 g008
Table 1. Polyphenolic compounds and metabolites analyzed and quantified on LC-MS.
Table 1. Polyphenolic compounds and metabolites analyzed and quantified on LC-MS.
CompoundSIR for Quantitation (m/z)MRM Transition for Quantitation (m/z)Standard Used for Quantification
Anthocyanins
Cyanidin *287463 ⟶ 287Cyanidin-3-O-glucoside
Peonidin *301463 ⟶ 301
Delphinidin *303465 ⟶ 303
Petunidin *317479 ⟶ 317
Malvidin *331493 ⟶ 331
Phenolic Acids **
Gallic acid169 Gallic acid
Chlorogenic acid353 Chlorogenic acid
Flavan-3-ols
Catechin/Epicatechin289 Epicatechin
Catechin/Epicatechin-O-glucuronide 465 ⟶ 289
Me-Catechin/Epicatechin-O-glucuronide 479⟶ 303
Procyanidins B1 and B2577
Flavonols
Quercetin-3-O-arabinoside433 Quercetin-3-O-glucoside
Quercetin-3-O-galactoside/glucoside463
Quercetin-3-O-glucuronide 477477 ⟶ 301
Quercetin-3-O-rhamnoside 447
Me-Quercetin-3-O-glucuronide 491 ⟶ 315
Quercetin-3-O-rutinoside609 Quercetin-3-O-rutinoside
Kaempferol-3-O-galactoside/glucoside447 Kaempferol-3-O-rutinoside
Kaempferol-3-O-rutinoside593
Myricetin-3-O-galactoside/glucoside479 Quercetin-3-O-glucoside
Myricetin-3-O-glucuronide 493 ⟶ 317
* Measured 3-O-arabinoside, galactoside, and glucoside derivatives, as well as acylated forms. ** Additional phenolics were included in method, but were below the LOD. These included salicylic acid, protocatechuic acid, p-coumaric acid, caffeic acid, ferulic acid, sinapic acid, ellagic acid, resveratrol, piceatannol, pterostilbene, EGC, ECG, and isorhamnetin-3-O-glycosides.
Table 2. Anthocyanin content of 10 genotypes of Vaccinium spp. (mg phenolic/100 g berry (dw)), from HPLC-MS analysis .
Table 2. Anthocyanin content of 10 genotypes of Vaccinium spp. (mg phenolic/100 g berry (dw)), from HPLC-MS analysis .
DelphinidinMalvidinCyanidinPetunidinPeonidinTotal
Ira3-O-gal150 ± 3.78 d,e237 ± 13.2 a230 ± 6.0 b142 ± 5.5 b159 ± 9.3 b916 ± 38 A
3-O-glu3.1 ± 0.2 f14.5 ± 0.5 e8.5 ± 0.1 f3.7 ± 0.5 e15.0 ± 0.6 g44.8 ± 2.0 E
3-O-ara78.5 ± 4.3 d,e190 ± 15.4 a134 ± 5.9 b79.7 ± 5.5 c,d99.7 ± 3.9 b582 ± 35 B
Other forms42.5 ± 5.9 e42.4 ± 10.1 d,e40.0 ± 8.6 b,c,d16.7 ± 4.2 e,f30.4 ± 6.4 c,d172 ± 35 E
Total274 ± 14 ζ483 ± 39 γ,δ412 ± 21 β242 ± 16 ε304 ± 20 β1715
Legacy3-O-gal184 ± 15.9 b,c195 ± 12.8 b41.5 ± 4.0 i112 ± 9.9 c17.7 ± 1.4 f551 ± 44 C
3-O-glu3.5 ± 0.3 f7.3 ± 1.4 e0.2 ± 0.2 g4.5 ± 1.3 e0.2 ± 0.2 h15.6 ± 3.3 E
3-O-ara101 ± 7.7 c156 ± 7.9 b28.6 ± 2.6 f62.0 ± 3.9 e14.0 ± 1.2 f362 ± 23 E,F
Other forms62.4 ± 3.9 d13.0 ± 5.1 f2.5 ± 0.9 f5.3 ± 1.6 g0.5 ± 0.5 e83.8 ± 12 F
Total351 ± 26 δ,ε372 ± 17 ε72.8 ± 5.9 η184 ± 14 ζ32.4 ± 2.6 ζ1013
Montgomery3-O-gal58.8 ± 12.8 g94.9 ± 15.9 d,e62.9 ± 14.9 g,h40.5 ± 8.3 f33.6 ± 5.4 e,f291 ± 57 D
3-O-glu24.3 ± 5.7 e74.1 ± 11.3 d20.1 ± 4.2 e28.0 ± 5.6 d33.9 ± 5.6 f180 ± 32 D
3-O-ara28.5 ± 6.0 g73.1 ± 8.3 e26.0 ± 4.7 f22.3 ± 3.9 g21.5 ± 2.4 e,f171 ± 25 G
Other forms16.2 ± 1.3 g11.1 ± 2.2 f0.3 ± 0.6 f4.3 ± 0.5 g5.1 ± 1.2 e37.1 ± 5.8 F
Total128 ± 26 η253 ± 34 ζ109 ± 23 ζ,η95 ± 18 η94 ± 13 ε679
Onslow3-O-gal139 ± 2.6 e142 ± 1.3 c191 ± 2.7 c97.4 ± 1.7 c,d,e98.3 ± 3.0 c668 ± 11 B
3-O-glu69.7 ± 1.0 d156 ± 1.8 c85.2 ± 1.1 b78.5 ± 0.3 c97.4 ± 0.4 b486 ± 4.6 C
3-O-ara64.1 ± 0.9 e,f107 ± 0.9 d100 ± 1.3 c50.7 ± 0.3 f60.7 ± 1.6 c382 ± 5.1 E
Other forms30.8 ± 2.2 f37.3 ± 5.4 e23.9 ± 5.3 e21.1 ± 2.9 e33.9 ± 5.2 c147 ± 21 E
Total304 ± 3.2 ε,ζ442 ± 3.4 δ400 ± 1.8 β248 ± 2.6 ε290 ± 5.6 β1684
Sampson3-O-gal203 ± 6.9 b245 ± 2.9 a67.1 ± 6.5 f,g165 ± 3.1 a57.0 ± 19.7 d,e737 ± 39 B
3-O-glu5.0 ± 0.4 f15.3 ± 1.2 e1.22 ± 0.2 f,g5.3 ± 0.3 e2.1 ± 1.2 h28.9 ± 3.4 E
3-O-ara129 ± 4.2 b209 ± 1.7 a53.3 ± 5.7 e104 ± 0.5 a36.9 ± 14.5 d532 ± 27 B,C
Other forms62.1 ± 3.0 d61.4 ± 2.0 d2.0 ± 0.6 f16.3 ± 0.8 e,f4.4 ± 0.6 e146 ± 7.0 E
Total399 ± 14 δ531 ± 3.7 γ124 ± 13 ε,ζ291 ± 2.8 δ100 ± 36 ε1444
SHF2 B1-21:33-O-gal166 ± 9.1 c,d108 ± 3.8 d93.0 ± 3.9 e102 ± 6.1 c,d39.0 ± 1.5 d,e,f508 ± 24 C
3-O-glu159 ± 11.0 b173 ± 10.4 b65.8 ± 2.7 c143 ± 8.2 a48.5 ± 2.3 d,e589 ± 35 B
3-O-ara134 ± 6.4 b136 ± 4.3 c72.5 ± 2.2 d86.7 ± 3.0 b,c30.6 ± 1.2 d,e461 ± 17 D
Other forms130 ± 5.7 b223 ± 4.3 b43.5 ± 3.1 b111 ± 2.2 a43.3 ± 2.2 b,c551 ± 17 B
Total589 ± 26 β641 ± 22 β275 ± 8.2 δ442 ± 18 α162 ± 6.0 δ2108
Cranberry3-O-galnd9.0 ± 0.4 f157 ± 6.9 dtrace342 ± 13.3 a507 ± 21 C
3-O-glundtrace4.6 ± 0.2 f,gnd41.7 ± 3.5 e46.3 ± 3.7 E
3-O-arand11.0 ± 0.3 f139 ± 1.2 btrace247 ± 4.7 a396 ± 6.3 E
Other forms90.4 ± 2.8 c0.5 ± 0.5 f41.7 ± 8.7 b,c32.6 ± 0.2 d94.8 ± 21.1 a260 ± 33 D
Total90.4 ± 2.8 η20.5 ± 0.4 η342 ± 2.6 γ32.6 ± 0.2 θ725 ± 0.2 α1210
Wild Blueberry3-O-gal58.8 ± 3.5 g113 ± 5.4 d42.7 ± 1.6 h,i52.4 ± 2.8 f40.7 ± 1.1 d,e,f307 ± 14 D
3-O-glu78.7 ± 3.7 d170 ± 6.5 b,c50.4 ± 3.2 d86.6 ± 4.8 c55.9 ± 2.4 d442 ± 21 C
3-O-ara46.5 ± 2.5 f,g132 ± 6.4 c41.3 ± 2.5 e46.1 ± 2.1 f39.7 ± 1.5 d305 ± 15 F
Other forms93.2 ± 5.3 c187 ± 14.0 c27.2 ± 2.1 d,e47.6 ± 3.8 c58.6 ± 4.3 b414 ± 29 C
Total277 ± 14 ζ602 ± 31 β162 ± 9.2 ε233 ± 13 ε195 ± 8.8 γ,δ1468
Bilberry3-O-gal258 ± 9.4 a79.0 ± 3.0 e269 ± 11.5 a92.1 ± 4.3 d,e45.1 ± 1.2 d,e744 ± 29 B
3-O-glu186 ± 9.1 a162 ± 3.0 b,c182 ± 6.3 a131 ± 6.1 a,b114 ± 2.9 a775 ± 27 A
3-O-ara277 ± 13.4 a98.9 ± 1.5 d253 ± 8.4 a93.3 ± 3.6 b43.1 ± 1.0 d765 ± 28 A
Other forms20.1 ± 1.1 f,g13.9 ± 3.2 f28.8 ± 5.9 c,d,e13.7 ± 2.6 f9.0 ± 2.1 d,e85.6 ± 15 F
Total741 ± 33 α354 ± 7.8 ε733 ± 28 α330 ± 15 γ211 ± 5.5 γ2369
Lowbush composite3-O-gal107 ± 1.0 f163 ± 1.7 c85.4 ± 1.2 e,f84.1 ± 0.6 e62.9 ± 0.8 d502 ± 5.2 C
3-O-glu125 ± 1.2 c228 ± 2.4 a85.2 ± 0.9 b126 ± 1.0 b77.7 ± 0.6 c641 ± 6.1 B
3-O-ara86.6 ± 2.1 c,d194 ± 4.6 a79.0 ± 1.0 d76.5 ± 2.9 d60.7 ± 0.8 c497 ± 11 C,D
Other forms168 ± 5.0 a334 ± 7.3 a65.4 ± 2.1 a96.5 ± 1.9 b96.0 ± 3.1 a760 ± 19 A
Total487 ± 6.3 γ918 ± 9.2 α315 ± 3.9 γ,δ383 ± 3.5 β297 ± 3.7 β2400
Lowercase letters represent significant differences in individual anthocyanins between different Vaccinium spp. genotypes; capital letters represent significant differences in anthocyanins with the same glycosylation/acylation pattern between genotypes; Greek letters represent significant differences in anthocyanins sharing the same aglycone between genotypes. Significant differences between genotypes were determined using Tukey’s HSD test (p < 0.05). “Other forms” represents the sum of anthocyanins with acylated side chains. “Total” represents the sum of all anthocyanins with the same parent anthocyanidin. “Trace” indicates compounds that were detected but below the LOQ, while “nd” indicates phenolics that were not detected.
Table 3. Phenolic acids and flavan-3-ols in 10 genotypes of Vaccinium spp. (mg phenolic/100 g berry (dw)) .
Table 3. Phenolic acids and flavan-3-ols in 10 genotypes of Vaccinium spp. (mg phenolic/100 g berry (dw)) .
Phenolic AcidsFlavan-3-ols
Gallic AcidChlorogenic AcidCatechinEpicatechinProcyanidin B1Procyanidin B2
Ira0.70 ± 0.09 b,c,d755 ± 46.7 a15.9 ± 1.28 a1.07 ± 0.25 d,e8.27 ± 0.96 a0.75 ± 0.31 e
Legacy0.52 ± 0.04 c,d520 ± 58.5 b8.11 ± 0.67 c0.71 ± 0.27 e4.02 ± 0.23 c2.51 ± 0.44 d,e
Montgomery0.47 ± 0.03 c,d493 ± 48.9 b12.8 ± 0.29 b1.63 ± 0.07 c,d,e6.56 ± 0.49 b2.03 ± 0.23 e
Onslow0.57 ± 0.19 c,d496 ± 30.5 b15.2 ± 0.57 a3.24 ± 0.09 c7.17 ± 0.29 a,b4.23 ± 0.24 c,d
Sampson0.92 ± 0.09 b,c269 ± 9.03 c3.90 ± 0.16 d0.41 ± 0.28 e0.91 ± 0.19 d0.89 ± 0.44 e
SHF2B1-21:30.66 ± 0.04 b,c,d492 ± 26.4 b6.97 ± 0.10 c1.89 ± 0.88 c,d,e3.23 ± 0.26 c2.67 ± 0.62 d,e
Cranberry0.38 ± 0.08 d20.3 ± 0.64 d1.93 ± 0.07 e19.3 ± 0.82 atrace13.8 ± 1.49 b
Wild BB0.52 ± 0.02 c,d566 ± 31.6 b7.64 ± 0.78 c3.04 ± 0.32 c,d6.21 ± 0.31 b4.62 ± 0.48 c,d
Bilberry2.04 ± 0.37 a104 ± 3.58 c,d0.06 ± 0.06 f10.9 ± 1.75 btrace19.3 ± 1.33 a
LB composite1.11 ± 0.32 b740 ± 25.1 a8.02 ± 0.43 c1.67 ± 0.64 c,d,e7.02 ± 0.53 a,b5.44 ± 0.62 c
Letters represent significant differences in phenolics between genotypes. Significant differences between genotypes were determined using Tukey’s HSD test (p < 0.05). “Trace” indicates compounds that were detected but below the LOQ.
Table 4. Flavonols in 10 genotypes of Vaccinium spp. (mg phenolic/100 g berry (dw)) .
Table 4. Flavonols in 10 genotypes of Vaccinium spp. (mg phenolic/100 g berry (dw)) .
Quer 3-O-arbQuer 3-O-rhamQuer 3-O-glcsQuer 3-O-gcndQuer 3-O-rutTotal QuerKaemp 3-O-glcsKaemp 3-O-rutMyr 3-O-glcs
Ira0.34 ± 0.14 f58.1 ± 9.21 b26.1 ± 3.18 d8.92 ± 0.34 c,d14.3 ± 1.30 c,d,e108 ± 11.7 e0.09 ± 0.08 dtrace2.20 ± 0.12 e
Legacy28.1 ± 7.30 d24.7 ± 6.50 c249 ± 29.1 a1.14 ± 0.48 d9.18 ± 2.16 d,e,f313 ± 43.7 b,c3.35 ± 1.03 a0.57 ± 0.31 b,c19.0 ± 1.40 c,d
Montgomery17.3 ± 1.40 d,e,f27.7 ± 1.35 c23.9 ± 2.83 d6.04 ± 0.59 d17.6 ± 1.15 c,d92.5 ± 5.48 e0.59 ± 0.06 c,d0.71 ± 0.11 b,c4.86 ± 0.10 d,e
Onslow26.3 ± 4.12 d47.8 ± 4.76 b33.3 ± 4.14 d15.5 ± 0.44 c7.68 ± 1.85 e,f131 ± 5.70 e0.73 ± 0.12 c,d0.34 ± 0.19 c2.35 ± 0.54 e
Sampson92.7 ± 8.20 b113 ± 6.15 a124 ± 13.0 ctrace31.3 ± 3.35 a360 ± 22.4 a,b1.10 ± 0.12 c,d1.77 ± 0.36 a26.1 ± 4.18 c
SHF2B1-21:320.6 ± 2.35 d,e13.9 ± 2.14 c,d156 ± 16.6 ctrace4.81 ± 0.74 f194 ± 19.1 d0.64 ± 0.07 c,dtrace52.1 ± 15.7 a,b
Cranberry136 ± 11.0 a21.1 ± 3.05 c206 ± 15.8 btracetrace363 ± 22.6 a,b0.72 ± 0.26 c,dnd58.7 ± 9.74 a
Wild BB26.9 ± 2.12 d20.7 ± 1.94 c161 ± 21.9 c40.3 ± 6.84 b20.9 ± 3.06 b,c269 ± 25.5 c1.59 ± 0.30 b,c1.32 ± 0.22 a,b22.4 ± 3.80 c,d
Bilberry7.37 ± 1.26 e,f1.09 ± 0.21 d47.5 ± 6.38 d38.5 ± 1.40 btrace94.5 ± 8.75 etracetrace35.3 ± 8.01 b,c
LB composite64.1 ± 12.4 c54.6 ± 7.43 b210 ± 9.01 a,b60.5 ± 4.19 a29.0 ± 7.50 a,b418 ± 20.6 a2.28 ± 0.30 a,b2.00 ± 0.51 a27.8 ± 1.52 c
Letters represent significant differences in phenolics between genotypes. Significant differences between genotypes were determined using Tukey’s HSD test (p < 0.05). “Trace” indicates compounds that were detected but below the LOQ, “nd” indicates phenolics that were not detected, and “total quer” represents the total of all glycosides containing quercetin as the parent flavonol. Abbreviations: Quer = quercetin; arb = arabinoside; rham = rhamnoside; glcs = glycosides (galactoside + glucoside); gcnd = glucuronide; rut = rutinoside; Kaemp = kaempferol; Myr = myricetin.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Weaver, C.M.; Ferruzzi, M.G.; Maiz, M.; Cladis, D.P.; Nakatsu, C.H.; McCabe, G.P.; Lila, M.A. Crop, Host, and Gut Microbiome Variation Influence Precision Nutrition: An Example of Blueberries. Antioxidants 2023, 12, 1136. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox12051136

AMA Style

Weaver CM, Ferruzzi MG, Maiz M, Cladis DP, Nakatsu CH, McCabe GP, Lila MA. Crop, Host, and Gut Microbiome Variation Influence Precision Nutrition: An Example of Blueberries. Antioxidants. 2023; 12(5):1136. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox12051136

Chicago/Turabian Style

Weaver, Connie M., Mario G. Ferruzzi, Maria Maiz, Dennis P. Cladis, Cindy H. Nakatsu, George P. McCabe, and Mary Ann Lila. 2023. "Crop, Host, and Gut Microbiome Variation Influence Precision Nutrition: An Example of Blueberries" Antioxidants 12, no. 5: 1136. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox12051136

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop