Back

D- and L-lactate consumers in the human gut are taxonomically, biochemically, and energetically different

Allaart, M. T.; Tyakht, A. V.; Ley, R.; Pabst, M.; Stouten, G. R.; Angenent, L. T.

2025-10-31 bioengineering
10.1101/2025.10.29.685474 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The human gut microbiota routinely produces D- and L-lactate during fermentation; however, the microbial fate of these stereoisomers, particularly the neurotoxic D-lactate, remains poorly understood. Given that D-lactate is an unavoidable byproduct of digestion, understanding its microbial turnover is essential for linking gut metabolism to host health. Here, we used chemostat bioreactors (pH 7.0, 37{degrees}C, and a solids retention time [SRT] of 4 d) to simulate gut-relevant, transient nutrient conditions and to enrich for lactate-consuming communities. DL-lactate-consuming consortia were enriched from a human-derived microbiota and then inoculated into duplicate bioreactors, which were fed exclusively D- or L-lactate. After steady-state was reached, the fed lactate stereoisomers were switched to assess community resilience. Regardless of the fed stereoisomer, the fermentation product spectra were consistent and dominated by acetate, propionate, and CO2. However, microbial communities and biomass yields diverged sharply, with a high relative abundance of Anaerotignum in D-lactate enrichments and Acidipropionibacterium and Propionibacterium in L-lactate enrichments. Notably, the biomass yield for D-lactate feeding was less than half that for L-lactate feeding, suggesting that the two isomers are metabolized through distinct biochemical pathways despite similar product spectra. Metagenomic and metaproteomic analyses confirmed this divergence at the pathway level. Our findings reveal how the stereoisomer identity of microbes shapes their niche specialization in the gut, with implications for understanding the ecology and clinical impact of lactate metabolism.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.