Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1 At present there is a lack of conclusive evidence to support or discourage the use of fiber- and prebiotic-containing foods or supplements by IBD patients. However, preliminary evidence suggests that these dietary strategies may enhance disease outcomes + 1554 word(s) 1554 2020-11-06 04:16:58 |
2 format correction -99 word(s) 1455 2020-11-08 10:59:54 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?


Are you sure to Delete?
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Healey, G.R.; Celiberto, L.S.; Lee, S.M.; Jacobson, K. Fiber in Health and Disease. Encyclopedia. Available online: (accessed on 24 April 2024).
Healey GR, Celiberto LS, Lee SM, Jacobson K. Fiber in Health and Disease. Encyclopedia. Available at: Accessed April 24, 2024.
Healey, Genelle R., Larissa S. Celiberto, Soo Min Lee, Kevan Jacobson. "Fiber in Health and Disease" Encyclopedia, (accessed April 24, 2024).
Healey, G.R., Celiberto, L.S., Lee, S.M., & Jacobson, K. (2020, November 07). Fiber in Health and Disease. In Encyclopedia.
Healey, Genelle R., et al. "Fiber in Health and Disease." Encyclopedia. Web. 07 November, 2020.
Fiber in Health and Disease

The etiology of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is complex but is thought to be linked to an intricate interaction between the host's immune system, resident gut microbiome and environment, i.e., diet. One dietary component that has a major impact on IBD risk and disease management is fiber. Fiber also has a significant impact on beneficially shaping gut microbiota composition and functional capacity. 

Fiber, inflammatory bowel disease, gut microbiome

1. Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is characterized by chronic, relapsing inflammation of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. There are two main subsets of IBD: Crohn's disease (CD), which affects any part of the GI tract but is primarily found in the terminal ileum and cecum, and ulcerative colitis (UC), which affects only the colon. The incidence and prevalence of IBD is rising in a concerning fashion, particularly in children [1].

It appears that one of the strongest determinants of IBD risk is a family history of the disease [2], although it is becoming increasingly evident that modifiable environmental factors such as diet, medication use, smoking, hygiene and breastfeeding also play a key role in disease risk [3]. The exact etiology of IBD is unknown, but the current view is that an intolerance to dysregulated gut microbiota (dysbiosis) due to environmental triggers leads to chronic gut inflammation in genetically susceptible individuals [3]. Of the environmental risk factors that have been identified, diet appears to be the most influential. Therefore, a deeper understanding of the impact diet has on the gut microbiome and subsequent development of IBD is warranted.

Presently, there is no known cure for IBD. Therefore, current therapies are directed at controlling symptoms and maintaining disease remission through the use of immunomodulatory medications that unfortunately have side effects and varying success rates. Consequently, novel therapies are in high demand, with alternative and complementary approaches, particularly dietary and gut microbiome-targeted therapeutic approaches, gaining validity and popularity [4]. More well-designed studies are needed to elucidate the true benefit these novel therapies have in treating IBD.

2. Fiber and Prebiotic Types

Dietary fibers (DFs) are commonly known as nondigestible carbohydrates that confer a health benefit to the host. The exact definition of fiber is still a matter of debate and is continuously evolving due to advances in the field and updates to international guidelines for food product definitions [5]. The differences in the chemical structure and physiochemical properties of DF such as water solubility and viscosity, fermentability and specific physiological benefits of each DF make specific definitions a challenge. Moreover, depending on the fiber studied, there is no consensus as to whether the positive health outcomes are restricted to intact fibers within a food matrix or whether the benefits also extend to fibers extracted from plants, i.e., fiber supplements [5].

Most countries' authorities align with the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) definition established in 2009, where DFs are defined as edible carbohydrate polymers with ten or more monomeric units that are resistant to endogenous digestive enzymes and thus are neither hydrolyzed nor absorbed in the small intestine of humans [6]. The CAC definition provides flexibility to international authorities regarding polymer size; in several countries such as Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Europe and New Zealand, nondigestible carbohydrates with greater than three monomeric units can be considered DFs [7]. According to the CAC, these edible carbohydrate polymers can be found naturally in whole foods such as fruits, vegetables, legumes and cereals as well as extracted from raw food materials by physical, enzymatic and chemical techniques. Additionally, synthetic carbohydrate polymers can also be consider DFs as long as a physiological benefit is proven [8].

DFs are subdivided into either polysaccharides, such as non-starch polysaccharides (NSP), resistant starch (RS) and resistant oligosaccharides, or into insoluble and soluble forms [8][9]. Soluble fibers are fermented in the colon and thus increase the concentration of beneficial bacterial metabolites such as short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) [8]. Most soluble NSPs such as guar gum, β-glucans, psyllium and specific pectins are able to absorb water in the intestinal tract, forming a gel structure that improves stool consistency [8][10]. Moreover, the viscosity properties of soluble fibers can delay absorption of glucose and lipids and thus positively impact postprandial metabolism [9]. In contrast, insoluble fibers such as cellulose and hemi-cellulose are poorly fermented by the bacteria present in the colon. Instead, they confer a fecal bulking effect that helps with bowel movements by improving intestinal transit time [8][10]. Soluble and insoluble fibers are found in different proportions among several food categories such as fruits, vegetables, seeds, nuts, legumes and cereals. While common sources of soluble fiber include oatmeal; barley; and legumes such as beans, lentils and peas, insoluble fibers are present mostly in wholegrain cereals as well as in seeds and the skins of fruits and vegetables.

Based on the physiochemical characteristics of DFs it has been suggested that, even as a secondary effect, all fibers positively shift the gut microbiota composition conferring a general health benefit to the host [11]. However, some of these compounds are classified as "prebiotics" as they meet the current International Scientific Association of Probiotics and Prebiotics (ISAPP) definition of "a substrate that is selectively utilized by host microorganisms conferring a health benefit" [12]. While some researchers and clinicians still use the prebiotic and DF definitions interchangeably, it is important to note that while DFs are broadly metabolized and will therefore stimulate growth of an array of gut microorganisms, prebiotics are non-viable substrates that target human and animal-associated microbiota by serving as a nutrient source for specific beneficial microorganisms harbored by the host. Although the resident microorganisms are the predominant utilizers of prebiotics, administered probiotic strains can also benefit from these specific fermentable substrates [12]. Thus, prebiotics have the ability to create a new nutritional niche within the GI tract, providing specific microbes with nutrients allowing them to establish residence within the indigenous ecosystem [13].

Established prebiotics with the most extensively documented health benefits include inulin-type fructans (i.e., inulin, fructo-oligosaccharide (FOS) and oligofructose), galacto-oligosaccharides (GOS) and lactulose [13][14]. Other fermentable carbohydrates that have shown prebiotic potential include RS, β-glucans, arabinoxylan oligosaccharides, xylo-oligosaccharides, soy bean oligosaccharides, isomalto-oligosaccharides and pectin [13]. Prebiotics are found naturally in foods such as breads, cereals, onions, garlic and artichokes. Likewise, they are easily incorporated into processed food to increase their fiber content as well as nutritional value. They are also sold in the form of DF supplements [13][15]. Substances such as human milk oligosaccharides and plant polyphenols may also be considered prebiotics due to their ability to positively influence GI health; however, additional studies are required to demonstrate their prebiotic capacity [12].

3. Effect of Fiber on Health and Disease

DF intake is notably different across industrialized and unindustrialized countries around the world, with inhabitants of rural communities consuming up to seven times more fiber than typical Western countries due to increased intake of fibrous plants [7]. Western dietary patterns consist of high amounts of processed food rich in sugar and fat and generally devoid of fiber-rich foods such as fruits, vegetables, legumes and wholegrains [16]. Current recommended fiber intakes in Canadian children and adolescents aged 1–3, 4–8 and 9–18 years are 19, 25 [17] and 31 (girls) to 38 (boys) g/day [18], respectively. Current fiber intakes are well below the dietary recommendations, with children 1–3 and 4–8 years consuming only 9.9 and 13.4 g/day, respectively [17]. Meanwhile, adolescent girls and boys are reported to only consume 14 and 16.3–18.2 g of fiber per day [18], respectively, which is less than half of the recommended fiber intake. Low fiber consumption has been indicated as one of the key factors in reducing gut microbiota diversity as well as leading to subsequent increases in chronic non-communicable diseases such as obesity, type 2 diabetes, cancer and cardiovascular disease [19]. Moreover, inadequate fiber intakes are positively associated with pediatric constipation [20] and future health risks including obesity in adulthood [21].

Interestingly, several population studies and meta-analyses have demonstrated a beneficial effect of DFs in the reduction of disease risk, including cardiovascular disease, diabetes, metabolic syndrome, obesity, cancer, diverticular disease, IBD and functional intestinal disorders [22][23][24][25][26][27][28]. The mechanisms of protection in chronic conditions differ depending on the disease as well as the type and dose of the fiber administered; however, shifts in the gut microbiota and the subsequent positive effects of the metabolites they produce (i.e., SCFA) seem to play a major role in the positive outcomes [26]. Prebiotics have also been shown to enhance immune function and insulin sensitivity, which are known to lead to beneficial health effects [29]. Fiber has been reported to help minimize exposure to intestinal carcinogens by diluting fecal content and increasing intestinal transit time [29]. Furthermore, it has been shown that SCFAs produced due to the fermentation of fiber lead to an array of tumor-suppressive and anti-inflammatory effects, with butyrate having particularly compelling effects in cancer [30][31][32] and IBD model studies [33]. Interestingly, some DFs can also aid in weight management and appetite control by improving intestinal transit time, prolonging postprandial and overall satiety and stimulating satiety hormones such as cholecystokinin [34].


  1. Benchimol, E.I.; Bernstein, C.N.; Bitton, A.; Carroll, M.W.; Singh, H.; Otley, A.R.; Vutcovici, M.; El-Matary, W.; Nguyen, G.C.; Griffiths, A.M.; et al. Trends in epidemiology of pediatric inflammatory bowel disease in Canada: Distributed network analysis of multiple population-based provincial health administrative databases. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 2017, 112, 1120–1134, doi:10.1038/ajg.2017.97.
  2. Russell, R.K.; Satsangi, J. IBD: A family affair. Best Pract Res. Clin. Gastroenterol. 2004, 18, 525–539, doi:10.1016/j.bpg.2003.12.006.
  3. Abegunde, A.T.; Muhammad, B.H.; Bhatti, O.; Ali, T. Environmental risk factors for inflammatory bowel diseases: Evidence based literature review. World J. Gastroenterol. 2016, 22, 6296–6317, doi:10.3748/wjg.v22.i27.6296.
  4. Chande, N.; Costello, S.P.; Limketkai, B.N.; Parker, C.E.; Nguyen, T.M.; Macdonald, J.K.; Feagan, B.G. Alternative and complementary approaches for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease: Evidence from Cochrane Reviews. Inflamm. Bowel Dis. 2020, 26, 843–851, doi:10.1093/ibd/izz223.
  5. Jones, J.M. CODEX-aligned dietary fiber definitions help to bridge the “fiber gap”. Nutr. J. 2014, 13, 34, doi:10.1186/1475-2891-13-34.
  6. FAO/WHO, Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme, Secretariat of the CODEX Alimentarius Commission: CODEX Alimentarius (CODEX) Guidelines on Nutrition Labeling CAC/GL 2–1985 as Last Amended 2010. Rome, Italy, 2010.
  7. Holscher, H.D. Dietary fiber and prebiotics and the gastrointestinal microbiota. Gut Microbes 2017, 8, 172–184, doi:10.1080/19490976.2017.1290756.
  8. Makki, K.; Deehan, E.C.; Walter, J.; Bäckhed, F. The impact of dietary fiber on gut microbiota in host health and disease. Cell Host Microbe 2018, 23, 705–715, doi:10.1016/j.chom.2018.05.012.
  9. Deehan, E.C.; Duar, R.M.; Armet, A.M.; Perez-Muñoz, M.E.; Jin, M.; Walter, J. Modulation of the gastrointestinal microbiome with nondigestible fermentable carbohydrates to improve human health. Microbial Spectrum 2017, 5, 5, doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.bad-0019-2017.
  10. Axelrod, C.H.; Saps, M. The role of fiber in the treatment of functional gastrointestinal disorders in children. Nutrients 2018, 10, doi:10.3390/nu10111650.
  11. Bindels, L.B.; Delzenne, N.M.; Cani, P.D.; Walter, J. Towards a more comprehensive concept for prebiotics. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2015, doi:10.1038/nrgastro.2015.47.
  12. Gibson, G.R.; Hutkins, R.; Sanders, M.E.; Prescott, S.L.; Reimer, R.A.; Salminen, S.J.; Scott, K.; Stanton, C.; Swanson, K.S.; Cani, P.D.; et al. Expert consensus document: The International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics (ISAPP) consensus statement on the definition and scope of prebiotics. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2017, 14, 491–502, doi:10.1038/nrgastro.2017.75.
  13. Celiberto, L.S.; Graef, F.A.; Healey, G.R.; Bosman, E.S.; Jacobson, K.; Sly, L.M.; Vallance, B.A. Inflammatory bowel disease and immunonutrition: Novel therapeutic approaches through modulation of diet and the gut microbiome. Immunology 2018, 155, 36–52, doi:10.1111/imm.12939.
  14. Wilson, B.; Whelan, K. Prebiotic inulin-type fructans and galacto-oligosaccharides: Definition, specificity, function, and application in gastrointestinal disorders. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2017, 32, 64–68, doi:10.1111/jgh.13700.
  15. Roberfroid, M.; Slavin, J. Nondigestible oligosaccharides. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2000, 40, 461–480, doi:10.1080/10408690091189239.
  16. Briefel, R.R.; Johnson, C.L. Secular trends in dietary intake in the United States. Annu. Rev. Nutr. 2004, 24, 401–431, doi:10.1146/annurev.nutr.23.011702.073349.
  17. Health Canada. Do Canadian Children Meet Their Nutrient Requirements through Food Intake Alone? 2012. Available online: (accessed on 26 August 2020).
  18. Health Canada. Do Canadian Adolescents Meet Their Nutrient Requirements through Food Intake Alone? 2012. Available online: (accessed on 26 August 2020).
  19. Deehan, E.C.; Walter, J. The Fiber gap and the disappearing gut microbiome: Implications for human nutrition. Trends Endocrinol. Metab. 2016, 27, 239–242, doi:10.1016/j.tem.2016.03.001.
  20. Tabbers, M.M.; Boluyt, N.; Berger, M.Y.; Benninga, M.A. Nonpharmacologic treatments for childhood constipation: Systematic review. Pediatrics 2011, 128, 753–761, doi:10.1542/peds.2011-0179.
  21. Kranz, S.; Brauchla, M.; Slavin, J.L.; Miller, K.B. What do we know about dietary fiber intake in children and health? The effects of fiber intake on constipation, obesity, and diabetes in children. Adv. Nutr. 2012, 3, 47–53, doi:10.3945/an.111.001362.
  22. Crowe, F.L.; Balkwill, A.; Cairns, B.J.; Appleby, P.N.; Green, J.; Reeves, G.K.; Key, T.J.; Beral, V. Source of dietary fibre and diverticular disease incidence: A prospective study of UK women. Gut 2014, 63, 1450–1456, doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2013-304644.
  23. Sanjoaquin, M.A.; Appleby, P.N.; Spencer, E.A.; Key, T.J. Nutrition and lifestyle in relation to bowel movement frequency: A cross-sectional study of 20 630 men and women in EPIC–Oxford. Public Health Nutr. 2004, 7, 77–83, doi:10.1079/phn2003522.
  24. Appleby, P.N.; Thorogood, M.; Mann, J.I.; Key, T.J. Low body mass index in non-meat eaters: The possible roles of animal fat, dietary fibre and alcohol. Int. J. Obes. 1998, 22, 454–460, doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0800607.
  25. Park, Y.; Hunter, D.J.; Spiegelman, D.; Bergkvist, L.; Berrino, F.; Brandt, P.A.V.D.; Buring, J.E.; Colditz, G.A.; Freudenheim, J.L.; Fuchs, C.S.; et al. Dietary fiber intake and risk of colorectal cancer: A pooled analysis of prospective cohort studies. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 2005, 294, 2849–2857, doi:10.1001/jama.294.22.2849.
  26. Soliman, G.A. Dietary fiber, atherosclerosis, and cardiovascular disease. Nutrients 2019, 11, doi:10.3390/nu11051155.
  27. Cicero, A.F.G.; Colletti, A. Role of phytochemicals in the management of metabolic syndrome. Phytomedicine 2016, 23, 1134–1144, doi:10.1016/j.phymed.2015.11.009.
  28. Weickert, M.O.; Pfeiffer, A.F.H. Impact of dietary fiber consumption on insulin resistance and the prevention of type 2 diabetes. J. Nutr. 2018, 148, 7–12, doi:10.1093/jn/nxx008.
  29. Anderson, J.W.; Baird, P.; Jr, R.H.D.; Ferreri, S.; Knudtson, M.; Koraym, A.; Waters, V.; Williams, C.L. Health benefits of dietary fiber. Nutr. Rev. 2009, 67, 188–205, doi:10.1111/j.1753-4887.2009.00189.x.
  30. Entin-Meer, M.; Rephaeli, A.; Yang, X.; Nudelman, A.; VandenBerg, S.R.; Haas-Kogan, D.A. Butyric acid prodrugs are histone deacetylase inhibitors that show antineoplastic activity and radiosensitizing capacity in the treatment of malignant gliomas. Mol. Cancer Ther. 2005, 4, 1952–1961, doi:10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-05-0087.
  31. Kuefer, R.; Hofer, M.D.; Altug, V.; Zorn, C.; Genze, F.; Kunzi-Rapp, K.; Hautmann, R.E.; Gschwend, J.E. Sodium butyrate and tributyrin induce in vivo growth inhibition and apoptosis in human prostate cancer. Br. J. Cancer 2004, 90, 535–541, doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6601510.
  32. Bras–Gonçalves, R.A.; Pocard, M.; Poirson–Bichat, F.; De Pinieux, G.; Pandrea, I.; Arvelo, F.; Ronco, G.; Villa, P.; Coquelle, A.; Milano, G.; et al. Synergistic efficacy of 3n-butyrate and 5-fluorouracil in human colorectal cancer xenografts via modulation of DNA synthesis. Gastroenterology 2001, 120, 874–888, doi:10.1053/gast.2001.22440.
  33. Silva, J.P.; Navegantes-Lima, K.C.; De Oliveira, A.L.; Rodrigues, D.V.; Gaspar, S.L.; Monteiro, V.V.; Moura, D.P.; Monteiro, M.C. Protective mechanisms of butyrate on inflammatory bowel disease. Curr. Pharm. Des. 2018, 24, 4154–4166, doi:10.2174/1381612824666181001153605.
  34. Rao, T.P. Role of guar fiber in appetite control. Physiol. Behav. 2016, 164 Pt A, 277–283, doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2016.06.014.
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to : , , ,
View Times: 506
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 08 Nov 2020