Submitted:
28 April 2026
Posted:
30 April 2026
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
1.1. Physiological Mediators of the Axis: The “Good”
1.1.1. Short-Chain Fatty Acids (SCFAs)
1.1.2. Neurotransmitters and Biogenic Amines
1.2. The Modern Industrial Shift: The “Bad”
1.2.1. The Xenobiotic Paradigm
1.2.2. Scope and Synthesis
2. Effect of Modern Food Additives: Non-Nutritive Sweeteners
2.1. Saccharin and Metabolic Dysregulation
2.2. Comparative Impacts of Modern Sweeteners
3. Effect of Microplastics
3.1. Exposure Pathways and Dysbiosis
3.2. Systemic Inflammation and Immune Dysregulation
3.3. The Gut-Liver and Gut-Heart Axes: Systemic Conduits to Neuroinflammation
3.4. The Gut-Brain Axis and Neurotoxicity
4. Effect of Nanoparticles
4.1. Food-Grade Nanoparticles and Packaging Migrants
4.2. Unintentional Anthropogenic Nanoparticles
4.3. Mechanisms of Nanoparticle-Induced MGBA Disruption
5. Effect of Air Pollution: Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
5.1. The Lung-Gut Exposure Route and Barrier Dysfunction
5.2. Profound Dysbiosis and Metabolic Perturbation
5.3. Neuroinflammatory and Neurodegenerative Consequences
6. Effect on Neurological Diseases
6.1. Neurodegenerative Disorders
6.1.1. Alzheimer’s Disease (AD)
6.1.2. Parkinson’s Disease (PD)
6.2. Neuroinflammation and Autoimmune Disorders
6.2.1. Multiple Sclerosis (MS)
6.2.2. Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS)
6.3. Neuropsychiatric Disorders
6.3.1. Major Depressive Disorder (MDD)
6.3.2. Schizophrenia
6.3.3. Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)
6.3.4. Bipolar Disorder (BD)
6.4. Other Neurological Disorders
6.4.1. Epilepsy
6.4.2. Migraine
6.4.3. Restless Leg Syndrome (RLS)
6.4.4. Substance Use Disorder
7. Conclusion and Future Directions
- Profound Dysbiosis: A consistent depletion of neuroprotective, SCFA-producing taxa (e.g., Faecalibacterium, Lachnospiraceae) and the aberrant proliferation of opportunistic pathobionts (e.g., Enterobacteriaceae, Proteobacteria). This sharply diminishes the bioavailability of essential neuroactive mediators, including butyrate, GABA, serotonin, and indole derivatives.
- Barrier Disruption & Systemic Translocation: The physical, chemical, and oxidative (ROS) erosion of critical tight junction proteins (ZO-1, Occludin) precipitates a “leaky gut” phenotype [89]. This facilitates the unrestricted systemic translocation of neurotoxic microbial products, such as lipopolysaccharides (LPS).
- Neurodegeneration: The culmination of systemic inflammation and, in the case of nanoparticles and microplastics, direct xenobiotic translocation across the blood-brain barrier [70], triggers microglial activation, attenuates autophagic flux, and accelerates the aggregation of neurotoxic proteins (e.g., amyloid-β and p-Tau).
7.1. A Potential “Dual-Hit” Mechanism
7.2. The Therapeutic Paradox and Environmental Complexity
7.3. Future Directions:
- Addressing the “Cocktail Effect”: Real-world exposure is cumulative. Longitudinal human studies and advanced in vivo modelling must evaluate the synergistic toxicity of simultaneous exposure to microplastics, nanoparticles, air pollution, and non-nutritive sweeteners on neuro-metabolic markers.
- Broadening the Neurological Scope: There is a critical need to expand investigations beyond classical neurodegeneration (AD/PD) to elucidate the causal correlations between modern xenobiotics and underexplored pathologies, including migraine, epilepsy, restless leg syndrome, and the alarming escalation of substance use disorders.
- Safe-by-Design Nanomedicine: The development of future oral therapeutics and food packaging must prioritize rigorous preclinical screening to filter out nanomaterials that inadvertently trigger mucosal oxidative stress or downregulate tight junction proteins.
- Targeted Microbiome Interventions: Therapeutic strategies must pivot towards rescuing the MGBA through “psychobiotics” and targeted postbiotics. Exploring the therapeutic administration of specific neuroprotective metabolites (e.g., SCFAs, Indole Propionic Acid) or bio-engineering probiotic consortia capable of degrading the MP “plastisphere” offers a promising frontier for preserving long-term neurological resilience against environmental disruptors.
Author Contributions
Acknowledgments
References
- Rinninella, E.; et al. What is the Healthy Gut Microbiota Composition? A Changing Ecosystem across Age, Environment, Diet, and Diseases. Microorganisms 2019, 7, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ray, S.; Shankaran, P. Nutrition and the gut microbiome: a symbiotic dialogue influencing health and disease. Front. Nutr. 2026, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Agus, A.; Clément, K.; Sokol, H. Gut microbiota-derived metabolites as central regulators in metabolic disorders. Gut 2021, 70, 1174–1182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Silva, Y. P.; Bernardi, A.; Frozza, R. L. The Role of Short-Chain Fatty Acids From Gut Microbiota in Gut-Brain Communication. Front. Endocrinol. . 2020, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Priyadarshini, M.; Kotlo, K. U.; Dudeja, P. K.; Layden, B. T. Role of Short Chain Fatty Acid Receptors in Intestinal Physiology and Pathophysiology. In in Comprehensive Physiology; Wiley, 2018; pp. 1091–1115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parada Venegas, D.; et al. Short Chain Fatty Acids (SCFAs)-Mediated Gut Epithelial and Immune Regulation and Its Relevance for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases. Front. Immunol. 2019, 10. [Google Scholar]
- Parker, A.; Fonseca, S.; Carding, S. R. Gut microbes and metabolites as modulators of blood-brain barrier integrity and brain health. Gut Microbes 2020, 11, 135–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sano, C. History of glutamate production. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2009, 90, 728S–732S. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tanous, C.; Chambellon, E.; Sepulchre, A.-M.; Yvon, M. The Gene Encoding the Glutamate Dehydrogenase in Lactococcus lactis Is Part of a Remnant Tn 3 Transposon Carried by a Large Plasmid. J. Bacteriol. 2005, 187, 5019–5022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chang, C.-H.; Lin, C.-H.; Lane, H.-Y. d-glutamate and Gut Microbiota in Alzheimer’s Disease. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 2676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Strandwitz, P.; et al. GABA-modulating bacteria of the human gut microbiota. Nat. Microbiol. 2018, 4, 396–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Strandwitz, P. Neurotransmitter modulation by the gut microbiota. Brain Res. 2018, 1693, 128–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quillin, S. J.; Tran, P.; Prindle, A. Potential Roles for Gamma-Aminobutyric Acid Signaling in Bacterial Communities. Bioelectricity 2021, 3, 120–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, H.; et al. Altered fecal microbiota composition in patients with major depressive disorder. Brain Behav. Immun. 2015, 48, 186–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jenkins, T.; Nguyen, J.; Polglaze, K.; Bertrand, P. Influence of Tryptophan and Serotonin on Mood and Cognition with a Possible Role of the Gut-Brain Axis. Nutrients 2016, 8, 56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guzel, T.; Mirowska-Guzel, D. The Role of Serotonin Neurotransmission in Gastrointestinal Tract and Pharmacotherapy. Molecules 2022, 27, 1680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hwang, Y. K.; Oh, J. S. Interaction of the Vagus Nerve and Serotonin in the Gut–Brain Axis. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2025, 26, 1160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dicks, L. M. T.; Hurn, D.; Hermanus, D. Gut Bacteria and Neuropsychiatric Disorders. Microorganisms 2021, 9, 2583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, L.-J.; Li, J.-N.; Nie, Y.-Z. Gut hormones in microbiota-gut-brain cross-talk. Chin. Med. J. (Engl) . 2020, 133, 826–833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- El-Salhy, M.; Solomon, T.; Hausken, T.; Gilja, O. H.; Hatlebakk, J. G. Gastrointestinal neuroendocrine peptides/amines in inflammatory bowel disease. World J. Gastroenterol. 2017, 23, 5068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dicks, L. M. T. Gut Bacteria and Neurotransmitters. Microorganisms 2022, 10, 1838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, S. Modulation of immunity by tryptophan microbial metabolites. Front. Nutr. 2023, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mu, Q.; Tavella, V. J.; Luo, X. M. Role of Lactobacillus reuteri in Human Health and Diseases. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, X.; et al. Sodium butyrate facilitates CRHR2 expression to alleviate HPA axis hyperactivity in autism-like rats induced by prenatal lipopolysaccharides through histone deacetylase inhibition. mSystems 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fernando, W. M. A. D. B.; et al. Sodium Butyrate Reduces Brain Amyloid-β Levels and Improves Cognitive Memory Performance in an Alzheimer’s Disease Transgenic Mouse Model at an Early Disease Stage. J. Alzheimer’s Dis. 2020, 74, 91–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tu, J.; Zhang, J.; Chen, G. Higher dietary butyrate intake is associated with better cognitive function in older adults: evidence from a cross-sectional study. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2025, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Huang, T.; Shi, H.; Xu, Y.; Ji, L. The gut microbiota metabolite propionate ameliorates intestinal epithelial barrier dysfunction-mediated Parkinson’s disease via the AKT signaling pathway. Neuroreport 2021, 32, 244–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Almutairi, S.; Sivadas, A.; Kwakowsky, A. The Effect of Oral GABA on the Nervous System: Potential for Therapeutic Intervention. Nutraceuticals 2024, 4, 241–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, H.; et al. GABAergic System Dysfunction in Autism Spectrum Disorders. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2022, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alharbi, B.; et al. Role of GABA pathway in motor and non-motor symptoms in Parkinson’s disease: a bidirectional circuit. Eur. J. Med. Res. 2024, 29, 205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Monti, J. M. Serotonin control of sleep-wake behavior. Sleep Med. Rev. 2011, 15, 269–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuuskmäe, C.; et al. Negr1 deficiency alters glutamate signalling and kynurenine pathway in a mouse model of psychiatric disorders. Sci. Rep. 2026, 16, 5317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ciaglia, T.; et al. Neuroprotective Potential of Indole-Based Compounds: A Biochemical Study on Antioxidant Properties and Amyloid Disaggregation in Neuroblastoma Cells. Antioxidants 2024, 13, 1585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, Q.; et al. Indole-3-propionic Acid Attenuates HI-Related Blood–Brain Barrier Injury in Neonatal Rats by Modulating the PXR Signaling Pathway. ACS Chem. Neurosci. 2022, 13, 2897–2912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ji, Y.; et al. Anti-Inflammatory and Anti-Oxidative Activity of Indole-3-Acetic Acid Involves Induction of HO-1 and Neutralization of Free Radicals in RAW264.7 Cells. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 1579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sun, J.; et al. Microbiota-derived metabolite Indoles induced aryl hydrocarbon receptor activation and inhibited neuroinflammation in APP/PS1 mice. Brain Behav. Immun. 2022, 106, 76–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Richardson, I. L.; Frese, S. A. Non-nutritive sweeteners and their impacts on the gut microbiome and host physiology. Front. Nutr. 2022, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coccurello, R. Disrupting the Gut–Brain Axis: How Artificial Sweeteners Rewire Microbiota and Reward Pathways. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2025, 26, 10220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suez, J.; et al. Artificial sweeteners induce glucose intolerance by altering the gut microbiota. Nature 2014, 514, 181–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kidangathazhe, A.; et al. Synthetic vs. non-synthetic sweeteners: their differential effects on gut microbiome diversity and function. Front. Microbiol. 2025, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Li, Z.; et al. Fructose metabolism and its roles in metabolic diseases, inflammatory diseases, and cancer. Mol. Biomed. 2025, 6, 43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Westerbeke, F. H. M.; Rios-Morales, M.; Attaye, I.; Nieuwdorp, M. Fructose catabolism and its metabolic effects: Exploring host–microbiota interactions and the impact of ethnicity. J. Physiol. 2025, 603, 7661–7681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Spruss, A.; Bergheim, I. Dietary fructose and intestinal barrier: potential risk factor in the pathogenesis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. J. Nutr. Biochem. 2009, 20, 657–662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nettleton, J. E.; et al. Maternal low-dose aspartame and stevia consumption with an obesogenic diet alters metabolism, gut microbiota and mesolimbic reward system in rat dams and their offspring. Gut 2020, 69, 1807–1817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Suez, J.; et al. Personalized microbiome-driven effects of non-nutritive sweeteners on human glucose tolerance. Cell 2022, 185, 3307–3328.e19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Olivier-Van Stichelen, S.; Rother, K. I.; Hanover, J. A. Maternal Exposure to Non-nutritive Sweeteners Impacts Progeny’s Metabolism and Microbiome. Front. Microbiol. 2019, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hanawa, Y.; et al. Acesulfame potassium induces dysbiosis and intestinal injury with enhanced lymphocyte migration to intestinal mucosa. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2021, 36, 3140–3148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Méndez-García, L. A.; et al. Ten-Week Sucralose Consumption Induces Gut Dysbiosis and Altered Glucose and Insulin Levels in Healthy Young Adults. Microorganisms 2022, 10, 434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zheng, Z.; et al. Low Dose of Sucralose Alter Gut Microbiome in Mice. Front. Nutr. 2022, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dai, X.; et al. Maternal sucralose intake alters gut microbiota of offspring and exacerbates hepatic steatosis in adulthood. Gut Microbes 2020, 11, 1043–1063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Q.-P.; Browman, D.; Herzog, H.; Neely, G. G. Non-nutritive sweeteners possess a bacteriostatic effect and alter gut microbiota in mice. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0199080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uebanso, T.; et al. Effects of Low-Dose Non-Caloric Sweetener Consumption on Gut Microbiota in Mice. Nutrients 2017, 9, 560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bian, X.; et al. Gut Microbiome Response to Sucralose and Its Potential Role in Inducing Liver Inflammation in Mice. Front. Physiol. 2017, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bian, X.; et al. Saccharin induced liver inflammation in mice by altering the gut microbiota and its metabolic functions. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2017, 107, 530–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bora, S. S.; et al. Microplastics and human health: unveiling the gut microbiome disruption and chronic disease risks. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 2024, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ravindra, K.; Kaur, M.; Mor, S. Impacts of microplastics on gut health: Current status and future directions. Indian J. Gastroenterol. 2026, 45, 20–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalra, A.; Dominoni, D. M.; Boonekamp, J. The impact of microplastics on the mice gut microbiome: a meta-analysis. 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Campanale, C.; Massarelli, C.; Savino, I.; Locaputo, V.; Uricchio, V. F. A Detailed Review Study on Potential Effects of Microplastics and Additives of Concern on Human Health. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 1212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Emenike, E. C.; et al. From oceans to dinner plates: The impact of microplastics on human health. Heliyon 2023, 9, e20440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nugrahapraja, H.; et al. Effects of Microplastic on Human Gut Microbiome: Detection of Plastic-Degrading Genes in Human Gut Exposed to Microplastics—Preliminary Study. Environments 2022, 9, 140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fournier, E.; et al. Exposure to polyethylene microplastics alters immature gut microbiome in an infant in vitro gut model. J. Hazard. Mater. 2023, 443, 130383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tamargo, A.; et al. PET microplastics affect human gut microbiota communities during simulated gastrointestinal digestion, first evidence of plausible polymer biodegradation during human digestion. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Schwarzfischer, M.; Rogler, G. The Intestinal Barrier—Shielding the Body from Nano- and Microparticles in Our Diet. Metabolites 2022, 12, 223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shim, J. A.; Ryu, J. H.; Jo, Y.; Hong, C. The role of gut microbiota in T cell immunity and immune mediated disorders. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 2023, 19, 1178–1191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oparaugo, N. C.; Ouyang, K.; Nguyen, N. P. N.; Nelson, A. M.; Agak, G. W. Human Regulatory T Cells: Understanding the Role of Tregs in Select Autoimmune Skin Diseases and Post-Transplant Nonmelanoma Skin Cancers. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 1527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, W.; et al. Polystyrene microplastics induce hepatotoxicity and disrupt lipid metabolism in the liver organoids. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 806, 150328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Candelli, M.; et al. Interaction between Lipopolysaccharide and Gut Microbiota in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 6242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Canyelles, M.; et al. Gut Microbiota-Derived TMAO: A Causal Factor Promoting Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease? Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 1940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marfella, R.; et al. Microplastics and Nanoplastics in Atheromas and Cardiovascular Events. N. Engl. J. Med. 2024, 390, 900–910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amato-Lourenço, L. F.; et al. Microplastics in the Olfactory Bulb of the Human Brain. JAMA Netw. Open 2024, 7, e2440018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Peng, Y.; Lu, J.; Fan, L.; Dong, W.; Jiang, M. Simulated gastrointestinal digestion of two different sources of biodegradable microplastics and the influence on gut microbiota. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2024, 185, 114474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, X.; et al. Effects of thermal exposure to disposable plastic tableware on human gut microbiota and metabolites: A quasi-experimental study. J. Hazard. Mater. 2024, 462, 132800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, X.; et al. Effect of microplastics on nasal and intestinal microbiota of the high-exposure population. Front. Public Health 2022, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ke, D.; et al. Occurrence of microplastics and disturbance of gut microbiota: a pilot study of preschool children in Xiamen, China. EBioMedicine 2023, 97, 104828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, B.; et al. Association between microplastics and the functionalities of human gut microbiome. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2025, 290, 117497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gao, B.; et al. Mixture Effects of Polystyrene Microplastics on the Gut Microbiota in C57BL/6 Mice. ACS Omega 2025, 10, 7597–7608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hong, Y.; et al. Take-out food enhances the risk of MPs ingestion and obesity, altering the gut microbiome in young adults. J. Hazard. Mater. 2024, 476, 135125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gupta, R. K.; Guha, P.; Srivastav, P. P. Investigating the toxicological effects of nanomaterials in food packaging associated with human health and the environment. J. Hazard. Mater. Lett. 2024, 5, 100125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mc Carthy, D. J.; Malhotra, M.; O’Mahony, A. M.; Cryan, J. F.; O’Driscoll, C. M. Nanoparticles and the Blood-Brain Barrier: Advancing from In-Vitro Models Towards Therapeutic Significance. Pharm. Res. 2015, 32, 1161–1185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, C.; et al. Zinc Oxide Nanoparticle-Induced Neurotoxicity: Underlying Molecular Mechanisms and Future Perspectives. Toxics 2025, 14, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, X.; et al. Evaluation of the gut microbiome alterations in healthy rats after dietary exposure to different synthetic ZnO nanoparticles. Life Sci. 2023, 312, 121250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, X.-L.; et al. Changes in Gut Microbiota Structure: A Potential Pathway for Silver Nanoparticles to Affect the Host Metabolism. ACS Nano 2022, 16, 19002–19012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, X.; Cui, X.; Wu, J.; Bao, L.; Chen, C. Oral administration of silver nanomaterials affects the gut microbiota and metabolic profile altering the secretion of 5-HT in mice. J. Mater. Chem. B 2023, 11, 1904–1915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pinget, G.; et al. Impact of the Food Additive Titanium Dioxide (E171) on Gut Microbiota-Host Interaction. Front. Nutr. 2019, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferdous, Z.; Nemmar, A. Health Impact of Silver Nanoparticles: A Review of the Biodistribution and Toxicity Following Various Routes of Exposure. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 2375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liu, Q.; Wang, B.; Wang, S.; Jing, H.; Xu, S. Carbon Black Nanoparticles Exposure Induces Intestinal Flora Dysbiosis and Consequent Activation of Gut-liver Axis Leading to Liver Lipid Accumulation in Zebrafish. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ogawa, T.; et al. Oral intake of silica nanoparticles exacerbates intestinal inflammation. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2021, 534, 540–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cai, X.; et al. NLRP3 inflammasome and gut microbiota–brain axis: A new perspective on white matter injury after intracerebral hemorrhage. Neural Regen. Res. 2026, 21, 62–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krishnamoorthy, R.; et al. Antibacterial Mechanisms of Zinc Oxide Nanoparticle against Bacterial Food Pathogens Resistant to Beta-Lactam Antibiotics. Molecules 2022, 27, 2489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Li, C.; Tang, M. The toxicological effects of nano titanium dioxide on target organs and mechanisms of toxicity. J. Appl. Toxicol. 2024, 44, 152–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shang, J.; et al. Oral Exposure to Food-Grade Nanoparticles Poses a Risk of Alzheimer’s Disease-Like Symptoms by Triggering Autophagy Defects in Neurons. Adv. Sci. 2026, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mao, Z.; et al. Exposure to Titanium Dioxide Nanoparticles During Pregnancy Changed Maternal Gut Microbiota and Increased Blood Glucose of Rat. Nanoscale Res. Lett. 2019, 14, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chen, Z.; Zhou, D.; Han, S.; Zhou, S.; Jia, G. Hepatotoxicity and the role of the gut-liver axis in rats after oral administration of titanium dioxide nanoparticles. Part. Fibre Toxicol. 2019, 16, 48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, J.; et al. Oral administration of rutile and anatase TiO 2 nanoparticles shifts mouse gut microbiota structure. Nanoscale 2018, 10, 7736–7745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Javurek, A. B.; et al. Gut Dysbiosis and Neurobehavioral Alterations in Rats Exposed to Silver Nanoparticles. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 2822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, H.; et al. The effects of orally administered Ag, TiO 2 and SiO 2 nanoparticles on gut microbiota composition and colitis induction in mice. NanoImpact 2017, 8, 80–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xia, T.; et al. Dietary ZnO nanoparticles alters intestinal microbiota and inflammation response in weaned piglets. Oncotarget 2017, 8, 64878–64891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yausheva, E.; Miroshnikov, S.; Sizova, E. Intestinal microbiome of broiler chickens after use of nanoparticles and metal salts. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 25, 18109–18120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Z.; Han, S.; Zhou, D.; Zhou, S.; Jia, G. Effects of oral exposure to titanium dioxide nanoparticles on gut microbiota and gut-associated metabolism in vivo. Nanoscale 2019, 11, 22398–22412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Landsiedel, R.; et al. Gut microbiome and plasma metabolome changes in rats after oral gavage of nanoparticles: sensitive indicators of possible adverse health effects. Part. Fibre Toxicol. 2022, 19, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Delbari, S. H.; Zare Shahne, M.; Hosseini, V. An Analysis of Primary Contributing Sources to the PM2.5 Composition in a Port City in Canada Influenced by Traffic, Marine, and Wildfire Emissions. Atmos. Environ. 2024, 334, 120712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, L.; Li, C.; Tang, X. The Impact of PM2.5 on the Host Defense of Respiratory System. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2020, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pang, X.; Huang, P.; Huang, S.; Liu, X. The gut–lung axis: a new perspective on the impact of atmospheric particulate matter exposure on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Front. Immunol. 2025, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Basith, S.; et al. The Impact of Fine Particulate Matter 2.5 on the Cardiovascular System: A Review of the Invisible Killer. Nanomaterials 2022, 12, 2656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wang, M.; et al. Particulate matter air pollution as a cause of lung cancer: epidemiological and experimental evidence. Br. J. Cancer 2025, 132, 986–996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Amnuaylojaroen, T.; Parasin, N. Pathogenesis of PM2.5-Related Disorders in Different Age Groups: Children, Adults, and the Elderly. Epigenomes 2024, 8, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mutlu, E. A.; et al. Inhalational exposure to particulate matter air pollution alters the composition of the gut microbiome. Environ. Pollut. 2018, 240, 817–830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, S.; Zhang, C.; Zhao, J.; Li, D.; Chen, J. Exposure to concentrated ambient PM2.5 (CAPM) induces intestinal disturbance via inflammation and alternation of gut microbiome. Environ. Int. 2022, 161, 107138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dai, S.; Wang, Z.; Yang, Y.; Du, P.; Li, X. PM2.5 induced weight loss of mice through altering the intestinal microenvironment: Mucus barrier, gut microbiota, and metabolic profiling. J. Hazard. Mater. 2022, 431, 128653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, X.; et al. Influences of PM2.5 on gut physiology, microbiota and metabolites. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2025, 307, 119423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, X.; et al. PM 2.5 induced neurotoxicity through unbalancing vitamin B12 metabolism by gut microbiota disturbance. Gut Microbes 2023, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Olloquequi, J.; et al. From Inhalation to Neurodegeneration: Air Pollution as a Modifiable Risk Factor for Alzheimer’s Disease. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 6928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, B.; et al. Ambient Air Pollution and the Severity of Alzheimer Disease Neuropathology. JAMA Neurol. 2025, 82, 1153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shin, S.; et al. Effects of ambient air pollution on incident Parkinson’s disease in Ontario, 2001 to 2013: a population-based cohort study. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2018, 47, 2038–2048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nunez, Y.; et al. Parkinson’s disease aggravation in association with fine particle components in New York State. Environ. Res. 2021, 201, 111554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qiu, T.; et al. Short-term exposures to PM2.5, PM2.5 chemical components, and antenatal depression: Exploring the mediating roles of gut microbiota and fecal short-chain fatty acids. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2024, 277, 116398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.; et al. Mapping multi-omics characteristics related to short-term PM2.5 trajectory and their impact on type 2 diabetes in middle-aged and elderly adults in Southern China. J. Hazard. Mater. 2024, 468, 133784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; et al. Prenatal PM 2.5 Exposure Associated with Neonatal Gut Bacterial Colonization and Early Children’s Cognitive Development. Environ. Health 2024, 2, 802–815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ding, E. M.; et al. A panel study on the effect of atmospheric PM2.5 exposure on the gut microbiome in healthy elderly people aged 60-69 years old. Zhonghua Yu Fang. Yi Xue Za Zhi 2023, 57, 1018–1025. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Bailey, M. J.; et al. Postnatal exposure to ambient air pollutants is associated with the composition of the infant gut microbiota at 6-months of age. Gut Microbes 2022, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wang, J.; et al. The effect of real-ambient PM2.5 exposure on the lung and gut microbiomes and the regulation of Nrf2. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2023, 254, 114702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.; Li, M.; Pu, Z.; Chi, X.; Yang, J. Multi-omics data reveals the disturbance of glycerophospholipid metabolism and linoleic acid metabolism caused by disordered gut microbiota in PM2.5 gastrointestinal exposed rats. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2023, 262, 115182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dong, X.; et al. Alterations in the gut microbiota and its metabolic profile of PM2.5 exposure-induced thyroid dysfunction rats. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 838, 156402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, H.; et al. Multi-omics analyses identify gut microbiota-fecal metabolites-brain-cognition pathways in the Alzheimer’s disease continuum. Alzheimers Res. Ther. 2025, 17, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marizzoni, M.; et al. A peripheral signature of Alzheimer’s disease featuring microbiota-gut-brain axis markers. Alzheimers Res. Ther. 2023, 15, 101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cattaneo, A.; et al. Association of brain amyloidosis with pro-inflammatory gut bacterial taxa and peripheral inflammation markers in cognitively impaired elderly. Neurobiol. Aging 2017, 49, 60–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wallen, Z. D.; et al. Metagenomics of Parkinson’s disease implicates the gut microbiome in multiple disease mechanisms. Nat. Commun. 2022, 13, 6958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, X.; Liu, Q.; Yang, G. The multifaceted roles of Akkermansia muciniphila in neurological disorders. Trends Neurosci. 2025, 48, 403–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sollid, L. M.; Iversen, R. Tango of B cells with T cells in the making of secretory antibodies to gut bacteria. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2023, 20, 120–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jangi, S.; et al. Alterations of the human gut microbiome in multiple sclerosis. Nat. Commun. 2016, 7, 12015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cosorich, I.; et al. High frequency of intestinal T H 17 cells correlates with microbiota alterations and disease activity in multiple sclerosis. Sci. Adv. 3 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wills, A.-M.; et al. Hypercaloric enteral nutrition in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial. The Lancet 2014, 383, 2065–2072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, K. J.; Gao, Y. Gut-brain axis and neurodegeneration: mechanisms and therapeutic potentials. Front. Neurosci. 2024, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, F.; et al. Transplantation of microbiota from drug-free patients with schizophrenia causes schizophrenia-like abnormal behaviors and dysregulated kynurenine metabolism in mice. Mol. Psychiatry 2020, 25, 2905–2918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Weston, B.; Fogal, B.; Cook, D.; Dhurjati, P. An agent-based modeling framework for evaluating hypotheses on risks for developing autism: Effects of the gut microbial environment. Med. Hypotheses 2015, 84, 395–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McIntyre, R. S.; et al. Characterizing the gut microbiota in adults with bipolar disorder: a pilot study. Nutr. Neurosci. 2021, 24, 173–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Painold, A.; et al. A step ahead: Exploring the gut microbiota in inpatients with bipolar disorder during a depressive episode. Bipolar Disord. 2019, 21, 40–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peng, A.; et al. Altered composition of the gut microbiome in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. Epilepsy Res. 2018, 147, 102–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arzani, M.; et al. Gut-brain Axis and migraine headache: a comprehensive review. J. Headache Pain 2020, 21, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Montini, A.; et al. Analysis of gut microbiota in Restless Legs Syndrome: searching for a metagenomic signature. SLEEPJ 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Volkow, N. D.; Blanco, C. Substance use disorders: a comprehensive update of classification, epidemiology, neurobiology, clinical aspects, treatment and prevention. World Psychiatry 2023, 22, 203–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, Y.; et al. Intestinal barrier damage caused by addictive substance use disorder. Eur. J. Med. Res. 2025, 30, 226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fu, X.; et al. The Microbiome–Gut–Brain Axis, a Potential Therapeutic Target for Substance-Related Disorders. Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Addolorato, G.; et al. Gut microbiota compositional and functional fingerprint in patients with alcohol use disorder and alcohol-associated liver disease. Liver Int. 2020, 40, 878–888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carbia, C.; et al. A biological framework for emotional dysregulation in alcohol misuse: from gut to brain. Mol. Psychiatry 2021, 26, 1098–1118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leclercq, S.; et al. Gut Microbiota-Induced Changes in β-Hydroxybutyrate Metabolism Are Linked to Altered Sociability and Depression in Alcohol Use Disorder. Cell Rep. 2020, 33, 108238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, Y.; et al. Bacterial Diversity of Intestinal Microbiota in Patients with Substance Use Disorders Revealed by 16S rRNA Gene Deep Sequencing. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 3628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fortune, A.; Aime, A.; Raymond, D.; Kumar, S. Nanotechnology in medicine: a double-edged sword for health outcomes. Health Nanotechnol. 2025, 1, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thompson, R. C.; et al. Twenty years of microplastic pollution research—what have we learned? Science (1979) . 2024, 386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liu, S.; et al. Eco-corona formation and associated ecotoxicological impacts of nanoplastics in the environment. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 836, 155703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yang, H.; et al. A Review of Eco-Corona Formation on Micro/Nanoplastics and Its Effects on Stability, Bioavailability, and Toxicity. Water . 2025, 17, 1124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]


| Metabolite | Primary Biosynthetic Taxa | Neuroprotective & Homeostatic Functions | References |
| Butyrate | Faecalibacterium prausnitzii, Roseburia spp., Eubacterium rectale, Clostridium butyricum, Coprococcus, Butyricicoccus pullicaecorum | Attenuates ASD-like endophenotypes; enhances memory in advanced Alzheimer’s disease stages; promotes neuroprotection, learning, and preserves cognitive function. | [24,25,26] |
| Propionate | Bacteroides fragilis, B. vulgatus, B. thetaiotaomicron, Prevotella copri, Veillonella parvula, V. alcalescens, Akkermansia muciniphila | Ameliorates motor and non-motor abnormalities in Parkinson’s disease models. | [27] |
| γ-Aminobutyric Acid (GABA) | Lactobacillus brevis, L. plantarum, L. buchneri, L. paracasei, Bifidobacterium adolescentis, B. dentium, B. infantis | Prevents neurodegeneration; mitigates oxidative stress and mitochondrial dysfunction (deficits are linked to PD neuropathology); attenuates ASD severity. | [28,29,30] |
| Serotonin (5-HT) | Ligilactobacillus ruminis, Limosilactobacillus mucosae, Escherichia spp., Enterococcus spp., Klebsiella pneumoniae, Streptococcus spp. | Regulates sleep-wake cycles, mood stabilization, and cognitive processes. | [31] |
| Kynurenine | Actinobacteria, Bacteroides, Firmicutes, Fusobacteria, Proteobacteria | Functions as an NMDA receptor antagonist, conferring neuroprotection by blocking excessive glutamate excitotoxicity. | [32] |
| Indole Propionic Acid (IPA) | Escherichia coli, Clostridium sporogenes, Bacteroides ovatus, B. thetaiotaomicron | Exerts potent antioxidant effects; scavenges reactive oxygen species (ROS) to protect neuronal integrity and attenuates central neuroinflammation. | [33,34] |
| Indole Acetic Acid (IAA) | Intestinibacter bartlettii, Blautia hydrogenotrophica, Lactobacillus reuteri, L. acidophilus, Bifidobacterium spp., Faecalibacterium | Attenuates neuroinflammatory responses in microglia and suppresses macrophage production of pro-inflammatory cytokines. | [35,36] |
| Study Model & Exposure Paradigm | Taxonomic Perturbations & Dysbiosis Profile | References |
| Female SD rats (8 weeks old, n=150); exposed to high-fat diet + aspartame (5-7 mg/kg) | ↓ Enterococcaceae, Enterococcus, Parasutterella; ↑ Clostridium cluster IV | [44] |
| Human cohort (n=120, divided into 4 groups); aspartame, saccharin, sucralose, or stevia | ↓ Abundance of Porphyromonas, Prevotella nanceiensis | [45] |
| Pregnant C57BL/6 mice (8 weeks old); fed sucralose (0.1 mg) + acesulfame-K (0.25 mg) | In offspring microbiome: ↑ Firmicutes; ↓ Akkermansia muciniphila | [46] |
| Male C57BL/6J mice (8 weeks old); acesulfame-K (150 mg/kg body weight/day for 8 weeks) | ↓ Clostridiaceae, Lachnospiraceae, Ruminococcaceae | [47] |
| Human volunteers (n=47, ages 18-35); administered sucralose (48 mg/day for 10 weeks) | ↑ Abundance of Blautia coccoides | [48] |
| Male C57BL/6J mice (SPF, age 28 days); sucralose (0.0003-0.3 mg/mL for 16 weeks) | Jejunum/Ileum/Colon: ↑ Tenacibaculum, Ruegeria, Staphylococcus, Allobaculum Cecum: ↓ Lachnoclostridium, Lachnospiraceae (in high dose group) |
[49] |
| Pregnant C57BL/6 mice; high-fat diet (4 weeks) then sucralose (0.1 mg/mL for 6 weeks) | Maternal: ↑ Firmicutes, Proteobacteria; ↓ Bacteroidetes Post-HFD: enhanced reduction in Proteobacteria compared to control |
[50] |
| Mice (5 weeks old); standard diet + sucralose vs. high-fat diet (HFD) + sucralose | ↑ Firmicutes; ↓ Bacteroidetes (Note: Firmicutes also increased in the standard HFD group) | [51] |
| Male C57BL/6J mice (8 weeks old); sucralose (15 mg/kg body weight/day for 8 weeks) | Faecal microbiota: ↓ Clostridium cluster XIVa | [52] |
| Male C57BL/6 mice; sucralose in drinking water (5 mg/kg body weight/day) | 3 months: ↑ Ruminococcus; ↓ Lachnospiraceae, Staphylococcus, Bacillus 6 months: ↑ Akkermansia, Roseburia; ↓ Streptococcus, Lachnospiraceae |
[53] |
| Male C57BL/6J mice (8 weeks old); saccharin in drinking water (0.3 mg/mL) | 3 months: ↑ Akkermansia, Oscillospira, Corynebacterium; ↓ Anaerostipes, Ruminococcus 6 months: ↑ Corynebacterium, Roseburia, Turicibacter; ↓ Ruminococcus, Dorea |
[54] |
| Study Model & Exposure Paradigm | Taxonomic Perturbations & Dysbiosis Profile | References |
| In vitro human GI digestion (n=6 volunteers, ages 20-27); PCL (150 nm) & PLA (75 nm) MPs | ↓ Richness and α-diversity; ↓ Bifidobacterium, Faecalibacterium; ↑ Pathogenic taxa (e.g., Prevotella) | [71] |
| Student cohort (n=60); exposed via disposable plastic tableware (3 hot meals/day) | ↓ Bacteroidota, ↑ Actinobacteriota; ↓ Faecalibacterium, ↑ Blautia | [72] |
| Occupational cohort (n=40; plastic factory workers vs. low exposure); Polyurethane predominantly detected | ↑ Bifidobacterium, Streptococcus, Sphingomonas; ↓ Ruminococcus, Dorea, Fusobacterium, Coprococcus | [73] |
| Preschool children cohort (n=69); Stool MPs (PVC, PET, PE, PA6) at 425.0 µg/kg/day | ↓ α-diversity; Altered probiotic taxa including ↓ Parabacteroides, Alistipes | [74] |
| Adult cohort (n=39, ages 25-69); Stool MPs (PE, PVC, PS, PP, PA6) | ↑ Enterobacteriaceae, Escherichia coli; ↓ Faecalibacterium prausnitzii | [75] |
| Male C57BL/6 mice; Polystyrene (PS) MPs (0.05–0.1 μm, 9–10 μm, or mixture at 100 ppb) | Mixed PS: ↑ Campylobacterota; Individual PS: ↓ Proteobacteria, Cyanobacteria; Small PS (0.1 µm): ↑ Actinobacteria | [76] |
| College student cohort (n=125, ages 18-30); Take-out food consumers (9 MP types detected) | Dose-dependent altered abundances of Firmicutes, Bacteroidota, Blautia, Lachnospiraceae, Faecalibacterium, Bacteroides, and Bifidobacterium | [77] |
| Study Model & Exposure Paradigm | Taxonomic Perturbations & Dysbiosis Profile | References |
| Female rats (prenatal exposure); TiO2 NPs (5 mg/kg, GD 5-18) | ↑ Clostridiales (GD 10); ↓ Dehalobacteriaceae (GD 17) | [92] |
| Rats; oral TiO2 NPs (29nm, 0-50 mg/kg/day for 90 days) | ↑ Lactobacillus reuteri; ↓ Romboutsia | [93] |
| Mice; oral TiO2 NPs (100 mg/kg/day for 28 days) | ↑ Actinobacteria, Proteobacteria; ↓ Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes | [94] |
| Rats and Mice; oral AgNPs (2.5 or 3.6 mg/kg for 7-14 days) | Shifted Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes (F/B) ratio | [95,96] |
| Piglets; oral ZnO NPs (600 mg/kg for 14 days) | Ileum: ↑ Streptococcus, ↓ Lactobacillus; Colon: ↑ Lactobacillus, ↓ Oscillospira, Prevotella | [97] |
| Broiler chickens; oral ZnO NPs (5 mg/kg for 42 days) | ↑ Ruminococcaceae, Bacteroidaceae; ↓ Lachnospiraceae, Lactobacillaceae, Rikenellaceae | [98] |
| Rats; oral TiO2 NPs (2-50 mg/kg/day for 30 days) | ↑ Lactobacillus gasseri, Turicibacter; ↓ Veillonella | [99] |
| Male C57BL/6JAusb mice (5-6 weeks old); oral TiO2 NPs (drinking water, 0-50 mg/kg for 3 weeks) | ↑ Lactobacillus, Allobaculum; ↓ Adlercreutzia, unclassified Clostridiaceae | [84] |
| C57BL/6 mice; oral AgNPs (0.1, 2, 40 µg for 120 days) | ↑ Firmicutes; ↓ Bacteroidetes | [82] |
| Wistar rats; oral AgNPs (7nm, 100 mg/kg for 28 days) | ↑ Bacteroidota; ↓ Verrucomicrobia, Proteobacteria, Lactobacillaceae | [100] |
| Wistar albino rats; oral ZnO NPs (1000 mg/kg for 28 days) | Males: ↑ Firmicutes, ↓ Bacteroidetes; Females: ↓ Firmicutes, ↑ Verrucomicrobia | [81] |
| Study Model & Exposure Paradigm | Taxonomic Perturbations & Dysbiosis Profile | References |
| Southwest China cohort (n=1583); long-term exposure to PM2.5 | ↓ α-diversity; ↓ Bacteroidetes, ↑ Proteobacteria | [116] |
| Guangdong Province cohort (n=3267, ages 40–75); exposure to PM2.5 | ↓ Bacteroidetes; ↑ Actinobacteria, Firmicutes, Ruminococcus | [117] |
| Shanghai maternal–child pairs (n=361); prenatal PM2.5 exposure | Validation of seven PM2.5-correlated genera: Ruminococcus gnavus group, Romboutsia, Burkholderiaceae, Blautia, Alistipes, Parabacteroides, and Bacteroides | [118] |
| Healthy seniors (n=76, ages 60–69); exposure to PM2.5 | ↓ α-diversity; ↑ Lachnoclostridium, Streptococcus, Veillonella; ↓ Megamonas, Erysipelatoclostridium, Dialister, Subdoligranulum, Holdemanella, Blautia | [119] |
| Latino breastfed infants (n=103, Southern California, 6 months old); exposure to PM2.5 | ↓ Alistipes, Proteobacteria, Rikenellaceae; ↑ Actinomyces | [120] |
| Nrf2+/- rat (8-week-old); filtered vs. outdoor air (16h/day, 6 & 12 weeks) | ↓ Bacteroides, Firmicutes, Allobaculum, Prevotella, Sutterella; ↑ Alphaproteobacteria, Pseudomonadaceae, Desulfovibrionaceae | [121] |
| Male C57BL/6 WT mice; exposed to PM2.5 for 5 months | ↓ α-diversity; ↑ Proteobacteria; ↓ Lactobacillus, Parabacteroides, Prevotella, Alloprevotella, Ruminococcus, Faecalibacterium, Bifidobacterium | [111] |
| SD rats (6-8 weeks); oral gavage of PM2.5 (10 mg/kg/day for 28 days) | ↓ Firmicutes, Ruminococcaceae; ↑ Lactobacillaceae, Clostridium, Ruminae, Atopobiaceae, Coriobacteriaceae_UCG_002 | [122] |
| Male C57BL/6J mice (3-week-old); exposed to PM2.5 (8, 16, 24 weeks) | ↓ Bacteroidetes, ↑ Proteobacteria; ↑ Clostridium, Akkermansia, Acetatifactor | [108] |
| Male BALB/c mice (8-week-old); exposed to PM2.5 (8h/day, 6 days/week for 6 weeks) | ↓ Bacteroidetes/Firmicutes ratio; ↑ Lactobacillus, Clostridium; ↓ Bacteroides, Parabacteroides. (Post-recovery dominance of Oscillospira) | [109] |
| Male SD rats (SPF grade); passive lung inhalation of PM2.5 (10-20 mg/kg) | ↓ Cyanobacteria, Bacteroidetes, Proteobacteria; ↑ Verrucomicrobia, Elusimicrobiota, Desulfobacterota, Patescibacteria, Firmicutes | [123] |
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. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).