Component

Fluoride ion

Species, exposure, manipulation and limitations are specified on each linked claim.

1 recorded relationships. Experimental role, claim status and evidence remain attached to each record.

How nutrients influence it

Every nutrient with a recorded effect on this component, credited to the nutrient that acted rather than the chapter that recorded it. Open a nutrient to see the findings and the conditions they were measured under.

How nutrients reach it in more than one step

Chains of two or more recorded steps that end here, grouped by the nutrient they start from. Each step is a separate finding, so a chain is a route a mechanism could take, not proof that it does.

Tracing routes…

What it does

Every recorded relationship this component is part of, grouped by its role. Plain wording comes first; the technical statement follows.

Recorded relationships

What it acts on

  1. Increasing fluoride from 0.50 to 0.75 ppm reduced enamel mineral loss during repeated sucrose exposure in the artificial-mouth model.

    Experimental context and source evidence
    dose
    3% or 5% sucrose for 30 minutes three times/day; 0.50 or 0.75 ppm fluoride for 22.5 hours/day
    duration
    5 days; separate 3-versus-9-day biofilm comparison
    evidence_access
    Primary full-text methods/results and metadata inspected.
    evidence_scope
    literature_reviewed; source-specific curation
    experimental_model
    Human enamel slabs with mixed streptococcal/lactobacillus biofilms in artificial mouth
    exposure_scope
    Sucrose, bacterial biofilm and fluoride interaction
    limitations
    Artificial-mouth lesion endpoint, not systemic fluoride or clinical prevention estimate. 3 versus 5% sucrose did not differ under this protocol; this does not establish general dose independence.
    nutrient_topic
    Sucrose chapter; direct sucrose observations are distinguished from shared component metabolism. · Sucrose
    organism
    Human enamel slabs with mixed streptococcal/lactobacillus biofilms in artificial mouth
    plain_language
    Increasing fluoride from 0.50 to 0.75 ppm reduced enamel mineral loss during repeated sucrose exposure in the artificial-mouth model.
    primary_references
    Enamel Carious Lesion Development in Response to Sucrose and Fluoride Concentrations and to Time of Biofilm Formation: An Artificial-Mouth Study. (2014). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25664342/ DOI: 10.1155/2014/348032
    route
    In vitro repeated local exposure
    tissue
    Enamel lesion depth and integrated mineral loss

    Sucrose: mechanism of action and metabolic impact (2026-09-20) · lines 463–473

    Original AI-assisted source-specific sucrose curation with shared canonical claims retained by identity. Primary-study citations, negative findings, exposure details and limitations preserved. Not publisher full text. · supports · Human enamel slabs with mixed streptococcal/lactobacillus biofilms in artificial mouth · source_derived_draft · unverified_draft

    ## sucrose-fluoride-mineral Increasing fluoride from 0.50 to 0.75 ppm reduced enamel mineral loss during repeated sucrose exposure in the artificial-mouth model. Model/species: Human enamel slabs with mixed streptococcal/lactobacillus biofilms in artificial mouth Tissue: Enamel lesion depth and integrated mineral loss Exposure: 3% or 5% sucrose for 30 minutes three times/day; 0.50 or 0.75 ppm fluoride for 22.5 hours/day Route: In vitro repeated local exposure Duration: 5 days; separate 3-versus-9-day biofilm comparison Exposure scope: Sucrose, bacterial biofilm and fluoride interaction Limits: Artificial-mouth lesion endpoint, not systemic fluoride or clinical prevention estimate. 3 versus 5% sucrose did not differ under this protocol; this does not establish general dose independence. Reference: Enamel Carious Lesion Development in Response to Sucrose and Fluoride Concentrations and to Time of Biofilm Formation: An Artificial-Mouth Study. (2014). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25664342/ DOI: 10.1155/2014/348032 Access: Primary full-text methods/results and metadata inspected.
    Complete structured claim and evidence

In the sources

Preserved passages that mention this component, quoted exactly. Open one to read it in context.

    This is a research prototype built from draft material. It is not medical advice, and its statements still await verification against the original studies.

    Evidence, AI assistance and curation standards