4.1 Article

The effect of lactobacillus cell size on its probiotic characteristics

期刊

ANAEROBE
卷 62, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.anaerobe.2019.102103

关键词

The Pearson's analysis; Probiotic characteristics; Cell size; Correlation; Culture collections; Lactobacillus

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Screening for probiotic characteristics is usually associated with a series of assays and a large number of isolates to be tested, which can be sometimes costly and frustrating. For this reason, finding some indicators to predict the probiotic potential would be of great significance. In this study, 10 Lactobacillus strains including L sakei, L. reuteri, L. delbrueckii subsp. lactic, L. delbrueckii subsp. delbrueckii, L. plantarum, L acidophilus, L rhamnosus, L. paracasei, L. salivarius, and L gasseri were characterized by cell morphology and growth properties. The strains were then examined in terms of some probiotic characteristics including resistance to acid and bile conditions, ability to adhesion to intestinal epithelial cells, antioxidant activity, aggregation characteristics, antibacterial activity, hemolytic activity, and resistance to different antibiotics. Correlations between different quantitative features were analyzed using Pearson's coefficient (r). Results of this study provided first-time evidence for the effects of cell length on probiotic features. Based on statistical analysis, long Lactobacillus strains had often higher antioxidant and aggregation activities. Moreover, these long strains were usually more sensitive to acid and bile conditions and resulted in a lower CFU yield compared to short strains. By conducting morphological tests at the first step of screening, some strains would gain higher priority because of predicting a high performance in some of the desired characteristics. Therefore, the cost and time required for the subsequent tests would be significantly reduced. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据