4.0 Article

Comparative analysis of glyceroglycolipids from Lactiplantibacillus pentosus and other Lactiplantibacillus species

期刊

JOURNAL OF GENERAL AND APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY
卷 69, 期 3, 页码 135-141

出版社

MICROBIOL RES FOUNDATION
DOI: 10.2323/jgam.2022.12.001

关键词

glyceroglycolipid; chemical structure; chemotaxonomy; Lactiplantibacillus plantarum; Lactibacillus pentosus

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The cellular lipids of Lactiplantibacillus species were extracted and analyzed. The neutral glyceroglycolipids (GGLs) were found to have similar profiles for all strains of Lactiplantibacillus species, indicating that the GGL profile could be a chemotaxonomic character of the genus. L. pentosus was found to have a higher proportion of a specific GGL compared to other species. The carbohydrate structure of this GGL was determined to be the same as that of L. plantarum.
Cellular lipids of Lactiplantibacillus species were extracted and neutral glyceroglycolipids (GGLs) were purified, and analyzed by thin-layer chromatography (TLC). Four GGLs with known structures were detected in GGL preparation of L. plantarum, and the same GGL profiles of TLC were observed for all other strains of Lactiplantibacillus species examined, suggesting that the GGL profile could be one of the chemotaxonomic characters of the genus Lactiplantibacillus. On the other hand, the quantity of each GGL showed some variation among species, and L. pentosus was found to have a higher proportion of disaccharide-type GGL, designated GGL-3 in this study, compared with other species including L. plantarum. The quantitative difference of GGL-3 found in this study could be regarded as the characteristics of L. pentosus. The carbohydrate structure of L. pentosus GGL-3 was precisely analyzed by 1H NMR and methylation analysis, and the structure was confirmed to be alpha Gal-(1 -> 2)-alpha Glc-diacyl-glycerol, with the carbohydrate structure identical to that of L. plantarum, although fatty acid composition of the two GGL-3 showed some difference.

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

4.0
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