Probiotic potential of Lactobacillus strains with antimicrobial activity against some human pathogenic strains
The objective of this study was to isolate, identify, and characterize some lactic acid bacterial strains from human milk, infant feces, and fermented grapes and dates, as potential probiotics with antimicrobial activity against some human pathogenic strains. One hundred and forty bacterial strains...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
2014
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | View Fulltext in Publisher View in Scopus |
LEADER | 05935nam a2201501Ia 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | 10.1155-2014-927268 | ||
008 | 220112s2014 CNT 000 0 und d | ||
020 | |a 23146133 (ISSN) | ||
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Probiotic potential of Lactobacillus strains with antimicrobial activity against some human pathogenic strains |
260 | 0 | |b Hindawi Publishing Corporation |c 2014 | |
856 | |z View Fulltext in Publisher |u https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/927268 | ||
856 | |z View in Scopus |u https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84904788199&doi=10.1155%2f2014%2f927268&partnerID=40&md5=6b6ff7aee43e4f5dff7688ea885d17a4 | ||
520 | 3 | |a The objective of this study was to isolate, identify, and characterize some lactic acid bacterial strains from human milk, infant feces, and fermented grapes and dates, as potential probiotics with antimicrobial activity against some human pathogenic strains. One hundred and forty bacterial strains were isolated and, after initial identification and a preliminary screening for acid and bile tolerance, nine of the best isolates were selected and further identified using 16 S rRNA gene sequences. The nine selected isolates were then characterized in vitro for their probiotic characteristics and their antimicrobial activities against some human pathogens. Results showed that all nine isolates belonged to the genus Lactobacillus. They were able to tolerate pH 3 for 3 h, 0.3% bile salts for 4 h, and 1.9 mg/mL pancreatic enzymes for 3 h. They exhibited good ability to attach to intestinal epithelial cells and were not resistant to the tested antibiotics. They also showed good antimicrobial activities against the tested pathogenic strains of humans, and most of them exhibited stronger antimicrobial activity than the reference strain L. casei Shirota. Thus, the nine Lactobacillus strains could be considered as potential antimicrobial probiotic strains against human pathogens and should be further studied for their human health benefits. © 2014 Parisa Shokryazdan et al. | |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a adult |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Adult |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a ampicillin |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a antibacterial activity |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a antibiotic resistance |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a antibiotic sensitivity |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a antiinfective agent |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Anti-Infective Agents |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a article |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Bacterial Adhesion |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a bacterial RNA |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a bacterium adherence |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a bacterium isolate |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a bile |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a breast milk |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Candida albicans |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a chloramphenicol |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a classification |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a clindamycin |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a cytology |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Enterobacter cloacae |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Enterococcus faecium |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a erythromycin |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Escherichia coli |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a feces |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Feces |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a female |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Female |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a gene sequence |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a genetics |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a gentamicin |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a grape |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Helicobacter pylori |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a human |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a human cell |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Humans |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a in vitro study |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a infant |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Infant |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Infant, Newborn |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a intestine epithelium cell |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a isolation and purification |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a kanamycin |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Klebsiella pneumoniae |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus acetotolerans |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus acidophilus |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus amylolyticus |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus amylovorus |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus aviarius |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus bifermentans |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus buchneri |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus casei |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus composti |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus coryniformis |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus crispatus |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus curvatus |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus delbrueckii |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus farraginis |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus fermentum |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus gallinarum |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus gastricus |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus hamsteri |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus helveticus |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus ingluviei |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus intestinalis |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus kalixensis |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a lactobacillus kefiranofaciens |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus kefiri |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus kitasatonis |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus mali |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus mucosae |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a lactobacillus parabuchneri |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus parafarraginis |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus parakefiri |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus saerimneri |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus sakei |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus salivarius |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus satsumensis |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus sobrius |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus ultunensis |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus vini |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactobacillus zeae |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Lactococcus lactis |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Listeria monocytogenes |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a microbiology |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Milk, Human |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a minimum inhibitory concentration |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a newborn |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a nonhuman |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a nucleotide sequence |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a pancreas enzyme |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a pH |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a phylogeny |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a physiology |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a probiotic agent |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Probiotics |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Propionibacterium acnes |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a RNA 16S |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a RNA, Bacterial |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a RNA, Ribosomal, 16S |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Shigella sonnei |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Staphylococcus aureus |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Staphylococcus epidermidis |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a streptomycin |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a tetracycline |
650 | 0 | 4 | |a Vibrio parahaemolyticus |
700 | 1 | 0 | |a Alitheen, N.B. |e author |
700 | 1 | 0 | |a Faseleh Jahromi, M. |e author |
700 | 1 | 0 | |a Ho, Y.W. |e author |
700 | 1 | 0 | |a Kalavathy, R. |e author |
700 | 1 | 0 | |a Liang, J.B. |e author |
700 | 1 | 0 | |a Shokryazdan, P. |e author |
700 | 1 | 0 | |a Sieo, C.C. |e author |
773 | |t BioMed Research International |