Advertisement

Digestive Diseases and Sciences

, Volume 53, Issue 3, pp 664–671 | Cite as

Age-related Effects of the Probiotic Bacterium Lactobacillus plantarum 299v on Gastrointestinal Function in Suckling Rats

  • Frida Fåk
  • Siv Ahrné
  • Ann Linderoth
  • Göran Molin
  • Bengt Jeppsson
  • Björn Weström
Original Paper

Abstract

The effect of a probiotic bacterium on gut function was studied in neonatal animals by using a model with suckling rats. Lactobacillus plantarum 299v (Lp299v) or saline (controls) was fed (3.0 × 106 CFU/g b.wt per day) for one week to rats aged either 3, 7 or 14 days, after which bacterial colonization, gut growth, and functional parameters were analyzed. In rats fed with Lp299v from 3 to 10 days of age, an increase in ceacal lactobacilli was correlated with reduced intestinal macromolecular permeability and increased mucosal protein compared to age-matched controls. Pups treated from 7 to 14 days of age showed a decrease in pancreas weight and protein content, whereas pups treated from 14 to 21 days of age showed little effect of the Lp299v treatment. The results indicated that the bacterial exposure affected the gut function, where the effects were age-related and the youngest rats appeared most sensitive.

Keywords

Probiotics Bacteria Barrier function Pancreas Neonatal 

Abbreviations

Lp299v

Lactobacillus plantarum 299v

BIgG

Bovine IgG

BSA

Bovine serum albumin

b.wt

Body weight

CFU

Colony-forming units

Notes

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank Mrs. Inger Mattsson for her expert technical assistance in analyzing the blood, intestinal, and pancreatic samples. The Swedish Research Council Formas is also acknowledged for financial support.

References

  1. 1.
    Walthall K, Cappon GD, Hurtt ME, Zoetis T (2005) Postnatal development of the gastrointestinal system: a species comparison. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 74:132–156PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wenzl HH, Schimpl G, Feierl G, Steinwender G (2001) Time course of spontaneous bacterial translocation from gastrointestinal tract and its relationship to intestinal microflora in conventionally reared infant rats. Dig Dis Sci 46:1120–1126PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kaur IP, Chopra K, Saini A (2002) Probiotics: potential pharmaceutical applications. Eur J Pharm Sci 15:1–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Neish AS (2002) The gut microflora and intestinal epithelial cells: a continuing dialogue. Microbes Infect 4:309–317PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Berg R (1996) The indigenous gastrointestinal microflora. Trends Microbiol 4:430–435PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hooper LV, Wong MH, Thelin A, Hansson L, Falk PG, Gordon JI (2001) Molecular analysis of commensal host-microbial relationships in the intestine. Science 291:881–884PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bernardeau M, Vernoux JP, Gueguen M (2002) Safety and efficacy of probiotic lactobacilli in promoting growth in post-weaning Swiss mice. Int J Food Microbiol 77:19–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Isolauri E, Majamaa H, Arvola T, Rantala I, Virtanen E, Arvilommi E (1993) Lactobacillus casei strain GG reverses increased intestinal permeability induced by cow milk in suckling rats. Gastroenterol 105:1643–1650Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Johansson M-L, Molin G, Jeppsson B, Nobaek S, Ahrne´ S, Bengmark S (1993) Administration of different Lactobacillus strains in fermented oatmeal soup: in vivo colonization of human intestinal mucosa and effect on the indigenous flora. Appl Environ Microbiol 59:15–20PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liu Q, Nobaek S, Adawi D, Mao Y, Wang M, Molin G, Ekelund M, Jeppsson B (2001) Administration of Lactobacillus plantarum 299v reduces side-effects of external radiation on colon anastomotic healing in an experimental model. Colorectal Dis 4:245–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mangell P, Nejdfors P, Wang M, Ahrne S, Weström B, Thorlacius H, Jeppsson B (2002) Lactobacillus plantarum 299v inhibits Escherichia coli-induced intestinal permeability. Dig Dis Sci 47:511–516PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wang M, Adawi D, Molin G, Pettersson B, Jeppsson B, Ahrne S (2001) Identification of the translocating bacteria in rats with acute liver injury and their relation to the bacterial flora of the intestinal mucosa. APMIS 109:551–558PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dahlqvist A (1984) Assay of intestinal disaccaridases. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 44:169–172PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lowry OH, Rosebrough NJ, Farr AL, Randall RJ (1951) Protein measurements with folin phenol reagent. J Biol Chem 193:256–275Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fritz H, Hartwich G, Werle E (1966) On protease inhibitors. I. Isolation and characterization of trypsin inhibitors from dog pancreas tissue and pancreas secretion. Hoppe Seyler’s Z Physiol Chem 345:150–167PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Laurell CB (1972) Electroimmunoassay. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 124:21–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Herias MV, Hessle C, Telemo E, Midtvedt T, Hanson LÅ, Wold AE (1999) Immunomodulatory effects of Lactobacills plantarum colonizing the intestine of gnotobiotic rats. Clin Exp Immunol 116:283–290PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Baken KA, Ezendam J, Gremmer ER, de Klerk A, Pennings JLA, Matthee B, Peijnenburg AACM, van Loveren H (2006) Evaluation of immunomodulation by Lactobacillus casei Shirota: immune function, autoimmunity and gene expression. Int J Food Microbiol 112:8–18PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yang H, Antony PA, Wildhaber BE, Teitelbaum DH (2004) Intestinal intraepithelial lymphocyte γδ-T cell-derived keratinocyte growth factor modulates epithelial growth in the mouse. J Immunol 172:4151–4158PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Olah A, Belagyi T, Issekutz A, Gamal ME, Bengmark S (2002) Randomized clinical trial of specific lactobacillus and fibre supplement to early enteral nutrition in patients with acute pancreatitis. Br J Surg 89:1103–1107PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lhoste EF, Catala I, Fiszlewicz M, Gueugneau AM, Popot F, Vaissade P, Corring T, Szylit O (1995) Influence of ceacal microflora and of two dietary protein levels on the adaptation of the exocrine pancreas: comparative study in germ-free and conventional rats. Br J Nutr 75:433–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gareau MG, Jury J, MacQueen G, Sherman PM and Perdue MH (2007) Probiotic treatment of rat pups normalizes corticosterone release and ameliorates colonic dysfunction induced by maternal separation. Gut 5 Mar, 2007; DOI: 10.1136/gut.2006.117176Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Henning SJ (1987) Functional development of the gastrointestinal tract. In: Johnson LR (ed) Physiology of the gastrointestinal tract, 2nd edn. New York, Raven Press, pp 285–300Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Inoue R, Otsuka M, Ushida K (2005) Development of intestinal microbiota in mice and its possible interaction with the evolution of luminal IgA in the intestine. Exp Anim 54:437–445PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kalliomäki M, Salminen S, Arvilommi H, Kero P, Koskinen P, Isolauri E (2001) Probiotics in primary prevention of atopic disease – a randomised, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 357:1076–1079PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frida Fåk
    • 1
  • Siv Ahrné
    • 2
  • Ann Linderoth
    • 1
  • Göran Molin
    • 2
  • Bengt Jeppsson
    • 3
  • Björn Weström
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Cell and Organism Biology, Animal PhysiologyLund UniversityLundSweden
  2. 2.Department of Food Technology, Engineering and NutritionLund UniversityLundSweden
  3. 3.Department of SurgeryMalmö University HospitalMalmoSweden

Personalised recommendations