The Safety of Two Bacillus Probiotic Strains for Human Use
- 1.2k Downloads
Probiotics based on Bacillus strains have been increasingly proposed for prophylactic and therapeutic use against several gastro-intestinal diseases. We studied safety for two Bacillus strains included in a popular East European probiotic. Bacillus subtilis strain that was sensitive to all antibiotics listed by the European Food Safety Authority. Bacillus licheniformis strain was resistant to chloramphenicol and clindamycin. Both were non-hemolytic and did not produce Hbl or Nhe enterotoxins. No bceT and cytK toxin genes were found. Study of acute toxicity in BALB/c mice demonstrated no treatment-related deaths. The oral LD50 for both strains was more than 2 × 1011 CFU. Chronic toxicity studies were performed on mice, rabbits, and pigs and showed no signs of toxicity or histological changes in either organs or tissues. We demonstrated that while certain risks may exist for the B. licheniformis strain considering antibiotic resistance, B. subtilis strain may be considered as non-pathogenic and safe for human consumption.
KeywordsProbiotics Bacillus Safety Toxicity Antimicrobials resistance
The authors thank Anne-Marie ELIE for technical assistance.
- 7.Urdaci MC, Pinchuk I (2004) Antimicrobial activity of Bacillus probiotics In: Ricca E, Henriques AO, Cutting SM (eds) Bacterial spore formers: probiotics and emerging applications. Horizon Bioscience, Norfolk, UK, pp 171–182Google Scholar
- 8.Logan NA (2004) Safety of aerobic endospore-forming bacteria. In: Ricca E, Henriques AO, Cutting SM (eds) Bacterial spore formers: probiotics and emerging applications. Horizon Bioscience, Norfolk, UK, pp 93–106Google Scholar
- 17.FAO/WHO (2002) Joint FAO/WHO (Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization) working group report on drafting guidelines for the evaluation of probiotics in food. London, Ontario, CanadaGoogle Scholar
- 19.European Food Safety Authority (2005) Opinion of the Scientific Committee on a request from EFSA related to a generic approach to the safety assessment by EFSA of microorganisms used in food/feed and the production of food/feed additives. EFSA J 226:1–12Google Scholar
- 26.Sneath PHA (1986) Endospore-forming gram-positive rods and cocci. In: Mair NS, Sharpe ME, Holt JG (eds) Bergey’s manual of systematic bacteriology 2. Lippincott Williams &Wilkins, Baltimore, pp 1104–1207Google Scholar
- 32.National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS) (1997) Performance standards for antimicrobial disk susceptibility tests, 6th edn. Approved standard M2-A5. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory standards, Wayne, PAGoogle Scholar
- 37.Scientific Committee on Animal Nutrition (2000) SCAN opinion on the safety of use of Bacillus species in animal nutrition http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/scan/out41_en.pdf
- 46.Zhou JS, Shu Q, Rutherfurd KJ, Prasad J, Birtles MJ, Gopal PK, Gill HS (2000) Safety assessment of potential probiotic lactic acid bacterial strains Lactobacillus rhamnosus HN001, Lb. acidophilus HN017, and Bifidobacterium lactis HN019 in BALB/c mice. Int J Food Microbiol 56:87–96PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar