Detection and Specific Enumeration of Multi-Strain Probiotics in the Lumen Contents and Mucus Layers of the Rat Intestine After Oral Administration
- 145 Downloads
Although the detection of viable probiotic bacteria following their ingestion and passage through the gastrointestinal tract (GIT) has been well documented, their mucosal attachment in vivo is more difficult to assess. In this study, we investigated the survival and mucosal attachment of multi-strain probiotics transiting the rat GIT. Rats were administered a commercial mixture of the intestinal probiotics Lactobacillus acidophilus LA742, Lactobacillus rhamnosus L2H and Bifidobacterium lactis HN019 and the oral probiotic Streptococcus salivarius K12 every 12 h for 3 days. Intestinal contents, mucus and faeces were tested 6 h, 3 days and 7 days after the last dose by strain-specific enumeration on selective media and by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis. At 6 h, viable cells and DNA corresponding to all four probiotics were detected in the faeces and in both the lumen contents and mucus layers of the ileum and colon. Viable probiotic cells of B. lactis and L. rhamnosus were detected for 7 days and L. acidophilus for 3 days after the last dose. B. lactis and L. rhamnosus persisted in the ileal mucus and colon contents, whereas the retention of L. acidophilus appeared to be relatively higher in colonic mucus. No viable cells of S. salivarius K12 were detected in any of the samples at either day 3 or 7. The study demonstrates that probiotic strains of intestinal origin but not of oral origin exhibit temporary colonisation of the rat GIT and that these strains may have differing relative affinities for colonic and ileal mucosa.
KeywordsProbiotics Viability Mucosal attachment Specific enumeration
This research was financially supported by a Ph.D. grant from the School of Pharmacy, University of Otago. We are grateful to Dr Philip A. Wescombe and Ms. Vidya Kulkarni of BLIS Technologies Ltd., Centre for Innovation, University of Otago, for their assistance in preparing the antibiotic-resistant probiotic cells and for making antibiotic-supplemented media, respectively.
- 9.FAO/WHO (2002) Guidelines for the evaluation of probiotics in food. Joint FAO/WHO Working Group Report on Drafting Guidelines for the Evaluation of Probiotics in Food. London, Ontario, Canada, 30 April and 1 May, 2002. http://www.who.int/foodsafety/fs_management/en/probiotic_guidelines.pdf. Accessed 4 July 2009
- 10.Firmesse O, Mogenet A, Bresson JL, Corthier G, Furet JP (2008) Lactobacillus rhamnosus R11 consumed in a food supplement survived human digestive transit without modifying microbiota equilibrium as assessed by real-time polymerase chain reaction. J Mol Microbiol Biotechnol 14(1–3):90–99CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 24.Rambaut A (1996–2002) SE-AL sequence alignment editor, v 2.0a11. Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- 26.Salminen S, Laine M, von Wright A, Vuopio-varkila J, Korhonen T, Mattila-Sandholm T (1996) Development of selection criteria for probiotic strains to assess their potential in functional food. A nordic and European approach. Biosci Microflora 2(1):23–28Google Scholar
- 33.Swofford D (2001) PAUP*. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods), v 4.0b10. Sinauer Associates, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
- 41.Walter J, Tannock GW, Tilsala-Timisjarvi A, Rodtong S, Loach DM, Munro K et al (2000) Detection and identification of gastrointestinal Lactobacillus species by using denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis and species-specific PCR primers. Appl Environ Microbiol 66(1):297–303CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar