Current Microbiology

, Volume 62, Issue 1, pp 27–31 | Cite as

Functional Characteristics of Lactobacillus fermentum F1

  • Xiao Qun Zeng
  • Dao Dong PanEmail author
  • Pei Dong Zhou


In this study, Lactobacillus fermentum (L. fermentum) F1 reduced cholesterol 48.87%. The strain was screened from cattle feces using an API 50 CHL system and the 16S rRNA sequence contrasting method. L. fermentum F1 showed acid and bile tolerance, and antimicrobial activity against pathogenic Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus. L. fermentum F1 deconjugated 0.186 mM of free cholalic acid after it was incubated at 37°C in 0.20% sodium taurocholate (TCA) broth for 24 h. Heat-killed and resting cells of L. fermentum F1 showed small amounts of cholesterol removal (6.85 and 25.19 mg/g, respectively, of dry weight) compared with growing cells (33.21 mg/g of dry weight). The supernatant fluid of the broth contained 50.85% of the total cholesterol, while the washing buffer and cell extracts had 13.53 and 35.39%, respectively. These findings suggest that L. fermentum F1 may remove cholesterol by co-precipitating with deconjugated bile salt, assimilating with cells and by incorporation into cellular membranes. Cholesterol assimilated by cells held 72.0% of the reduced cholesterol, while 21.65% of the reduced cholesterol was coprecipitated with deconjugated bile salt and 5.89% was adsorbed into the surface of the cells.


Cholesterol Lactobacillus Lactic Acid Bacterium Bile Salt Sodium Taurocholate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This work was supported by the State Science and Technology Ministry of the People’s Republic of China (programs no. 2007AA10Z357, 2009C22014, and 2006BAD27B09), the Natural Science Ministry of China (program no. 30972130) and the K. C. Wong Magna Fund, Ningbo University.


  1. 1.
    Ranade VV (1993) Significance of cholesterol in health and disease. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol 31:276–284PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tabas I (2002) Cholesterol in health and disease. J Clin Invest 110:583–590PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Harrison VC, Peat G (1975) Serum cholesterol and bowel flora in the newborn. Am J Clin Nutr 28:1351–1355PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Endo T, Nakano M, Shimizu S, Fukushima M, Miyoshi S (1999) Effects of a probiotic on the lipid metabolism of cocks fed on a cholesterol-enriched diet. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 63:1569–1575CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sanders TA (1999) Food production and food safety. Bmj 318:1689–1693PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gilliland SE, Nelson CR, Maxwell C (1985) Assimilation of cholesterol by Lactobacillus acidophilus. Appl Environ Microbiol 49:377–381PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gilliland SE, Walker DK (1990) Factors to consider when selecting a culture of Lactobacillus acidophilus as a dietary adjunct to produce a hypocholesterolemic effect in humans. J Dairy Sci 73:905–911CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Klaver FA, van der Meer R (1993) The assumed assimilation of cholesterol by Lactobacilli and Bifidobacterium bifidum is due to their bile salt-deconjugating activity. Appl Environ Microbiol 59:1120–1124PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Noh DO, Kim SH, Gilliland SE (1997) Incorporation of cholesterol into the cellular membrane of Lactobacillus acidophilus ATCC 43121. J Dairy Sci 80:3107–3113CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rudel LL, Morris MD (1973) Determination of cholesterol using o-phthalaldehyde. J Lipid Res 14:364–366PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pan D, Zhang D (2005) Screening of cholesterol reducing lactic acid bacteria and its activity in cholesterol reducing. Food Sci 26:233–237Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Usman HA (1999) Bile tolerance, taurocholate deconjugation, and binding of cholesterol by Lactobacillus gasseri strains. J Dairy Sci 82:243–248CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Irvin JL, Johnson CG, Kopalo J (1944) A photometric method of the determination of cholates in bile and blood. J Biol Chem 153:439Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Liong MT, Shah NP (2005) Acid and bile tolerance and cholesterol removal ability of lactobacilli strains. J Dairy Sci 88:55–66CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Razin S, Kutner S, Efrati H, Rottem S (1980) Phospholipid and cholesterol uptake by mycoplasma cells and membranes. Biochim Biophys Acta 598:628CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Usman HA (1999) Viability of Lactobacillus gasseri and its cholesterol-binding and antimutagenic activities during subsequent refrigerated storage in nonfermented milk. J Dairy Sci 82:2536–2542CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mishra V, Prasad DN (2005) Application of in vitro methods for selection of Lactobacillus casei strains as potential probiotics. Int J Food Microbiol 103:109–115CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Temmerman R, Pot B, Huys G, Swings J (2003) Dentification and antibiotic susceptibility of bacterial isolates from probiotic products. Int J Food Microbiol 81:1–10CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vanderhoof JA, Whitneyx DB, Antonson DL (1999) Lactobacillus GG in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea in children. J Pediatr 35:564–568Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xiao Qun Zeng
    • 1
    • 2
  • Dao Dong Pan
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Pei Dong Zhou
    • 2
  1. 1.Life Science and Biotechnology CollegeNingbo UniversityNingboPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Food Science and Nutrition DepartmentNanjing Normal UniversityNanjingPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations