Advertisement

Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins

, Volume 9, Issue 4, pp 459–465 | Cite as

Lack of Heterogeneity in Bacteriocin Production Across a Selection of Commercial Probiotic Products

  • J. W. Hegarty
  • C. M. Guinane
  • R. P. Ross
  • C. Hill
  • P. D. CotterEmail author
Article

Abstract

Probiotics are live microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit to the host. Bacteriocin production has often been mooted as a desirable probiotic trait and, in specific cases, has been shown to promote probiotic survival within the gastrointestinal tract, contribute to the control of pathogens and even influence host gene expression in the gut. However, it is not clear what proportion of probiotic strains routinely found in commercial products produces bacteriocins, and additionally, it is not known which bacteriocins are produced most frequently. To address this, we conducted a culture-based assessment of the bacteriocinogenic ability of bacterial strains found in a variety of commercially available probiotic products. We detected eight bacteriocin-producing isolates from 16 tested products. Interestingly, in all cases, the isolates were Lactobacillus acidophilus, and the bacteriocin produced was identified as the narrow spectrum class II bacteriocin, lactacin B. The apparent absence of other bacteriocin-producing strains from across these products suggests a lack of heterogeneity in bacteriocin production within probiotic products and suggests that bacteriocin production is not being optimally harnessed as a probiotic trait.

Keywords

Probiotic Lactobacillus acidophilus Bacteriocin Lactacin B 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by a SFI award “Obesibiotics” (11/P1/1137) to PDC. The authors thank Brian Healy for technical assistance with PFGE and Clare Piper and Angele Lecouillard for assistance with screening.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Statement

No ethical approval was required for this study. All products were commercially available.

References

  1. 1.
    Hill C et al (2014) Expert consensus document: the International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics consensus statement on the scope and appropriate use of the term probiotic. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 11(8):506–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mennigen R, Bruewer M (2009) Effect of probiotics on intestinal barrier function. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1165(1):183–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Oelschlaeger TA (2010) Mechanisms of probiotic actions—a review. Int J Med Microbiol 300(1):57–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Guarner F et al (2012) World gastroenterology organisation global guidelines: probiotics and prebiotics october 2011. J Clin Gastroenterol 46(6):468–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chapman C, Gibson G, Rowland I (2011) Health benefits of probiotics: are mixtures more effective than single strains? Eur J Nutr 50(1):1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tuomola E et al (2001) Quality assurance criteria for probiotic bacteria. Am J Clin Nutr 73(2):393s–398sGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Selle K, Klaenhammer TR (2013) Genomic and phenotypic evidence for probiotic influences of Lactobacillus gasseri on human health. FEMS Microbiol Rev 37(6):915–935Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cotter PD, Hill C, Ross RP (2005) Bacteriocins: developing innate immunity for food. Nat Rev Microbiol 3(10):777–788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nes IF, Yoon S, Diep DB (2007) Ribosomally synthesiszed antimicrobial peptides (bacteriocins) in lactic acid bacteria: a review. Food Sci Biotechnol 16(5):675Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cotter PD, Ross RP, Hill C (2013) Bacteriocins—a viable alternative to antibiotics? Nat Rev Microbiol 11(2):95–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Perez RH, Zendo T, Sonomoto K (2014) Novel bacteriocins from lactic acid bacteria (LAB): various structures and applications. Microb Cell Factories 13(1):1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hassan M et al (2012) Natural antimicrobial peptides from bacteria: characteristics and potential applications to fight against antibiotic resistance. J Appl Microbiol 113(4):723–736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dobson A et al (2012) Bacteriocin production: a probiotic trait? Appl Environ Microbiol 78(1):1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Walsh MC et al (2008) Predominance of a bacteriocin-producing Lactobacillus salivarius component of a five-strain probiotic in the porcine ileum and effects on host immune phenotype. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 64(2):317–327Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Corr SC et al (2007) Bacteriocin production as a mechanism for the antiinfective activity of Lactobacillus salivarius UCC118. Proc Natl Acad Sci 104(18):7617–7621Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    van Hemert S et al (2010) Identification of Lactobacillus plantarum genes modulating the cytokine response of human peripheral blood mononuclear cells. BMC Microbiol 10(1):1Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Millette M et al (2008) Capacity of human nisin-and pediocin-producing lactic acid bacteria to reduce intestinal colonization by vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Appl Environ Microbiol 74(7):1997–2003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Murphy EF et al (2013) Divergent metabolic outcomes arising from targeted manipulation of the gut microbiota in diet-induced obesity. Gut 62:220–226Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Guinane CM et al (2016) The bacteriocin bactofencin A subtly modulates gut microbial populations. Anaerobe 40:41–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sanders M, Klaenhammer T (2001) Invited review: the scientific basis of Lactobacillus acidophilus NCFM functionality as a probiotic. J Dairy Sci 84(2):319–331Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tabasco R et al (2009) Lactobacillus acidophilus La-5 increases lactacin B production when it senses live target bacteria. Int J Food Microbiol 132(2–3):109–116Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Burton JP et al (2006) Safety assessment of the oral cavity probiotic Streptococcus salivarius K12. Appl Environ Microbiol 72(4):3050–3053Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hyink O et al (2007) Salivaricin A2 and the novel lantibiotic salivaricin B are encoded at adjacent loci on a 190-kilobase transmissible megaplasmid in the oral probiotic strain Streptococcus salivarius K12. Appl Environ Microbiol 73(4):1107–1113Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Weese JS, Martin H (2011) Assessment of commercial probiotic bacterial contents and label accuracy. Can Vet J 52(1):43Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lewis ZT et al (2015) Validating bifidobacterial species and subspecies identity in commercial probiotic products. Pediatr ResGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chapman C, Gibson GR, Rowland I (2012) In vitro evaluation of single- and multi-strain probiotics: inter-species inhibition between probiotic strains, and inhibition of pathogens. Anaerobe 18(4):405–413Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lewus CB, Kaiser A, Montville TJ (1991) Inhibition of food-borne bacterial pathogens by bacteriocins from lactic acid bacteria isolated from meat. Appl Environ Microbiol 57(6):1683–1688Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ryan MP et al (1996) An application in cheddar cheese manufacture for a strain of Lactococcus lactis producing a novel broadspectrum bacteriocin, lacticin 3147. Appl Environ Microbiol 62(2):612–619Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lakshminarayanan B et al (2013) Isolation and characterization of bacteriocin-producing bacteria from the intestinal microbiota of elderly Irish subjects. J Appl Microbiol 114(3):886–898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Simpson P et al (2003) Genomic diversity and relatedness of bifidobacteria isolated from a porcine cecum. J Bacteriol 185(8):2571–2581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Simpson P et al (2002) Genomic diversity within the genus Pediococcus as revealed by randomly amplified polymorphic DNA PCR and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. Appl Environ Microbiol 68(2):765–771Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    O’Shea EF et al (2009) Characterization of enterocin- and salivaricin-producing lactic acid bacteria from the mammalian gastrointestinal tract. FEMS Microbiol Lett 291(1):24–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Casey P et al (2004) Isolation and characterization of anti-Salmonella lactic acid bacteria from the porcine gastrointestinal tract. Lett Appl Microbiol 39(5):431–438Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Klaenhammer TR (1993) Genetics of bacteriocins produced by lactic acid bacteria*. FEMS Microbiol Rev 12(1–3):39–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bull M et al (2013) The life history of Lactobacillus acidophilus as a probiotic: a tale of revisionary taxonomy, misidentification and commercial success. FEMS Microbiol Lett 349(2):77–87Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Shah NP (2007) Functional cultures and health benefits. Int Dairy J 17(11):1262–1277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Barefoot SF, Klaenhammer TR (1983) Detection and activity of lactacin B, a bacteriocin produced by Lactobacillus acidophilus. Appl Environ Microbiol 45(6):1808–1815Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Saleh FA, El-Sayed EM (2004) Isolation and characterization of bacteriocins produced by Bifidobacterium lactis BB-12 and Bifidobacterium longum BB-46. 9th Egyptian conference for dairy science and technology, Cairo, EgyptGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. W. Hegarty
    • 1
    • 2
  • C. M. Guinane
    • 1
  • R. P. Ross
    • 1
    • 3
  • C. Hill
    • 2
    • 3
  • P. D. Cotter
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Teagasc Food Research CentreFermoyIreland
  2. 2.School of MicrobiologyUniversity College CorkCorkIreland
  3. 3.APC Microbiome InstituteUniversity College CorkCorkIreland

Personalised recommendations