Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Lactobacillus johnsonii CPN23 vis-à-vis Lactobacillus acidophilus NCDC15 Improves Gut Health, Intestinal Morphometry, and Histology in Weaned Wistar Rats

  • Published:
Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The present investigation was carried out with the aim to establish the comparative efficacy of a canine-sourced probiotic meant for canine feeding and a conventional dairy-sourced probiotic. For this purpose, canine-origin Lactobacillus johnsonii CPN23 and dairy-origin Lactobacillus acidophilus NCDC15 were evaluated for potential probiotics health benefits in the rat model. Forty-eight weaned Wistar rats enrolled in this experiment of 8 weeks were fed a basal diet and divided into three dietary treatments. Rats of group I enrolled as control (CON) were given MRS placebo at 1 mL/head/day, while rats of group II (LAJ) and III (LAC) were administered with overnight MRS broth grown-culture of L. johnsonii CPN23 and L. acidophilus NCDC15, respectively, at 1 mL/head/day (108 cfu/mL). The average daily gain and net gain in body weight were significantly higher (p < 0.05) in LAJ and LAC than in CON. Fecal and digesta biochemical attributes altered (p < 0.05) positively in response to both probiotics. Total fecal and pooled digesta SCFAs were higher (p < 0.05) in both LAJ and LAC than in CON. The microbial population in cecal and colonic digesta responded (p < 0.05) positively to both probiotics. The diameter of intestinal segments was higher (p < 005) in LAJ as compared to CON. The number and height of villi in jejunum tended to be higher in LAJ as compared to CON. The humoral immune response to sheep erythrocytes as well as chicken egg-white lysozyme was higher in LAJ as compared to CON. Overall, the results of the study have demonstrated the effectiveness of the canine-sourced L. johnsonii CPN23 as a potential probiotic, with a comparatively better response than the dairy-sourced L. acidophilus NCDC15. It could thus be recommended for use in feeding dogs to help augment their health.

Graphical Abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of Data and Material

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article [and its supplementary information files]. The probiotics strains (Lactobacillus johnsonii CPN23) have been deposited to NCBI GenBank (GenBank Accession No-KP065494) and National Centre for Dairy Collection (NCDC, Karnal, India; Assigned No- NCDC-966). NCDC is registered with the World Data Centre for Microorganisms (WDCM).

References

  1. Nakagawa H, Miyazaki T (2016) Anti-aging effects of Lactobacilli. Integr Mol Med 3:680–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Gupta M, Pattanaik AK, Singh A et al (2021) Functional and probiotic characterization of Ligilactobacillus salivarius CPN60 isolated from calf faeces and its appraisal in rats. J Biosci Bioeng 132(6):575–584

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Group JFWW (2002) Guidelines for the evaluation of probiotics in food: Report of a joint FAO/WHO working group on drafting guidelines for the evaluation of probiotics in food. World Health Organization and Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy

  4. Hill C, Guarner F, Reid G et al (2014) 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):506–514

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kumar S, Pattanaik AK, Sharma S, Gupta R, Jadhav SE, Dutta N (2017) Comparative assessment of canine-origin Lactobacillus johnsonii CPN23 and dairy-origin Lactobacillus acidophillus NCDC 15 for nutrient digestibility, faecal fermentative metabolites and selected gut health indices in dogs. J Nut Sci 6:e38. https://doi.org/10.1017/jns.2017.35

  6. Kumar S, Pattanaik AK, Sharma S, Jadhav SE, Dutta N, Kumar A (2017) Probiotic potential of a Lactobacillus bacterium of canine faecal-origin and its impact on select gut health indices and immune response of dogs. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins 9(3):262–277

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Varada VV, Tyagi AK, Banakar PS et al (2022) Autochthonous Limosilactobacillus reuteri BFE7 and Ligilactobacillus salivarius BF17 probiotics consortium supplementation improves performance, immunity, and selected gut health indices in Murrah buffalo calves. Vet Res Comm 46(3):757–776

  8. Kechagia M, Basoulis D, Konstantopoulou S et al (2013) Health benefits of probiotics: a review. ISRN Nutr. https://doi.org/10.5402/2013/481651

  9. Sniffen JC, McFarland LV, Evans CT, Goldstein EJ (2018) Choosing an appropriate probiotic product for your patient: An evidence-based practical guide. PLoS ONE 13(12):e0209205

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Singh A, Kumar S, Vinay VV et al (2021) Autochthonous Lactobacillus spp. isolated from Murrah buffalo calves show potential application as probiotic. Curr Res Biotechnol 3:109–119

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Kumar S, Varada VV, Banakar PS et al (2022) Screening and characterization of Sahiwal cattle calves-origin lactic acid bacteria based on desired probiotic attributes for potential application. Anim Biotechnol. https://doi.org/10.1080/10495398.2022.2043885

  12. Buhnik-Rosenblau K, Matsko-Efimov V, Jung M et al (2012) Indication for co-evolution of Lactobacillus johnsonii with its hosts. BMC Microbiol. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2180-12-149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. La Ragione R, Narbad A, Gasson M, Woodward MJ (2004) In vivo characterization of Lactobacillus johnsonii FI9785 for use as a defined competitive exclusion agent against bacterial pathogens in poultry. Lett Appl Microbiol 38(3):197–205

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Van Coillie E, Goris J, Cleenwerck I et al (2007) Identification of lactobacilli isolated from the cloaca and vagina of laying hens and characterization for potential use as probiotics to control Salmonella Enteritidis. J Appl Microbiol 102(4):1095–1106

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Taheri H, Tabandeh F, Moravej H et al (2009) Potential probiotic of Lactobacillus johnsonii LT171 for chicken nutrition. Afr J Biotechnol 8(21):5833–5837

  16. Kumar S, Pattanaik AK, Jadhav SE (2021) Potent health-promoting effects of a synbiotic formulation prepared from Lactobacillus acidophilus NCDC15 fermented milk and Cichorium intybus root powder in Labrador dogs. Curr Res Biotechnol 3:209–214

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Gómez-Gallego C, Junnila J, Männikkö S, Hämeenoja P, Valtonen E, Salminen S, Beasley S (2016) A canine-specific probiotic product in treating acute or intermittent diarrhea in dogs: A double-blind placebo-controlled efficacy study. Vet Microbiol 197:122–128

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Jang HJ, Son S, Kim JA, Jung MY, Choi YJ, Kim DH, Lee HK, Shin D, Kim Y (2021) Characterization and functional test of canine probiotics. Front Microbiol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.625562

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Tanprasertsuk J, Jha AR, Shmalberg J, Jones RB, Perry LM, Maughan H, Honaker RW (2021) The microbiota of healthy dogs demonstrates individualized responses to synbiotic supplementation in a randomized controlled trial. Anim Microb 3(1):36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42523-021-00098-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ojha L, Kumar S, Kewalramani N, Sarkar S, Tyagi AK (2018) Growth and haematological parameters in Murrah buffalo calves as affected by addition of Lactobacillus acidophilus in the diet. Indian J Anim Nut 35(3):282–289

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Ojha L, Kumar S, Kewalramani N et al (2020) Effect of dietary supplementation of Lactobacillus acidophilus on blood biochemical profile, antioxidant activity and plasma immunoglobulin level in neonatal Murrah buffalo calves. Indian J Anim Sci 90(1):48–54

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Ojha L, Kumar S, Kewalramani N, Sarkar S, Tyagi AK (2022) Effect of milk fermented with Lactobacillus acidophilus NCDC15 on nutrient digestibility, faecal biomarkers and immune response in Murrah calves. Braz Archi Bio Technol 64:e21210179. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-4324-2021210179

  23. AOAC (1995) Official methods of analysis, 15th edn. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  24. Chaney AL, Marbach EP (1962) Modified reagents for determination of urea and ammonia. Clin Chem 8(2):130–132

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Barker S, Summerson WH (1941) The colorimetric determination of lactic acid in biological material. J Bio Chem 138:535–554

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Cottyn BG, Boucque CV (1968) Rapid method for the gas-chromatographic determination of volatile fatty acids in rumen fluid. J Agri Food Chem 16(1):105–107

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Luna LG (1968) Manual of histologic staining methods of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology. McGraw-Hill, New York

  28. Bain BJ, Bates I, Laffan MA (2016) Dacie and Lewis practical haematology, 12th edn. Elsevier

    Google Scholar 

  29. Basoglu A, Sevinc M, Birdane FM, Boydak M (2002) Efficacy of sodium borate in the prevention of fatty liver in dairy cows. J Vet Intern Med 16(6):732–735

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Choubey M, Pattanaik AK, Baliyan S et al (2015) Dietary supplementation of a novel phytogenic feed additive: effects on nutrient metabolism, antioxidant status and immune response of goats. Anim Pro Sci 56(10):1612–1621

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Prins H, Loos J (1969) Glutathione. Biochemical methods in red cell genetics. Academic Press New York

  32. Bergmeyer HU, Bergmeyer, J, Grassl M (1983) Methods of enzymatic analysis, 3rd edn., vol. 2. Verlag Chemie, Weinheim

  33. Marklund S, Marklund G (1974) Involvement of the superoxide anion radical in the autoxidation of pyrogallol and a convenient assay for superoxide dismutase. Eur J Biochem 47(3):469–474

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Saxena R, Garg P, Jain D (2011) In vitro anti-oxidant effect of vitamin E on oxidative stress induced due to pesticides in rat erythrocytes. Toxicol Int 18(1):73

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Cirak B, Inci S, Palaoglu S, Bertan VJ (2003) Lipid peroxidation in cerebral tumors. Clin Chim Acta 327(1–2):103–107

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Habig WH, Pabst MJ, Jakoby WB (1974) Glutathione S-transferases: the first enzymatic step in mercapturic acid formation. J Bio Chem 249(22):7130–7139

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Pattanaik AK, Khan SA, Goswami TK (2007) Influence of iodine on nutritional, metabolic and immunological response of goats fed Leucaena leucocephala leaf meal diet. J Agric Sci Camb 145 (4):395–405

  38. Wegmann TG, Smithies O (1966) A simple hemagglutination system requiring small amounts of red cells and antibodies. Transfusion 6(1):67–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Snedecor GW, Cochran WG (1994) Statistical methods, 8th edn. East West Press Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi, India

  40. Al-Yassir F, Holail H, Olama Z (2018) Effect of different Lebanese probiotics on the growth and some biochemical parameters of the experimental rats. J Pure Appl Microbiol 12(1):393–404

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Oyetayo V (2004) Performance of rats orogastrically dosed with faecal strains of Lactobacillus acidophilus and challenged with Escherichia coli. Afr J Biotechnol 3(8):409–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Abdul-Rahman AA, Ahmed MMM, Amal HM, Hadil FA (2011) Effect of feeding probiotics on rats' immunity and health conditions during pregnancy. Food Nutr Sci 2:96–104

  43. Mohania D, Kansal VK, Shah D et al (2013) Therapeutic effect of probiotic dahi on plasma, aortic, and hepatic lipid profile of hypercholesterolemic rats. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther 18(5):490–497

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Mohammad Malyar R, Li H, Enayatullah H et al (2019) Zinc-enriched probiotics enhanced growth performance, antioxidant status, immune function, gene expression, and morphological characteristics of Wistar rats raised under high ambient temperature. 3 Biotech 9(8):1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Park J, Jeong J, Lee S, Kim I (2016) Effect of dietary supplementation with a probiotic (Enterococcus faecium) on production performance, excreta microflora, ammonia emission, and nutrient utilization in ISA Brown laying hens. Poult Sci 95(12):2829–2835

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Sakata T, Kojima T, Fujieda M, Takahashi M, Michibata T (2003) Influences of probiotic bacteria on organic acid production by pig caecal bacteria in vitro. Proc Nutr Soc 62:73–80. https://doi.org/10.1079/PNS2002211

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Nilsson U, Nyman M (2007) Carboxylic acids in the hindgut of rats fed highly soluble inulin and Bifidobacterium lactis (Bb-12), Lactobacillus salivarius (UCC500) or Lactobacillus rhamnosus (GG). Scand J Food Nut 51(1):13–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Chen Z, Ruan J, Li D et al (2021) The role of intestinal bacteria and gut–brain Axis in hepatic encephalopathy. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 10:595759

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Smith EA, Macfarlane GT (1997) Formation of phenolic and indolic compounds by anaerobic bacteria in the human large intestine. Microb Ecol 33(3):180–188

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Geboes KP, De Hertogh G, De Preter V et al (2006) The influence of inulin on the absorption of nitrogen and the production of metabolites of protein fermentation in the colon. Br J Nutr 96(6):1078–1086

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Cummings J, Macfarlane G (1991) The control and consequences of bacterial fermentation in the human colon. J Appl Bacteriol 70(6):443–459

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Zierer J, Jackson MA, Kastenmüller G et al (2018) The fecal metabolome as a functional readout of the gut microbiome. Nat Genet 50(6):790–795

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Van Zyl WF, Deane SM, Dicks LM (2020) Molecular insights into probiotic mechanisms of action employed against intestinal pathogenic bacteria. Gut Microbes. https://doi.org/10.1080/19490976.2020.1831339

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Hemarajata P, Versalovic J (2013) Effects of probiotics on gut microbiota: mechanisms of intestinal immunomodulation and neuromodulation. Therapeutic Adv Gastroenterol 6(1):39–51

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Gerritsen J, Smidt H, Rijkers GT, de Vos WM (2011) Intestinal microbiota in human health and disease: the impact of probiotics. Genes Nutr 6:209–240

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Grazul H, Kanda LL, Gondek D (2016) Impact of probiotic supplements on microbiome diversity following antibiotic treatment of mice. Gut Microbes 7(2):101–114

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Dock DB, Aguilar-Nascimento JE, Latorraca MQ (2004) Probiotics enhance the recovery of gut atrophy in experimental malnutrition. Biocell 28(2):143–150

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Campbell JM, Fahey GC Jr, Wolf BW (1997) Selected indigestible oligosaccharides affect large bowel mass, cecal and fecal short-chain fatty acids, pH and microflora in rats. J Nutr 127(1):130–136

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Gaskins H (1997) Immunological aspects of host/microbiota interactions at the intestinal epithelium. Gastrointest Microbiol 2:537–587

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Caspary WF (1992) Physiology and pathophysiology of intestinal absorption. Am J Clin Nutr 55(1):299S-308S

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Perić L, Milošević N, Žikić D et al (2010) Effects of probiotic and phytogenic products on performance, gut morphology and cecal microflora of broiler chickens. Arch Anim Breed 53(3):350–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Shen Y, Piao X, Kim S et al (2009) Effects of yeast culture supplementation on growth performance, intestinal health, and immune response of nursery pigs. J Anim Sci 87(8):2614–2624

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Scheppach W, Christl S, Bartram H-P, Richter F, Kasper H (1997) Effects of short-chain fatty acids on the inflamed colonic mucosa. Scand J Gastroenterol 32:53–57

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Aboderin F, Oyetayo V (2006) Haematological studies of rats fed different doses of probiotic, Lactobacillus plantarum, isolated from fermenting corn slurry. Pak J Nutr 5(2):102–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Yamano T, Tanida M, Niijima A et al (2006) Effects of the probiotic strain Lactobacillus johnsonii strain La1 on autonomic nerves and blood glucose in rats. Life Sci 79(20):1963–1967

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Kumar S, Pattanaik A, Sharma S, Jadhav S (2016) Species-specific probiotic Lactobacillus johnsonii CPN23 supplementation modulates blood biochemical profile and erythrocytic antioxidant indices in Labrador dogs. Indian J Anim Sci 86:918–924

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Puri P, Mahapatra S, Bijlani R, Prasad H, Nath I (1994) Feed efficiency and splenic lymphocyte proliferation response in yogurt-and milk-fed mice. Int J Food Sci Nutr 45(4):231–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Dock DB, Aguilar-Nascimento J, Latorraca MQ (2003) Enhanced immunological response influenced by probiotics during the recovery of experimental malnutrition. Rev Bras Nutr Clín 18:157–162

    Google Scholar 

  69. Link-Amster H, Rochat F, Saudan K, Mignot O, Aeschlimann J (1994) Modulation of a specific humoral immune response and changes in intestinal flora mediated through fermented milk intake. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol 10(1):55–63

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Ghanem K, Badawy I, Abdel-Salam A (2004) Influence of yoghurt and probiotic yoghurt on the absorption of calcium, magnesium, iron and bone mineralization in rats. Milchwissenschaft 59(9–10):472–475

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Øie E, Sandberg WJ, Ahmed MS et al (2010) Activation of Notch signaling in cardiomyocytes during post-infarction remodeling. Scand Cardiovas J 44(6):359–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Savcheniuk OA, Virchenko OV, Falalyeyeva TM et al (2014) The efficacy of probiotics for monosodium glutamate-induced obesity: dietology concerns and opportunities for prevention. EPMA J 5(1):1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Grasso F, Napolitano F, De Rosa G, Quarantelli T, Serpe L, Bordi A (1999) Effect of pen size on behavioral, endocrine, and immune responses of water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) calves. J Anim Sci 77(8):2039–2046

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Smits J, Bortolotti GR, Tella JL (1999) Simplifying the phytohaemagglutinin skin-testing technique in studies of avian immunocompetence. Funct Ecol 13(4):567–572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Meydani SN, Ha W-K (2000) Immunologic effects of yogurt. Am J Clin Nutr 71(4):861–872

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Masucci F, De Rosa G, Grasso F et al (2011) Performance and immune response of buffalo calves supplemented with probiotic. Livest Sci 137(1–3):24–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Delcenserie V, Martel D, Lamoureux M et al (2008) Immunomodulatory effects of probiotics in the intestinal tract. Curr Issues Mol Biol 10(1–2):37–54

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Perdigon G, Vintini E, Alvarez S, Medina M, Medici M (1999) Study of the possible mechanisms involved in the mucosal immune system activation by lactic acid bacteria. J Dairy Sci 82(6):1108–1114

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Shu Q, Qu F, Gill HS (2001) Probiotic treatment using Bifidobacterium lactis HN019 reduces weanling diarrhea associated with rotavirus and Escherichia coli infection in a piglet model. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 33(2):171–177

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge Director, ICAR-Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, India, for providing all the necessary facilities to carry out the research work. The authors also acknowledge the funding received for the work from Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi, India, under the Niche Area of Excellence program.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Clinical and Pet Nutrition Laboratory, Division of Animal Nutrition, ICAR-Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, 243 122, India

    Sachin Kumar, Ashok Kumar Pattanaik, Sunil Ekanath Jadhav & Babu Lal Jangir

  2. Animal Nutrition Division, ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, 132 001, India

    Sachin Kumar

  3. Department of Veterinary Pathology, College of Veterinary Sciences, Lala Lajpat Rai University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Hisar, 125 004, India

    Babu Lal Jangir

Authors
  1. Sachin Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ashok Kumar Pattanaik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sunil Ekanath Jadhav
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Babu Lal Jangir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

SK contributed in conceptualization, data curation, investigation, methodology, formal analysis, software, and writing of the manuscript. AKP designed the experiment, and contributed in visualization, writing, funding acquisition, project and administration, SEJ analyzed data and wrote the manuscript. BLJ contributed in histology assessment and interpretation. All authors read and approved the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ashok Kumar Pattanaik.

Ethics declarations

Ethics Approval

The Institutional Animal Ethics Committee of the ICAR-Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, India, approved the use of animals in this study.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 27 kb)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kumar, S., Pattanaik, A.K., Jadhav, S.E. et al. Lactobacillus johnsonii CPN23 vis-à-vis Lactobacillus acidophilus NCDC15 Improves Gut Health, Intestinal Morphometry, and Histology in Weaned Wistar Rats. Probiotics & Antimicro. Prot. 16, 474–489 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-023-10063-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-023-10063-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation