Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Basic Characteristics of Sporolactobacillus inulinus BCRC 14647 for Potential Probiotic Properties

  • Published:
Current Microbiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The basic characteristics of the spore-forming lactic acid bacterium, Sporolactobacillus inulinus BCRC 14647, was evaluated in vitro for its potential probiotic properties. Assessments including acid and bile salt tolerance, adhesiveness, and antagonistic effects on pathogenic Salmonella enteritidis BCRC 10744, as well as inhibition factors of spent culture supernatant (SCS) and an invasion assay, were conducted using Lactobacillus acidophilus BCRC 10695 and two bifidobacteria (Bifidobacterium bifidum BCRC 14615 and B. longum BCRC 11847) as a reference. In the results, S. inulinus spores presented significantly higher survival rates than the vegetative cell form in acidic conditions as well as the reference bifidobacteria. However, L. acidophilus showed the highest viability among all tested strains. Similar results were found in the bile tolerance test. Compared with the reference strains, the vegetative cell form of S. inulinus possessed a proper adhesive characteristic (71.7 bacteria/field for S. inulinus and 91.3 and 45.7 bacteria/field for B. bifidum and B. longum, respectively). In the adhesion assay, both the spore form of S. inulinus (17.1 bacteria/field) and the negative control, L. bulgaricus BCRC 14009 (5.9 bacteria/field), displayed nonadhesive traits. The vegetative cells of S. inulinus and its SCS both dramatically decrease the adhesion of S. enteritidis to Caco-2 cells; meanwhile, the SCS of S. inulinus vegetative cells inhibited the growth of S. enteritidis in the inhibition zone test. The existing inhibition factor could be assumed to be lactic acid in the SCS. From the results of the invasion assay, S. inulinus showed high safety properties. In conclusion, based on these in vitro evaluations, results suggest that S. inulinus presents probiotic features of great potential in the vegetative cell form.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature Cited

  1. Apostolou E, Kirjavainen PV, Saxelin M, et al. (2001) Good adhesion properties of probiotics: A potential risk for bacteremia? FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol 31:35–39

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Asahara T, Shimizu K, Nomoto K, et al. (2004) Probiotic bifidobacteria protect mice from lethal infection with Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli O157: H7. Infect Immun 72:2240–2247

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Axelsson L (1998) Lactic acid bacteria: Classification and physiology. In: Salminen S (ed) Lactic acid bacteria: Microbiology and functional aspects. New York,Ny, Marcel Dekker, pp 1–72

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bhatia SJ, Kochar N, Abraham P, et al. (1989) Lactobacillus acidophilus inhibits growth of Campylobacter pylori in vitro. J Clin Microbiol 27:2328–2330

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Briske-Anderson MJ, Finley JQ, Newman SM (1997) The influence of culture time and passage number on the morphological and physiological development of Caco-2 cells. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 214:248–257

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Brocklehurst TF, Lund BM (1990) The influence of pH, temperature and organic acids on the initiation of growth of Yersinia enterocolitica. J Appl Bacteriol 69:390–397

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Coconnier MH, Klaenhammer TR, Kernels S, etal. (1992) Protein-mediated adhesion of Lactobacillus acidophilus BG2FO4 on human enterocyte and mucus-secreting cell lines in culture. Appl Environ Microbiol 58:2034–2039

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Coconnier MH, Lievin V, Hemery E, et al. (1998) Antagonistic activity against Helicobacter infection in vitro and in vivo by the human Lactobacillus acidophilus strain LB. Appl Environ Microbiol 64:4573–4580

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. du Toit M, Franz CM, Dicks LM, et al. (1998) Characterisation and selection of probiotic lactobacilli for a preliminary minipig feeding trial and their effect on serum cholesterol levels, faeces pH and faeces moisture content. Int J Food Microbiol 40:93–104

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Eklund T (1983) The antimicrobial effect of dissociated and undissociated sorbic acid at different pH levels. J Appl Bacteriol 54:383–389

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Fernandez MF, Boris S, Barbes C (2003) Probiotic properties of human lactobacilli strains to be used in the gastrointestinal tract. J Appl Microbiol 94:449–455

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ford HR, Avanoglu A, Boechat PR, et al. (1996) The microenvironment influences the pattern of bacterial translocation in formula-fed neonates. J Pediatr Sum 31:486–489

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Gagnon M, Kheadr EE, Le Blay G, et al. (2004) In vitro inhibition of Escherichia coll O157: H7 by bifidobacterial strains of human origin. Int J Fppd Microbiol 92:69–78

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Gill HS (1998) Stimulation of the immune system by lactic cultures. Int J Food Microbiol 8:535–544

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Gopal PK, Prasad J, Smart J, et al. (2001) In vitro adherence properties of Lactobacillus rhamnosus DR20 and Bifidobacterium lactis DR10 strains and their antagonistic activity against an enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli. Int J Food Microbiol 67:207–216

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Holzapfel WH, Botha SJ (1988) Physiology of Sporolactobacillus strains isolated from different habitats and the indication of in vitro antagonism against Bacillus sp. Int J Food Microbiol 7:161–168

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Hyronimus B, Le Marrec C, Hadj Sassi A, et al. (2000) Acid and bile tolerance of spore-forming lactic acid bacteria. Int J Food Microbiol 61:193–197

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Jacobsen CN, Nielsen VR, Hayford AE, et al. (1999) Screening of probiotic activities of forty-seven strains of Lactobacillus spp. by in vitro techniques and evaluation of the colonization ability of five selected strains in humans. Appl Environ Microbiol 65:4949–4956

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Jiang T, Mustapha A, Savaiano DA (1996) Improvement of lactose digestion in human by ingestion of unfermented milk containing Bifidobacterium longurn. J Dairy Sci 79:750–757

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Kirjavainen PV, Ouwehand AC, Isolauri E, et al. (1998) The ability of probiotic bacteria to bind to human intestinal mucus. FEMS Microbiol Lett 167:185–189

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Lee YK, Puong KY, Ouwehand AC, et al. (2003) Displacement of bacterial pathogens from mucus and Caco-2 cell surface by lactobacilli. J Med Microbiol 52:925–930

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Marteau P, Pochart P, Bouhnik Y, et al. (1993) Fate and effects of some transiting microorganisms in the human gastrointestinal tract. World Rev Nutr Diet 74:1–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Mattila-Sandholm T, Mättö J, Saarela M (1999) Lactic acid bacteria with health claims—interactions and interference with gastrointestinal flora. Int Dairy J 9:25–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. McNaught CE, MacFie J (2001) Probiotics in clinical practice: A critical review of the evidence. Nutr Res21:343–353

    Google Scholar 

  25. Nakayama O, Yanoshi M (1967) Spore bearing lactic acid bacteria isolated from rhizosphere. I. Taxonomic studies on Bacillus laevolacticus nov. sp. and Bacillus zacemilacticus nov, sp. J Gen Appl Microbiol 13:139–153

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ouwehand AC, Salminen S, Isolauri E (2002) Probiotics: An overview of beneficial effects. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 82:279–289

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Pinto M, Robine-Leon S, Appay MD, et al. (1983) Enterocyte-like differentiation and polarization of the human colon carcinoma cell line Caco-2 in culture. Biol Cell 47:323–333

    Google Scholar 

  28. Prasad J, Gill H, Smart J, et al. (1998) Selection and characterization of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacierium strains of use as probiotics. Int Dairy J 8:993–1002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Resta-Lenert S, BarrettKE, (2003). Live probiotics protect intestinal epithelial cells from the effects of infection with enteroinvasive Escheridhia coli (EIEC). Gut 52:988–997

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Restall RA (2004) Bacteria in the gut: Friends and foes and how to alter the balance. J Nutr 134(Suppl. 8):s2022–s2026

    Google Scholar 

  31. Russell JB (1991) Resistance of Streptococcus bovis to acetic acid at low pH: Relationship between intracellular pH and anion accumulation. Appl Environ Microbiol 57:255–259

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Salazar-Lindo E, Miranda-Laneschwager R Gampos-Sanchez M, et al. (2004) Lactobacillus casei strain GG in the treatment of infants with acute watery diarrhea: A randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled clinical trial. BMC Pediatr 4:18

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Sarrela M, Lahteenmaki L, Crittenden R, et al. (2002) Gut bacteria and health foods- the European perspective. Int J Food Microbiol 78:99–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Schilinger U, Lucke FK (1989) Antibacterial activity of Lactobacillus sake isolated from meat. Appl Environ Microbiol 55:1901–1906

    Google Scholar 

  35. Succi M, Tremonte P, Reale A, et al. (2005) Bile salt and acid tolemnde of Lactobacillus rhamnosus strains isolated from Parmigiano Reggiano chesse. FEMS Microbiol Lett 244:129–137

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Suzuki T, Yamasato K (1994) Phylogeny of spore-forming lactic acid bacteria based on 16S rRNA gene sequence. FEMS Microbiol Lett 115:13–18

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Szylit O, Raibaud P, Dhoms P, et al. (1996) Food additive intended for human consumption and as animal feed and foodstuffs containing it. US Patent 5520936

  38. Tang P, Foubister V, Pucciarelli MQ, et al. (1993) Methods to study bacterial invasion. J Microbiol methods 18:227–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Tsai CC, Huang LF, Lin CC, et al. (2004) Antagonistic activity against Helicobacter pylori infection in vitro by a strain of Enterococcus faecium TM39. Int J Food Microbiol 96:1–12

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Urao M., Teitelbaum DH, Drongowski RA, et al. (1996) The association of gut-associated lymphoid tissue and bacterial translocation in the newborn rabbit. J Pediatr Surg 31:1482–1487

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Wadstrom T, Hirmo S, Novalc H, et al. (1997) Sulfatides inhibit binding of Helicobacter pylori to the gastric cancer kato III cell line. Curr Microbiol 34:267–272

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Walker DK, Gilliland SE (1993) Relationships among bile tolerance, bile salt deconjugation, and assimilationof cholesterol by Lactobacillus acidophilus. J Dairy Sci 76:956–961

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Walker WA, Duffy LC (1998) Diet and bacterial colonization: role of probiotics and prebiotics. J Nutr Biochem 9:668–675

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Available at http://www.mothernature.com/shop/detail.cfm/sku/95880. Accessed: January 29, 2007

  45. Available at http://www.chinsho.com.tw/product2_1.html. Accessed: January 29, 2007

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by China Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan (Grant No. CMU94-071).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nutrition, China Medical University, Taichung, 404, Taiwan, ROC

    Hui-Ying Huang, Pei-Yu Chen & Jen-Horng Tsen

  2. School of Nutrition and Health Sciences, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, 110, Taiwan, ROC

    Hui-Ying Huang & Shih-Yi Huang

  3. Department of Food Science and Biotechnology, National Chung-Hsing University, Taichung, 402, Taiwan, ROC

    V. An-Erl King

  4. Department of Food Science and Technology, Tung-Fang Institute of Technology, Hu-Nei Hsiang, Kaohsiung, 829, Taiwan, ROC

    Yeu-Pyng Lin

Authors
  1. Hui-Ying Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shih-Yi Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pei-Yu Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. V. An-Erl King
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yeu-Pyng Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jen-Horng Tsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jen-Horng Tsen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Huang, HY., Huang, SY., Chen, PY. et al. Basic Characteristics of Sporolactobacillus inulinus BCRC 14647 for Potential Probiotic Properties. Curr Microbiol 54, 396–404 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00284-006-0496-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00284-006-0496-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation