Live and heat-inactivated lactobacilli from feces inhibit Salmonella typhi and Escherichia coli adherence to Caco-2 cells
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké Médium print-electronic
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články
- MeSH
- bakteriální adheze * MeSH
- Caco-2 buňky MeSH
- Escherichia coli fyziologie MeSH
- feces mikrobiologie MeSH
- Lactobacillus izolace a purifikace fyziologie MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- novorozenec MeSH
- probiotika izolace a purifikace MeSH
- Salmonella typhi fyziologie MeSH
- střeva mikrobiologie MeSH
- vysoká teplota MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- novorozenec MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
A quantitative approach has been proposed to evaluate the competitive inhibition of Escherichia coli and Salmonella typhi by live and heat-inactivated laboratory isolated Lactobacillus sp. on adhesion to monolayer of Caco-2 cells. Three species of Lactobacillus (L. casei, L. acidophilus, L. agilis) isolated from human neonate feces and two commercial probiotic strains (L. casei, L. acidophilus) have been compared for probiotic activity. All lactobacilli were able to attach to the Caco-2 cells, however, the degree of adhesion was bacterial strain-dependent. The adhesion indices of the two commercial probiotic strains were not significantly different from the values obtained for the other two similar fecal strains (p > 0.01). The inhibition of attachment of the pathogenic bacteria by inactivated cells of fecal L. acidophilus was examined and compared to the results of live bacteria. The inhibition pattern was similar for live and heat-inactivated L. acidophilus (p > 0.01). The number of attached pathogenic bacteria to the Caco-2 cells decreased when the number of L. acidophilus increased from 10(6) to 10(9) CFU/mL. The heat-inactivated L. acidophilus displayed similar probiotic activity compared to the live bacteria.
Zobrazit více v PubMed
Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2008;53(1):89-93 PubMed
Am J Physiol. 1998 Sep;275(3):G425-32 PubMed
Microbiol Immunol. 1992;36(7):683-94 PubMed
FEMS Microbiol Lett. 1997 Aug 15;153(2):455-63 PubMed
Scand J Infect Dis. 1987;19(5):531-7 PubMed
Gastroenterol Jpn. 1983 Feb;18(1):47-55 PubMed
Am J Clin Nutr. 1997 Aug;66(2):515S-520S PubMed
Int J Immunopharmacol. 1994 Jan;16(1):29-36 PubMed
Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2008;53(5):378-94 PubMed
J Diarrhoeal Dis Res. 1993 Dec;11(4):235-42 PubMed
FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2004 Oct;28(4):405-40 PubMed
J Appl Bacteriol. 1989 May;66(5):365-78 PubMed
Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2007;52(4):367-73 PubMed
Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2008;53(1):61-6 PubMed
Int J Food Microbiol. 1995 Apr;25(2):199-203 PubMed
J Nutr. 2000 Feb;130(2S Suppl):415S-416S PubMed
Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2008;53(3):189-94 PubMed
Probiotic Lactobacillus strains: in vitro and in vivo studies
