Experimental administration of the probiotic Escherichia coli strain Nissle 1917 results in decreased diversity of E. coli strains in pigs
Language English Country United States Media print-electronic
Document type Clinical Trial, Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- MeSH
- Genes, Bacterial MeSH
- Bacteriocins genetics MeSH
- Escherichia coli classification isolation & purification MeSH
- Phylogeny MeSH
- Genetic Variation MeSH
- Molecular Typing MeSH
- Swine MeSH
- Probiotics administration & dosage MeSH
- Biota * MeSH
- Intestinal Mucosa microbiology MeSH
- Animals MeSH
- Check Tag
- Female MeSH
- Animals MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Clinical Trial MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Names of Substances
- Bacteriocins MeSH
The strain Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) is widely used as an efficient probiotic in therapy and prevention of human infectious diseases, especially of the intestinal system. Concurrently, small adult pigs are being used as experimental omnivore models to study human gastrointestinal functions. EcN bacteria were applied to 6 adult healthy female pigs in a 2-week trial. 6 Control animals remained untreated. Altogether, 164 and 149 bacterial strains were isolated from smear samples taken from gastrointestinal mucosa in the experimental and control group, respectively. Each individual E. coli strain was then tested for the presence of 29 bacteriocin-encoding determinants as well as for DNA markers of A, B1, B2 and D phylogenetic groups. A profound reduction of E. coli genetic variance (from 32 variants to 13 ones, P = 0.0006) was found in the experimental group, accompanied by a lower incidence of bacteriocin producers in the experimental group when compared to control (21.3 and 34.9%, respectively; P = 0.007) and by changes in the incidence of individual bacteriocin types. The experimental administration of EcN strain was not sufficient for stable colonization of porcine gut, but induced significant changes in the enterobacterial microbiota.
See more in PubMed
World J Gastroenterol. 2011 Feb 7;17(5):609-17 PubMed
J Bacteriol. 2004 Aug;186(16):5432-41 PubMed
Microbiology (Reading). 2006 Nov;152(Pt 11):3239-3244 PubMed
Lancet. 1999 Aug 21;354(9179):635-9 PubMed
J Hyg Epidemiol Microbiol Immunol. 1960;4:151-65 PubMed
Plasmid. 2008 Jan;59(1):1-10 PubMed
Mon Bull Minist Health Public Health Lab Serv. 1961 Mar;20:51-8 PubMed
Microbiology (Reading). 2003 Sep;149(Pt 9):2557-2570 PubMed
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2000 Oct;66(10):4555-8 PubMed
Biol Neonate. 1997;71(4):224-32 PubMed
BMC Microbiol. 2010 Nov 15;10:288 PubMed
Scand J Immunol. 2002 Feb;55(2):204-9 PubMed
Dig Dis Sci. 2006 Apr;51(4):724-31 PubMed
Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2006;51(5):387-91 PubMed
Cesk Epidemiol Mikrobiol Imunol. 1992 Sep;42(3):126-32 PubMed
Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2007;119(15-16):456-62 PubMed
Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2006 Jun 15;111(3-4):239-50 PubMed
FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol. 2004 Apr 9;40(3):223-9 PubMed
J Appl Microbiol. 2009 Nov;107(5):1697-710 PubMed
Nature. 1962 Aug 18;195:730-2 PubMed
J Appl Microbiol. 2006 Dec;101(6):1357-66 PubMed
Gut. 2004 Nov;53(11):1617-23 PubMed
