Literature DB >> 10857928

Safety assessment of potential probiotic lactic acid bacterial strains Lactobacillus rhamnosus HN001, Lb. acidophilus HN017, and Bifidobacterium lactis HN019 in BALB/c mice.

J S Zhou1, Q Shu, K J Rutherfurd, J Prasad, M J Birtles, P K Gopal, H S Gill.   

Abstract

The general safety of immune-enhancing lactic acid bacteria (LAB) strains Lactobacillus rhamnosus HN001 (DR20), Lb. acidophilus HN017, and Bifidobacterium lactis HN019 (DR10) was investigated in a feeding trial. Groups of BALB/c mice were orally administered test LAB strains or the commercial reference strain Lb. acidophilus LA-1 at 2.5 x 10(9), 5 x 10(10) or 2.5 x 10(12) colony forming units (CFU)/kg body weight/day for 4 weeks. Throughout this time, their feed intake, water intake, and live body weight were monitored. At the end of the 4 week observation period, samples of blood, liver, spleen, kidney, mesenteric lymph nodes, and gut tissues (ileum, caecum, and colon) were collected to determine: haematological parameters (red blood cell and platelet counts, haemoglobin concentration, mean corpuscular volume, mean corpuscular haemoglobin, and mean corpuscular haemoglobin concentration); differential leukocyte counts; blood biochemistry (plasma total protein, albumin, cholesterol, and glucose); mucosal histology (epithelial cell height, mucosal thickness, and villus height); and bacterial translocation to extra-gut tissues (blood, liver, spleen, kidney and mesenteric lymph nodes). DNA finger printing techniques were used to identify any viable bacterial strains recovered from these tissues. The results demonstrated that 4 weeks consumption of these LAB strains had no adverse effects on animals' general health status, haematology, blood biochemistry, gut mucosal histology parameters, or the incidence of bacterial translocation. A few viable LAB cells were recovered from the tissues of animals in both control and test groups, but DNA fingerprinting did not identify any of these as the inoculated strains. The results obtained in this study suggest that the potentially probiotic LAB strains HN001, HN017, and HN019 are non-toxic for mice and are therefore likely to be safe for human use.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10857928     DOI: 10.1016/s0168-1605(00)00219-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Food Microbiol        ISSN: 0168-1605            Impact factor:   5.277


  17 in total

1.  Biopreservation of Sardinella longiceps and Penaeus monodon Using Protective Culture Streptococcus phocae PI 80 Isolated from Marine Shrimp Penaeus indicus.

Authors:  Alagesan Paari; Kanmani Paulraj; Satishkumar Ramraj; Yuvaraj Neelkandan; Pattukumar Vellaiyan; Ponni Siva; Arul Venkatesan
Journal:  Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.609

2.  Safety evaluation of Lactobacillus paracasei subsp. paracasei LC-01, a probiotic bacterium.

Authors:  Hao Zhang; Yu Wang; Jing Sun; Zirui Guo; Huiyuan Guo; Fazheng Ren
Journal:  J Microbiol       Date:  2013-10-31       Impact factor: 3.422

3.  Functional analysis of putative adhesion factors in Lactobacillus acidophilus NCFM.

Authors:  B Logan Buck; Eric Altermann; Tina Svingerud; Todd R Klaenhammer
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 4.792

4.  Impact of Probiotics for Reducing Infections in Veterans (IMPROVE): Study protocol for a double-blind, randomized controlled trial to reduce carriage of Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  Shoshannah Eggers; Anna Barker; Susan Valentine; Timothy Hess; Megan Duster; Nasia Safdar
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2016-11-09       Impact factor: 2.226

5.  In vitro and in vivo inhibition of Helicobacter pylori by Lactobacillus casei strain Shirota.

Authors:  D Sgouras; P Maragkoudakis; K Petraki; B Martinez-Gonzalez; E Eriotou; S Michopoulos; G Kalantzopoulos; E Tsakalidou; A Mentis
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 4.792

6.  Assessment of safety of lactobacillus strains based on resistance to host innate defense mechanisms.

Authors:  Takashi Asahara; Masatoshi Takahashi; Koji Nomoto; Hiroo Takayama; Masaharu Onoue; Masami Morotomi; Ryuichiro Tanaka; Teruo Yokokura; Naoya Yamashita
Journal:  Clin Diagn Lab Immunol       Date:  2003-01

7.  The safety of two Bacillus probiotic strains for human use.

Authors:  Iryna B Sorokulova; Iryna V Pinchuk; Muriel Denayrolles; Irina G Osipova; Jen M Huang; Simon M Cutting; Maria C Urdaci
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2007-10-13       Impact factor: 3.199

8.  Characterization of Lactic Acid Bacteria in Raw Buffalo Milk: a Screening for Novel Probiotic Candidates and Their Transcriptional Response to Acid Stress.

Authors:  Gabriela Merker Breyer; Nathasha Noronha Arechavaleta; Franciele Maboni Siqueira; Amanda de Souza da Motta
Journal:  Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins       Date:  2021-04       Impact factor: 4.609

9.  A Comprehensive Assessment of the Safety of Blautia producta DSM 2950.

Authors:  Xuemei Liu; Weiling Guo; Shumao Cui; Xin Tang; Jianxin Zhao; Hao Zhang; Bingyong Mao; Wei Chen
Journal:  Microorganisms       Date:  2021-04-23

10.  Effects of a ferment soy product on the adipocyte area reduction and dyslipidemia control in hypercholesterolemic adult male rats.

Authors:  Nadia Carla Cheik; Elizeu Antônio Rossi; Ricardo Luís Fernandes Guerra; Neuli Maria Tenório; Cláudia Maria Oller do Nascimento; Fabiana Pavan Viana; Marla Simone Jovenasso Manzoni; Iracilda Zeponni Carlos; Patrícia Leão da Silva; Regina Célia Vendramini; Ana Raimunda Dâmaso
Journal:  Lipids Health Dis       Date:  2008-12-16       Impact factor: 3.876

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.