Literature DB >> 30954499

A comparison of methods for enumerating bacteria in direct fed microbials for animal feed.

John Gorsuch1, Daniel LeSaint2, Jennifer VanderKelen3, Dana Buckman4, Christopher L Kitts5.   

Abstract

Aerobic plate counts are the standard enumeration method for probiotic-containing products. This counting method is limited by the ability of many cells to enter a viable but non-culturable (VBNC) state upon exposure to stressful conditions like dehydration and heating commonly used in probiotic product preparation. Alternative enumeration methods are available including flow cytometry (FC) which counts total live/dead cells by assessing cellular integrity and/or metabolic activity, and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) in which enumeration is correlated with the quantity of a nucleic acid target. These three methods were compared for enumerating three lactic acid bacteria (LAB): Pediococcus acidilactici, Pediococcus pentosaceus, and Lactobacillus plantarum, and a Bacillus subtilis related strain in twenty samples of a mixed probiotic product ranging in age from one to 825 days post-production. Flow cytometry and qPCR enumerations were similar and much higher compared to plate counts at later storage times, suggesting that some strains in the population were entering the VBNC state and were only countable by FC and qPCR. We propose the use of FC and/or qPCR as an alternative to plate counts for more accurate enumeration of bacteria in probiotic products.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bacterial enumeration; Flow cytometry; Plate counts; Viable but not culturable; qPCR

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30954499     DOI: 10.1016/j.mimet.2019.04.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Microbiol Methods        ISSN: 0167-7012            Impact factor:   2.363


  7 in total

1.  Enumeration of Probiotic Strain Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus GG (ATCC 53103) Using Viability Real-time PCR.

Authors:  Hanan R Shehata; Steven G Newmaster
Journal:  Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins       Date:  2021-09-30       Impact factor: 4.609

Review 2.  Microbiological Testing of Probiotic Preparations.

Authors:  Anna Zawistowska-Rojek; Tomasz Zaręba; Stefan Tyski
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-05-07       Impact factor: 4.614

3.  Riboflavin and Bacillus subtilis effects on growth performance and woody-breast of Ross 708 broilers with or without Eimeria spp. challenge.

Authors:  Sabin Poudel; George T Tabler; Jun Lin; Wei Zhai; Li Zhang
Journal:  J Anim Sci Technol       Date:  2022-05-31

4.  Nutrient germination improves DNA recovery from industrial Bacillus subtilis endospores during qPCR enumeration assays.

Authors:  John P Gorsuch; Peyton Woodruff
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2019-12-05

Review 5.  Bacillus Species as Direct-Fed Microbial Antibiotic Alternatives for Monogastric Production.

Authors:  Shifa A Bahaddad; Meshal H K Almalki; Othman A Alghamdi; Sayed S Sohrab; Muhammad Yasir; Esam I Azhar; Hichem Chouayekh
Journal:  Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins       Date:  2022-01-29       Impact factor: 5.265

6.  Intraamniotic Administration (Gallus gallus) of Genistein Alters Mineral Transport, Intestinal Morphology, and Gut Microbiota.

Authors:  Jacquelyn Cheng; Nikolai Kolba; Philip Sisser; Sondra Turjeman; Carmel Even; Omry Koren; Elad Tako
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2022-08-24       Impact factor: 6.706

7.  Customized antimicrobial efficacy tests offer superior evaluation of growth inhibitor efficacy for liquid microbial products.

Authors:  John P Gorsuch; Zachary Jones
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2020-02-25
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.