| Literature DB >> 31225698 |
Shari Kiekens1,2, Dieter Vandenheuvel1, Géraldine Broeckx2, Ingmar Claes1, Camille Allonsius1, Ilke De Boeck1, Sofie Thys3, Jean-Pierre Timmermans3, Filip Kiekens2, Sarah Lebeer1.
Abstract
The preservation of the viability of microorganisms in probiotic formulations is the most important parameter ensuring the adequate concentration of live microorganisms at the time of administration. The formulation and processing techniques used to produce these probiotic formulations can influence the preservation of the microbial viability. However, it is also required that the bacteria maintain their key probiotic capacities during processing, formulation and shelf life. In this study, we investigated the impact of spray-drying on different cell wall properties of the model probiotic strain Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, including its adherence to intestinal epithelial cells. The dltD gene knock-out mutant, L. rhamnosus GG CMPG5540, displaying modified cell wall lipoteichoic acids, showed significantly increased colony-forming units after spray-drying and subsequent storage under standard conditions compared to wild-type L. rhamnosus GG. In contrast, disruption of the biosynthesis of exopolysaccharides or pili expression did not impact survival. However, spray-drying did significantly affect the adherence capacity of L. rhamnosus GG. Scanning electron microscopy confirmed that the pili, key surface factors for adherence to intestinal cells and mucus, were sheared off during the spray-drying process. These data thus highlight that both the functionality and viability of probiotics should be assessed during the spray-drying process and subsequent storage.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31225698 PMCID: PMC6680608 DOI: 10.1111/1751-7915.13426
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microb Biotechnol ISSN: 1751-7915 Impact factor: 5.813
Figure 1Evaluation of survival and viability of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG after spray‐drying. A. The Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG wild‐type strain (WT) (ATCC53103), the lipoteichoic acid mutant ΔdltD::TcR (∆LTA) (CMPG 5540), the pili‐deficient ΔspaCBA::TcR mutant (represented as —pili in the graph) (CMPG5357) and the exopolysaccharide deficient ΔwelE::TcR mutant [∆EPS (++pili) (CMPG5351)] were routinely grown and spray‐dried (n = 4). The colony‐forming units before and after spray‐drying were compared, and the data are expressed as a logarithmic reduction of the colony‐forming units per gram powder after spray‐drying (∆log). B. The spray‐dried powders were stored at 4°C, and the viability was determined after 1, 4, 13 and 26 weeks (n = 3). After 26 weeks, the viability was below the detection limit (103 CFU g−1). Values are shown as means ± standard error of the mean. ANOVA test and Tukey's multiple comparisons test were used to determine differences in parametric data. GraphPad Prism, version 6.1 (GraphPad Software Inc) performed the analytical test at a significance level α = 0.05 (indicated with asterisks).
Figure 2Adhesion capacity of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG before and after spray‐drying. Adhesion capacity of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG wild‐type strain (WT) (ATCC53103), the pili‐deficient ΔspaCBA::TcR mutant (—pili) (CMPG5357) and the exopolysaccharide deficient ΔwelE::TcR mutant (∆EPS (++ pili) (CMPG5351) to Caco‐2 intestinal epithelial cells was evaluated after spray‐drying. The line on the ‘1’ mark represents the adhesion capacity of L. rhamnosus GG WT before spray‐drying, which was used as a reference. Values are shown as means ± standard error of the mean (two‐way ANOVA, Tukey's multiple comparisons test). GraphPad Prism, version 6.1 (GraphPad Software Inc, La Jolla, Ca, USA) performed the analytical test at a significance level α = 0.05 (indicated with asterisks). The experiment was repeated three times with three biological repetitions.
Figure 3Scanning electron microscopy analysis of cell wall molecules on Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG before and after spray‐drying. SEM pictures showing the surface of the Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG wild‐type strain (WT) (ATCC53103) (A), the lipoteichoic acid mutant ΔdltD::TcR (CMPG5540) (B), the pili‐deficient ΔspaCBA::TcR mutant (CMPG5357) (C) and the EPS‐deficient ΔwelE::TcR mutant (CMPG5351) (D) before (1) and after (2) spray‐drying. The length and the number of pili (marked with an arrow) on each of the bacterium are visualized in the graphs under the SEM pictures.