| Literature DB >> 33732048 |
Anjali Sharma1, Meeta Lavania1, Raghvendar Singh2, Banwari Lal1.
Abstract
In the present study, a total of 80 presumed lactic acid bacteria (LAB) were isolated from camel milk. Selected LAB were identified as Lactococcus lactis (cam 12), Enterococcus lactis (cam 14) and Lactobacillus plantarum (cam 15) and their potential were tested by tolerance & de-conjugation of bile salts, antimicrobial activity, surface hydrophobicity and adhesion potential) along with this of probiotics were evaluated for curd formation and assessed for sensory properties and syneresis. Selected LABs showed antimicrobial activity against wide range of pathogenic bacteria (Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Bacillus cereus and Escherchiaia. coli). LAB (cam 12, cam 14 and cam15) were highly sceptible to chloramphenicol, vancomycin, and tetracyclin. In vitro adhesion studies with Caco-2 cells demonstrated strong adhesion activity with hydrophobicity (99%) was observed. Acute oral toxicity of E. lactis and L. plantarum showed non-toxic, non-virulent and safe for industrial application. The study provides potential LAB which may act as a substitute of functional food, synthetic feed and industrial curd formulation with in the shortest span (240 min at 28-32 °C).Entities:
Keywords: Caco-2 cell line; Camel milk; In vitro studies; Lactic acid bacteria; Probiotics
Year: 2020 PMID: 33732048 PMCID: PMC7938203 DOI: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2020.11.062
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Saudi J Biol Sci ISSN: 2213-7106 Impact factor: 4.219
Showing milk composition (percent) value of different breeds of camel in India.
| Bikaneri | 28.0229° N, 73.3119° E | 6.35 ± 0.002 | 83.97 ± 0.02 | 2.82 ± 0.001 | 6.61 ± 0.002 | 2.16 ± 0.001 | 3.68 ± 0.001 | 0.76 ± 0.0001 |
| Jaislmeri | 26.9157° N, 70.9083° E | 6.35 ± 0.002 | 85.13 ± 0.01 | 2.50 ± 0.001 | 6.18 ± 0.003 | 2.01 ± 0.001 | 3.47 ± 0.001 | 0.71 ± 0.0002 |
| Kachchhi | 23.7337° N, 69.8597° E | 6.39 ± 0.001 | 84.13 ± 0.03 | 2.68 ± 0.001 | 6.60 ± 0.002 | 2.14 ± 0.001 | 3.69 ± 0.001 | 0.76 ± 0.0001 |
| Mewari | 29.9917° N, 78.5931° E | 6.38 ± 0.002 | 84.51 ± 0.02 | 2.72 ± 0.001 | 6.38 ± 0.003 | 2.10 ± 0.001 | 3.56 ± 0.001 | 0.73 ± 0.0003 |
Values are given as mean ± standard deviation (SD) from triplicate experiments.
Fatty acid and mineral profile of camel milk (average value) composition.
| Fatty acid | Butyric acid C3H7COOH | Caproic acid C6H12O2 | Caprylic acid C8H16O2 | Capric acid C10H20O2 | Lauric acid C12H24O2 | Myristic acid C14H28O2 | Myristoleic acid C14H26O2 | Palmitic acid C16H32O2 | Palmitoleic acid C16H30O2 | Stearic acid C18H36O2 | Oleic acid C18H34O2 | Linoleic acid C18H32O2 | Arachidic acid C20H40O2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Value % by weight | 0.31–0.75 | 0.2–0.6 | 0.2–0.3 | 0.2–0.4 | 1–1.8 | 15.9–25.2 | 1.7–4.5 | 25–29.5 | 6.1–19.1 | 1.9–11.7 | 6.8–24.9 | 0.9–0.2 | 0.6–3.4 |
| Mineral profile | Na | K | Ca | P | Mg | Fe | Zn | Cu | α-casein - | β-casein - | κ-casein - | – | – |
| Values | 29.70 ± 0.53 mEq/L | 50.74 ± 0.51 mEq/L | 94.06 ± 0.75 mg% | 41.68 ± 0.55 mg% | 11.82 ± 0.22 mg% | 1.00 ± 0.12 mg/dl | 2.00 ± 0.02 mg/dl | 0.44 ± 0.04 mg/dl | 21% | 65% | 3.47% | – | – |
Values are given as average in percentages (%).
Fig. 1SEM images of selected strains.
Fig. 2Phylogenetic analysis of selected strains.
Fig. 3Acid tolerance of selected strains in different pH.
Fig. 4Bile salt tolerance data of selected strains.
Bile salt hydrolysis activity.
| No precipitated colonies were observed | 7.0 ± 0.001 | No precipitated colonies were observed | |
| 8.25 ± 0.003 | 7.85 ± 0.002 | 7.89 ± 0.002 | |
| 7.21 ± 0.002 | 7.90 ± 0.001 | No precipitated colonies were observed |
Values are given as mean ± standard deviation (SD) from triplicate experiments
Fig. 5Percentage of surface hydrophobicity (H%).
Fig. 6Antibiotic evaluation of potential strains.
Fig. 7Adhesion score of strains (no. of bacterial cells adhere to Caco-2 cell line).
Fig. 8(A) TERI cam 14 Enterococcus lactis cells adhered to CaCo2 cells (B) TERI cam15 Lactobacillus plantarum cells adhered to CaCo2 cells.
Fig. 9Taste attributes presented as a radar chart of Taste evaluation data of formulated probiotic curd (L. lactis, L. plantarum and E. lactis and control sample).