Literature DB >> 34129182

The Ability of Probiotic Lactobacillus Strains in Removal of Benzo[a]pyrene: a Response Surface Methodology Study.

Mojtaba Yousefi1, Nasim Khorshidian2, Hedayat Hosseini3.   

Abstract

In this study, the ability of various lactic acid bacteria was assessed in removing benzo[a]pyrene (BaP) from contaminated phosphate buffer saline (PBS). Response surface methodology (RSM) was performed using Box-Behnken design to investigate the effect of four independent variables including pH (5-7), incubation time (1-24 h), cell density (107-109 cfu/mL), and initial BaP concentration (5-15 mg/kg) at three levels to evaluate in vitro removal of BaP as response. The results showed that all the tested strains were able to remove BaP from PBS and this reduction was entirely strain-specific. Bifidobacterium lactis BB-12 followed by Lactobacillus casei TD10 exhibited the lowest binding ability while the highest binding rate was related to Lactobacillus acidophilus LA-5, Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus PTCC 1737, Lactobacillus casei TD4, and Lactobacillus brevis TD3, respectively. Cyclohexane washing weakened BaP-bacteria complex, while this complex was not significantly changed by PBS washing. The results showed that BaP binding rate was influenced by pH, cell density, time, and BaP concentration in linear and quadratic manners. Moreover, there were interactions between cell density and time as well as between time and BaP concentration. The highest BaP-binding rate by L. acidophilus LA-5 was 10 ppm of BaP concentration, pH = 5, cell density of 109 cfu/mL, and an incubation period of 24 h. It can be concluded that a range of pH, time, and microbial population is required to obtain maximum binding efficiency for BaP based on the concentration of the toxin and the species of the bacteria.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Benzo[a]pyrene; Binding; Detoxification; Lactic acid bacteria; Probiotics; Response surface methodology

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34129182     DOI: 10.1007/s12602-021-09810-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins        ISSN: 1867-1306            Impact factor:   5.265


  26 in total

1.  In vitro binding of mutagenic heterocyclic aromatic amines by Bifidobacterium pseudocatenulatum G4.

Authors:  F Faridnia; A S M Hussin; N Saari; S Mustafa; L Y Yee; M Y A Manap
Journal:  Benef Microbes       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 4.205

Review 2.  Surface binding of toxins and heavy metals by probiotics.

Authors:  Alaleh Zoghi; Kianoush Khosravi-Darani; Sara Sohrabvandi
Journal:  Mini Rev Med Chem       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 3.862

3.  Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) content of edible vegetable oils in Iran: A risk assessment study.

Authors:  Mojtaba Yousefi; Ghazal Shemshadi; Nasim Khorshidian; Vahid Ghasemzadeh-Mohammadi; Yadolah Fakhri; Hedayat Hosseini; Amin Mousavi Khaneghah
Journal:  Food Chem Toxicol       Date:  2018-05-29       Impact factor: 6.023

4.  In vitro models reveal differences in the developmental neurotoxicity of an environmental polycylic aromatic hydrocarbon mixture compared to benzo[a]pyrene: Neuronotypic PC12 Cells and embryonic neural stem cells.

Authors:  Theodore A Slotkin; Samantha Skavicus; Jennifer Card; Richard T Di Giulio; Frederic J Seidler
Journal:  Toxicology       Date:  2016-12-31       Impact factor: 4.221

Review 5.  A review of airborne polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and their human health effects.

Authors:  Ki-Hyun Kim; Shamin Ara Jahan; Ehsanul Kabir; Richard J C Brown
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2013-09-06       Impact factor: 9.621

6.  Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in Haliotis tuberculata (Linnaeus, 1758) (Mollusca, Gastropoda): Considerations on food safety and source investigation.

Authors:  Francesca Conte; Chiara Copat; Sabrina Longo; Gea Oliveri Conti; Alfina Grasso; Giovanni Arena; Angela Dimartino; Maria Violetta Brundo; Margherita Ferrante
Journal:  Food Chem Toxicol       Date:  2016-05-25       Impact factor: 6.023

7.  Screening of Lactobacillus strains for their ability to bind benzo(a)pyrene and the mechanism of the process.

Authors:  Hongfei Zhao; Fang Zhou; Yeqiong Qi; Piotr Dziugan; Fengling Bai; Piotr Walczak; Bolin Zhang
Journal:  Food Chem Toxicol       Date:  2013-06-05       Impact factor: 6.023

Review 8.  Review of PAH contamination in food products and their health hazards.

Authors:  Vasudha Bansal; Ki-Hyun Kim
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2015-07-20       Impact factor: 9.621

Review 9.  Overview on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: occurrence, legislation and innovative determination in foods.

Authors:  Giorgia Purcaro; Sabrina Moret; Lanfranco S Conte
Journal:  Talanta       Date:  2012-11-06       Impact factor: 6.057

Review 10.  Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) removal by sorption: A review.

Authors:  Shanti Lamichhane; K C Bal Krishna; Ranjan Sarukkalige
Journal:  Chemosphere       Date:  2016-01-25       Impact factor: 7.086

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.