Characterization of Nuvita Biosearch Center (NBC) Isolated Lactic Acid Bacteria Strains from Human Origin and Determination of Growth Kinetic Profiles of Selected Cultures by Lab-Scale Bioreactor Fermentation

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4188437/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Characterization of Nuvita Biosearch Center (NBC) Isolated Lactic Acid Bacteria Strains from Human Origin and Determination of Growth Kinetic Profiles of Selected Cultures by Lab-Scale Bioreactor Fermentation

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4188437/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Journal Publication

published 30 Jul, 2024

Read the published version in Annals of Microbiology →

You are reading this latest preprint version

Backgorund

In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in the field of research into the isolation and characterization of probiotics in the prevention of diseases and the need to maintain the continuity of healthy microbiota. Therefore, the aim of this study is to isolate and identify bacteria found in maternal colostrum, breast milk, adult and infant feces, analyze possible probiotic potential, and reveal the developmental kinetics of selected strains.

Results

We isolated 40 bacterial species from 4 different sources and identified 19 bacteria in the form of bacilli through molecular biology and carried out studies with 11 of them. 5 of the selected strains were showed the better results considering bile salt resistance and ability to survive at different pH, antimicrobial effect. When the adhesion capacity in cell culture was compared, Lactobacillus pontis ZZ6780 and Lactobacillus reuteri NBC2680 came into prominence. Furthermore, the growth kinetics of these strains were demonstrated on a 3 L bioreactor scale. Finally, the growth kinetics of selected strains were determined and the maximum specific growth rate of selected Lactobacillus pontis ZZ6780 and Lactobacillus reuteri NBC2680 was calculated as 0.412 h^-1 and 0.481 h^-1, respectively. In addition, the dry cell matter amounts were found to be and 4.45 g/L and 5.23 g/L, respectively.

Conclusion

This study established the groundwork for the selection of safety probiotics for the development and application of LAB. It is thought that the two strains obtained as a result of this study can be considered as potential probiotic strains in the food, pharmaceutical and cosmetic industries.

Probiotics

Growth kinetic

Lactic acid bacteria

Isolation

Human origin

NBC

The human microbiota consists of a population of beneficial and harmful bacteria. Probiotics are live microorganisms that are beneficial for human health (Anadón et al. 2021). Probiotic microorganisms most frequently colonize in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract (Nithya et al. 2023). Probiotic bacteria, which maintain the balance in the microbiota, are located in epithelial cells, supporting the development of these cells and regulating the functions of these cells (Toupal and Cosansu 2023).

Lactobacillus is the most common lactic acid bacteria that is gram positive, facultative anaerobic or microaerophilic, rod-shaped and nonsporing (Makaravo et al. 2006). Lactobacillus bacteria have been proven to have many positive effects on health. These effects include protection against intestinal and infections (Karami et al. 2017), regulation of the indigenous microbial population, reduction of lactose intolerance, immunotherapeutic effect (Harahap et al. 2023), increasing the nutritional value of foods, lowering the serum cholesterol level (Nami et al. 2019) and strengthening the immune system. The effectiveness of probiotics is proven through tests such as sensitivity to antibiotics, resistance to bile salts and low pH, thus ensuring consumer safety. Probiotic bacteria are considered safe food (GRAS) due to their bioactive molecules (Srinivash et al. 2023).

Lactic acid bacteria isolated from breast milk have been attractive for their probiotic potential, human origin, and the ability to reside in the intestine (Fernández et al. 2013). Breast milk has been shaped by millions of years of evolution that has resulted in a perfect multifunctional fluid. Actually, beyond the supply of nutrients and vitamins, breast milk provides bioactive factors, including immunoglobulins, cytokines, antimicrobial proteins, hormones, and oligosaccharides, which work in concert to fortify mucosal immunity, shape the gut microbiota, stimulate body growth and it is considered the best source of nutrition for infants (Hennet and Borsig 2016; Verhasselt et al. 2008). Breast milk has long been thought to be aseptic, and the presence of bacteria was assumed to be a result of contamination. Breast milk obtained from healthy women contains approximately 10³-10⁴ colony forming units / mililitre (cfu/ml) bacterial flora and is a source of microbiota for infants (Murphy et al. 2017). Breast milk is an important factor in the initiation, development, and composition of the neonatal gut microbiota (Gaudana et al. 2010). Commonly isolated facultatif anaerob bacteria from breast milk belong to the genera Staphylococcus, Streptococcus, Enterococcus, Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium (Martin et al. 2012; Reis et al. 2016).

Probiotic bacteria must adhere to the mucus layer and epithelial cells covering the intestinal lumen in order to prevent them from sliding out of the small intestine with peristaltic movements (Fernández et al. 2003). Adhesion to the intestinal epithelium is a crucial step for a probiotic bacteria to benefit the host. The ability of probiotic bacteria to adhere to intestinal mucosa is very significant in establishing temporary colonization of probiotics by maintaining the balance of the intestinal microflora. The high adhesion capacity of probiotic bacteria increases their residence time in the intestine. According to literature, Lactobacillus type probiotic strains adhere to the intestinal epithelium and function as a microbial barrier against pathogenic bacteria (Coconnier et al. 1997; Hudault et al. 1997; Servin 2004). Due to the difficulties that may be encountered during in vivo bacterial adhesion studies in human, an in vitro model system for bacterial adhesion to human intestinal cells has been developed (Ouwehand et al. 2002). Caco-2, HT29 are frequently used as epithelial colon cells and HT29-MTX cells are usually used as mucus-secreting cells in vitro studies (Archer et al. 2018; Gagnon et al. 2013).

Recently, understanding of the importance of probiotics has increased interest in large-scale fermentation studies of lactic acid bacteria (Chang and Liew 2012). In this regard, microbial growth kinetics studies are an crucial opportunity for advances in biotechnology. Growth kinetic are very useful in the design and control of biotechnological processes because they provide a high degree of information about the growth behavior of microorganisms (Khalfallah et al. 2023). The growth of lactic acid bacteria has a complex structure and many components such as carbon source, nitrogen source, vitamins, inorganic salts and various nutrients are required in the growth medium. Thus, the production of viable cells, biomass and metabolites of lactic acid strains are notably affected by the cultivation conditions and medium components (Brinques et al. 2010). In order to be produced on an industrial scale and used effectively for subsequent processes; It is very important to reveal the specific growth rate (µmax), doubling time (g), number of generations and productivity values (Ucok and Sert 2020).

The aim of present study is to characterize the probiotic properties of lactic acid bacteria isolated from breast milk, maternal colostrum, adult and infant feces, and to reveal the growth characteristics of selected cultures for industrial production.

Sample Collection

In order to provide isolation from microbial flora, four different sources were studied: maternal colostrum, breast milk, adult and infant feces. Maternal colostrum was collected 10 days after birth, breast milk and infant feces were collected within 6 months after birth, adult feces from a 28 year old female individual. The study protocol was approved by the Ümraniye Training and Research Hospital Clinical Research Ethics Committee (B.10.1.TKH.4.34.H.GP.0.01/110). All samples was collected as independent each other. Milk samples were collected manually in sterile tubes after disinfecting the teats and the surrounding area, but the first few drops were discarded. In addition, feces samples were collected with sterile swabs. The samples were kept at 4°C until delivery to the Microbiology Laboratory of the Nuvita Biosearch Center (NBC) (Alyors Inc.) and immediately processed.

Isolation of LAB

For the isolation and identification of lactic acid bacteria, 1 gram of sample was taken from the isolation sources and transferred to 9 ml of 0.9% NaCl solutions and homogenized for 2 minutes. Six-fold dilutions of the samples were made with NaCl solution and 0.1 ml of sample for each dilution was planted on MRS-Cys agar plates. Agar plates were incubated at 37°C under anaerobic conditions for 48 hours (Dunne et al. 2003). Colonies with different morphologies were purified and tested for catalase reaction, gram staining and microscopic examination. Then, 40 isolates were selected for further studies and stored in 30% glycerol stocks at − 80°C.

Preliminary Characterization of LAB Isolates

Lactobacillus isolation was performed according to gram staining, catalase test, bacillus shape and non-spore-forming morphological and biochemical characteristics. Bacterial colonies that had gram-positive and catalase-negative characteristics and were rod-shaped on microscopic examination were accepted as lactobacilli (Adugna and Andualem 2023).

Catalase Test

For the catalase test, 3% hydrogen peroxide was used to select catalase-negative isolates. In the catalase test, bacteria taken from solid agar with the help of a loop tip were mixed with hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂) on the slide, and it was observed that gas was released in those with catalase positive (+) and there was no gas in those with catalase negative (-) (Khalil et al. 2018).

Genotypic Identification of Lactic Acid Bacteria Isolates

Genomic DNA Isolation

Stock bacterial isolate kept at -80°C were activated in deMan, Rogosa, and Sharpe (MRS) broth (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) with cysteine (add 0.05% cysteine-hydrochloride). DNA isolation was performed with the Thermo Scientific GeneJet Genomic DNA Purification Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific, US). Determination of the amount of DNA obtained after isolation was made using a NanoPhotometer (Implen, Germany). The obtained DNA isolate was stored at -20°C until the next step.

Identification of Isolates by RAPD PCR Gene Sequence

As excluding duplicates, was applied to a total of 19 bacteria. were grouped by random amplification of polymorphic DNA (RAPD) with primer M13 (5c-GAGGGTGGCGGTTCT-3c), as reported by Rossetti and Giraffa (2005). For this purpose, sterile water, primer (M13), master mix and DNA template were added to 100 µl PCR tubes, with a total final volume of 50 µl, and all components were mixed thoroughly with a micropipette. DNA fragments were amplified in a Bio-Rad Thermal Cycler (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA) under the following conditions: Initial denaturation occurred at 94°C for 3 min, followed by 30 cycles of denaturation at 95°C for 30 s, annealing for 30 s, extension at 72°C for 1 min and a 10 min final extension step at 72°C. The products resulting from the PCR reaction were loaded onto a 1% agarose gel stained with ethidium bromide and DNA separation was performed at 90 V for 1 hour. The gel obtained as a result of electrophoresis was subjected to imaging on the Bio-Rad Gel Doc EZ Imager (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA) (Dertli et al. 2016).

Identification of Isolates by 16S PCR Gene Sequence

16S rRNA analysis was applied to 11 bacteria distinguished by RAPD-PCR analysis. The PCR mixture prepared for 16S rRNA analysis; A PCR mixture targeting 1,500 bp was prepared with 1-µl DNA of the relevant bacterium, 25 µl Q5 High-Fidelity 2X Master Mix (New England Biolabs), 20 mmol AMP_F (5'GAGAGTTTGATYCTGGCTCAG − 3') and AMP_R (3'AAGGAGGTGATCCARCCGCA − 5'). This mixture was completed with 50 µl of sterile pure water. Program used for 16S rRNA PCR analysis: 2 min at 98°C, 30 s at 98°C, 20 s at 57°C. and in the last stage, 5 minutes at 72°C. This process was carried out for 25 cycles. The products resulting from the PCR reaction were loaded onto a 1% agarose gel and DNA separation was performed at 90 V for 40 minutes. The gel obtained as a result of electrophoresis was subjected to imaging in the Bio-Rad Gel Doc EZ Imager. Reaction products were prepared as described above, and PCR products were sequenced and identified by Medsantek (Istanbul, Türkiye). Sequences obtained based on the 99%-100% similarity criterion were identified using the BLAST algorithm. Sequences representing the best matches were retrieved and aligned using the clustal method (Kumar et al. 2018; Serrano-Niño et al. 2016; Tamura et al. 2021). The 16S rRNA sequences of lactic acid bacteria strain NBC2680 and ZZ6780 of human origin identified in this study have been recorded in NCBI GenBank under the number OR999593-PP059538, respectively.

Probiotic Potential Characterization of Bacterial Isolates

Some of the criteria that can be used to select potential probiotic strains; biosafety, selection of strain resource, resistance to low pH and bile salt in in vitro conditions, adhesion to intestinal epithelium and colonization, antimicrobial activity, stimulation of immune response, survival in industrial processes and shelf life.

Tolerance to low pH

To determine the tolerance to low pH, the potential probiotic bacterial strains were grown in appropriate MRS or MRS-Cys medium with 1% inoculation for 24 hours. Each bacterial suspension was adjusted to a concentration of 10⁶ cfu/ml. The bacteria were incubated in MRS or MRS-Cys broth adjusted to pH 2.0 and pH 3.0 with 1 M HCl, and control broth for 6 hours. After 0, 3, and 6 hours of incubation, serial dilutions were prepared for bacterial viability and planted on MRS or MRS-Cys agar medium. The analyzes were performed in duplicate.

Resistance of Bile Salts

To determine the resistance of bile salts, the potential bacteria were grown in appropriate MRS or MRS-Cys medium with 1% inoculation for 24 hours. Each bacterial suspension was adjusted to a concentration of 10⁶ cfu/ml. The bacteria were incubated in MRS or MRS-Cys medium supplemented with bile salt (Bovine bile, Sigma-Aldrich) at concentrations of 0.3% and 2% (v/v), and control broth for 6 hours. After 0, 3, and 6 hours of incubation, serial dilutions were prepared for bacterial viability and planted on MRS or MRS-Cys agar medium. The experiment was studied in duplicate.

Haemolytic Activity

The bacterial isolates were inoculated on agar containing 5% sheep blood and the petri dishes were incubated at 37°C for 24–48 hours. At the end of incubation, zone formation in the petri dishes was observed. Streptococcus aureus strain was used as a positive control. The formation of a green appearance around the colony indicates alpha hemolytic activity, the formation of a clear zone indicates beta hemolytic activity, and the absence of a zone indicates gamma hemolytic activity. This test was performed in duplicate (Maragkoudakis et al. 2009).

Antibiotic Susceptibility

The susceptibility of potential probiotic strains to Vancomycin (VA, 30 µg) and Ofloxacin (OFX, 5 µg), Clindamycin (C, 2 µg), Erythromycin (E, 15 µg), Trimethoprim-sulphamethoxazole (TMP-SMX, 1.25 µg/23.75 µg), Levofloxacin (LEV, 5 µg), Streptomycin (S, 10 µg), Gentamycin (CN, 10 µg) was determined with antibiotic disks. The bacterial strains were inoculated at 1% into MRS or MRS-Cys broth and incubated at 37°C for 24 hours. The bacteria were planted on agar petri dishes using the spread plate technique. The antibiotic discs were placed in the middle of the petri dish and were incubated for 24–48 hours at 37°C. The resulting zone diameters were measured and the results were evaluated according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) parameters. The analysis was duplicated.

Antimicrobial Activitiy

Antimicrobial activity of probiotic isolates was determined using the agar well diffusion method. The probiotic isolates were incubated in appropriate broth for 24 hours at 37°C. Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, Salmonella enterica, Listeria monocytogenese pathogenic bacteria were inoculated in Brain Heart Infusion broth (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany). These selected pathogenic bacteria are common microorganisms that harm human health. The density of probiotic and pathogenic bacteria was adjusted according to the McFarland (0.5%) standard. 100 µl of each pathogen to be tested was spread on the BHI agar surface. A corkbor was used to puncture the agar surface. The probiotic bacterial strains in the broth medium were centrifuged at 10,000 rpm for 10 minutes and the cell-free supernatant (CFS) was collected and its pH was neutralized. 100 µl of CFS was added to the wells on the agar and the petri dishes were incubated at 37°C for 16 hours. The clean zone diameters formed around the wells by probiotic bacterial isolates against pathogens were measured in millimeters (mm). The experiment was duplicated (Tsega et al. 2023).

Cell Culture

Culturing of Caco-2 and HT29-MTX Cells

The mucus-secreting cell line HT29-MTX was purchased from European Collection of Authenticated Cell Cultures (ECACC) and the human colonic cell line Caco-2 was obtained from The American Type Culture Collection (ATCC). The Caco-2 cells were routinely grown in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s minimal essential medium (DMEM) with 4.5 g/L glucose (PAN-Biotech, Germany), supplemented with 10% (v/v) fetal bovine serum (FBS) inactivated for one hour at 56°C (PAN-Biotech, Germany), with 1% (v/v) non-essential amino acids (PAN-Biotech, Germany), and 1% (v/v) penicillin-streptomycin (PAN-Biotech, Germany). The culture medium was changed 1 to 2 times per week. The HT29-MTX cells were grown in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s minimal essential medium (DMEM) with 4.5 g/L glucose (PAN-Biotech, Germany), supplemented with 10% (v/v) fetal bovine serum (FBS) inactivated for one hour at 56°C (PAN-Biotech, Germany), with 1% (v/v) ) L-Glutamine 2 mM (PAN-Biotech, Germany), 1% (v/v) non-essential amino acids (PAN-Biotech, Germany), and 1% (v/v) penicillin-streptomycin (PAN-Biotech, Germany). The culture medium was changed 2 to 3 times per week. All experiments were carried out at 37°C and cells were maintained in a 5% CO2:95% air atmosphere. Fully differentiated cells were obtained 21 days and used in the adhesion assays. At least 24 h before the tests, Caco-2 and HT29-MTX cells inthe DMEM medium without serum and antibiotic (DMEM w/o) were seeded in 12-well culture plates at a concentration of 2×10⁵ and 3×10⁵ cells per well, respectively.

Bacterial Adhesion Assay

The adhesion ability of selected probiotic microorganisms to Caco-2 and HT29-MTX cells was appraised by plate counting method. The bacterial strains were activated in MRS broth under appropriate conditions 24 h before the assays. The Lactobacillus cells were recovered by centrifugation at 8000 g for 5 min, washed twice with sterile 0.85% Sodium chloride (NaCI) solution and suspended at a concentration of 1×10⁸ cfu/ml in DMEM w/o medium. Initial viable bacteria were counted by plating on MRS agar. The bacterial suspension was added to each well of the cell lines and incubated in a 5% CO₂:95% air atmosphere at 37°C for 3 h. After incubation, the Caco-2 and HT29-MTX monolayers were gently washed five times with PBS (pH 7.4) to remove unattached bacteria. The cells with adherent bacteria were treated with 0.05% trypsin-EDTA (PAN-Biotech, Germany) for 3 min at 37°C followed by addition of culture medium containing FBS to stop the trypsin reaction. The supernatants containing adherent bacterias were collected and determined by plating serial dilutions on MRS agar. The enumeration was done after 48 h incubation at 37°C in a suitable atmosphere. The results of the adhesion assays were expressed as the ratio of adherent bacteria to the total number of bacteria added to each well. The experiments were performed in duplicate.

Growth Kinetics of Selected Lactobacilli Cultures

Strain and inoculum preparation

Lactobacillus strains were stored in 15% glycerol at -80°C. Frozen cells were precultured in MRS broth for 37°C and 200 rpm for 16 h before inoculation in the bioreactor.

Fermentation Process and Calculation of Kinetic Parameters

NBC broth media was used as culture medium for Lactobacillus strains in the bioreactors (Minifors 2, Infors HT, Switzerland). The composition of NBC media is 96.06 g/L glucose, 40.76 g/L yeast extract, 19.43 g/L inorganic salts, and 11.01 ml/L Tween 80 (Kavak et al. 2022). Batch cultivations were carried out with 1.5 L total volume at 37 ⁰C and during 18 h, in two parallels. pH was adjusted to pH 5.8 by the automatic addition of 3 N NaOH. Stirrer speed was 150 rpm and after sterilization, oxygen was removed by sparging N₂ for 30 minutes. The inoculum ratio was 1:20 (v/v) of the initial volume.

To determine the kinetic parameters, the specific growth rate µ value is calculated mathematically with the following expression below:

$$\frac{\text{d}\text{X}}{\text{d}\text{t}}= {\mu }· \text{X} \text{X}\text{t} = \text{X}0 ·{e}^{\mu ·t} {\mu } =\frac{\left(\text{l}\text{n}\text{X}1 – \text{l}\text{n}\text{X}0\right)}{\text{t}} \text{E}\text{q}. \left(1\right)$$

where X (cells per mL) is the microbial population at time t (hours); X₀ (cells per mL) is the initial microbial population; µ is the specific growth rate, defined as the tangent in the inflection point (per hour). The value of td (is also referred to as the doubling time) which indicates the generation time is expressed as follows:

$X1 = 2X0$ $\mu = ln 2 / td$ $td = 0.693 / \mu$ Eq. (2)

where n, which is the number of generations, was obtained by dividing the period of logarithmic growing time to the doubling time is expressed as follows:

$$n = t / td n = \varDelta t / td \text{E}\text{q}. \left(3\right)$$

Productivity (φ) is obtained as the biomass production per unit time per unit culture volume is expressed as follows:

$\phi biomass =\frac{\left( Wbm1 – Wbm0 \right)}{\left(t1 – t0\right)}$ Eq. (4)

where W, is the weight of biomass calculated from absorbance values at 600 nm in the Optical Density (OD) graph. OD600 measurements were performed on a UV-VIS spectrophotometer (Shimadzu UV-1900, Japan).

Dry cell weight is the weight of biomass calculated from the wet matter value in 1 grams of sample in the moisture analyzer (Ohaus MB120, Switzerland).

$\text{D}\text{r}\text{y} \text{c}\text{e}\text{l}\text{l} \text{w}\text{e}\text{i}\text{g}\text{h}\text{t} \left(\frac{\text{g}}{\text{L}}\right)= \text{W}\text{e}\text{t} \text{w}\text{e}\text{i}\text{g}\text{h}\text{t}\left(\frac{\text{g}}{\text{L}}\right) ·\text{D}\text{r}\text{y} \text{w}\text{e}\text{i}\text{g}\text{h}\text{t} \left(\text{%}\right)$ Eq. (5)

Data Analysis

The data were analyzed statistically using the SPSS Statistics software package (version 29.0, IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). The quantitative data were analyzed using One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with the Duncan multiple range tests (p < 0.05). The total bacteria cell counts (cfu/ml) was converted to a logarithmic value before statistical analysis.

Preliminary Characterization of LAB Isolates

A total of 40 bacteria were isolated from four different sources of human origin, and 32 bacterial colonies were identified as gram positive and catalase negative from these isolates. It was determined that 19 of the 32 isolates obtained were in the form of bacilli and 13 had cocci morphology.

Genotypic Identification of Lactic Acid Bacteria Isolates

As a result of RAPD PCR, 7 of 19 bacteria obtained from four different sources of human origin were determined to be similar. Phylogenetic analysis of the 11 strains obtained based on the 16S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) gene sequence was performed and bacterial names were identified from the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) BLAST system. Molecular identification of bacteria isolated from human sources using 16S rRNA gene sequencing is shown in Table 1.

According to the genotypic identification and 16S rRNA sequencing results of bacteria obtained from human origin sources; 3 Lactobacillus rhamnosus, 1 Limosilactobacillus fermentum, 1 Lactobacillus mucosae, 1 Lentilactobacillus parabuchneri, 1 Lactobacillus reuteri, 1 Lacticaseibacillus paracasei, 1 Lactiplantibacillus plantarum, 1 Lactobacillus oris, 1 Lactobacillus pontis strains were identified.

The 16S rRNA genes of different lactic acid bacteria isolated from human sources were aligned using the MEGA11 program, and the phylogenetic relationship of these strains was determined by creating different subgroups.

Multiple sequence alignment analysis showed that the 16S rRNA sequences of Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus strains isolated from three different sources are close, and similarly, the sequences of Lactobacillus mucosae and Lentilactobacillus parabuchneri strains isolated from two different sources showed closeness. Although Limosilactobacillus fermentum and Lactobacillus mucosae strains were isolated from two different sources, their sequences were related. The similarities of Lactobacillus oris strains isolated from infant feces and Lactobacillus pontis strains isolated from adult feces are shown on the phylogenetic tree based on 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis (Fig. 1).

Table 1

Molecular identification of isolates using 16S rRNA gene sequencing
Strain Code	Source	Genetic Identification	Accession Number	Percent
NUV 7	Breast Milk	Lactobacillus rhamnosus strain Qpuy3.3	JQ446560.1	100.0%
NUV 13	Maternal Colostrum	Limosilactobacillus fermentum strain LB7.3- LO2B-1015	OR405221.1	100.0%
NUV 17	Maternal Colostrum	Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus strain PRS2	MN559363.1	99.77%
NUV 81	Infant feces	Lactobacillus mucosae strain 2885	MT611847.1	100.0%
SA 74	Adult feces	Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus strain 2319	MT604778.1	97.53%
NUV 135	Adult feces	Lentilactobacillus parabuchneri strain RKG 1-509A	MT045984.1	100.0%
NBC 2680	Infant feces	Limosilactobacillus reuteri strain 1509	MT597457.1	99.31%
NUV 160	Infant feces	Lacticaseibacillus paracasei strain V3183	OR758766.1	99.54%
NUV 180	Infant feces	Lactiplantibacillus plantarum strain beLP1	CP137847.1	99.77%
NUV 185	Infant feces	Lactobacillus oris strain 8192	MT538938.1	100.0%
ZZ6780	Adult feces	Lactobacillus pontis strain GE7-1	KF030752.1	100.0%

Probiotic Potential Characterization of Bacterial Isolates

Tolerance to Low pH

Probiotic strains must survive under gastrointestinal stress factors to maintain their biological activity within the host (Mbye et al. 2020). The viability analysis results of 11 selected Lactobacillus isolates under pH 2.0 and pH 3.0 acidic conditions are shown in Fig. 2. The viability of bacteria treated under pH 2.0 acidic conditions decreased compared to the control group. At the 6th hour of incubation at pH 2.0, 5 probiotic bacteria strains showed viability. It was determined that NUV81, one of the probiotic bacteria whose viability was examined under pH 3.0 acidic conditions, decreased compared to the control group at the 3rd hour and did not show viability at the 6th hour. Among the probiotic bacteria whose viability was examined in pH 3.0 acidic environment, an increase in the viability of NUV160, NUV185, SA74 and ZZ6780 strains was observed, while a decrease was observed in other strains.

Resistance of bile salts

It has been reported that high bile tolerance benefits probiotic strain colonization in the host gastrointestinal tract (Luo et al. 2012). In this regard, it is important to evaluate the ability of potential probiotics to survive in the presence of bile salt. In the present work, two different bile concentrations were evaluated (0.3%-2% w/v). The results determined by the plate count method are given in Table 2. When the results were examined, it was seen that the strains maintained their viability in the medium containing bile salt. In general, an increase in the viability of all strains except NUV81 was observed at both concentrations at the 6th hour of incubation. It was determined that NBC2680, NUV135, SA74 and ZZ6780 strains showed the highest resistance to bile salt at both concentrations.

Table 2

Selected *Lactobacillus* strains viability after 0, 3 and 6 h incubation in 0.3% or 2% bile salts.
Strain Code	0.3% Bile Salts		2% Bile Salts
	3 h	6 h	3 h	6 h
NUV7	7.26 ± 0.070^f	7.60 ± 0^de	7.40 ± 0.056^ef	7.50 ± 0.035^d
NUV13	7.86 ± 0.021^c	7.91 ± 0.070^c	7.85 ± 0.014^cd	7.83 ± 0.049^c
NUV17	7.56 ± 0.021^de	7.73 ± 0.021^cd	7.54 ± 0.049^e	7.68 ± 0.106^cd
NUV81	7.52 ± 0.035^e	7.22 ± 0.022^f	7.56 ± 0.035^e	7.07 ± 0.042^e
SA74	8.01 ± 0.0014^bc	8.71 ± 0.028^b	8.06 ± 0.042^c	8.19 ± 0.084^b
NUV135	8.07 ± 0.028^b	8.56 ± 0.028^b	8.18 ± 0.063^ab	8.12 ± 0.028^b
NBC2680	7.85 ± 0.042^c	8.62 ± 0.04^b	7.81 ± 0.035^d	8.11 ± 0.028^b
NUV160	7.70 ± 0.021^d	7.92 ± 0.035^c	7.50 ± 0.113^e	7.62 ± 0.035^cd
NUV180	7.49 ± 0^e	7.56 ± 0.091^e	7.84 ± 0.014^cd	7.92 ± 0.035^c
NUV185	7.30 ± 0.049^f	7.52 ± 0.028^e	7.22 ± 0.028^f	7.80 ± 0.084^c
ZZ6780	8.70 ± 0.042^a	8.92 ± 0.035^a	8.37 ± 0.049^a	8.45 ± 0.056^a

The values are expressed as mean ± standart deviation (SD). ^a–f Values with different letters are significantly different according to Duncan multiple range tests (p < 0.05).

Hemolytic Activity

Hemolytic activity is an important criterion in evaluating potential probiotics in terms of safety. The reason is that hemolytic activity indicates the potential virulence of pathogenic bacteria (Gebre et al. 2023). As a result of the analysis, potential probiotic strains did not form zones and showed gamma hemolytic activity.

Antibiotic Susceptibility

One of the most important safety considerations for a potential probiotic strains that it does not contain transferable antibiotic resistance genes to the pathogenic microorganisms which may bring about danger. It was observed that all strains were resistant to vancomycin, oflaxin and TMP-SMX, and only the NUV160 strain was determined to have intermediate sensitivity to the TMP-SMX antibiotic. All strains except NUV180 strain were found to be sensitive to clindamycin. While all strains showed sensitivity to erythromycin, strain NBC2680 was observed to have the intermadiate sensitive gene. In general, there is a group of antibiotics to which all strains are sensitive and resistant. The results are show in Table 3.

Table 3

Antibiotics susceptibility test results of the selected *Lactobacillus* strains for various antibiotics.
Strain Code	VA	OFX	C	E	TMP-SMX	LEV	S	CN
NUV7	R	R	S	S	R	I	R	R
NUV13	R	R	S	S	R	R	R	R
NUV17	R	R	I	S	R	I	I	R
NUV81	R	R	S	S	R	R	R	R
SA74	R	R	I	S	R	I	I	R
NUV135	R	R	S	S	R	R	R	R
NBC2680	R	R	S	I	R	R	S	I
NUV160	R	R	S	S	I	I	R	R
NUV180	R	R	R	S	R	R	R	R
NUV185	R	R	S	S	R	R	R	R
ZZ6780	R	R	S	S	R	R	R	R
VA: Vancomycin, OFX: Ofloxacin, C: Clindamycin, E: Erythromycin, TMP-SMX: Trimethoprim- sulphamethoxazole, LEV: Levofloxacin, S: Streptomycin, CN: Gentamycin, (Susceptible: ≥ 20 mm, Intermediate: 15–19 mm, Resistant: ≤ 14 mm (CLSI, 2020))

Antimicrobial Activity

The ability to inhibit pathogenic microorganisms growth is one of the mechanisms by which probiotic bacteria perform to protect the host. The analysis results of the antimicrobial effects of potential probiotic isolates against the pathogens E. coli, S. aureus, S. enterica and L. monocytogenes are given in Table 4.

Table 4

Antimicrobial activity profile of strains against various pathogens
Strain Code	Escherichia coli	Listeria monocytogenes	Salmonella enterica	Staphylococcus aureus
NUV7	±	+++	+	±
NUV13	±	-	±	-
NUV17	-	+++	-	+
NUV81	-	-	++	++
SA74	±	++	-	-
NUV135	±	-	++	+++
NBC2680	±	++	+	-
NUV160	-	-	+++	+
NUV180	±	-	+++	-
NUV185	-	++	++	±
ZZ6780	-	±	-	++

Zone of inhibition < 0 mm (−), 0–4 mm (±), 4–8 mm (+), 8–12 mm (++) and > 12 mm (+++).

The NUV7 strain showed inhibitory effects on all four different pathogens studied. In general, probiotic strains showed the most inhibition against the S. enterica pathogen. It was determined that the pathogen with the lowest inhibition zone diameter was E. coli. NUV135 strain formed the highest zone diameters against the S. aureus pathogen, NUV160 and NUV180 strains against the S. enterica pathogen, and NUV7 and NUV17 strains against the L. monocytogenes pathogen.

Cell Culture

The adhesion ability to Caco-2 and HT29-MTX cells was evaluated for the 11 selected LAB and the results are presented in Fig. 1. The seven isolates showed a very low percentage of adhesion ability. However ZZ6780, NBC2680 and NUV81 showed higher percentages (12.04%, 10.67% and 10.63% of adhesion, respectively) of adhesion to Caco-2 cells compared to the positive control L. rhamnosus GG (10.04%). Similar results were obtained for the adhesion to HT29-MTX cells. While the percentage of adhesion to HT29-MTX cells of the control strain L.rhamnosus GG was 9.24%, the adhesion percentages of ZZ6780, NBC2680 and NUV81 strains were determined 10.03%, 9.70% and 9.61%, SA74 and NUV180 were characterized by its moderate adhesion capacity to Caco-2 and HT29-MTX cells compared to LGG control strain (8.51% and 8.74%, 7.22% and 5.48% of adhesion, respectively). It was observed that the adhesion percentage of five strains showing low capacity adhesion to HT29-MTX cells was higher than the adhesion percentage to Caco-2 cells.

Table 5

Percentage values of Caco-2 and HT-29 MTX cell lines adhesion
Strain Code	Adhesion to Caco-2	Adhesion to HT29-MTX
NUV7	0.95 ± 0.07^ef	1.90 ± 0.07^def
NUV13	0.42 ± 0.03^g	0.62 ± 0.03^g
NUV17	2.35 ± 0.07^d	2.80 ± 0.28^d
NUV81	10.63 ± 0.04^b	9.61 ± 0.11^ab
SA74	8.51 ± 0.35^c	8.74 ± 0.28^b
NUV135	2.60 ± 0.10^d	2.55 ± 0.41^de
NBC2680	10.67 ± 0.02^b	9.70 ± 0.21^ab
NUV160	1.83 ± 0.23^de	0.73 ± 0.09^fg
NUV180	7.22 ± 0.85^c	5.48 ± 0.42^c
NUV185	0.98 ± 0.02^ef	1.27 ± 0.25^efg
ZZ6780	12.04 ± 0.45^a	10.03 ± 0.54^a
LGG	10.04 ± 0.03^b	9.24 ± 0.24^ab
The adhesion capacity of selected probiotic strains to Caco-2 and HT29-MTX cells expressed as the percentage of adherent bacteria (cfu/ml) in relation to added bacteria. LGG (L. rhamnosus GG) was used as a reference strain. Each adhesion assay was conducted duplicate (±, Standard Deviation). ^a–g Values with different letters in a column of the same cell model are significantly different according to Duncan multiple range tests (p < 0.05).

Growth Kinetics of Selected Culture

Following the characterization of lactobacilli for their technological properties, NBC2680 and ZZ6780 were further selected for determination of their growth kinetics properties. Both strains were tested for their growth kinetics under laboratory-scale on 3 L bioreactor fermentation conditions and µmax (specific growth ratemax), t_d (doubling time), n (number of generations), φ and φmax (productivity) were determined. The growth kinetic parameters and biomass value are show in Table 6.

Table 6

Growth kinetic parameters and biomass value

Strain Code	µmax		t_d n φ		φmax Wet weight Dry cell weight
NBC2680	0.481		1.21 6.4 0.572		1.02 17.58 5.23
ZZ6780		0.412 1.12 5.5		0.498 0.764 15.96 4.45

Growth, OD600 and amount of dry weight per 1 g/L curves of NBC2680 and ZZ6780 versus time are given in Fig. 3. Mainly, L. reuteri ve L. pontis growth was characterized by a delay phase of about 3–4 hours, a steep exponential phase for 12 hours, followed by a fixed phase for 2 hours. The maximum increase in the count of bacteria was found as 3.1 log₁₀ cfu/ml when NBC2680 had reached the stationary phase. Also, the maximum increase in the count of bacteria was found as 2.25 log₁₀ cfu/ml when the ZZ6780 had reached the stationary phase.

The identification of lactic acid bacteria with probiotic properties based on physiological and biochemical properties, their identification on the basis of species and genus using international specific primers has been widely published in the literature. Since the 16S rRNA gene is highly conserved among different bacteria and archaea, phylogenetic studies have been handled in this context. Genomic DNA was isolated by the method described by Dertli et al. (2016). The amplified PCR product was purified and sequenced to identify the isolated bacteria.

Isolation and identification of strains human origin revealed the presence of L. mucosae, L. reuteri, L. paracasei, L. plantarum, L. oris, L. rhamnosus, L. parabuchneri, L. pontis, L. fermentum strain. When the studies in isolation from breast milk were examined, it was determined that the L. rhamnosus strain was generally included in each study (Damaceno et al. 2021; Kang et al. 2020; Li et al. 2017).

L. reuteri, L. paracasei and L. plantarum bacteria obtained by isolation of baby feces Zhang et al. 2018; Ahrné et al. 2005, while it was similar to the study results in the articles by Khalil et al. 2007, it was determined that there was no article stating that L. oris and L. mucosae bacteria were found in baby feces. As a result of the isolation studies, it was concluded that L. paracasei bacteria was commonly found in baby feces. The presence of L. fermentum and L. rhamnosus bacteria in the maternal colostrum in our study was similar to the study of Liu et al. (2020), and both studies determined the presence of the L. rhamnosus strain.

L. parabuchneri bacteria isolated from adult feces was similar to our study because it was also found in the results of previous studies (Dal Bello et al. 2003). When the isolation results were examined, it was concluded that L. parabuchneri bacteria was not found very frequently in adult feces. The results of the L. rhamnosus strain isolated from adult feces was supported by the studies of Kang et al (2017). While L. pontis bacteria was not isolated from human feces, it was determined to be present in the isolation study from vaginal flora (Shazadi et al. 2020; Mehta et al. 2020).

It was determined that the lactic acid bacterium common in isolations from adult feces, breast milk and maternal colostrum was L. rhamnosus. While L. rhamnosus obtained from breast milk and maternal colostrum was found on the same branching with its similarities, L. rhamnosus isolated from adult feces was located on different branching. The similarity of L. oris and L. paracasei bacteria isolated from baby feces was revealed as a result of phylogenetic branching. It was determined that L. mucosae and L. parabuchneri bacteria isolated from different sources were located in the same branch.

The characterization as probiotics is determined by their ability to survive in the low pH of the stomach and the high concentration of bile salt in the gastrointestinal tract (Kobierecka et al. 2017). The pH in human stomach ranges from 1 during fasting, to 4.5 after a meal (Wang et al. 2009). Since Lactobacillus strains are known to survive at pH 4.6, which is the common final acidity of many fermented dairy products, lower pH values (2.0 and 3.0) were examined. The pH value of 3.0 has been most investigated to use probiotic strains (Shokryazdan et al. 2014), because strain viability is reduced at pH 2.0 (Bhatt et al. 2012). In our study, the highest viability at the end of the 6th hour at pH 2 was observed in NBC2680, while at pH 3 it was also observed in ZZ6780. In the studies of De Angelis et al. in 2006, it was reported that the L. mucosae strain isolated from pig feces showed resistance at pH 2.0 and pH 3.0 in 180 minutes; similar results were seen in our study. (De Angelis et al. 2006). Bile released in the small intestine damages bacteria by destroying the bacterial cell membrane. Probiotics has a bile salt hydrolase enzyme (BSH), which hydrolyzes bile salts and reduces their solubility (Jannah et al. 2014, Hwanhlem et al.2010). Gondaliya and Ramani analyzed the bile salt resistance of L. fermentum and L. oris strains isolated from breast milk at 0.5% and 1.50% concentration, and as a result of the analysis, it was observed that bacterial viability decreased with increasing concentration (Gondaliya and Ramani 2021). It was reported by Jose et al. that the tolerance of Lactobacillus isolates isolated from dairy food product and animal rumen to 0.3% bile salt was higher than the tolerance to 2.0% bile salt (Jose et al. 2015). Overall, Lactobacillus strains are tolerant to bile salts (Liu et al. 2020; Mohammedi et al. 2018; Khalkhali and Mojgani 2017).

Previous studies of hemolytic activity have reported that Lactobacillus strains were non-hemolytic (Halder et al. 2017; Kaktcham et al. 2012). It was observed that Lactobacillus species isolated from milk by Maragkoudakis and colleagues showed γ hemolytic activity (Maragkoudakis et al. 2006).

Antibiotic susceptibility studies showed that was determined 7 strains of the selected probiotic bacteria were resistant to Levoflaxin and 4 strains had intermediate sensitivity. It was determined that 8 strains were resistant to the antibiotic streptomycin, 2 strains had intermediate sensitivity and 1 strain was sensitive. It was observed that strain NBC2680 had intermediate sensitivity to the antibiotic gentamicin, while all other strains had resistance genes. Previous stuides, different resistance rates to ciprofloxacin (60–70%), gentamicin (0–100%), and streptomycin (70–80%) have been reported among Lactobacillus spp., including L. helveticus, L. casei, and L. plantarum (Hummel et al. 2007; Guo et al. 2017; Li et al. 2019). This indicates the existence of considerable differences in antibiotic resistance both on an intergenus and interspecies level as well as a species dependency in Lactobacillus spp. Similar to our study results, Florez et al. reported that the L. plantarum strain showed high sensitivity to the antibiotic Clindamycin (Florez et al. 2006). Chang et al. observed that the L. reuteri strain was sensitive to erythromycin but resistant to gentamicin (Chang et al. 2023).

Probiotics produce antimicrobial substances such as lactic acid and acetic acid and acidification of the intestine helps to inhibit the proliferation of some pathogenic microorganisms; they are also sources of metabolites such as hydrogen peroxide, short-chain fatty acid and low-molecular-weight proteins (Tanaka et al. 1999, Torshizi et al. 2008). It was observed by Wang et al. that the L. plantarum strain showed high antimicrobial activity against S. aureus, E. coli and S. enterica pathogens (Wang et al. 2011). These results are similar to the results in our study. According to the antimicrobial results of Ambalam et al., L. rhamnosus strain showed high activity against L. monocyctogenes and our analysis results were supported (Ambalam et al. 2009). In the study conducted by Jomehzade et al. with lactic acid bacteria isolated from infant feces in southwest Iran, it was determined that L. plantarum, L. fermentum, L. rhamnosus and L. paracasei strains were effective against E. coli and S. enterica pathogens (Jomehzade et al. 2020). The activity of the lactic acid bacteria tested in this study against pathogens has been supported by previous studies (Jovanovic et al.2015; Mollova et al. 2024).

Probiotic bacterial strains must be able to survive passage through the gastrointestinal tract and colonize the small intestine and colon for a long period to provide host health benefits (Suskovic et al., 2001). We analyzed the ability of 11 selected probiotic strains to adhere to the intestinal epithelial cells Caco-2 and the mucus-secreting cells HT29-MTX. In general, it was observed differences in the adhesion capacities of probiotic isolates depending on the type of probiotic bacteria strain and the isolated source. It was determined that NBC2680 strain, which showed the highest tolerance to 0.3% bile salt, and ZZ6780 strain, which showed high resistance in pH 3 environment, showed high adhesion ability to both cell lines. Moreover, It has been observed that bacteria isolated from adult and infant feces show higher adhesion ability compared to the other sources. It has also been associated in previous studies that probiotic bacteria that are resistant to low acid environment and bile salt have a higher capacity to adhere to the intestinal epithelium and mucosa (Bao et al. 2010; Guo et al. 2015; Jin et al. 1998; Ross et al. 2005). L. plantarum probiotic bacteria strains, which is known to have high adhesion ability (Duary et al. 2011), showed average adhesion capacity compared to the L. rhamnosus GG control strain in our adhesion tests. When the findings of the L. rhamnosus species obtained from three different sources were evaluated, the probiotic isolated from adult feces showed higher adhesion capacity than the other sources. L. rhamnosus strains have a high capacity to adhere to the intestinal mucosa (Chae et al. 2022). In our results, it was observed that L. rhamnosus strains had increased adhesion efficiency in mucus-secreting cells compared to intestinal epithelial cells. Similar to our findings, it was found previously that the L. paracasei strain isolated from feces showed lower adhesion capacity than the L. rhamnosus strain (Verdenelli et al. 2009). According to the result of our adhesion assays, it was found that L. pontis, L. reuteri and L. mucosae species showed high adhesion ability compared to the selected other species. The result is similar to that observed previously (Jensen et al. 2014; Pearce et al. 2018; Repally et al. 2017; Roos and Jonsson 2002). However, there was no study about the adhesion to epithelial cells and intestinal mucosa of L. pontis and L. oris strains.

Determination of the growth parameters in a reasonable accepted media is a crucial step for the commercial application of a probiotic strain. Considering the previous stuies, many factors such as pH, air supply rate, fermentation temperature, fermentation operation system (batch, fed-batch or continuous) afected lactic acid bacteria growth although the same synthetic medium (MRS broth) was used as the fermentation medium (Kayacan et al. 2023; Mechmeche et al. 2017; Zheng et al. 2018). Additionally, determining growth kinetics is an important issue for biotechnological processes. In the present study, µmax value was calculated to be 0.481 h^− 1 for L.reuteri NBC280 with a doubling time (t_d) of 1.21 h^− 1. Additionally, number of generations (n) was calculated to be 6.4 for strain NBC2680 productivity (φ) and maximum specific productivity (φ max) values were 0.572 g L^− 1 and 1.02 g L^− 1, respectively. In terms of growth kinetics of ZZ6780 µmax value was calculated 0.412 h^− 1 whereas the doubling time (t_d) 1.12 h^− 1. The number of generations (n) was calculated to be, 5.5 and productivity (φ) and maximum specific productivity (φ max) value for ZZ6780 were 0.498 g L^− 1 and 0.764 g L^− 1, respectively. These findings revealed that maximum specific growth rate of both strains was higher in comparison to the growth kinetics of other LAB strains (Gao et al. 2009; Rezvani et al. 2017; Ucok and Sert 2020). According to the fermantation results, the wet weight of dry biomass NBC2680 and ZZ6780 was determined as 29.80% and 27.91%, repectively. Based on this, biomass production was 5.23 g/L and 4.45 g/L on dry cell matter basis, repectively. In previous studies; Hwang et al. (2011) reported that during the batch fermentation of LP02 isolated from infant feces, 2.2 g/L dry cell was produced. Choi et al. (2021), find out that the maximum biomass was 4.3 g/L amount of L. plantarum 200655. Fonteles et al. (2011), DSM 20016 strain of determined the cell viability was 8.3 log cfu m/L and biomass concentration 3.96 g/L at the end of the fermentation. In different study, Lactobacillus casei biomass was produced at a maximum dry cell of 0.45 g/L in batch, semi-batch and continuous cultures (Aguirre-Ezkauriatza et al. 2010). Furthermore, L. plantarum strain Pi06 cultured in MRS-Cys (0.05% L cysteine) medium was reported produced 4.60 g/L biomass (Hwang et al. 2012). Determination of the growth kinetics of NBC2680 and ZZ6780 in the study revealed their suitability for industrial scale growth applications. Because the growth kinetic data and both dry cell matter and cell viability amount obtained as a result of the study are promising when compared to previous studies.

To summarize ın the present study, 40 bacteria were isolated from 4 different sources of human origin: breast milk, maternal colostrum, adult feces and infant feces. 19 of these isolates were determined to be lactobacilli as a result of analyzes and microscopic analyzing, and 7 of them were determined to be similar as a result of RAPD PCR. Phylogenetic analysis based on the 16S rRNA gene sequence of 11 strains obtained as a result of eliminating similar bacterial strains was performed. According to the findings obtained after isolation and identification, human feces; regardless of adult or infant, is reach in terms of containing various lactobacilli than human milk. While 5 different Lactobacillus species and 8 Lactobacillus strains were obtained from feces samples; 2 different Lactobacillus species and 6 Lactobacillus strains were obtained from milk samples. These results show the importance of the isolation source in obtaining different types and numbers of potential probiotic bacterial strains.

After the identification step, characterization studies were carried out to determine the potential probiotic properties of 11 strains. As a result of the investigation of the potential probiotic properties of 11 different Lactobacillus strains obtained from 4 different sources, the most prominent strains were SA74, NUV180, NUV81, NBC2680 and ZZ6780. NBC2680 and ZZ6780 strains were selected through cell culture studies and their fermentation was studied. Finally, determination of the growth kinetics of NBC2680 and ZZ6780 demonstrated their suitability for industrial-scale growth applications. As a result of the study, NBC2680 and ZZ6780 strains, which are considered to be commercialized, were registered in NCBI Genbank. It is thought that the results of this study will play an important role in introducing potential probiotic strains to the industry.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank NBC employees who contributed to the realization of present research.

Author Contributions

A.E.K. conceived the study; A.E.K. designed the experiments. A.E.K., İ.Z., E.M.S., G.Ö. performed the experiments and analysed the data. F.İ.Ş. contributed to writing the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the manuscript.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available on reasonable request from the corresponding author.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical statement

The studies involving humans were approved by the Ümraniye Training and Research Hospital Clinical Research Ethics Committee (B.10.1.TKH.4.34.H.GP.0.01/110). The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informe consent to participate in this study.

Adugna, M., & Andualem, B. (2023). Isolation, characterization and safety assessment of probiotic lactic acid bacteria from metata ayib (Traditional spiced cottage cheese). Food Hum, 1, 85-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foohum.2023.05.002
Aguirre-Ezkauriatza EJ, Aguilar-Yáñez JM, Ramírez-Medrano A, Alvarez MM. (2010). Production of probiotic biomass (Lactobacillus casei) in goat milk whey: comparison of batch, continuous and fed-batch cultures. Bioresour Technol. 2010 Apr;101(8):2837-44. https://doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2009.10.047
Ahrné S, Lönnermark E, Wold AE, Aberg N, Hesselmar B, Saalman R, Strannegård IL, Molin G, Adlerberth I. (2005). Lactobacilli in the intestinal microbiota of Swedish infants. Microbes Infect. 2005 Aug-Sep;7(11-12):1256-62. https://doi:10.1016/j.micinf.2005.04.011
Anadón, A., Ares, I., Martínez-Larrañaga, M. R., Martínez, M. A. (2021). Probiotics: safety and toxicity considerations. Nutrac. 2021;1081-1105 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-821038-3.00065-3
Archer AC, Kurrey NK, Halami PM. (2018). In vitro adhesion and anti-inflammatory properties of native Lactobacillus fermentum and Lactobacillus delbrueckii spp. J Appl Microbiol. 2018 Jul;125(1):243-256. https://doi:10.1111/jam.13757
Bao Y, Zhang Y, Zhang Y, Liu Y, Wang S, Dong X et al. Screening of potential probiotic properties of Lactobacillus fermentum isolated from traditional dairy products. Food Control. 2010; 21: 695–701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2009.10.010
Bhatt, V.D., Vaidya, Y.H., Kunjadia, P.D. and Kunjadia, A.P. (2012). Isolation and characterization of probiotic bacteria from human milk. Int J Pharm Sci and Health Care 3, 62–70
Brinques GB, do Carmo Peralba M, Ayub MA. (2010). Optimization of probiotic and lactic acid production by Lactobacillus plantarum in submerged bioreactor systems. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol. 2010 Feb;37(2):205-12. https://doi:10.1007/s10295-009-0665-1
Chae SA, Ramakrishnan SR, Kim T, Kim SR, Bang WY, Jeong CR, Yang J, Kim SJ. (2022). Anti-inflammatory and anti-pathogenic potential of Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus IDCC 3201 isolated from feces of breast-fed infants. Microb Pathog. 2022 Dec;173(Pt A):105857. https://doi:10.1016/j.micpath.2022.105857
Chang, C.P., Liew, S.L. (2013). Growth Medium Optimization for Biomass Production of a Probiotic Bacterium, Lactobacillus rhamnosus ATCC 7469. J. Food Biochem. 2013, 37, 536–543
Chang, Z., Xiao, Q., Ye, Y., Iqbal, M., Duan, M., Chamba, Y., & Shang, P. (2023). Isolation, Identification and Biological Characteristics of Lactobacillus reuteri from Tibetan Pigs. Pakistan J. Zool., pp 1-6, 2023. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjz/20220702030717
Choi GH, Lee NK, Paik HD (2021). Optimization of medium composi tion for biomass production of Lactobacillus plantarum 200655 using response surface methodology. J Microbiol Biotechnol 31(5):717–725. https://doi.org/10.4014/jmb.2103.03018
CLSI. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing; 30 th Informational Supplement (Junnary 2020 Update). CLSI document M100. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2020
Coconnier MH, Liévin V, Bernet-Camard MF, Hudault S, Servin AL. (1997). Antibacterial effect of the adhering human Lactobacillus acidophilus strain LB. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1997 May;41(5):1046-52. https://doi:10.1128/AAC.41.5.1046
Çakmakoğlu SK, Vurmaz M, Bezirci E, Kaya Y, Dikmen H, Göktaş H, Demirbaş F, Encu B, Acar Soykut E, Alemdar F, Çakır İ, Durak MZ, Arıcı M, Sağdıç O, Türker M, Dertli E. (2023). Isolation and characterization of yogurt starter cultures from traditional yogurts and growth kinetics of selected cultures under lab-scale fermentation. Prep Biochem Biotechnol. 2023;53(4):454-463. https://doi:10.1080/10826068.2022.2098325
Dal Bello, F., Walter, J., Hammes, W. P., Hertel, C. (2003). Increased complexity of the species composition of lactic acid bacteria in human feces revealed by alternative incubation condition. Microbial Eco, 455-463.
Damaceno QS, Gallotti B, Reis IMM, Totte YCP, Assis GB, Figueiredo HC, Silva TF, Azevedo V, Nicoli JR, Martins FS. (2023). Isolation and Identification of Potential Probiotic Bacteria from Human Milk. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins. 2023 Jun;15(3):491-501. https://doi:10.1007/s12602-021-09866-5
De Angelis M, Siragusa S, Berloco M, Caputo L, Settanni L, Alfonsi G, Amerio M, Grandi A, Ragni A, Gobbetti M. (2006). Selection of potential probiotic lactobacilli from pig feces to be used as additives in pelleted feeding. Res Microbiol. 2006. Oct;157(8):792-801. https://doi:10.1016/j.resmic.2006.05.003
Dertli, E., Mercan, E., Arıcı, M., Yılmaz, M. T., Sağdıç, O. (2016). Characterisation of lactic acid bacteria from Turkish sourdough and determination of their exopolysaccharide (EPS) production characteristics. LWT-Food Sci and Technol, 71, 116-124. https://doi:10.1016/j.lwt.2016.03.030
Duary RK, Rajput YS, Batish VK, Grover S. (2011). Assessing the adhesion of putative indigenous probiotic lactobacilli to human colonic epithelial cells. Indian J Med Res. 2011 Nov;134(5):664-71. https://doi:10.4103/0971-5916.90992
Dunne, C., O'Mahony, L., Murphy, L., Thornton, G., Morrisey, D., O'Halloran, S., Feeney, M., Flynn, S., Fitzgerald, G., Daly, C., Kiely, B., O'Sullivan, G.C., Shanahan, F. and Collins, J.K (2003). “In vitro selection criteria for probiotic bacteria of human origin: correlation with in vivo findings,” Am. J. Clin. Nutr, 73 (2). 386S-392S. February 2003.
Fernández, M.F., Boris, S., Barbѐs, C., (2003). Probiotic properties of human lactobacilli strains to be used in the gastrointestinal tract, J of Appl Microbiol, 94; 449-455
Fernández L, Langa S, Martín V, Maldonado A, Jiménez E, Martín R, Rodríguez JM. (2013). The human milk microbiota: origin and potential roles in health and disease. Pharmacol Res. 2013 Mar;69(1):1-10. https://doi:10.1016/j.phrs.2012.09.001
Florez AB, Egervärn M, Danielsen M, Tosi L, Morelli L, Lindgren S, Mayo B. (2006). Susceptibility of Lactobacillus plantarum strains to six antibiotics and definition of new susceptibility-resistance cutoff values. Microb Drug Resist. 2006 Winter;12(4):252-256. https://doi:10.1089/mdr.2006
Gagnon M, Zihler Berner A, Chervet N, Chassard C, Lacroix C. (2013). Comparison of the Caco-2, HT-29 and the mucus-secreting HT29-MTX intestinal cell models to investigate Salmonella adhesion and invasion. J Microbiol Methods. 2013 Sep;94(3):274-9. https://doi:10.1016/j.mimet.2013.06.027
Gao, X., Qiao, S. Y., Lu, W. Q. (2009). Determination of an economical medium for growth of Lactobacillus fermentum using response surface methodology. Lett Appl Microbiol, 49, 556–561 https://doi:10.1111/j.1472-765X.2009.02705.x
Gaudana, S. B., Dhanani, A. S., Bagchi, T. (2010). Probiotic attributes of Lactobacillus strains isolated from food and of human origin. Br. J. Nutr. 103(11), 1620-1628
Gebre, T. S., Emire, S. A., Chelliah, R., Aloo, S. O., & Oh, D. H. (2023). Isolation, functional activity, and safety of probiotics from Ethiopian traditional cereal-based fermented beverage,“Borde”. LWT, 184, 115076 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2023.115076
Gondaliya, S. M., & Ramani, V. M. (2021). Determination of Probiotic Properties of L. fermentum MT308789 and L. oris MT308790 Isolated from Mother Breast Milk. (2021). Int. J. Life Sci. Pharma Res, 11(1), L63-72.
Guo CF, Zhang S, Yuan YH, Yue TL, Li JY. (2015). Comparison of lactobacilli isolated from Chinese suantsai and koumiss for their probiotic and functional properties. J Funct Foods 2015; 12: 294 302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jff.2014.11.029
Guo H, Pan L, Li L, Lu J, Kwok L, Menghe B, Zhang H, Zhang W. (2017). Characterization of antibiotic resistance genes from Lactobacillus isolated from traditional dairy products. J Food Sci 2017; 82:724–730 https:// DOI: 10.1111/1750-3841.13645
Halder D, Mandal M, Chatterjee SS, Pal NK, Mandal S. Indigenous Probiotic Lactobacillus Isolates Presenting Antibiotic like Activity against Human Pathogenic Bacteria. Biomedicines. 2017 Jun 16;5(2):31. https://doi:10.3390/biomedicines5020031
Harahap P, N. I. P., Munir, E., Hutahaean, S. (2023). Immunomodulatory effects of probiotics isolated from traditional fermented foods and beverages of Sumatra (Indonesia) and synbiotics in mice. Biodivers J of Biol Diver, 24(2)
Hennet T and Borsig L. (2016). Breastfed at Tiffany's. Trends Biochem Sci. 2016 Jun;41(6):508-518. https://doi:10.1016/j.tibs.2016.02.008
Hudault S, Liévin V, Bernet-Camard MF, Servin AL. (1997). Antagonistic activity exerted in vitro and in vivo by Lactobacillus casei (strain GG) against Salmonella typhimurium C5 infection. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1997 Feb;63(2):513-8. https://doi:10.1128/aem.63.2.513-518.1997
Hummel A.S, Hertel C, Holzapfel W. H, Franz C.M. (2007). Antibiotic resistances of starter and probiotic strains of lactic acid bacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 2007;73:730–739
Hwanhlem, N., Watthanasakphuban, N., Riebroy, S., Benjakul, S., H‐Kittikun, A., & Maneerat, S. (2010). Probiotic lactic acid bacteria from Kung‐Som: isolation, screening, inhibition of pathogenic bacteria. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol.45(3), 594-601
Hwang, C. F., Chang, J. H., Houng, J. Y., Tsai, C. C., Lin, C. K., Tsen, H. Y. (2012). Optimization of medium composition for improving biomass production of Lactobacillus plantarum Pi06 using the Taguchi array design and the Box-Behnken method. Biotechnol. Bioprocess Eng., 17(4), 827-834. https://doi:10.1007/s12257-012-0007-4
Hwang, C. F., Chen, J. N., Huang, Y. T., Mao, Z. Y. (2011). Biomass production of Lactobacillus plantarum LP02 isolated from infant feces with potential cholesterol-lowering ability. Afr J of Biotechnol, 10, 7010-7020
Jannah, SN., A. Dinoto, K. G. Wiryawan, & I. Rusmana. (2014). Characteristic of lactic acid bacteria isolated from gastrointestinal tract cemani chicken and their potential use as probiotics. Med. Pet. 37:182-189. https://doi.org/10.5398/medpet.2014.37.3.182
Jensen H, S. Roos, H. Jonsson, I. Rud, S. Grimmer, J. P. Van Pijkeren, R. A. Britton and L. Axelsson, (2014). Role of Lactobacillus reuteri cell and mucus-binding protein A (CmbA) in adhesion to intestinal epithelial cells and mucus in vitro. Microbiol, 2014, 160, 671–681
Jin LZ, Ho YW, Abdullah N, Jalaludin S. (1998). Acid and bile tolerance of Lactobacillus isolated from chicken intestine. Lett Appl Microbiol. 1998; 27: 183–185. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1472-765X.1998.00405.x
Jomehzadeh N, Javaherizadeh H, Amin M, Saki M, Al-Ouqaili MTS, Hamidi H, Seyedmahmoudi M, Gorjian Z. (2020). Isolation and identification of potential probiotic Lactobacillus species from feces of infants in southwest Iran. Int J Infect Dis. 2020 Jul;96:524-530. https://doi:10.1016/j.ijid.2020.05.034
Jose, N. M., Bunt, C. R., & Hussain, M. A. (2015). Comparison of microbiological and probiotic characteristics of lactobacilli isolates from dairy food products and animal rumen contents. Microorganisms, 3(2), 198-212.
Jovanović, J. N., Nikolić, B., Šeatović, S., Zavišić, G., Mitić-Ćulafić, D., Vuković-Gačić, B., & Knežević-Vukčević, J. (2015). Characterization of some potentially probiotic Lactobacillus strains of human origin. Food sci biotechnol. 24, 1781-1788.
Kaktcham PM, Zambou NF, Tchouanguep FM, El-Soda M, Choudhary MI. (2012). Antimicrobial and Safety Properties of Lactobacilli Isolated from two Cameroonian Traditional Fermented Foods. Sci Pharm. 2012 Jan-Mar;80(1):189-203. https://doi:10.3797/scipharm.1107-12
Kang, C. H., Kim, Y. G., Han, S. H., Jeong, Y., Paek, N. S. (2017). Antibacterial activity and probiotic properties of lactic acid bacteria from Korean Intestine Origin. KSBB J, 32(2), 153-159 https://doi.org/10.7841/ksbbj.2017.32.2.153
Kang, W., Pan, L., Peng, C., Dong, L., Cao, S., Cheng, H., Zhou, H. (2020). Isolation and characterization of lactic acid bacteria from human milk. J Dairy Sci, 103(11), 9980-9991 https:// DOI: 10.3168/jds.2020-18704
Karami, S., Roayaei, M., Hamzavi, H., Bahmani, M., Hassanzad-Azar, H., Leila, M., Rafieian-Kopaei, M. (2017). Isolation and identification of probiotic Lactobacillus from local dairy and evaluating their antagonistic effect on pathogens. Int. J. Pharm. Investig, 7(3), 137
Kavak, A E, Selen, V, Tamtürk, F, 2022. Optimization of Media Composition for Maximum Growth of Probiotic Lactobacillus fermentum NBC-08 Using Response Surface Methodology. YYU J Agric Sci, 32(1): 69-80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29133/yyutbd.993781
Khalfallah, R., Mechmeche, M., Jmoui, I., Ksontini, H., Hamdi, M., Kachouri, F. (2023). Growth Kinetics of Lactobacillus plantarum in Sesame Seed Protein Extract Media. Chem Afr (2023) 6:1217–1226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42250-022-00573-4
Khalil, R., El-Halafawy, K., Mahrous, H., Kamaly, K., Frank, J., El Soda, M. (2007). Evaluation of the probiotic potential of lactic acid bacteria isolated from faeces of breast-fed infants in Egypt. Afr J Biotechnol, 6(7)
Khalil, E. S. Manap, M. Y. Mustafa, S. Amid, M. Alhelli, A. M. Aljoubori, A. (2018). Probiotic Characteristics of Exopolysaccharides-producing Lactobacillus Isolated from Some Traditional Malaysian Fermented Foods. CyTA J. Food 2018, 16, 287–298. https://DOI:10.1080/19476337.2017.1401007
Khalkhali S, Mojgani N. (2017). Characterization of Candidate probionts isolated from human breast milk. Cell Mol Biol. 2017 May 20;63(5):82-88. https://doi:10.14715/cmb/2017.63.5.15
Kobierecka PA, Wyszyńska AK, Aleksandrzak-Piekarczyk T, Kuczkowski M, Tuzimek A, Piotrowska W, Górecki A, Adamska I, Wieliczko A, Bardowski J, Jagusztyn-Krynicka EK. (2017). In vitro characteristics of Lactobacillus spp. strains isolated from the chicken digestive tract and their role in the inhibition of Campylobacter colonization. Microbiol open, 2017 Oct;6(5):e00512. https://doi:10.1002/mbo3.512
Kumar, S., Stecher, G., Li, M., Knyaz, C., Tamura, K. (2018). MEGA X: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis across computing platforms. Mol biol evol, 35(6), 1547
Li SW, Watanabe K, Hsu CC, Chao SH, Yang ZH, Lin YJ, Chen CC, Cao YM, Huang HC, Chang CH, Tsai YC. (2017). Bacterial Composition and Diversity in Breast Milk Samples from Mothers Living in Taiwan and Mainland China. Front Microbiol. 2017 May 30;8:965. https://doi:10.3389/fmicb.2017.00965
Li, Y.; Li, L.; Kromann, S.; Chen, M.; Shi, L.; Meng, H. (2019). Antibiotic Resistance of Lactobacillus spp. and Streptococcus thermophilus Isolated from Chinese Fermented Milk Products Foodborne Pathog. Dis. 2019, 16, 221–228. https://DOI:10.1089/fpd. 2018.2516
Liu W, Chen M, Duo L, Wang J, Guo S, Sun H, Menghe B, Zhang H. (2020). Characterization of potentially probiotic lactic acid bacteria and bifidobacteria isolated from human colostrum. J Dairy Sci. 2020 May;103(5):4013-4025. https://doi:10.3168/jds.2019-17602
Luo, Y., Ma, B.C., Zou, L.K., Cheng, J.G., Cai, Y.H., Kang, J.P., Li, B., Gao, X.H., Wang, P., and Xiao, J.J., (2012). “Identification and characterization of lactic acid bacteria from forest musk deer feces,” Afr J Microbiol Res, 6 (29), 5871- 5881, August 2012
Makarova K, Slesarev A, Wolf Y, Sorokin A, Mirkin B, Koonin E, Pavlov A, Pavlova N, Karamychev V, Polouchine N, Shakhova V, Grigoriev I, Lou Y, Rohksar D, Lucas S, Huang K, Goodstein DM, Hawkins T, Plengvidhya V, Welker D, Hughes J, Goh Y, Benson A, Baldwin K, Lee JH, Díaz-Muñiz I, Dosti B, Smeianov V, Wechter W, Barabote R, Lorca G, Altermann E, Barrangou R, Ganesan B, Xie Y, Rawsthorne H, Tamir D, Parker C, Breidt F, Broadbent J, Hutkins R, O'Sullivan D, Steele J, Unlu G, Saier M, Klaenhammer T, Richardson P, Kozyavkin S, Weimer B, Mills D. (2006). Comparative genomics of the lactic acid bacteria. Proc Natl Acad Sci. U S A. 2006 Oct 17;103(42):15611-6. https://doi:10.1073/pnas.0607117103
Maragkoudakis, P. A., Mountzouris, K. C., Psyrras, D., Cremonese, S., Fischer, J., Cantor, M. D., & Tsakalidou, E. (2009). Functional properties of novel protective lactic acid bacteria and application in raw chicken meat against Listeria monocytogenes and Salmonella enteritidis. Int J food microbiol, 130(3), 219-226 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2009.01.027
Maragkoudakis, P. A., Zoumpopoulou, G., Miaris, C., Kalantzopoulos, G., Pot, B., & Tsakalidou, E. (2006). Probiotic potential of Lactobacillus strains isolated from dairy products. Int. Dairy J, 16(3), 189-199 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idairyj.2005.02.009
Martın, V., Maldonado-Barragan, A., Moles, L., RodriguezBanos, M., del Campo, R., Fernandez, L., Rodrıguez, J.M. and Jimenez, E. (2012). Sharing of bacterial strains between breast milk and infant feces. J Hum Lact 28, 36–44.
Mbye M, Baig MA, AbuQamar SF, El-Tarabily KA, Obaid RS, Osaili TM, Al-Nabulsi AA, Turner MS, Shah NP, Ayyash MM. (2020). Updates on understanding of probiotic lactic acid bacteria responses to environmental stresses and highlights on proteomic analyses. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2020 May;19(3):1110-1124. https://doi:10.1111/1541-4337.12554
Mechmeche M, Kachouri F, Yaghlane HB, Ksontini H, Setti K, Hamdi M (2017). Kinetic analysis and mathematical modeling of growth parameters of Lactobacillus plantarum in protein-rich isolates from tomato seed. Food Sci Technol Int. 23(2):128–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/1082013216665706
Mehta O, Ghosh TS, Kothidar A, Gowtham MR, Mitra R, Kshetrapal P, Wadhwa N, Thiruvengadam R; GARBH-Ini study group; Nair GB, Bhatnagar S, Das B. (2020). Vaginal Microbiome of Pregnant Indian Women: Insights into the Genome of Dominant Lactobacillus Species. Microb Ecol. 2020 Aug;80(2):487-499. https://doi:10.1007/s00248-020-01501-0
Mohammadi, F., Eshaghi, M., Razavi, S., Sarokhalil, D. D., Talebi, M., Pourshafie, M. R. (2018). Characterization of bacteriocin production in Lactobacillus spp. isolated from mother's milk. Microb. pathog.118, 242-246.
Mollova, D., Batsalova, T., Dzhambazov, B., Vasileva, T., Bivolarski, V., & Iliev, I. (2024). In vitro Digestion: Exploring the probiotic abilities and metabolization of human milk oligosaccharides by two strains of Limosilactobacillus fermentum isolated from breast milk. J. Funct. Foods 114, 106068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jff.2024.106068
Nami, Y., Bakhshayesh, R. V., Manafi, M., & Hejazi, M. A. (2019). Hypocholesterolaemic activity of a novel autochthonous potential probiotic Lactobacillus plantarum YS5 isolated from yogurt. LWT, 111, 876-882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2019.05.057
Nithya, A., Misra, S., Panigrahi, C., Dalbhagat, C. G. and Mishra H.N. (2023). Probiotic potential of fermented foods and their role in non-communicable diseases management: An understanding through recent clinical evidences. Food Chem Adv. Volume 3 December 2023, 100381 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.focha.2023.100381
Ouwehand, A.C., Seppo, S., Tölkö, S., Robert, P., Ovaska, J., Salminen, E., (2002). Restected human colonic tissue: New model for characterizing adhesion of lactic acid bacteria. Clin. Diagn. Lab. Immunol. 9: 184-186
Pearce SC, Coia HG, Karl JP, Pantoja-Feliciano IG, Zachos NC, Racicot K. (2018). Intestinal in vitro and ex vivo Models to Study Host-Microbiome Interactions and Acute Stressors. Front Physiol. 2018 Nov 12;9:1584. https://doi:10.3389/fphys.2018.01584
Rezvani, F.; Ardestani, F.; Najafpour, G. (2017). Growth Kinetic Models of Five Species of Lactobacilli and Lactose Consumption in Batch Submerged Culture. Braz. J. Microbiol. 2017, 48, 2, 251–258. https://DOI:10.1016/j.bjm.2016.12.007
Reis NA, Saraiva MA, Duarte EA, de Carvalho EA, Vieira BB, Evangelista-Barreto NS. (2016). Probiotic properties of lactic acid bacteria isolated from human milk. J Appl Microbiol. Sep;121(3):811-20. https://doi:10.1111/jam.13173
Repally A, Perumal V, Dasari A, Palanichamy E, Venkatesan A. (2018). Isolation, Identification of Lactobacillus mucosae AN1 and its Antilisterial Peptide Purification and Characterization. Probiotics Antimicrob. 2018 Dec;10(4):775-786. https://doi:10.1007/s12602-017-9341-3
Roos, S., and Jonsson, H. (2002). A high-molecular-mass cell-surface protein from Lactobacillus reuteri 1063 adheres to mucus components. Microbiol. 148(Pt2), 433–442. https://doi.org/10.1099/00221287-148-2-433
Ross R, Desmond C, Fitzgerald G, Stanton C. (2005). Overcoming the technological hurdles in the development of probiotic foods. J Appl Microbiol. 2005; 98: 1410–1407. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672
Rossetti, L. and Giraffa, G. (2005). Rapid Identification of Dairy Lactic Acid Bacteria by M13-Generated, RAPD-PCR Fingerprint Databases. J Microbiol Meth. 63, 135-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mimet.2005.03.001
Serrano-Niño J.C, Solís-Pacheco J.R, Gutierrez-Padilla J.A, Cobián-García A, Cavazos-Garduño A and González-Reynoso O., Aguilar-Uscanga B.R. (2016). Isolation and Identification of Lactic Acid Bacteria from Human Milk with Potential Probiotic Role. J Food and Nutr Res. 2016; 4(3):170-177. https://doi:10.12691/jfnr-4-3-7
Servin, A. L. (2004). Antagonistic activities of lactobacilli and bifidobacteria against microbial pathogens. FEMS Microbiol Rev 28(4), 405-440. https://doi.org/0.1016/j.femsre.2004.01.003
Shazadi, K., & Arshad, N. (2022). Evaluation of inhibitory and probiotic properties of lactic acid bacteria isolated from vaginal microflora. Folia Microbiol, 67(3), 427-445
Shokryazdan, P., Sieo, C.C., Kalavathy, R., Liang, J.B., Alitheen, N.B., Jahromi, M.F. and Ho, Y.W. (2014). Probiotic potential of Lactobacillus strains with antimicrobial activity against some human pathogenic strains. Biomed Res Int 2014, 1–16
Srinivash, M., Krishnamoorthi, R., Mahalingam, P. U., Malaikozhundan, B., & Keerthivasan, M. (2023). Probiotic potential of exopolysaccharide producing lactic acid bacteria isolated from homemade fermented food products. J Agric Food Res. 11,100517 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2023.100517
Susković J, Kos B, Beganović J, Pavunc A, Habjanič K, Matosˇić S. (2001). Role of lactic acid bacteria and bifidobacteria in synbiotic effect. Food Technol Biotechnol. 2001; 48: 296–307
Tanaka, H., Doesburg, K., Iwasaki, T., Mierau, I. (1999). “Screening of lactic acid bacteria for bile salt hydrolase activity,” J Dairy Sci, 82 (12), 2530-2535, December 1999
Tamura, K., Stecher, G., Kumar, S. (2021). MEGA11: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 11. Mol biol evol, 38(7), 3022-3027
Toupal S, Coşansu S. (2023). Effects of Freeze-Dried Banana and Watermelon Peel Powders on Bile Salt Resistance, Growth Kinetics, and Survival of Probiotic Bacteria. Probiotics Antimicrob 2023 Aug 3. https://doi:10.1007/s12602-023-10131-0
Torshizi MAK, Rahimi S, Mojgani N, Esmaeilkhanian S, Grimes J. L. (2008). Screening of indigenous strains of lactic acid bacteria for development of a probiotic for poultry. Asian-australas. J. Anim. Sci, 21(10): 1495–1500. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2008.80081
Tsega, K. T., Maina, K. J., Tesema, N. B. (2023). Characterization of potential probiotics Lactobacillus species isolated from the gastrointestinal tract of Rhode Island Red (RIR) chicken in Ethiopia. Heliyon. 9 (2023), e17453 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17453
Ucok, G., and Sert, D. (2020). Growth kinetics and biomass characteristics of Lactobacillus plantarum L14 isolated from sourdough: effect of fermentation time on dough machinability LWT--Food Sci. Technol., 129 (2020), Article 109516, Doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2020.109516
Verdenelli MC, Ghelfi F, Silvi S, Orpianesi C, Cecchini C, Cresci A. (2009). Probiotic properties of Lactobacillus rhamnosus and Lactobacillus paracasei isolated from human faeces. Eur J Nutr. 2009 Sep;48(6):355-63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00394-009-0021-2
Verhasselt V, Milcent V, Cazareth J, Kanda A, Fleury S, Dombrowicz D, Glaichenhaus N, Julia V. (2008). Breast milk-mediated transfer of an antigen induces tolerance and protection from allergic asthma. Nat Med. 2008;14(2):170–5
Wang J., Guo Z., Zhang Q., Yan L., Chen W., Liu X.M., Zhang H.P. (2009). Fermentation Characteristics and Transit Tolerance of Probiotic Lactobacillus Casei Zhang in Soymilk and Bovine Milk during Storage. J. Dairy Sci. 2009;92:2468–2476. https://doi:10.3168/jds.2008-1849.
Zhang D, Zhang S, Guidesi E, Zonenschain D, Sagheddu V, Lee S, Lim CY, Elli M. (2018). Isolation and Characterization of New Probiotic Strains From Chinese Babies. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2018:S27-S34. https://doi:10.1097/MCG.0000000000001113
Zheng X, Duan Y, Dong H, Zhang J (2018). Efects of dietary Lactobacillus plantarum on growth performance, digestive enzymes and gut morphology of Litopenaeus vannamei. Probiotics Antimicrob 10:504–510.https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-017-9300-z

Download PDF

Journal Publication

published 30 Jul, 2024

Read the published version in Annals of Microbiology →

Reviewers agreed at journal
15 Apr, 2024
Reviewers invited by journal
04 Apr, 2024
Editor assigned by journal
02 Apr, 2024
First submitted to journal
31 Mar, 2024

You are reading this latest preprint version

Characterization of Nuvita Biosearch Center (NBC) Isolated Lactic Acid Bacteria Strains from Human Origin and Determination of Growth Kinetic Profiles of Selected Cultures by Lab-Scale Bioreactor Fermentation

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introductıon

Material and Methods

Sample Collection

Isolation of LAB

Preliminary Characterization of LAB Isolates

Catalase Test

Genotypic Identification of Lactic Acid Bacteria Isolates

Genomic DNA Isolation

Identification of Isolates by RAPD PCR Gene Sequence

Identification of Isolates by 16S PCR Gene Sequence

Probiotic Potential Characterization of Bacterial Isolates

Tolerance to low pH

Resistance of Bile Salts

Haemolytic Activity

Antibiotic Susceptibility

Antimicrobial Activitiy

Cell Culture

Culturing of Caco-2 and HT29-MTX Cells

Bacterial Adhesion Assay

Growth Kinetics of Selected Lactobacilli Cultures

Strain and inoculum preparation

Fermentation Process and Calculation of Kinetic Parameters

Data Analysis

Results

Preliminary Characterization of LAB Isolates

Genotypic Identification of Lactic Acid Bacteria Isolates

Probiotic Potential Characterization of Bacterial Isolates

Tolerance to Low pH

Resistance of bile salts

Hemolytic Activity

Antibiotic Susceptibility

Antimicrobial Activity

Cell Culture

Growth Kinetics of Selected Culture

Discussion

Conclusion

Declarations

References

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1