The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Antioxidant properties of potentially probiotic bacteria: in vitro and in vivo activities
Open accessAbstract
Thirty-four strains of lactic acid bacteria (seven Bifidobacterium, 11 Lactobacillus, six Lactococcus, and 10 Streptococcus thermophilus) were assayed in vitro for antioxidant activity against ascorbic and linolenic acid oxidation (TAAAA and TAALA), trolox-equivalent antioxidant capacity (TEAC), intracellular glutathione (TGSH), and superoxide dismutase (SOD). Wide dispersion of each of TAAAA, TAALA, TEAC, TGSH, and SOD occurred within bacterial groups, indicating that antioxidative properties are strain specific. The strains Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis DSMZ 23032, Lactobacillus acidophilus DSMZ 23033, and Lactobacillus brevis DSMZ 23034 exhibited among the highest TAAAA, TAALA, TEAC, and TGSH values within the lactobacilli and bifidobacteria. These strains were used to prepare a potentially antioxidative probiotic formulation, which was administered to rats at the dose of 107, 108, and 109 cfu/day for 18 days. The probiotic strains colonized the colon of the rats during the trial and promoted intestinal saccharolytic metabolism. The analysis of plasma antioxidant activity, reactive oxygen molecules level, and glutathione concentration, revealed that, when administered at doses of at least 108 cfu/day, the antioxidant mixture effectively reduced doxorubicin-induced oxidative stress. Probiotic strains which are capable to limit excessive amounts of reactive radicals in vivo may contribute to prevent and control several diseases associated with oxidative stress.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Superoxide dismutase: Improved assays and an assay applicable to acrylamide gels
Beauchamp, C., & Fridovich, I. (1971) · Analytical Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/0003-2697(71)90370-8 · Cited by 12,892
Cited by
Postbiotics: An Evolving Term within the Functional Foods Field
Aguilar-Toalá, J. E., Garcia-Varela, R., Garcia, H. S., Mata-Haro, V., González-Córdova, A. F., Vallejo-Cordoba, B., & Hernández-Mendoza, A. (2018) · Trends in Food Science & Technology · doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2018.03.009 · Cited by 1,078
How to select a probiotic? A review and update of methods and criteria
de Melo Pereira, G. V., de Oliveira Coelho, B., Magalhães Júnior, A. I., Thomaz-Soccol, V., & Soccol, C. R. (2018) · Biotechnology Advances · doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2018.09.003 · Cited by 523
Postbiotics and paraprobiotics: From concepts to applications
Cuevas-González, P. F., Liceaga, A. M., & Aguilar-Toalá, J. E. (2020) · Food Research International · doi:10.1016/j.foodres.2020.109502 · Cited by 431
Lactic acid bacteria as antifungal and anti-mycotoxigenic agents: A comprehensive review
Sadiq, F. A., Yan, B., Tian, F., Zhao, J., Zhang, H., & Chen, W. (2019) · Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety · doi:10.1111/1541-4337.12481 · Cited by 313
Chen, Y.-M., Wei, L., Chiu, Y.-S., Hsu, Y.-J., Tsai, T.-Y., Wang, M.-F., & Huang, C.-C. (2016) · Nutrients · doi:10.3390/nu8040205 · Cited by 297
Metadata
- Authors
- Amaretti, A., di Nunzio, M., Pompei, A., Raimondi, S., Rossi, M., & Bordoni, A.
- Venue
- Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
- Published
- 2012-07-12
- Volume
- 97
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 809-817
- ISSN
- 0175-7598 (ISSN-L)
- 1432-0614
- OpenAlex
- W2086813844
- Cited by
- 528
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 21.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Antioxidant properties of potentially probiotic bacteria: in vitro and in vivo activities. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s00253-012-4241-7
- The paper
- Amaretti, A., di Nunzio, M., Pompei, A., Raimondi, S., Rossi, M., & Bordoni, A. (2013). Antioxidant properties of potentially probiotic bacteria: in vitro and in vivo activities. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-012-4241-7
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.