Bifidobacterial Diversity Determined by Culturing and by 16S rDNA Sequence Analysis in Feces and Mucosa from Ten Healthy Spanish Adults
Abstract
This study aimed to identify the numerically predominant bifidobacterial species in feces and mucosa of healthy Spanish people and to determine their phenotypic and genetic diversity. To this end, both traditional culturing and molecular methods were used. A set of 196 bifidobacterial colonies was identified from the counting plates by sequencing of a stretch of their 16S rRNA gene. Representative isolates were phenotypically characterized by their carbohydrate fermentation profile and genotypically typed by RAPD-PCR. Four 16S rDNA libraries composed of 113 clones from two fecal and two mucosal samples were independently analyzed. Seven bifidobacterial species were identified by culturing, and six by 16S rDNA analysis. Both methodologies showed Bifidobacterium longum and B. pseudocatenulatum to predominate in feces and mucosa, although high interindividual variability was noted. High phenotypic variation was observed in the fermentation profile of different isolates from the same species. RAPD analysis showed that two to five strains made up the subjects' personal bifidobacterial communities. The identification of the dominant bifidobacterial species could be useful for the rational design, use, and evaluation of probiotics in our community.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Bifidobacteria are members of the intestinal microbiota of mammals and other animals.
“Bifidobacteria are members of the intestinal microbiota of mammals and other animals, and some strains are able to exert health-promoting effects.”
From Bifidobacteria and Their Health-Promoting Effects (2017) · cites this paper as [5]
Bifidobacteria are among the dominant bacterial populations in the gastrointestinal tract of humans.
“Bifidobacteria are among the dominant bacterial populations in the gastrointestinal tract (GIT) of humans.”
From Bifidobacteria and Their Health-Promoting Effects (2017) · cites this paper as [5]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 45 · Cited by 25
- Authors
- Delgado, S., Suárez, A., & Mayo, B.
- Affiliations
- Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (ES)
- Hospital Universitario De Cabueñes (ES)
- Corresponding author
- Mayo, Baltasar
- Venue
- Digestive Diseases and Sciences
- Published
- 2006-09-12
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1878-1885
- ISSN
- 0163-2116 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-2568
- OpenAlex
- W2094617233
- Cited by
- 25
- References
- 45
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 1.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Digestive Diseases and Sciences (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Infant Nutrition and Health
- Keywords
- Bifidobacterium, Bifidobacterium longum, Bifidobacterium pseudocatenulatum, fecal microbiota, intestinal mucosa, 16S rRNA gene, RAPD genotyping, interindividual variability, probiotics, healthy adults
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Bifidobacterium, DNA, Bacterial, DNA, Ribosomal, Feces, Humans, Intestinal Mucosa, Reference Values, RNA, Ribosomal, 16S, Spain, Sequence Analysis, DNA, Colon, Descending, Biodiversity
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