The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Antagonistic activities of lactobacilli and bifidobacteria against microbial pathogens
Abstract
The gastrointestinal tract is a complex ecosystem that associates a resident microbiota and cells of various phenotypes lining the epithelial wall expressing complex metabolic activities. The resident microbiota in the digestive tract is a heterogeneous microbial ecosystem containing up to 1 x 10(14) colony-forming units (CFUs) of bacteria. The intestinal microbiota plays an important role in normal gut function and maintaining host health. The host is protected from attack by potentially harmful microbial microorganisms by the physical and chemical barriers created by the gastrointestinal epithelium. The cells lining the gastrointestinal epithelium and the resident microbiota are two partners that properly and/or synergistically function to promote an efficient host system of defence. The gastrointestinal cells that make up the epithelium, provide a physical barrier that protects the host against the unwanted intrusion of microorganisms into the gastrointestinal microbiota, and against the penetration of harmful microorganisms which usurp the cellular molecules and signalling pathways of the host to become pathogenic. One of the basic physiological functions of the resident microbiota is that it functions as a microbial barrier against microbial pathogens. The mechanisms by which the species of the microbiota exert this barrier effect remain largely to be determined. There is increasing evidence that lactobacilli and bifidobacteria, which inhabit the gastrointestinal microbiota, develop antimicrobial activities that participate in the host's gastrointestinal system of defence. The objective of this review is to analyze the in vitro and in vivo experimental and clinical studies in which the antimicrobial activities of selected lactobacilli and bifidobacteria strains have been documented.
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
Molecular Analysis of Commensal Host-Microbial Relationships in the Intestine
Hooper, L. V., Wong, M. H., Thelin, A., Hansson, L., Falk, P. G., & Gordon, J. I. (2001) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.291.5505.881 · Cited by 2,202
Bacteriocins: safe, natural antimicrobials for food preservation.
Cleveland, J., Montville, T. J., Nes, I. F., & Chikindas, M. L. (2001) · International Journal of Food Microbiology · doi:10.1016/s0168-1605(01)00560-8 · Cited by 1,835
Functional food science and gastrointestinal physiology and function
Salminen, S., Bouley, C., Boutron, M.-C., Cummings, J. H., Franck, A., Gibson, G. R., Isolauri, E., Moreau, M.-C., Roberfroid, M., & Rowland, I. (1998) · British Journal of Nutrition · doi:10.1079/bjn19980108 · Cited by 1,398
The indigenous gastrointestinal microflora
Berg, R. (1996) · Trends in Microbiology · doi:10.1016/0966-842x(96)10057-3 · Cited by 1,153 · cited 2×
“The resident microbiota in the digestive tract is a heterogeneous microbial ecosystem containing up to 1 10 colony-forming units (CFUs) of bacteria [4–7].”
BackgroundCharteris, Kelly, Morelli, & Collins (1998) · Journal of Applied Microbiology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2672.1998.00407.x · Cited by 774
Gill, H. S., Rutherfurd, K. J., Cross, M. L., & Gopal, P. K. (2001) · The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1093/ajcn/74.6.833 · Cited by 485
Kim, H. J., Camilleri, M., Mckinzie, S., Lempke, M. B., Burton, D. D., Thomforde, G. M., & Zinsmeister, A. R. (2003) · Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2036.2003.01543.x · Cited by 468
Haller, D., Bode, C., Hammes, W. P., Pfeifer, A. M. A., Schiffrin, E. J., & Blum, S. (2000) · Gut · doi:10.1136/gut.47.1.79 · Cited by 466
Oral probiotics can resolve urogenital infections
Reid, G., Bruce, A. W., Fraser, N., Heinemann, C., Owen, J., & Henning, B. (2001) · FEMS Immunology & Medical Microbiology · doi:10.1016/s0928-8244(00)00233-9 · Cited by 464
Talham, G. L., Jiang, H.-Q., Bos, N. A., & Cebra, J. J. (1999) · Infection and Immunity · doi:10.1128/iai.67.4.1992-2000.1999 · Cited by 408
Cited by
Dethlefsen, L., & Relman, D. A. (2011) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1000087107 · Cited by 2,421
Dethlefsen, L., Huse, S., Sogin, M. L., & Relman, D. A. (2008) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0060280 · Cited by 2,361
An ecological and evolutionary perspective on human–microbe mutualism and disease
Dethlefsen, L., McFall-Ngai, M., & Relman, D. A. (2007) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature06245 · Cited by 1,660
Host interactions of probiotic bacterial surface molecules: comparison with commensals and pathogens
Lebeer, S., Vanderleyden, J., & De Keersmaecker, S. C. J. (2010) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro2297 · Cited by 1,062
Genes and Molecules of Lactobacilli Supporting Probiotic Action
Lebeer, S., Vanderleyden, J., & De Keersmaecker, S. C. J. (2008) · Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews · doi:10.1128/mmbr.00017-08 · Cited by 1,013
Metadata
- Authors
- Servin, A. L.
- Venue
- FEMS Microbiology Reviews
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2004-10
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 405-440
- ISSN
- 0168-6445 (ISSN-L)
- 1574-6976
- OpenAlex
- W2163542601
- Cited by
- 1,236
- References
- 23
- FWCI
- 46.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Antagonistic activities of lactobacilli and bifidobacteria against microbial pathogens. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.femsre.2004.01.003
- The paper
- Servin, A. L. (2004). Antagonistic activities of lactobacilli and bifidobacteria against microbial pathogens. FEMS Microbiology Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.femsre.2004.01.003
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.