Cited by 195Microencapsulation and Drying ProcessesProbiotics and Fermented FoodsProteins in Food Systems

Viability of Lactobacillus acidophilus La5 in pectin–whey protein microparticles during exposure to simulated gastrointestinal conditions

Open access
Gebara, Clarice, Chaves, Karina S., Ribeiro, Maria Cecília E., Souza, Flavia N., Grosso, Carlos R.F., Gigante, Mirna L.·2013·Food Research International

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate whether the coating of pectin microparticles containing Lactobacillus acidophilus La5 with whey protein heat treated or without heat treatment affects the viability of probiotics when exposed to conditions simulating the passage through the gastrointestinal tract. The microparticles were produced by ionotropic gelation and coated with whey protein by electrostatic interaction. The microparticle morphology and the viability of L. acidophilus La5 during exposure to simulated gastric (pH1.2 or 3.0) and intestinal (pH7.0) conditions were evaluated. There was no significant difference in the viability of L. acidophilus La5 after encapsulation, which was in the order of 8 log10 CFU/g for all the microparticles. The pectin microparticles remained intact when exposed to simulated gastrointestinal conditions at pH1.2, 3.0 and after 300min at pH7.0. On the other hand, both microparticles coated with whey protein heat treated or without heat treatment have remained intact for 120min exposure to simulated gastric juice but have disintegrated after 300min exposure to simulated intestinal juice (pH7.0). This occurrence suggests that the probiotics would be released in a different part of the intestinal tract whether delivered by one microparticle or another. Microencapsulation conferred greater protective effect to L. acidophilus as compared to the free cells. However, the coating of pectin microparticles with whey protein did not confer additional protection to probiotics when exposed to simulated gastrointestinal conditions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.foodres.2013.02.008

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gebara, C., Chaves, K. S., Ribeiro, M. C. E., Souza, F. N., Grosso, C. R. F., & Gigante, M. L.
Affiliations
Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) (BR)
Corresponding author
Gebara, Clarice
Venue
Food Research International
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-05
Volume
51
Issue
2
Pages
872-878
ISSN
0963-9969 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1993644792
Cited by
195
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 3
FWCI
23.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Food Research International (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Foundation for Research Support of the State of São Paulo (FAPESP) (2009/54268-9)
  • National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq)
  • Coordination of Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Microencapsulation and Drying Processes
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Proteins in Food Systems
Keywords
Lactobacillus acidophilus LA-5, probiotic viability, whey protein coatings, microencapsulation, simulated gastrointestinal conditions, ionic gelation, electrostatic coating, gastric juice, intestinal juice, probiotic delivery

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