Cited by 286Probiotics and Fermented FoodsReproductive tract infections researchInfant Nutrition and Health

Adhesion abilities of dairy Lactobacillus plantarum strains showing an aggregation phenotype

García-Cayuela, Tomás, Korany, Ahmed M., Bustos, Irene, P. Gómez de Cadiñanos, Luz, Requena, Teresa, Peláez, Carmen, Martínez-Cuesta, M. Carmen·2014·Food Research International

Abstract

Bacterial aggregation phenotype and cell surface hydrophobicity of dairy Lactobacillus plantarum strains were screened in order to assess a correlation with their adhesion and pathogen competitive exclusion abilities. Lactobacilli strains showing an aggregation phenotype, L. plantarum IFPL33, IFPL81, IFPL150, IFPL156 and IFPL162, also exhibited the highest percentages of autoaggregation (>50%) at 24h. In addition, autoaggregation abilities of the lactobacilli were highly correlated with their percentages of co-aggregation with all the pathogens tested, although co-aggregation properties were pathogen specific. Nevertheless, none of the autoaggregation and co-aggregation abilities correlated with the affinity to xylene (hydrophobicity) and the ability of adhesion to Caco-2 cells. Furthermore, these properties are not fully correlated with the ability of the lactobacilli strains for inhibiting pathogen adhesion. Aggregation abilities and cell surface hydrophobicity may not be the only components responsible for adhesion but some of the criteria to bear in mind of a complex mechanism that enables microorganisms to interact with the host and exert its beneficial effect. Further research is needed to identify remaining attributes related to adhesion and pathogen exclusion properties of potential probiotic strains.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.foodres.2014.01.010

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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
García-Cayuela, T., Korany, A. M., Bustos, I., P. Gómez de Cadiñanos, L., Requena, T., Peláez, C., & Martínez-Cuesta, M. C.
Affiliations
  • Beni-Suef University (EG)
  • Instituto de Investigación en Ciencias de la Alimentación (ES)
Venue
Food Research International
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-03
Volume
57
Pages
44-50
ISSN
0963-9969 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1973868947
Cited by
286
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 2
FWCI
18.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Food Research International (publishedVersion)
  • DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Spanish Ministry for Science and Innovation
  • Comunidad Autónoma de Madrid
  • CYTED
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Infant Nutrition and Health
Keywords
Lactobacillus plantarum, bacterial adhesion, self-aggregation, co-aggregation, cell surface hydrophobicity, competitive exclusion, probiotics, dairy lactic acid bacteria, Caco-2 cell adhesion, pathogen inhibition

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