Statistical Optimization of Exopolysaccharide Production by Lactobacillus Plantarum NTMI05 and NTMI20
Abstract
In this study, 27 strains of Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) were isolated and identified from different milk sources. All the isolates were biochemically characterized and screened for their ability to produce exopolysaccharides (EPS), among which two isolates namely Lactobacillus plantarum NTMI05 (197mg/L) and Lactobacillus plantarum NTMI20 (187mg/L) showed higher EPS production. Both the isolates were molecular characterized and tested for their probiotic properties. The chemical composition of EPS from L. plantarum NTMI05 and NTMI20 revealed the presence of 95.45% and 92.35% carbohydrates, 14±0.1and 11±0.15mg/L lactic acid, 10.5±0.2 and 9±0.1mg/mL of reducing sugar, respectively. HPLC analysis showed galactose at the retention time of 2.29.The maximum EPS yield was optimized for the media components like glucose (20g/L), yeast extract (25g/L) and ammonium sulphate (2g/L) using Central Composite Design and Response Surface Methodology (RSM). Under optimum conditions the predicted maximum EPS production was 0.891g/L, 0.797g/L, while the actual experimental value was 0.956g/L and 0.827g/L for L. plantarum NTMI05 and NTMI20, respectively. The antioxidant capacity was also evaluated by DPPH and reducing power assay proving the potentiality of these organisms in food and dairy industries.
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?
Different strains of Lpb. plantarum isolated from Turkish sourdough and cow milk showed an average EPS production of 1153.8 μg/10^7 cells and 197 mg/L, respectively.
“Different strains of Lpb. plantarum isolated from different sources—Turkish sourdough and cow milk—showed an average EPS production of 1153.8 µg/107 cells and 197 mg/L, respectively [75,76].”
From Lactic Acid Bacteria Exopolysaccharides Producers: A Sustainable Tool for Functional Foods (2021) · cites this paper as [76]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 66 · Cited by 134
- Authors
- Imran, M. Y. M., Reehana, N., Jayaraj, K. A., Ahamed, A. A. P., Dhanasekaran, D., Thajuddin, N., Alharbi, N. S., & Muralitharan, G.
- Affiliations
- Bharathidasan University (IN)
- King Saud University (SA)
- Corresponding author
- Muralitharan, Gangatharan
- Venue
- International Journal of Biological Macromolecules
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016-12
- Volume
- 93
- Issue
- Pt A
- Pages
- 731-745
- ISSN
- 0141-8130 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2515823130
- Cited by
- 134
- References
- 66
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 4
- FWCI
- 11.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Biological Macromolecules (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Department of Biotechnology (DBT) Government of India, New Delhi,
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Polysaccharides Composition and Applications
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Biopolymer Synthesis and Applications
- Keywords
- exopolysaccharide production, Lactobacillus plantarum, lactic acid bacteria, probiotic properties, galactose, fermentation medium optimization, antioxidant capacity, DPPH radical scavenging, reducing power, dairy biotechnology
- MeSH terms
- Antioxidants, Polysaccharides, Bacterial, Probiotics, Lactiplantibacillus plantarum
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