CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 247Probiotics and Fermented FoodsInfant Nutrition and HealthGut microbiota and health

Culture-dependent and culture-independent qualitative analysis of probiotic products claimed to contain bifidobacteria

Masco, L., Huys, G., De Brandt, E., Temmerman, R., Swings, J.·2005·International Journal of Food Microbiology
DOI 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2004.11.018
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A total of 58 probiotic products obtained worldwide, which were claimed to contain Bifidobacterium strains (including 22 yoghurts, 5 dairy fruit drinks, 28 food supplements and 3 pharmaceutical preparations) were investigated in parallel using a culture-dependent and a culture-independent approach. Three isolation media previously reported as selective for Bifidobacterium were evaluated for their suitability in the quality analysis of these products. Subsequently, possible bifidobacterial colonies were picked from the best medium and identified by means of rep-PCR fingerprinting using the BOX primer (BOX-PCR). Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis, formerly classified as Bifidobacterium lactis, was most frequently found, but strains belonging to Bifidobacterium longum biotypes longum and infantis, Bifidobacterium bifidum and Bifidobacterium breve were recovered also. In parallel, all products were also subjected to culture-independent analysis which involved a nested-PCR step on total bacterial DNA extracted directly from the product, followed by separation of the amplicons by Denaturing Gradient Gel Electrophoresis (DGGE) and subsequent identification of species from the band patterns. By conventional cultivation, 70.7% of the products analysed were found to contain culturable bifidobacteria whereas by culture-independent DGGE analysis members of the genus Bifidobacterium could be detected in 96.5% of the analysed products. Genotypic characterization of a number of bifidobacterial isolates at the strain level by means of Pulsed-Field Gel Electrophoresis (PFGE) revealed a relatively high degree of genomic homogeneity among the Bifidobacterium strains currently used in the probiotic industry.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2004.11.018

Cites

22 of 22 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?

  • In the human gut the most commonly found species of Bifidobacterium genus include B. adolescentis, B. angulatum, B. bifidum, B. breve, B. catenulatum, B. dentium, B. longum, B. pseudocatenulatum, and B. pseudolongum, whereas B. animalis subsp. lactis is the species most often included in functional foods and food supplements.

    “In the human gut the most commonly found species of Bifidobacterium genus include B. adolescentis, B. angulatum, B. bifidum, B. breve, B. catenulatum, B. dentium, B. longum, B. pseudocatenulatum, and B. pseudolongum [91] , whereas B. animalis subsp.lactis is the species most often included in functional foods and food supplements [92] .”

    From Intestinal microbiota in health and disease: Role of bifidobacteria in gut homeostasis (2014) · cites this paper as [92]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Masco, L., Huys, G., De Brandt, E., Temmerman, R., & Swings, J.
Affiliations
Ghent University (BE)
Corresponding author
Masco, L.
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of Food Microbiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-07
Volume
102
Issue
2
Pages
221-230
ISSN
0168-1605 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2004.11.018
OpenAlex
W2045664599
Cited by
247
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 22
FWCI
24.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • International Journal of Food Microbiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Infant Nutrition and Health
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
Keywords
probiotic products, Bifidobacterium, yogurt, dietary supplements, pharmaceutical preparations, selective isolation media, BOX-PCR fingerprinting, denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis, Bifidobacterium longum, Bifidobacterium bifidum, Bifidobacterium breve, probiotic quality control
MeSH terms
Bifidobacterium, Culture Media, DNA, Bacterial, Electrophoresis, Agar Gel, Food Labeling, Humans, Colony Count, Microbial, Polymerase Chain Reaction, Electrophoresis, Gel, Pulsed-Field, Probiotics

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