Cited by 73Probiotics and Fermented FoodsGut microbiota and healthInfant Nutrition and Health

Effects of administration of Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis GCL2505 on defecation frequency and bifidobacterial microbiota composition in humans

Ishizuka, Akihiro, Tomizuka, Kotomi, Aoki, Ryo, Nishijima, Tomohiko, Saito, Yasuo, Inoue, Ryo, Ushida, Kazunari, Mawatari, Takashi +1 more·2012·Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the changes in endogenous bifidobacteria and administered Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis (B. lactis) GCL2505 (GCL2505) in the intestine after administration of GCL2505 by means of a randomized, placebo-controlled double-blind, cross-over study. An increase in the number of total bifidobacteria (the sum of B. bifidum, B. breve, B. longum subsp. longum, B. adolescentis, B. anglatum, B. catenulatum, B. pseudocatenulatum, B. dentium, B. longum subsp. infantis and B. lactis) in the feces were observed after administration of GCL2505 using species- and subspecies-specific real-time polymerase chain reaction analysis. However, the number of endogenous bifidobacteria species (excluding B. lactis) remained unchanged. B. lactis also became the predominant bifidobacterial species. Taking into account the number of GCL2505 administered, the findings further suggested that GCL2505 proliferated in the intestine. In addition, the defecation frequency increased during GCL2505 administration compared with the placebo. Moreover, a single administration study (n=17) clearly demonstrated that GCL2505 successfully reached the intestine before proliferating at least 10-fold. This is the first report to show an increase in intestinal bifidobacteria, with no changes to the endogenous species, and improvements in constipation following proliferation of administered bifidobacteria.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jbiosc.2011.12.016

Cites

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 37 · Cited by 73

Authors
Ishizuka, A., Tomizuka, K., Aoki, R., Nishijima, T., Saito, Y., Inoue, R., Ushida, K., Mawatari, T., & Ikeda, T.
Affiliations
  • Fuji Women's University (JP)
  • Kyoto Prefectural University (JP)
Corresponding author
Ishizuka, Akihiro
Venue
Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-05
Volume
113
Issue
5
Pages
587-591
ISSN
  • 1347-4421 (ISSN-L)
  • 1389-1723
OpenAlex
W2009483198
Cited by
73
References
37
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 7
FWCI
4.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Infant Nutrition and Health
Keywords
probiotics, stool frequency, constipation, Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis
MeSH terms
Adult, Bifidobacterium, Constipation, Defecation, Double-Blind Method, Feces, Female, Humans, Intestines, Male, RNA, Ribosomal, 16S, Colony Count, Microbial, Cross-Over Studies, Biodiversity, Metagenome, Young Adult, Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction

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