Identification, characterization, and probiotic potential of Lactobacillus rhamnosus isolated from human milk
Abstract
Breast milk is a source of lactic acid bacteria with remarkable functional and Technological properties; it is also a potential source of probiotics. In the present study, seven strains of Lactobacillus rhamnosus were isolated from breast milk and identified according to their 16S rDNA sequences. Furthermore, their probiotic potential was evaluated. The probiotic properties were tested for aspects of antibiotic susceptibility, antimicrobial activity, lysozyme tolerance, gut condition tolerance (low pH, bile salt tolerance, and 0.4% phenol resistance), hydrophobicity, antioxidant ability, aggregation ability, and adhesion to Caco-2. Most isolates were resistant to Streptomycin, Ampicillin, Gentamicin, Kanamycin, Penicillin, Cephalotoxin, and Ciprofloxacin. The isolate shows a strong ability to adhere to Caco-2 cells as well as DPPH radical scavenging activity in the range of 76%–85%. Isolates SHA113 and SHA117 showed a high survival rate under gastrointestinal tract conditions (>80%), indicating excellent potential for application as probiotics. The results of these tests indicate that the lactic acid bacteria isolated from human milk have excellent potential for use as probiotics in various products.
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?
A previous study reported survival rates of over 80% and 60% by LAB isolates from human origin after incubation for 3 h at pH 2.5% and 0.3% bile salt, respectively.
“A previous study [49] reported survival rates of over 80% and 60% by LAB isolates from human origin after incubation for 3 h at pH 2.5% and 0.3% bile salt, respectively.”
From Bioprophylactic potential of novel human colostrum probiotics via apoptotic induction of colon cancer cells and cell immune activation (2022) · cites this paper as [49]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 60 · Cited by 198
- Authors
- Riaz Rajoka, M. S., Mehwish, H. M., Siddiq, M., Haobin, Z., Zhu, J., Yan, L., Shao, D., Xu, X., & Shi, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Agriculture Faisalabad (PK)
- Northwestern Polytechnical University (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Shi, Junling
- Venue
- LWT
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-10
- Volume
- 84
- Pages
- 271-280
- ISSN
- 0023-6438 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2618402943
- Cited by
- 198
- References
- 60
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 16.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- LWT (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Key Technology R&D Program (2015BAD16B02)
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (31201408, 31471718)
- 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 › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Animal Diversity and Health Studies
- Keywords
- Lactobacillus rhamnosus, breast milk, probiotics, lactic acid bacteria, 16S rRNA identification, antibiotic susceptibility, antimicrobial activity, bile salt tolerance, phenol resistance, hydrophobicity, antioxidant activity, cell adhesion, Caco-2 cells, gastrointestinal survival, DPPH radical scavenging
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