Cited by 15Probiotics and Fermented FoodsAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyInfant Nutrition and Health

Comparative exoproteome analyses of Lactobacillus spp. reveals species-and strain-specific proteins involved in their extracellular interaction and probiotic potential

Bagon, Bernadette B., Valeriano, Valerie Diane V., Oh, Ju Kyoung, Pajarillo, Edward Alain B., Cho, Chun-Sung, Kang, Dae-Kyung·2018·LWT

Abstract

Due to their health-promoting effects, the probiotic applications of lactobacilli have been investigated. Aside from their basic cellular functions, the extracellular activities of probiotic lactobacilli influence their establishment and interaction with the host. Many extracellular proteins play important roles in bacterial colonization and survival in their host's gastrointestinal environment. In this study, we compared the exoproteome of three lactobacillus strains isolated from the gastrointestinal tracts of pigs and chickens, namely, Lactobacillus mucosae LM1, L. johnsonii PF01, and L. johnsonii C1–10. Extracellular proteins collected in the mid-logarithmic growth phase were identified and quantified using a Q Exactive™ Orbitrap mass spectrometer (MS). Of 99 total extracellular proteins, 83% belonged to L. mucosae LM1; L. johnsonii PF01 strains had fewer extracellular proteins. Enolase, which is involved in the glycolysis pathway and has moonlighting functions in the adhesion of probiotic bacteria, was found in the core exoproteomes of the three strains. The most abundant proteins of each strain were phosphoketolase in L. mucosae LM1, aggregation-promoting factor in L. johnsonii PF01, and levansucrase in L. johnsonii C1–10. The observed differences between these three exoproteomes in terms of cellular and molecular function elucidate the extracellular activities of these isolates.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.lwt.2018.03.069

Cites

51 of 51 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
Bagon, B. B., Valeriano, V. D. V., Oh, J. K., Pajarillo, E. A. B., Cho, C.-S., & Kang, D.-K.
Affiliations
  • Dankook University (KR)
  • Dankook University Hospital (KR)
Corresponding author
Kang, Dae-Kyung
Venue
LWT
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-07
Volume
93
Pages
420-426
ISSN
0023-6438 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2795000862
Cited by
15
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1
FWCI
1.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
LWT (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2016R1D1A1A09918986)
  • Next-Generation BioGreen 21 Program (PJ01322303)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Nutrition and Physiology
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Infant Nutrition and Health
Keywords
Lactobacillus, exoproteome, probiotic bacteria, extracellular proteins, Lactobacillus mucosae, Lactobacillus johnsonii, enolase, phosphoketolase, levansucrase, bacterial adhesion, host colonization

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