The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Examination of Strains of Lactobacilli for Properties that May Influence Bacterial Interference in the Urinary Tract
Abstract
Lactobacilli strains vary in their ability to interfere with colonization of uroepithelial cells by pathogenic organisms. Bacterial size, adherence capability, competitive exclusion and inhibition of pathogenic growth were examined in selected strains of lactobacilli to assess their relative importance. We tested adherence to uroepithelial cells of 34 lactobacillus isolates originating from the urogenital tract, dairy sources and chickens, and 1 lactobacillus strain isolated from a commercially available preparation. The ability to adhere differed greatly among the 34 strains, with a range of 8 to 74 bacteria per cell, and the commercial strain attached poorly with a mean of 15 bacteria per cell. Eleven strains of lactobacilli were selected and found to differ in length and width dimensions. These strains were found to exclude competitively with varying efficiency 6 strains of uropathogens from adhering to uroepithelial cells. The effective ability of Lactobacillus casei GR-1 to exclude the uropathogens confirmed previous findings and other strains (GR-2, GR-3 and A-60) gave a similar range of exclusion. The lactobacillus isolates varied greatly in their ability to inhibit the growth of 11 uropathogens under the conditions of an agar overlay inhibition assay. A combination score was allocated to each of the 11 lactobacillus strains based on size, adherence, exclusion and inhibition. Lactobacillus casei GR-1 attained the highest score while the commercial strain attained the lowest score. The results of this study identified 4 properties that should be examined to select lactobacillus strains before embarking upon bacterial interference studies to prevent urinary tract and other infections in humans.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Potential Uses of Probiotics in Clinical Practice
Reid, G., Jass, J., Sebulsky, M. T., & McCormick, J. K. (2003) · Clinical Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1128/cmr.16.4.658-672.2003 · Cited by 912
Self-citationProbiotic Spectra of Lactic Acid Bacteria (LAB)
Naidu, A. S., Bidlack, W. R., & Clemens, R. A. (1999) · Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition · doi:10.1080/10408699991279187 · Cited by 698
Survival ofLactobacillus species (strain GG) in human gastrointestinal tract
Goldin, B. R., Gorbach, S. L., Saxelin, M., Barakat, S., Gualtieri, L., & Salminen, S. (1992) · Digestive Diseases and Sciences · doi:10.1007/bf01308354 · Cited by 554
Lactobacillus species as biomarkers and agents that can promote various aspects of vaginal health
Petrova, M. I., Lievens, E., Malik, S., Imholz, N., & Lebeer, S. (2015) · Frontiers in Physiology · doi:10.3389/fphys.2015.00081 · Cited by 523
Probiotic agents to protect the urogenital tract against infection
Reid, G. (2001) · The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1093/ajcn/73.2.437s · Cited by 259
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Reid, G., Cook, R. L., & Bruce, A. W.
- Venue
- Journal of Urology
- Published
- 1987-08
- Volume
- 138
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 330-335
- ISSN
- 0022-5347 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-3792
- OpenAlex
- W23200840
- Cited by
- 251
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 16.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Examination of Strains of Lactobacilli for Properties that May Influence Bacterial Interference in the Urinary Tract. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0022-5347(17)43137-5
- The paper
- Reid, G., Cook, R. L., & Bruce, A. W. (1987). Examination of Strains of Lactobacilli for Properties that May Influence Bacterial Interference in the Urinary Tract. Journal of Urology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(17)43137-5
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.