The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Lactic acid starter and probiotic bacteria: a comparative “in vitro” study of probiotic characteristics and biological barrier resistance
Open accessAbstract
Probiotic characteristics (deconjugation of bile salts, hydrophobicity and β-galactosidase activity) and the resistance to biological barriers (gastric juice and bile salts) of 24 strains of lactic acid starter bacteria (Streptococcus thermophilus, Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus and Lactococcus lactis) and 24 strains of probiotic bacteria (Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus casei, Lactobacillus rhamnosus and bifidobacteria) were compared. Among the probiotic bacteria tested, Lactobacillus acidophilus was the most interesting species since it showed high values of resistance to gastric juice and bile, hydrophobicity and β-galactosidase and bile salts deconjugation activities. Bifidobacterium bifidum strains showed the same behavior, although the values of the parameters investigated were slightly lower than those obtained for Lactobacillus acidophilus. On the other hand, it was demonstrated that Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus was the lactic acid starter species with the best probiotic characteristics among the starter species assessed. It was resistant to gastric juice and bile, and showed high values for β-galactosidase activity. On the other hand, lactic acid starter bacteria showed hydrophobicity values similar to or higher than those obtained for the strains of the Lactobacillus casei . According to the results found, the total probiotic value of a fermented dairy product should take into account not only the intestinal probiotic cultures used in the formulation but also the probiotic contribution of the lactic acid starter microflora.
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
Cites
Charteris, Kelly, Morelli, & Collins (1998) · Journal of Applied Microbiology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2672.1998.00407.x · Cited by 774
Marteau, P., Minekus, M., Havenaar, R., & Huis In’t Veld, J. H. J. (1997) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(97)76027-2 · Cited by 488
Cited by
Probiotic functional foods: Survival of probiotics during processing and storage
Tripathi, M. K., & Giri, S. K. (2014) · Journal of Functional Foods · doi:10.1016/j.jff.2014.04.030 · Cited by 1,181
β Galactosidases and their potential applications: a review
Husain, Q. (2010) · Critical Reviews in Biotechnology · doi:10.3109/07388550903330497 · Cited by 420
Angmo, K., Kumari, A., Savitri, & Bhalla, T. C. (2016) · LWT - Food Science and Technology · doi:10.1016/j.lwt.2015.10.057 · Cited by 379
Removal of Cholesterol by Lactobacilli via Incorporation and Conversion to Coprostanol
Lye, H.-S., Rusul, G., & Liong, M.-T. (2010) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.2009-2574 · Cited by 338
Bustos, A. Y., Font de Valdez, G., Fadda, S., & Taranto, M. P. (2018) · Food Research International · doi:10.1016/j.foodres.2018.06.035 · Cited by 232
Metadata
- Authors
- Vinderola, C. G., & Reinheimer, J. A.
- Venue
- Food Research International
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2003-01
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 9-10
- Pages
- 895-904
- ISSN
- 0963-9969 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1979781775
- Cited by
- 569
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 10.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Lactic acid starter and probiotic bacteria: a comparative “in vitro” study of probiotic characteristics and biological barrier resistance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0963-9969(03)00098-x
- The paper
- Vinderola, C. G., & Reinheimer, J. A. (2003). Lactic acid starter and probiotic bacteria: a comparative “in vitro” study of probiotic characteristics and biological barrier resistance. Food Research International. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0963-9969(03)00098-x
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.