Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 644

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Pathogen elimination by probiotic Bacillus via signalling interference

Open access
Piewngam, Pipat, Zheng, Yue, Nguyen, Thuan H., Dickey, Seth W., Joo, Hwang-Soo, Villaruz, Amer E., Glose, Kyle A., Fisher, Emilie L., Hunt, Rachelle L., Li, Barry, Chiou, Janice, Pharkjaksu, Sujiraphong, Khongthong, Sunisa, Cheung, Gordon Y. C., Kiratisin, Pattarachai, Otto, Michael·2018·Nature

Abstract

Probiotic nutrition is frequently claimed to improve human health. In particular, live probiotic bacteria obtained with food are thought to reduce intestinal colonization by pathogens, and thus to reduce susceptibility to infection. However, the mechanisms that underlie these effects remain poorly understood. Here we report that the consumption of probiotic Bacillus bacteria comprehensively abolished colonization by the dangerous pathogen Staphylococcus aureus in a rural Thai population. We show that a widespread class of Bacillus lipopeptides, the fengycins, eliminates S. aureus by inhibiting S. aureus quorum sensing—a process through which bacteria respond to their population density by altering gene regulation. Our study presents a detailed molecular mechanism that underlines the importance of probiotic nutrition in reducing infectious disease. We also provide evidence that supports the biological significance of probiotic bacterial interference in humans, and show that such interference can be achieved by blocking a pathogen’s signalling system. Furthermore, our findings suggest a probiotic-based method for S. aureus decolonization and new ways to fight S. aureus infections. Lipopeptides secreted by Bacillus bacteria block quorum sensing by Staphylococcus aureus and thereby inhibit the growth of this opportunistic pathogen in the gut, suggesting why people in rural Thailand who are colonized by Bacillus are not also colonized by S. aureus.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41586-018-0616-y

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 644

Metadata

Authors
Piewngam, P., Zheng, Y., Nguyen, T. H., Dickey, S. W., Joo, H.-S., Villaruz, A. E., Glose, K. A., Fisher, E. L., Hunt, R. L., Li, B., Chiou, J., Pharkjaksu, S., Khongthong, S., Cheung, G. Y. C., Kiratisin, P., & Otto, M.
Venue
Nature
Published
2018-10
Volume
562
Issue
7728
Pages
532-537
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2897776677
Cited by
644
References
5
FWCI
47.65
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: Pathogen elimination by probiotic Bacillus via signalling interference. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/s41586-018-0616-y
The paper
Piewngam, P., Zheng, Y., Nguyen, T. H., Dickey, S. W., Joo, H.-S., Villaruz, A. E., Glose, K. A., Fisher, E. L., Hunt, R. L., Li, B., Chiou, J., Pharkjaksu, S., Khongthong, S., Cheung, G. Y. C., Kiratisin, P., & Otto, M. (2018). Pathogen elimination by probiotic Bacillus via signalling interference. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0616-y

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.