The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Inhibition of Staphylococcus aureus by the commensal bacteria of human milk
Abstract
AIMS: To study the bacterial diversity in expressed human milk with a focus on detecting bacteria with an antimicrobial activity against Staphylococcus aureus, known as a causative agent of maternal breast infections and neonatal infections. METHODS AND RESULTS: Random isolates (n = 509) were collected from breast milk samples (n = 40) of healthy lactating women, genotypically identified, and tested for antimicrobial activity against Staph. aureus. Commensal staphylococci (64%) and oral streptococci (30%), with Staph. epidermidis, Strep. salivarius, and Strep. mitis as the most frequent isolates, were the predominant bacterial species in breast milk. One-fifth of Staph. epidermidis and half of Strep. salivarius isolates suppressed growth of Staph. aureus. Enterococci (Ent. faecalis), isolated from 7.5% of samples, and lactic acid bacteria (LAB) (Lactobacillus rhamnosus, Lact. crispatus, Lactococcus lactis, Leuconoctoc mesenteroides), isolated from 12.5% of samples, were also effective against Staph. aureus. One L. lactis isolate was shown to produce nisin, a bacteriocin used in food industry to prevent bacterial pathogens and spoilage. CONCLUSIONS: Expressed breast milk contains commensal bacteria, which inhibit Staph. aureus. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: The strains inhibitory against the pathogen Staph. aureus have potential use as bacteriotherapeutic agents in preventing neonatal and maternal breast infections caused by this bacterium.
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
Bacteriocins: safe, natural antimicrobials for food preservation.
Cleveland, J., Montville, T. J., Nes, I. F., & Chikindas, M. L. (2001) · International Journal of Food Microbiology · doi:10.1016/s0168-1605(01)00560-8 · Cited by 1,835
Cited by
The microbiome in early life: Implications for health outcomes
Tamburini, S., Shen, N., Wu, H. C., & Clemente, J. C. (2016) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/nm.4142 · Cited by 1,213
The Intestinal Microbiome in Early Life: Health and Disease
Arrieta, M.-C., Stiemsma, L. T., Amenyogbe, N., Brown, E. M., & Finlay, B. (2014) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2014.00427 · Cited by 1,024
The Complex Microbiota of Raw Milk
Quigley, L., O'Sullivan, O., Stanton, C., Beresford, T. P., Ross, R. P., Fitzgerald, G. F., & Cotter, P. D. (2013) · FEMS Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1111/1574-6976.12030 · Cited by 919
Our gut microbiome: The evolving inner self
Kundu, P., Blacher, E., Elinav, E., & Pettersson, S. (2017) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2017.11.024 · Cited by 633
Development of the gut microbiota in infancy and its impact on health in later life
Tanaka, M., & Nakayama, J. (2017) · Allergology International · doi:10.1016/j.alit.2017.07.010 · Cited by 639
Metadata
- Authors
- Heikkila, M. P., & Saris, P. E. J.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Microbiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-09
- Volume
- 95
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 471-478
- ISSN
- 1364-5072 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2672
- OpenAlex
- W2007743314
- Cited by
- 500
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 5.26
- 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: Inhibition of Staphylococcus aureus by the commensal bacteria of human milk. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2672.2003.02002.x
- The paper
- Heikkila, M. P., & Saris, P. E. J. (2003). Inhibition of Staphylococcus aureus by the commensal bacteria of human milk. Journal of Applied Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2672.2003.02002.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.