Cited by 122Mycotoxins in Agriculture and FoodProbiotics and Fermented FoodsEssential Oils and Antimicrobial Activity

Antifungal effect of organic acids from lactic acid bacteria on Penicillium nordicum

Open access
Guimarães, Ana, Venancio, Armando, Abrunhosa, Luís·2018·Food Additives & Contaminants: Part A

Abstract

The control of fungal contamination is particularly important to avoid both spoilage of food and feed products and the occurrence of toxic compounds, known as mycotoxins. Some lactic acid bacteria (LAB) strains have shown the capacity to inhibit fungal growth and the production of mycotoxins. In this work, cell-free supernatants (CFS) of Lactobacillus plantarum UM55 and Lactobacillus buchneri UTAD104 were tested against Penicillium nordicum radial growth and OTA production. When CFS of these strains were used, the radial growth of the fungus was inhibited by less than 20%, but the production of OTA was reduced by approx. 60%. These antifungal effects resulted from organic acids produced by LAB. The CFS of L. plantarum UM55 contained lactic acid, phenyllactic acid (PLA), hydroxyphenyllactic acid (OH-PLA) and indole lactic acid (ILA), while L. buchneri UTAD104 CFS contained acetic acid, lactic acid and PLA. These organic acids were further tested individually for their inhibitory capacity. Calculation of the inhibitory concentrations (ICs) showed that acetic acid, ILA and PLA were the most effective in inhibiting P. nordicum growth and OTA production. When the inhibitory activity of LAB cells incorporated into the culture medium was tested, L. buchneri UTAD104 inhibited the production of OTA entirely in all conditions tested, but fungal growth was only inhibited completely by the highest concentrations of cells. Acetic acid production was primarily responsible for this effect.…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/19440049.2018.1500718

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Guimarães, A., Venancio, A., & Abrunhosa, L.
Affiliations
  • University of Minho (PT)
  • CEB - Centre of Biological Engineering, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal
Venue
Food Additives & Contaminants: Part A
Published
2018-08-06
Volume
35
Issue
9
Pages
1803-1818
ISSN
  • 1944-0049 (ISSN-L)
  • 1944-0057
OpenAlex
W2767922233
Cited by
122
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 4
FWCI
7.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Food Additives & Contaminants Part A (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (UMINHO/BPD/51/2015, UID/BIO/04469/2013)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Mycotoxins in Agriculture and Food
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Essential Oils and Antimicrobial Activity
Keywords
lactic acid bacteria, Penicillium nordicum, organic acids, antifungal activity, mycotoxin production, ochratoxin A, Lactobacillus plantarum, Lactobacillus buchneri, phenyllactic acid, acetic acid, lactic acid, cell-free supernatant, fungal growth inhibition, dry-cured meat, cheese
MeSH terms
Antifungal Agents, Microbial Sensitivity Tests, Penicillium, Acetic Acid, Lactic Acid, Lactobacillales

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