Phenotypic differences between commercial Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG and L. rhamnosus strains recovered from blood
Abstract
The isolation of clinical isolates that are indistinguishable, by molecular methods, from the probiotic strain of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG has been reported. We compared the virulence potential of these clinical isolates with that of the probiotic strain. It was observed that all isolates differed significantly in 1 or more phenotypic properties.
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
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.
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?
LB may be underdiagnosed, as lactobacilli are difficult to culture and identify, and in many cases have been deemed as contaminants in blood samples.
“LB may be underdiagnosed, as lactobacilli are difficult to culture and identify, and, in many cases, have been deemed as contaminants in blood samples [2,21].”
From Lactobacillus Bacteremia and Probiotics: A Review (2023) · cites this paper as [21]
The Materials and methods section (page unavailable) describes culturing blood isolates and identifying them by PCR and PFGE, but does not say that lactobacilli are difficult to culture or identify. The Discussion (page unavailable) reports a low incidence of Lactobacillus bacteremia; neither it nor the passages retrieved for underdiagnosis and blood-sample contaminants says that cases are underdiagnosed or that isolates are commonly dismissed as contaminants. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 11 · Cited by 44
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Ouwehand AC, Tuomola EM, Lee YK, Salminen S. Microbial inter- actions to intestinal mucosal models. Meth Enzymol 2001; 337:200-12.
- Asahara T, Takahashi M, Nomoto K, et al. Assessment of safety of Lactobacillus strains based on resistance to host innate defence mech- anisms. Clin Diag Lab Immunol 2003; 10:169-73.
- Authors
- Ouwehand, A. C., Saxelins, M., & Salminen, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Turku (FI)
- Valio (Finland) (FI)
- Corresponding author
- Ouwehand, A. C.
- ORCID
- Ouwehand, A. C.
- Venue
- Clinical Infectious Diseases
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2004-12-15
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1858-1860
- ISSN
- 1058-4838 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-6591
- OpenAlex
- W2098706584
- Cited by
- 44
- References
- 11
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 3.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Clinical Infectious Diseases (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Valio
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Neonatal and Maternal Infections
- Keywords
- Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, probiotics, clinical isolates, virulence, phenotypic differences, blood culture isolates
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Lactobacillus, Phenotype, Plasma, Virulence, Bacteremia, Probiotics
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
