Cited by 267Probiotics and Fermented FoodsInfant Nutrition and HealthReproductive tract infections research

Assessment of cell surface properties and adhesion potential of selected probiotic strains

Xu, H., Jeong, H.S., Lee, H.Y., Ahn, J.·2009·Letters in Applied Microbiology

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate the physicochemical cell surface and adhesive properties of selected probiotic strains for human use. METHODS AND RESULTS: Probiotic strains, Bifidobacterium longum B6, Lactobacillus acidophilus ADH, Lactobacillus paracasei, Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, Lactobacillus brevis, Lactobacillus casei, Leuconostoc mesenteroides and Pediococcus acidilactici were tested for the physicochemical properties of cell surfaces and the adhesion abilities against foodborne pathogens. Bif. longum B6 (53.6%) and Lact. rhamnosus GG (46.5%) showed the highest hydrophobicity, while the least affinity to xylene was observed in Ped. acidilactici (10.4%). Bifidobacterium longum B6 showed the strongest coaggregation phenotype with Listeria monocytogenes (53.0%), Shigella boydii (42.0%) and Staphylococcus aureus (45.9%). Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG had the strong binding ability to Caco-2 cells and effectively inhibited the adhesion of L. monocytogenes, Salmonella Typhimurium, Sh. boydii and Staph. aureus to Caco-2 cells. The hydrophobicity was highly correlated with coaggregative abilities and competitive inhibition, suggesting a good relationship between in vitro adhesion and in vivo colonization. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that Bif. longum B6 and Lact. rhamnosus GG can be candidate probiotics available for human consumption. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: Because the use of probiotic strains has been more concerned with their beneficial effects in the GI tract, it is essential to examine the potential of probiotic strains based on the physicochemical properties in terms of bacterial-binding and adhesion capabilities.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1472-765x.2009.02684.x

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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
Xu, H., Jeong, H. S., Lee, H. Y., & Ahn, J.
Affiliations
Kangwon National University (KR)
Corresponding author
Ahn, J.
Venue
Letters in Applied Microbiology
Published
2009-10
Volume
49
Issue
4
Pages
434-442
ISSN
  • 0266-8254 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-765X
OpenAlex
W2072004656
Cited by
267
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 41 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 8
FWCI
7.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Letters in Applied Microbiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Infant Nutrition and Health
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
Keywords
probiotic strains, cell surface hydrophobicity, bacterial adhesion, co-aggregation, competitive inhibition, Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, foodborne pathogens, Listeria monocytogenes, Staphylococcus aureus, Shigella boydii, Salmonella typhimurium, probiotic colonization, Leuconostoc mesenteroides, Pediococcus acidilactici
MeSH terms
Bacteria, Bacterial Adhesion, Humans, Surface Properties, Bacterial Physiological Phenomena, Caco-2 Cells, 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