Cited by 17Probiotics and Fermented FoodsInfant Nutrition and HealthAnimal Diversity and Health Studies

Probiotic potential of Lactobacillus paraplantarum BT‐11 isolated from raw buffalo ( Bubalus bubalis ) milk and characterization of bacteriocin‐like inhibitory substance produced

Kalhoro, Muhammad Saleem, Visessanguan, Wonnop, Nguyen, Loc Thai, Anal, Anil Kumar·2019·Journal of Food Processing and Preservation

Abstract

This study aimed to isolate bacteriocin-like inhibitory substance (BLIS) producing strains from raw buffalo milk and characterize their probiotic and antimicrobial potential. The BT-11 isolate was identified through 16S rDNA gene sequencing and recA gene amplification as Lactobacillus paraplantarum. The BT-11 strain survived in low pH (2, 3) and bile (0.5, 1, and 2%) for 3 hr of incubation. The strain exhibited adhesion to Caco-2 cells (69.85%), auto-aggregation (89.74%), and hydrophobicity (81.76%). The BLIS produced by BT-11 showed antibacterial activity against indicator bacteria including multidrug-resistant pathogens. Time–kill kinetic analysis revealed the reduction in the growth of Staphylococcus aureus and Salmonella typhimurium (>3 Log CFU/ml) in time-dependent manner. BLIS showed biopreservative effect in meat contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes. The results concluded that L. paraplantarum BT-11 is potential probiotic strain with potential to produce BLISs. Practical applications Raw buffalo milk represents excellent source of unexplored potential probiotics with antimicrobial characteristics. In this study, the Lactobacillus paraplantarum BT-11 was isolated from raw buffalo milk and its probiotic potential and bacteriocin-like inhibitory substance (BLIS) was characterized. The results demonstrated that L. paraplantarum BT-11 is promising potential probiotic. The BLIS produced by L. paraplantarum BT-11 showed antagonistic activity against pathogens including multidrug-resistant foodborne bacteria. BLIS also showed biopreservative potential in meat against Listeria monocytogenes. L. paraplantarum and its antimicrobial compound can be used as bio preservative agent in food safety applications.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jfpp.14015

Cites

59 of 59 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
Kalhoro, M. S., Visessanguan, W., Nguyen, L. T., & Anal, A. K.
Affiliations
  • Asian Institute of Technology (TH)
  • National Science and Technology Development Agency (TH)
Corresponding author
Anal, Anil Kumar
Venue
Journal of Food Processing and Preservation
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-05-20
Volume
43
Issue
8
ISSN
  • 0145-8892 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-4549
OpenAlex
W2944967174
Cited by
17
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2
FWCI
1.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Food Processing and Preservation (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 › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Animal Diversity and Health Studies
Keywords
Lactobacillus paraplantarum, probiotics, bacteriocin-like inhibitory substances, antimicrobial activity, multidrug-resistant bacteria, Staphylococcus aureus, Salmonella typhimurium, Listeria monocytogenes, biopreservation, meat preservation, bile tolerance, acid resistance, cell adhesion, self-aggregation, hydrophobicity, food safety

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