Cited by 1,013Probiotics and Fermented FoodsReproductive tract infections researchGut microbiota and health

Genes and Molecules of Lactobacilli Supporting Probiotic Action

Open access
Lebeer, Sarah, Vanderleyden, Jos, De Keersmaecker, Sigrid C. J.·2008·Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews

Abstract

SUMMARY: Lactobacilli have been crucial for the production of fermented products for centuries. They are also members of the mutualistic microbiota present in the human gastrointestinal and urogenital tract. Recently, increasing attention has been given to their probiotic, health-promoting capacities. Many human intervention studies demonstrating health effects have been published. However, as not all studies resulted in positive outcomes, scientific interest arose regarding the precise mechanisms of action of probiotics. Many reported mechanistic studies have addressed mainly the host responses, with less attention being focused on the specificities of the bacterial partners, notwithstanding the completion of Lactobacillus genome sequencing projects, and increasing possibilities of genomics-based and dedicated mutant analyses. In this emerging and highly interdisciplinary field, microbiologists are facing the challenge of molecular characterization of probiotic traits. This review addresses the advances in the understanding of the probiotic-host interaction with a focus on the molecular microbiology of lactobacilli. Insight into the molecules and genes involved should contribute to a more judicious application of probiotic lactobacilli and to improved screening of novel potential probiotics.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/mmbr.00017-08

Cites

293 of 293 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Genomics is required to identify and elucidate antimicrobial genetic determinants, including bacteriocin and AMP biosynthesis gene clusters, which play critical roles in probiotic-mediated inhibition of pathogenic bacteria.

    “In particular, genomics is required to identify and elucidate antimicrobial genetic determinants, including bacteriocin and AMP biosynthesis gene clusters, which play critical roles in probiotic-mediated inhibition of pathogenic bacteria [13].”

    From Comparative Genomics-Based Evaluation of <i>Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus</i> KFOM 0134 as a Probiotic against <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

    The ‘Genetic Tools to Study Lactobacilli’ section says genome comparisons can identify candidate genetic traits, and ‘Production of antimicrobial compounds’ describes bacteriocin loci and a bacteriocin that reduced Listeria infection in mice. But the paper does not say genomics is required: it says genome sequences need to be complemented by functional studies. It identifies bacteriocins as antimicrobial peptides, but does not establish a separate category of AMP biosynthesis gene clusters. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Studies have suggested a set of genes associated with resistance to stress, active metabolism in the host, adhesion, and immunomodulation as genes with probiotic properties.

    “Studies have suggested a set of genes associated with resistance to stress, active metabolism in the host, adhesion, and immunomodulation as genes with probiotic properties [37,38,39].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. In G. W. Tannock (ed.), Probiotics & prebiotics: scientific aspects. Caister Academic Press, Norfolk, United Kingdom.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lebeer, S., Vanderleyden, J., & De Keersmaecker, S. C. J.
Affiliations
  • KU Leuven (BE)
  • Centre of Microbial and Plant Genetics, K. U. Leuven, Kasteelpark Arenberg 20, 3001 Leuven, Belgium
Venue
Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
Published
2008-12
Volume
72
Issue
4
Pages
728-764
ISSN
  • 1092-2172 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-5557
OpenAlex
W2100189539
Cited by
1,013
References
290
Citations by year
2026: 62 · 2025: 55 · 2024: 51 · 2023: 53 · 2022: 73 · 2021: 66 · 2020: 82 · 2019: 65 · 2018: 61 · 2017: 62 · 2016: 40 · 2015: 62 · 2014: 63 · 2013: 53 · 2012: 55
FWCI
4.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
  • Vlaamse regering
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
Keywords
lactobacilli, probiotics, probiotic mechanisms of action, mutant analysis, probiotic screening, fermented foods, gut microbiota, urogenital microbiota
MeSH terms
Animals, Food Microbiology, Genes, Bacterial, Humans, Intestines, Lactobacillus, 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