Comprehensive probiogenomics analysis of the commensal Escherichia coli CEC15 as a potential probiotic strain
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Background: Probiotics have gained attention for their potential maintaining gut and immune homeostasis. They have been found to confer protection against pathogen colonization, possess immunomodulatory effects, enhance gut barrier functionality, and mitigate inflammation. However, a thorough understanding of the unique mechanisms of effects triggered by individual strains is necessary to optimize their therapeutic efficacy. Probiogenomics, involving high-throughput techniques, can help identify uncharacterized strains and aid in the rational selection of new probiotics. This study evaluates the potential of the Escherichia coli CEC15 strain as a probiotic through in silico , in vitro , and in vivo analyses, comparing it to the well-known probiotic reference E. coli Nissle 1917. Genomic analysis was conducted to identify traits with potential beneficial activity and to assess the safety of each strain (genomic islands, bacteriocin production, antibiotic resistance, production of proteins involved in host homeostasis, and proteins with adhesive properties). In vitro studies assessed survival in gastrointestinal simulated conditions and adhesion to cultured human intestinal cells. Safety was evaluated in BALB/c mice, monitoring the impact of E. coli consumption on clinical signs, intestinal architecture, intestinal permeability, and fecal microbiota. Additionally, the protective effects of both strains were assessed in a murine model of 5-FU-induced mucositis. Results: CEC15 mitigates inflammation, reinforces intestinal barrier, and modulates intestinal microbiota. In silico analysis revealed fewer pathogenicity-related traits in CEC15, when compared to Nissle 1917, with fewer toxin-associated genes and no gene suggesting the production of colibactin (a genotoxic agent). Most predicted antibiotic-resistance genes were neither associated with actual resistance, nor with transposable elements. The genome of CEC15 strain encodes proteins related to stress tolerance and to adhesion, in line with its better survival during digestion and higher adhesion to intestinal cells, when compared to Nissle 1917. Moreover, CEC15 exhibited beneficial effects on mice and their intestinal microbiota, both in healthy animals and against 5FU-induced intestinal mucositis. Conclusions: These findings suggest that the CEC15 strain holds promise as a probiotic, as it could modulate the intestinal microbiota, providing immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory effects, and reinforcing the intestinal barrier. These findings may have implications for the treatment of gastrointestinal disorders, particularly some forms of diarrhea.
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?
E. coli CEC15 is positive for the hly gene.
“The strain is positive for the hly gene [50].”
From Selection, Comparative Genomics, and Potential Probiotic Features of Escherichia coli 5C, a pks-Negative Strain Isolated from Healthy Infant Donor Feces (2026) · cites this paper as [50]
The Results section, “CEC15 and EcN did not present hemolytic activity” (page unavailable), reports a gene encoding hemolysin HlyE in CEC15. It does not identify a gene named simply hly, so it supports the presence of a hemolysin-related gene but not the precise gene designation in the claim. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredE. coli CEC15 is a pks-negative strain.
“To our knowledge, only the strain E. coli CEC15, isolated from a suckling rat pup and initially developed for probiotic purpose, but never commercialized for human use, is a pks-negative strain [50].”
From Selection, Comparative Genomics, and Potential Probiotic Features of Escherichia coli 5C, a pks-Negative Strain Isolated from Healthy Infant Donor Feces (2026) · cites this paper as [50]
All 25 recovered presumptive E. coli strains were confirmed to belong to the E. coli species by species-specific PCR.
“All of them were confirmed to belong to E. coli species by species-specific PCR [50].”
From Selection, Comparative Genomics, and Potential Probiotic Features of Escherichia coli 5C, a pks-Negative Strain Isolated from Healthy Infant Donor Feces (2026) · cites this paper as [50]
The Methods (In silico analysis; no page given) describe two E. coli strains used in this study and genomic analysis, not 25 recovered presumptive isolates. Searches for species-specific PCR and isolate identification found no passage confirming that all 25 strains were identified by that method; the paper's RT-qPCR assay addresses a different purpose. (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 187 · Cited by 11
- Authors
- da Silva, T. F., Glória, R. D. A., de Sousa, T. J., Americo, M. F., Freitas, A. D. S., Viana, M. V. C., de Jesus, L. C. L., da Silva Prado, L. C., Daniel, N., Ménard, O., Cochet, M.-F., Dupont, D., Jardin, J., Borges, A. D., Fernandes, S. O. A., Cardoso, V. N., Brenig, B., Ferreira, E., Profeta, R., Aburjaile, F. F., de Carvalho, R. D. O., Langella, P., Le Loir, Y., Cherbuy, C., Jan, G., Azevedo, V., & Guédon, É.
- Affiliations
- Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (BR)
- Institut National de Recherche pour l'Agriculture, l'Alimentation et l'Environnement (FR)
- University of Göttingen (DE)
- AgroParisTech (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Guédon, Éric
- ORCID
- Venue
- BMC Microbiology
- Published
- 2023-11-27
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 364-364
- ISSN
- 1471-2180 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC10680302
- OpenAlex
- W4389055642
- Cited by
- 11
- References
- 187
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 6
- FWCI
- 1.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- BMC Microbiology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- GoeScholar The Publication Server of the Georg-August-Universität Göttingen (Georg-August-Universität Göttingen) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- This work was supported by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) and National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) from Brazil.
- This work has received financial support from INRAE (Rennes, France) and Institut Agro (Rennes, France).
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Endocrinology › Escherichia coli research studies
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
- Keywords
- probiotic strains, probiogenomics, Escherichia coli Nissle 1917, gut commensal bacteria, intestinal mucositis, intestinal barrier, intestinal permeability, gut microbiota, colibactin, bacteriocin production, antibiotic resistance genes, bacterial adhesion, simulated gastrointestinal conditions, immunomodulation, inflammation
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Escherichia coli, Humans, Inflammation, Probiotics, Escherichia coli Proteins, Mice, Mucositis
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