Cited by 569Probiotics and Fermented FoodsAgricultural safety and regulationsBacterial Genetics and Biotechnology

The Genus Enterococcus: Between Probiotic Potential and Safety Concerns—An Update

Open access
Hanchi, Hasna, Mottawea, Walid, Sebei, Khaled, Hammami, Riadh·2018·Frontiers in Microbiology

Abstract

A considerable number of strains belonging to different species of Enterococcus are highly competitive due to their resistance to wide range of pH and temperature. Their competitiveness is also owed to their ability to produce bacteriocins recognized for their wide-range effectiveness on pathogenic and spoilage bacteria. Enterococcal bacteriocins have attracted great research interest as natural antimicrobial agents in the food industry, and as a potential drug candidate for replacing antibiotics in order to treat multiple drugs resistance pathogens. However, the prevalence of virulence factors and antibiotic-resistance genes and the ability to cause disease could compromise their application in food, human and animal health. From the current regulatory point of view, the genus Enterococcus is neither recommended for the QPS list nor have GRAS status. Although recent advances in molecular biology and the recommended methods for the safety evaluation of Enterococcus strains allowed the distinction between commensal and clinical clades, development of highly adapted methods and legislations are still required. In the present review, we evaluate some aspects of Enterococcus spp. related to their probiotic properties and safety concerns as well as the current and potential application in food systems and treatment of infections. The regulatory status of commensal Enterococcus candidates for food/feed/probiotic use and recommended methods to assess and ensure their safety are also discussed.

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 · 10.3389/fmicb.2018.01791

Cites

184 of 184 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?

  • Saccharomyces strains have a higher survival capacity when passing through the digestive tract compared with other probiotics, help maintain the balance of the normal microflora of the intestinal tract, and have immunomodulatory effects.

    “This is because, when passing through the digestive tract, Saccharomyces strains have a higher survival capacity compared with the other probiotics. Also, these strains help to maintain the balance of the normal microflora of the intestinal tract and have immunomodulatory effects, acting to fine-tune immunological pathways during pathogenic infections or chronic diseases [32,33,34].”

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

5 of the 189 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hanchi, H., Mottawea, W., Sebei, K., & Hammami, R.
Affiliations
  • Tunis University (TN)
  • University of Ottawa (CA)
Corresponding author
Hammami, Riadh
Venue
Frontiers in Microbiology
Published
2018-08-03
Volume
9
Pages
1791-1791
ISSN
1664-302X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2885034377
Cited by
569
References
189
Citations by year
2026: 43 · 2025: 77 · 2024: 99 · 2023: 83 · 2022: 86 · 2021: 91 · 2020: 59 · 2019: 30 · 2015: 1
FWCI
4.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Microbiology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Greater South Information System
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Agricultural safety and regulations
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Bacterial Genetics and Biotechnology
Keywords
Enterococcus, probiotics, food safety, bacteriocins, antimicrobial peptides, antibiotic resistance, virulence factors, GRAS status, qualified presumption of safety, safety assessment, probiotic regulation, antibiotic alternatives, multidrug resistance

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