The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Metabiotics: novel idea or natural development of probiotic conception
Open accessAbstract
Traditionally, probiotics on the base of live microorganisms are considered to be both beneficial and safe. Unfortunately, their effects may have short-term success or are absent or uncertain. Some symbiotic (probiotic) microorganisms with known beneficial health affects may cause opportunistic infections, increase incidence of allergic sensitization and autoimmune disorders, produce microecological imbalance, modify gene expression, transfer antibiotic resistant and virulence genes, cause disorders in epigenome and genome integrity, induce chromosomal DNA damage, and activate signaling pathways associated with cancer and other chronic diseases. The commercially available probiotics should be considered as a first generation means of correcting microecological disorders. Further, their development will include the selection of natural metabiotics and/or working out the synthetic (or semi-synthetic) metabiotics that will be analogies or improved copies of natural bioactives, produced by symbiotic (probiotic) microorganisms. Metabiotics are the structural components of probiotic microorganisms and/or their metabolites and/or signaling molecules with a determined (known) chemical structure that can optimize host-specific physiological functions, regulator, metabolic and/or behavior reactions connected with the activity of host indigenous microbiota. Metabiotics have some advantages because of their exact chemical structure, well dosed, very safe and long shelf-life. Thus, now metabiotics should not consider myth; they are the result of the natural evolution of probiotic conception.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Bifidobacteria can protect from enteropathogenic infection through production of acetate
Fukuda, S., Toh, H., Hase, K., Oshima, K., Nakanishi, Y., Yoshimura, K., Tobe, T., Clarke, J. M., Topping, D. L., Suzuki, T., et al. (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature09646 · Cited by 2,387
Intestinal inflammation targets cancer-inducing activity of the microbiota
Arthur, J. C., Perez-Chanona, E., Mühlbauer, M., Tomkovich, S., Uronis, J. M., Fan, T.-J., Campbell, B. J., Abujamel, T., Dogan, B., Rogers, A. B., et al. (2012) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1224820 · Cited by 2,263
Commensal microbiota and myelin autoantigen cooperate to trigger autoimmune demyelination
Berer, K., Mues, M., Koutrolos, M., Rasbi, Z. A., Boziki, M., Johner, C., Wekerle, H., & Krishnamoorthy, G. (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature10554 · Cited by 1,251
Escherichia coli Induces DNA Double-Strand Breaks in Eukaryotic Cells
Nougayrède, J.-P., Homburg, S., Taieb, F., Boury, M., Brzuszkiewicz, E., Gottschalk, G., Buchrieser, C., Hacker, J., Dobrindt, U., & Oswald, E. (2006) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1127059 · Cited by 1,188
Host interactions of probiotic bacterial surface molecules: comparison with commensals and pathogens
Lebeer, S., Vanderleyden, J., & De Keersmaecker, S. C. J. (2010) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro2297 · Cited by 1,062
Genes and Molecules of Lactobacilli Supporting Probiotic Action
Lebeer, S., Vanderleyden, J., & De Keersmaecker, S. C. J. (2008) · Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews · doi:10.1128/mmbr.00017-08 · Cited by 1,013
Gut microorganisms, mammalian metabolism and personalized health care
Nicholson, J. K., Holmes, E., & Wilson, I. D. (2005) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro1152 · Cited by 945
Mechanisms of action of probiotics: Recent advances
Ng, S. C., Hart, A. L., Kamm, M. A., Stagg, A. J., & Knight, S. C. (2009) · Inflammatory Bowel Diseases · doi:10.1002/ibd.20602 · Cited by 596
Understanding the role of gut microbiome–host metabolic signal disruption in health and disease
Holmes, E., Li, J. V., Athanasiou, T., Ashrafian, H., & Nicholson, J. K. (2011) · Trends in Microbiology · doi:10.1016/j.tim.2011.05.006 · Cited by 541
Community Health Care: Therapeutic Opportunities in the Human Microbiome
Sonnenburg, J. L., & Fischbach, M. A. (2011) · Science Translational Medicine · doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3001626 · Cited by 102
Cited by
Swanson, K. S., Gibson, G. R., Hutkins, R., Reimer, R. A., Reid, G., Verbeke, K., Scott, K. P., Holscher, H. D., Azad, M. B., Delzenne, N. M., et al. (2020) · Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology · doi:10.1038/s41575-020-0344-2 · Cited by 2,196
Postbiotics: An Evolving Term within the Functional Foods Field
Aguilar-Toalá, J. E., Garcia-Varela, R., Garcia, H. S., Mata-Haro, V., González-Córdova, A. F., Vallejo-Cordoba, B., & Hernández-Mendoza, A. (2018) · Trends in Food Science & Technology · doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2018.03.009 · Cited by 1,078
Postbiotics-Parabiotics: The New Horizons in Microbial Biotherapy and Functional Foods
Nataraj, B. H., Ali, S. A., Behare, P. V., & Yadav, H. (2020) · Microbial Cell Factories · doi:10.1186/s12934-020-01426-w · Cited by 737
Feeding the microbiota–gut–brain axis: Diet, microbiome, and neuropsychiatry
Sandhu, K. V., Sherwin, E., Schellekens, H., Stanton, C., Dinan, T. G., & Cryan, J. F. (2017) · Translational Research · doi:10.1016/j.trsl.2016.10.002 · Cited by 491
Postbiotics and paraprobiotics: From concepts to applications
Cuevas-González, P. F., Liceaga, A. M., & Aguilar-Toalá, J. E. (2020) · Food Research International · doi:10.1016/j.foodres.2020.109502 · Cited by 431
Metadata
- Authors
- Shenderov, B. A.
- Venue
- Microbial Ecology in Health & Disease
- Publisher
- Co-Action Publishing
- Published
- 2013-04-12
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 0
- ISSN
- 0891-060X (ISSN-L)
- 1651-2235
- OpenAlex
- W1999553135
- Cited by
- 206
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 8.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Metabiotics: novel idea or natural development of probiotic conception. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3402/mehd.v24i0.20399
- The paper
- Shenderov, B. A. (2013). Metabiotics: novel idea or natural development of probiotic conception. Microbial Ecology in Health & Disease. https://doi.org/10.3402/mehd.v24i0.20399
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
