AJCN Tufts Nutrition Symposium, Boston & Online Sept 2009
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dunne, C.
Right arrow Articles by Collins, J K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Dunne, C.
Right arrow Articles by Collins, J K.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Dunne, C.
Right arrow Articles by Collins, J K.
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 73, No. 2, 386S-392s, February 2001
© 2001 American Society for Clinical Nutrition

Supplement

In vitro selection criteria for probiotic bacteria of human origin: correlation with in vivo findings1,2,3,4

Colum Dunne, Liam O'Mahony, Lisa Murphy, Gerardine Thornton, Darrin Morrissey, Sile O'Halloran, Maria Feeney, Sarah Flynn, Gerald Fitzgerald, Charles Daly, Barry Kiely, Gerald C O'Sullivan, Fergus Shanahan and J Kevin Collins

1 From the Departments of Microbiology, Food Science and Technology, and Medicine and the National Food Biotechnology Center, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland, and the Department of Surgery, Mercy Hospital, Cork, Ireland.

2 Presented at the symposium Probiotics and Prebiotics, held in Kiel, Germany, June 11–12, 1998.

3 Supported in part by grants awarded by Bio Research Ireland, the Irish Department of Agriculture and Food noncommissioned food research program, and DGXII of the European Commission (PROBDEMO: FAIR-CT96-1028 and LABVAC: BIO4-CT96-0542).

4 Address reprint requests to JK Collins, Department of Microbiology, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland. E-mail: nfbc{at}ucc.ie.


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 ISOLATION OF POTENTIAL PROBIOTIC...
 IN VITRO ASSESSMENT OF...
 IN VIVO ASSESSMENT OF...
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
The enteric flora comprises {approx}95% of the total number of cells in the human body and can elicit immune responses while protecting against microbial pathogens. However, the resident bacterial flora of the gastrointestinal tract may also be implicated in the pathogenesis of diseases such as inflammatory bowel disease (ulcerative colitis and Crohn disease). The objectives of the Probiotic Research Group based at University College Cork were to isolate and identify lactic acid bacteria exhibiting beneficial probiotic traits, such as bile tolerance in the absence of deconjugation activity, acid resistance, adherence to host epithelial tissue, and in vitro antagonism of pathogenic microorganisms or those suspected of promoting inflammation. To isolate potentially effective probiotic bacteria, we screened the microbial population adhering to surgically resected segments of the gastrointestinal tract (the environment in which they may subsequently be reintroduced and required to function). In total, 1500 bacterial strains from resected human terminal ilea were assessed. From among these organisms, Lactobacillus salivarius subsp. salivarius strain UCC118 was selected for further study. In mouse feeding trials, milk-borne L. salivarius strain UCC118 could successfully colonize the murine gastrointestinal tract. A human feeding study conducted in 80 healthy volunteers showed that yogurt can be used as a vehicle for delivery of strain UCC118 to the human gastrointestinal tract with considerable efficacy in influencing gut flora and colonization. In summary, we developed criteria for in vitro selection of probiotic bacteria that may reflect certain in vivo effects on the host such as modulation of gastrointestinal tract microflora.

Key Words: Probiotics • lactic acid • bacteria • isolation • assessment • feeding studies • mouse studies • human studies • selection criteria


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
ISOLATION OF POTENTIAL PROBIOTIC...
 IN VITRO ASSESSMENT OF...
 IN VIVO ASSESSMENT OF...
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
As today's consumers become increasingly aware of the processes that may be necessary for maintenance of their environment, health, and nutrition, scientific research has focused on the roles that diet, stress, and modern medical practices (eg, the use of antibiotics and radiotherapy) play in threatening human health. In particular, the shifting of population dynamics toward older societies is increasing the incidence of illnesses that may be caused by deficient or compromised microflora, such as gastrointestinal tract infections, constipation, irritable bowel syndrome, inflammatory bowel disease (Crohn disease and ulcerative colitis), food allergies, antibiotic-induced diarrhea, cardiovascular disease, and certain cancers (eg, colorectal cancer) (1–3). Furthermore, concern has been expressed as the degree of microbial resistance to indiscriminately prescribed and misused antibiotics increases. To combat these trends directly, the World Health Organization currently advocates the implementation of alternative disease control strategies, such as exploiting the prophylactic and therapeutic potential of probiotic bacteria (4, 5).

Probiotics have been defined as "a live microbial food supplement which beneficially affects the host by improving the intestinal microbial balance" (6) and, more broadly, as "living micro-organisms, which upon ingestion in certain numbers, exert health affects beyond inherent basic nutrition" (7). Cocktails of various microorganisms, particularly species of Lactobacillus and Streptococcus, have traditionally been used in fermented dairy products to promote human health. However, it was Metchnikoff in 1907 who first implied that ingested bacteria, in the form of yogurt and other fermented foods, could beneficially affect the normal gut flora (8). Numerous studies from subsequent research programs reported the generally unsubstantiated health-promoting properties of lactic acid bacteria, yeast, and fermented dairy products in animals and humans. These properties include the beneficial influences probiotics apparently exert on the microbial ecology of the host, lactose intolerance, incidence of diarrhea, mucosal immune response, blood cholesterol concentrations, and cancer (2).

In recent years, the commercial manufacture and marketing of functional foods (foods that affect functions of the body in a targeted manner so as to bring about positive effects on physiology and nutrition), particularly probiotic (acidophilus-bifidus) yogurts, has spread from the well-established Japanese niche marketplace into the lucrative and expanding European Union marketplace. Although several probiotic bacteria of human origin are now being exploited commercially [eg, Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (9), Lactobacillus casei Shirota (10, 11), and Lactobacillus acidophilus LA-1 (12)], many consumers, consumer organizations, and members of the scientific community are skeptical of such products and their publicized probiotic claims (13). The dairy food industry is therefore under considerable pressure to scientifically validate these and new probiotic food products. Previously, efforts to derive complementary scientific evidence suffered because of difficulties in definitively identifying the bacterial strains involved, differences in experimental procedures, subjective data interpretation, and poor communication between academic scientists, the dairy food industry, and clinicians (4, 14). However, workshops similar to those hosted by European Union–funded programs such as The Lactic Acid Bacteria Industrial Platform (LABIP) and PROBDEMO (FAIR CT-96 1028) (15) promote the dissemination of scientific results, the generation of consensus, and the direct interaction of research institutions and universities with industry.

In 1998 the participants involved in the LABIP workshop on probiotics concluded that "probiotics may be consumed either as a food component or as a non-food preparation" and supported criteria outlined by others for the selection and assessment of probiotic lactic acid bacteria (7). These criteria may be summarized as follows: human origin, nonpathogenic behavior, resistance to technologic processes (ie, viability and activity in delivery vehicles), resistance to gastric acidity and bile toxicity, adhesion to gut epithelial tissue, ability to persist within the gastrointestinal tract, production of antimicrobial substances, ability to modulate immune responses, and ability to influence metabolic activities (eg, cholesterol assimilation, lactase activity, and vitamin production) (7, 16–20). The participants of the LABIP workshop on probiotics also concluded that the demonstration of probiotic activity of a certain strain requires well-designed, double-blind, placebo-controlled human studies (7). However, these requirements were further outlined by Berg (21) and Salminen et al (2, 20) as follows: each potential probiotic strain should be documented and assessed independently; extrapolation of data from closely related strains is not acceptable; only well-defined strains, products, and study populations should be used in trials; when possible, all human studies should be randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled; results should be confirmed by independent research groups; and preferentially, the study should be published in a peer-reviewed journal.


   ISOLATION OF POTENTIAL PROBIOTIC BACTERIAL STRAINS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 ISOLATION OF POTENTIAL PROBIOTIC...
IN VITRO ASSESSMENT OF...
 IN VIVO ASSESSMENT OF...
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
Currently, probiotics are being used successfully to improve the quality of feed provided to domestic animals (22). The resulting benefits of effective administration of probiotics in feed to cattle, pigs, and chickens include enhanced general health, faster growth rates as a result of improved nutrition, and increased production of milk and eggs (21). Some of the microorganisms most commonly used to promote animal health and nutrition include strains of the Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Bacillus, Streptococcus, Pediococcus, Enterococcus genera and yeast of the Saccharomyces, Aspergillus, and Torulopsis genera (18). In the development of probiotic foods intended for human consumption, strains of lactic acid bacteria, such as Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, and Streptococcus, have been used most commonly, primarily because of the perception that they are desirable members of the intestinal microflora (21, 23) (Table 1Go). In addition, these bacteria have traditionally been used in the manufacture of fermented dairy products and have GRAS (generally regarded as safe) status (34). However, some of the probiotic isolates currently used in the dairy food industry are not of human origin and therefore do not meet the criteria outlined above for the selection of acceptable probiotic microorganisms.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 1. Some probiotic bacterial and yeast strains and their reported effects1
 
At University College Cork, the Probiotic Research Group recognized that lactobacilli isolated from human feces have been relatively well characterized (35). However, it was further recognized that few attempts had been made to isolate potential adherent probiotic bacteria directly from the human intestinal mucosa, the environment in which they may subsequently be reintroduced and required to function. The enteric flora, including >500 bacterial species, comprises {approx}95% of the total number of cells in the human body and contributes significantly to the host's resistance to infectious disease. Furthermore, changes in the composition of the intestinal flora are often associated with disease and may, in some cases, be the cause of disease (36). In addition, although bifidobacteria and lactobacilli are the dominant bacterial species found in the feces of breast-fed infants (37), controversy still exists as to which species dominate in the gastrointestinal tract. Although L. acidophilus has been recovered in relatively high numbers from the gastrointestinal tract, more reports have shown that other Lactobacillus groups (Lactobacillus crispatus, Lactobacillus gasseri, Lactobacillus salivarius, and Lactobacillus reuteri) can also be isolated in similar amounts (38, 39), indicating the lack of a single dominant species.

The human gastrointestinal tract can be divided into 4 anatomical regions: the esophagus, the stomach, the small intestine (consisting of the duodenum, jejunum, and ileum), and the large intestine or colon. At University College Cork, bacteria were isolated from resected human terminal ilea obtained from patients undergoing urinary tract reconstructive surgery. After the luminal contents were initially washed out with one-quarter strength Ringer solution (Merck KgaA, Darmstadt, Germany) and subjected to increasingly vigorous shaking in cysteinated one-quarter strength Ringer solution, the samples obtained from 7 patients were found to contain between 1 x 102 and 1 x 105 colony-forming units (CFU)/g tissue when incubated anaerobically at 37°C for 2–5 d in a variety of media (40). Approximately 1500 catalase-negative bacterial isolates were chosen and characterized further. Of these, >60% were gram-positive homofermentative cocci, {approx}18% were gram-negative rods and heterofermentative coccobacilli, and 22% were predominantly homofermentative coccobacilli (40). Of the last group, 38 gram-positive isolates were further characterized by physiologic and biochemical means. Of these microorganisms, 28 belonged to the Lactobacillus genus (mainly Lactobacillus paracasei and L. salivarius) (40).

In addition to lactobacilli, presumptive strains of Bifidobacterium were isolated from homogenized ileal tissue samples. With use of molecular analysis, these bifidobacteria were classified as Bifidobacterium infantis (41). Interestingly, these results differ significantly from previous observations that adults do not possess detectable amounts of B. infantis but rather Bifidobacterium longum and Bifidobacterium bifidum (38).


   IN VITRO ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL PROBIOTIC BACTERIAL STRAINS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 ISOLATION OF POTENTIAL PROBIOTIC...
 IN VITRO ASSESSMENT OF...
IN VIVO ASSESSMENT OF...
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
As stated earlier, several research groups have recommended that the assessment of potential probiotics involve assessment of resistance to gastric acidity and bile toxicity, adhesion to gut epithelial tissue, ability to colonize the gastrointestinal tract, production of antimicrobial substances, and ability to modulate immune responses (7, 16–20, 42). Therefore, a subset of the bacterial strains we isolated from surgically removed samples of human ilea were evaluated within these parameters under laboratory conditions.

Resistance to gastric acidity
Before reaching the intestinal tract, probiotic bacteria must first survive transit through the stomach (43). There, the secretion of gastric acid constitutes a primary defense mechanism against most ingested microorganisms. In fact, gastric surgery or the administration of acid blockers such as proton pump inhibitors may permit microbial colonization of the stomach (44). Therefore, preliminary experiments were completed to determine the degree of acid resistance exhibited by several Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium strains isolated from the human ileum. These results were then compared directly with the resistance of several additional Lactobacillus strains obtained from independent research groups (Table 2Go). Survival of the bacterial strains was initially assessed by adding {approx}1 x 1011 and 1 x 109 CFU lactobacilli and bifidobacteria/L, respectively, to MRS medium (45) amended with hydrogen chloride to pH values of between 2.0 and 3.4. However, survival of bacterial strains in human gastric juice is a more accurate indication of the ability of strains to survive passage through the stomach. For this reason, human gastric juice was obtained from healthy subjects by aspiration through a nasogastric tube. Because the pH of the stomach is known to fluctuate [eg, when an individual is fasting the stomach pH may be as low as 1.5 (46)], the pH of the obtained samples was quantified before use. The gastric juice was then added to MRS medium as described above. Analysis of the results showed that many of the lactobacilli isolated from the ileal samples performed as well as, or even better than, many of the probiotic bacterial strains described in the literature to date (40, 47, 48). These results suggest that these human isolates could successfully transit the human stomach and may be capable of reaching the intestinal environment and functioning effectively there. The bifidobacteria, however, proved less acid resistant than the lactobacilli, particularly when exposed to human gastric juice (Table 2Go).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 2 . Survival of some strains of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium in human gastric juice at different pH values1
 
Bile acid resistance
When evaluating the potential of using lactic acid bacteria as effective probiotics it is generally considered necessary to evaluate their ability to resist the effects of bile acids (33). Bile acids are synthesized in the liver from cholesterol and are secreted from the gall bladder into the duodenum in the conjugated form (500–700 mL/d) (49). These acids then undergo extensive chemical modifications (deconjugation, dehydroxylation, dehydrogenation, and deglucuronidation) in the colon almost solely as a result of microbial activity (50–52). Both conjugated and deconjugated bile acids exhibit antibacterial activity inhibiting the growth of Escherichia coli strains, Klebsiella sp., and Enterococcus sp. in vitro (53, 54). However, the deconjugated forms are more inhibitory (54–56) and gram-positive bacteria are found to be more sensitive than gram-negative bacteria (55).

In these preliminary studies, the objective of the Probiotic Research Group was to determine the level of acid resistance exhibited by several of the Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium strains isolated from the human ileum. In a manner analogous to that described above, solid media were supplemented with bovine bile (Sigma Chemical Co Ltd, Poole, United Kingdom), porcine bile (Sigma), and human bile (obtained by laparoscopic cholecystectomy) to final concentrations of between 0.3% and 7.5%. These plates were then incubated at 37°C under anaerobic conditions and growth was recorded after 24–48 h (Table 3Go). Although the tested Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium strains exhibited resistance to the bovine bile used, the porcine bile used in these assays proved to be significantly more inhibitory to both of the bacterial groups. However, in relation to the assessment of probiotic strains intended for human consumption, the most relevant determination is that of the strains' ability to grow in human bile. Interestingly, regardless of the resistance patterns observed in the presence of either bovine or porcine bile, all of the assayed bacteria could grow in physiologically relevant concentrations of human bile (40).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 3. Resistance of some strains of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium to bovine and porcine bile1
 
Adherence of ileal bacterial isolates to human cell lines
The participants involved in the LABIP workshop on probiotics concluded that adhesion to gut epithelial tissue and the ability to colonize the gastrointestinal tract should be assessed during preselection of probiotic bacterial strains (7). The relative importance of these traits is further highlighted by the fact that many probiotics do not colonize their targeted hosts. Indeed, of those currently available, only L. rhamnosus GG remains within the gastrointestinal tract for any significant period of time (21, 23).

HT-29 and Caco-2 cells are human intestinal cell lines expressing morphologic and physiologic characteristics of normal human enterocytes (16) that have been exploited to elucidate the mechanisms mediating enteropathogen adhesion (12, 57–60). In more recent studies, however, these cell lines were used to select for and subsequently assess lactic acid bacteria on the basis of their adhesion properties (61–66). In our studies, completed by using both HT-29 and Caco-2 cell lines, the observed adherence of Lactobacillus strains compared well with that of the well-characterized adherent L. rhamnosus GG strain (40). However, only low degrees of adherence were observed with the Bifidobacterium strains, regardless of the cell line used (40).

Antimicrobial activity
Several metabolic compounds produced by lactic acid bacteria (including organic acids, fatty acids, hydrogen peroxide, and diacetyl) have antimicrobial effects (67). However, bacteriocins or proteinaceous substances with specific inhibitory activity against closely related species are perhaps the most extensively studied (67–69). Of these, nisin, which is produced by some Lactobacillus lactis subsp. lactis strains is at present the only purified bacteriocin approved for use in products intended for human consumption (70, 71). In our studies, the lactobacilli and bifidobacteria isolated from the human ileum were assayed for antimicrobial activity against a range of indicator bacteria, including strains of Listeria, Bacillus, Enterococcus, Staphylococcus, Clostridium, Pseudomonas, E. coli, Lactobacillus, Streptococcus, Bifidobacterium, and Lactococcus. L. salivarius UCC118 was found to perform consistently well against several of the indicator strains (40). Notably, however, neither lactobacilli (with the exception of Lactobacillus fermentum) nor bifidobacteria were inhibited by strain UCC118 (40).


   IN VIVO ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL PROBIOTIC BACTERIAL STRAINS: MOUSE AND HUMAN FEEDING TRIALS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 ISOLATION OF POTENTIAL PROBIOTIC...
 IN VITRO ASSESSMENT OF...
 IN VIVO ASSESSMENT OF...
CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
To date, the benefits of probiotics have predominantly been shown under defined and well-controlled laboratory conditions. In response, the LABIP workshop participants, among others, stated that although "several in vitro assays or animal studies...are very useful in the preselection of (probiotic) bacterial strains...the proof of efficacy in humans should be granted by at least one well-designed human study" (7, 21, 42). Several prospective studies showed the efficacy of administration of lactic acid bacteria for both prophylactic and therapeutic use against diarrhea in premature infants (72), newborns (73), children (74), and the elderly (75) and in the therapy of antibiotic-related diarrhea (76) and traveler's diarrhea (77).

As described above, the criteria used in our studies to select and assess potential probiotic bacterial strains resulted in the identification of a small number of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium strains capable of resisting the effects of bile and low pH, adhering to human epithelial cell lines, and exhibiting antimicrobial activity in vitro (40). The ability of several of these bacterial isolates to survive transit through the gastrointestinal tract was then assessed. Initially, these evaluations were completed in mice (78), focusing on 1) whether we could effectively deliver the probiotic microorganism to the gastrointestinal tract; 2) whether the introduced strains would survive transit through, and possibly colonize, the murine gastrointestinal tract; and 3) given the complexity of the hostile gastrointestinal tract and fecal environments, whether we could develop a method of counting the introduced bacterial strains by use of molecular techniques (such as those described in references 79–83) or conventional microbiological techniques. In summary, the results of this study showed that it was possible to enumerate an antibiotic-resistant variant of L. salivarius strain UCC118 from collected feces after daily administration and subsequent transit through the murine gastrointestinal tract (78).

A subsequent double-blind, placebo-controlled, ethically approved feeding trial in 80 volunteers was conducted to compare the efficacy of 2 standard food systems (fermented milk and fresh milk) in delivering L. salivarius strain UCC118 to the human gastrointestinal tract (84, 85). The results of this trial indicated that both fresh milk and yogurt are effective vehicles for the bacterial strain (84). In addition, in a proportion of volunteers (<10%), significant numbers of strain UCC118 were still detectable in feces 3 wk after cessation of its administration, indicating that the strain was capable of persisting, albeit for a short period, within the human gastrointestinal tract (84).


   CONCLUSIONS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 ISOLATION OF POTENTIAL PROBIOTIC...
 IN VITRO ASSESSMENT OF...
 IN VIVO ASSESSMENT OF...
 CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
 
In these studies, we showed that the adoption of logical criteria for the in vitro selection of probiotic bacteria can result in the isolation of strains capable of performing effectively in the gastrointestinal tract. However, given that the human gastrointestinal tract is a complex and hostile environment, it appears unlikely that a single probiotic bacterial strain will be capable of influencing the microbial ecology of the host and of beneficially affecting lactose intolerance, the incidence of diarrhea, mucosal immune responses, blood cholesterol concentrations, and the induction of cancer. It is more likely that these effects will require the introduction of a consortium of strains, such as those observed in our studies (eg, lactobacilli and bifidobacteria). Furthermore, it is essential that these probiotic strains not be developed as individual entities but rather as the active ingredients of the food products that are ultimately intended for human consumption.


   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 ISOLATION OF POTENTIAL PROBIOTIC...
 IN VITRO ASSESSMENT OF...
 IN VIVO ASSESSMENT OF...
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Salminen S, Isolauri E, Onnela T. Gut flora in normal and diseased states. Chemotherapy 1995;41(suppl):5–15.
  2. Salminen S, Deighton MA, Benno Y, Gorbach SL. Lactic acid bacteria in health and disease. In: Salminen S, von Wright A, eds. Lactic acid bacteria: microbiology and functional aspects. 2nd ed. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc, 1998:211–54.
  3. Schaafsma G. Application of lactic acid bacteria in novel foods from a nutritional perspective. In: Novel G, Le Querler J-F, eds. Lactic acid bacteria: Actes du Colloque LACTIC 94. Caen, France: Presses Universitaires de Caen, 1995:85–93.
  4. Daly C, Davis R. The biotechnology of lactic acid bacteria with emphasis on applications in food safety and human health. Agric Food Sci Finland 1998;7:251–65.
  5. Bengmark S. Ecological control of the gastrointestinal tract. The role of probiotic bacteria. Gut 1998;42:2–7.[Free Full Text]
  6. Fuller R. A review: probiotics in man and animals. J Appl Bacteriol 1989;66:365–78.[Medline]
  7. Guarner F, Schaafsma GJ. Probiotics. Int J Food Microbiol 1998; 39:237–8.[Medline]
  8. Metchnikoff E. The prolongation of life. Optimistic studies. London: William Heinemann, 1907.
  9. Saxelin M. Lactobacillus GG: a human probiotic strain with thorough clinical documentation. Food Rev Int 1997;13:293–313.
  10. Aso Y, Akazan H. Prophylactic effect of a Lactobacillus casei preparation on the recurrence of superficial bladder cancer. Urol Int 1992;49:125–9.[Medline]
  11. Spanhaak S, Havenaar R, Schaafsma G. The effect of consumption of milk fermented by Lactobacillus casei strain Shirota on the intestinal microflora and immune parameters in humans. Eur J Clin Nutr 1998;52:899–907.[Medline]
  12. Bernet MF, Brassart D, Neeser JR, Servin AL. Lactobacillus acidophilus LA-1 binds to cultured human intestinal cell-lines and inhibits cell attachment and cell invasion by enterovirulent bacteria. Gut 1994;35:483–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Sanders ME, Huis in't Veld J. Bringing a probiotic-containing functional food to the market: microbiological, product, regulatory and labeling issues. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 1999;76:293–315.[Medline]
  14. Sanders ME. Lactic acid bacteria as promoters of human health. In: Goldberg I, ed. Functional foods: designer foods, pharmafoods, nutraceuticals. New York: Chapman and Hall, 1994:294–322.
  15. Mattila-Sandholm T. Demonstration Project FAIR CT96-1028. In: Alander M, Kauppila T, Mattila-Sandholm T, eds. Novel methods for probiotic research: 2nd workshop demonstration of the nutritional functionality of probiotic foods FAIR CT96-1028. Helsinki, Finland: Technical Research Center of Finland (VTT), 1997:11–7.
  16. Brassart D, Schiffrin E, Rochat F, Offord EA, Macé C, Neeser J-R. The future of functional foods: scientific basis and future requirements. Lebensmittel Technol 1998;7–8:258–66.
  17. Marteau P, Rambaud J-C. Potential of using lactic acid bacteria for therapy and immunomodulation in man. FEMS Microbiol Rev 1993;12:207–20.[Medline]
  18. Tannock GW. Probiotic properties of lactic-acid bacteria: plenty of scope for fundamental R & D. Trends Biotechnol 1997;15:270–74.[Medline]
  19. Huis in't Veld J, Shortt C. Selection criteria for probiotic micro-organisms. In: Leeds AR, Rowland IR, eds. Gut flora and health: past, present and future. London: The Royal Society of Medicine Press Ltd, 1996:19–26.
  20. Salminen S, Isolauri E, Salminen E. Clinical uses of probiotics for stabilizing the gut mucosal barrier: successful strains and future challenges. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 1996;70:251–62.
  21. Berg RD. Probiotics, prebiotics or "conbiotics." Trends Microbiol 1998;6:89–92.[Medline]
  22. Huis in't Veld J, Havenaar R, Marteau P. Establishing a scientific basis for probiotic R & D. Trends Biotechnol 1994;12:6–8.[Medline]
  23. Goldin BR, Gorbach SL. Probiotics for humans. In: Fuller R, ed. Probiotics, the scientific basis. London: Chapman and Hall, 1992:355–76.
  24. Salminen S, Deighton MA, Gorbach SL. Lactic acid bacteria in health and disease. In: Salminen S, von Wright A, eds. Lactic acid bacteria. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc, 1993:199–225.
  25. Lidbeck A, Overnick E, Rafter J, Nord CE, Gustaffsson JA. Effect of Lactobacillus acidophilus supplements on mutagen excretion in feces and urine in humans. Microb Ecol Health Dis 1992;5:59–67.
  26. Kaila M, Isolauri E, Soppi E, Virtanen E, Laine S, Arvilommi H. Enhancement of the circulatory antibody screening cell response in human diarrhea by a human Lactobacillus strain. Pediatr Res 1992; 32:141–4.[Medline]
  27. Kaila M, Isolauri E, Saxelin M, Arvilommi H, Vesikari T. Viable versus inactivated Lactobacillus GG in acute rotavirus diarrhea. Arch Dis Child 1995;72:51–3.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. Majamaa H, Isolauri E, Saxelin M, Vesikari T. Lactic acid bacteria in the treatment of acute rotavirus gastroenteritis. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1995;20:333–9.[Medline]
  29. Raza S, Graham SM, Allen SJ, Sultana S. Lactobacillus GG promotes recovery from acute nonbloody diarrhea in Pakistan. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1995;14:107–11.[Medline]
  30. Pedrosa MC, Golner BB, Goldin BR, Barakat S, Dallal GE, Russell RM. Survival of yogurt-containing organisms and Lactobacillus gasseri (ADH) and their effect on bacterial enzyme activity in the gastrointestinal tract of healthy and hypochlorhydric elderly subjects. Am J Clin Nutr 1995;61:353–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  31. Marteau P, Flourie B, Pochart P, et al. Effect of chronic ingestion of a fermented dairy product containing Lactobacillus acidophilus and Bifidobacterium bifidum on metabolic activities of the colonic flora in humans. Am J Clin Nutr 1990;52:685–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  32. Castex F, Corthier G, Jovert S, Elmer GW, Lucas F, Bastide M. Prevention of Clostridium difficile-induced experimental pseudomembranous colitis by Saccharomyces boulardii: a scanning electron microscopic and microbiological study. J Gen Microbiol 1990;136:1085–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Lee Y-K, Salminen S. The coming age of probiotics. Trends Food Sci Technol 1995;6:241–5.
  34. O'Sullivan MG, Thornton GM, O'Sullivan GC, Collins JK. Probiotic bacteria: myth or reality? Trends Food Sci Technol 1992;3:309–14.
  35. Kandler O, Weiss N. Regular, non-sporing gram positive rods. In: Sneath PHA, Mair N, Sharpe ME, Holt JG, eds. Bergey's manual of systematic bacteriology. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1986: 1208–34.
  36. Morotomi M, Watanabe T, Suegara N, Kawai Y, Mutai M. Distribution of indigenous bacteria in the digestive tract of conventional and gnotobiotic rats. Infect Immun 1975;11:962–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  37. Long SS, Swenson RM. Development of anaerobic fecal flora in healthy new-born infants. J Pediatr 1977;91:298–301.[Medline]
  38. Mitsuoka T. Taxonomy and ecology of bifidobacteria. Bifidobacteria Microflora 1984;3:11–28.
  39. Molin G, Jeppsson B, Johansson ML, et al. Numerical taxonomy of Lactobacillus sp. associated with healthy and diseased mucosa of the human intestines. J Appl Bacteriol 1993;74:314–23.[Medline]
  40. Thornton GM. Probiotic bacteria. Selection of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium strains from the healthy human gastrointestinal tract; characterization of a novel Lactobacillus-derived antibacterial protein. PhD thesis. National University of Ireland, Cork, Ireland, 1996.
  41. O'Riordan K, Fitzgerald GF. Determination of genetic diversity within the genus Bifidobacterium and estimation of chromosomal size. FEMS Microbiol Lett 1997;156:259–64.[Medline]
  42. Collins JK, Thornton G, Sullivan GD. Selection of probiotic strains for human applications. Int Dairy J 1998;8:487–90.
  43. Henriksson A, Khaled AKD, PL Conway. Lactobacillus colonization of the gastrointestinal tract of mice after removal of the non-secreting stomach region. Microb Ecol Health Dis 1999;11:96–9.
  44. Marteau P, Pochart P, Bouhnik Y, Rambaud J-C. The fate and effects of transiting, nonpathogenic micro-organisms in the human intestine. In: Simopoulos AP, Corring T, Rérat A, eds. Intestinal flora, immunity, nutrition and health. World Rev Nutr Diet 1993;74:1–21.[Medline]
  45. De Man JC, Rogosa M, Sharpe MT. A medium for the cultivation of lactobacilli. J Appl Bacteriol 1960;23:130–5.
  46. Draser BS, Shiner M, McLeod GM. Studies on the intestinal flora. 1. The bacterial flora of the gastrointestinal tract in healthy and achlorhydric persons. Gastroenterology 1969;56:71–9.[Medline]
  47. Conway PL, Gorbach SL, Goldin BR. Survival of lactic acid bacteria in the human stomach and adhesion to intestinal cells. J Dairy Sci 1987;70:1–12.
  48. Goldin BR, Gorbach SL, Saxelin M, Barakat S, Gualtieri L, Salminen S. Survival of Lactobacillus sp. (strain GG) in the human gastrointestinal tract. Dig Dis Sci 1992;37:121–8.[Medline]
  49. Hoffman AF, Molino G, Milanese M, Belforte G. Description and stimulation of a physiological pharmokinetic model for the metabolism and enterohepatic circulation of bile acids in man. J Clin Invest 1983;71:1003–22.
  50. Hill MJ, Draser BS. Degradation of bile salts by human intestinal bacteria. Gut 1968;9:22–7.[Free Full Text]
  51. Shimada K, Bricknell KS, Finegold SM. Deconjugation of bile acids by intestinal bacteria: a review of literature and additional studies. J Infect Dis 1969;119:73–81.[Medline]
  52. Hylemon PB, Glass TL. Biotransformation of bile acids and cholesterol by the intestinal microflora. In: Hentges DJ, ed. Human intestinal microflora in health and disease. New York: Academic Press, 1983:189–213.
  53. Lewis R, Gorbach S. Modification of bile acids by intestinal bacteria. Arch Intern Med 1972;130:545–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  54. Stewart L, Pellegrini CA, Way LW. Antibacterial activity of bile acids against common biliary tract organisms. Surg Forum 1986; 37:157–9.
  55. Floch MH, Binder HJ, Filburn B, Gershengoren W. The effect of bile acids on intestinal microflora. Am J Clin Nutr 1972;25:1418–26.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  56. Percy-Robb IW, Collee JG. Bile acids: a pH dependent antibacterial system in the gut? Br Med J 1972;3:813–5.
  57. Neeser J-R, Chambaz A, Golliard M, Link-Amster H, Fryder V, Kolodziejczyk E. Adhesion of colonization factor antigen II-positive enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli strains to human enterocytelike differentiated HT-29 cells: a basis for host-pathogen interactions in the gut. Infect Immun 1989;57:3727–34.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  58. Kerneis S, Bilge SS, Fourel V, Chauviere G, Coconnier M-H, Servin AL. Use of purified F1845 fimbrial adhesin to study localization and expression of receptors for diffusely adhering Escherichia coli during enterocytic differentiation of human colon carcinoma cell lines HT-29 and Caco-2 in culture. Infect Immun 1991;59:4013–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  59. Chauviere G, Coconnier M-H, Kerneis S, Darfeuille-Michaud A, Joly B, Servin AL. Competitive exclusion of diarrheagenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) from human enterocyte-like Caco-2 cells by heat-killed Lactobacillus. FEMS Microbiol Lett 1992;91:213–8.
  60. Coconnier M-H, Bernet M-F, Kerneis S, Chauviere G, Fourniat J, Servin AL. Inhibition of adhesion of enteroinvasive pathogens to human intestinal Caco-2 cells by Lactobacillus acidophilus strain LB decreases bacterial invasion. FEMS Microbiol Lett 1993;110: 299–305.[Medline]
  61. Coconnier M-H, Klaenhammer TR, Kerneis S, Bernet M-F, Servin AL. Protein-mediated adhesion of Lactobacillus acidophilus BG2FO4 on human enterocyte and mucus-secreting cell lines in culture. Appl Environ Microbiol 1992;58:2034–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  62. Bernet M-F, Brassart D, Neeser J-R, Servin AL. Adhesion of human bifidobacterial strains to cultured human intestinal epithelial cells and inhibition of enteropathogen-cell interactions. Appl Environ Microbiol 1993;59:4121–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  63. Greene JD, Klaenhammer TR. Factors involved in adherence of lactobacilli to human Caco-2 cells. Appl Environ Microbiol 1994;60: 4487–94.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  64. Crociani J, Grill J-P, Huppert M, Ballongue J. Adhesion of different bifidobacteria strains to human enterocyte-like Caco-2 cells and comparison with in vivo study. Lett Appl Microbiol 1995;21:146–8.[Medline]
  65. Sarem F, Sarem-Damerdji LO, Nicolas JP. Comparison of the adherence of three Lactobacillus strains to Caco-2 and Int-407 human intestinal cell lines. Lett Appl Microbiol 1996;22:439–42.[Medline]
  66. Tuomola EM, Salminen SJ. Adhesion of some probiotic and dairy Lactobacillus strains to Caco-2 cell cultures. Int J Food Microbiol 1998;41:45–51.[Medline]
  67. Ouwehand AC. Antimicrobial components from lactic acid bacteria. In: Salminen S, von Wright A, eds. Lactic acid bacteria: microbiology and functional aspects. 2nd ed. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc, 1998:139–60.
  68. Abee T, Klaenhammer TR, Letellier L. Kinetic studies of the action of Lactacin F, a bacteriocin produced by Lactobacillus johnsonii that forms poration complexes in the cytoplasmic membrane. Appl Environ Microbiol 1994;60:1006–13.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  69. McAuliffe O, Ryan MP, Ross RP, Hill C, Breeuwer P, Abee T. Lacticin 3147, a broad-spectrum bacteriocin which selectively dissipates the membrane potential. Appl Environ Microbiol 1998;64:439–45.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  70. Dodd HM, Gasson MJ. Bacteriocins of lactic acid bacteria. In: Gasson MJ, de Vos WM, eds. Genetics and biotechnology of lactic acid bacteria. Glasgow, United Kingdom: Blackie Academic and Professional, 1994:211–51.
  71. Jack RW, Tagg JR, Ray B. Bacteriocins of gram positive bacteria. Microbiol Rev 1995;59:171–200.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  72. Millar MR, Bacon C, Smith SL, Walker V, Hall MA. Enteral feeding of premature infants with Lactobacillus GG. Arch Dis Child 1993;69:483–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  73. Sepp E, Mikelsaar M, Salminen S. Effect of administration of Lactobacillus casei strain GG on the gastrointestinal microbiota of newborns. Microb Ecol Health Dis 1993;6:309–14.
  74. Majamaa H, Isolauri E, Saxelin M, Vesikari T. Lactic acid bacteria in the treatment of acute rotavirus gastroenteritis. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1995;20:333–8.
  75. Bennett RG, Gorbach SL, Goldin BR, et al. Treatment of relapsing Clostridium difficile diarrhea with Lactobacillus GG. Nutr Today 1996;31(suppl):35–8.
  76. Siitonen S, Vapautalo H, Salminen S, et al. Effect of Lactobacillus GG yogurt in prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea. Ann Med 1990;22:57–9.[Medline]
  77. Oksanen PI, Salminen S, Saxelin M, et al. Prevention of traveler's diarrhea by Lactobacillus GG. Ann Med 1990;22:53–6.[Medline]
  78. Murphy L, Dunne C, Kiely B, Shanahan F, O'Sullivan GC, Collins JK. In vivo assessment of potential probiotic Lactobacillus salivarius strains: evaluation of their establishment, persistence, and localization in the murine gastrointestinal tract. Microb Ecol Health Dis 1999;11:149–57.
  79. O'Sullivan D. Methods of analysis of the intestinal micro-flora. In: Tannock GW, ed. Probiotics: a critical review. Wymondham, United Kingdom: Horizon Scientific Press, 1999:23–44.
  80. Vaughan EE, Mollet B, deVos WM. Functionality of probiotics and intestinal lactobacilli: light in the intestinal tract tunnel. Curr Opin Biotechnol 1999;10:505–10.[Medline]
  81. Klijn N, Weerkamp AH, deVos WM. Identification of mesophilic lactic acid bacteria by using polymerase chain reaction-amplified variable regions of 16S rRNA and specific DNA probes. Appl Environ Microbiol 1991;57:3390–3.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  82. Zoetendal EG, Akkermans ADL, deVos WM. Temperature gradient gel electrophoresis analysis of 16S rRNA from human fecal samples reveals stable and host-specific communities of active bacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 1998;64:3854–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  83. Tannock GW. Analysis of the intestinal microflora: a renaissance. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 1999;76:265–378.[Medline]
  84. Collins JK, O'Mahony L, Dunne C, Morrissey D, O'Sullivan G, Shanahan F. Probiotics and man: the host microbe interface. Gastroenterology 1999;116:G2982 (abstr).
  85. Dunne C, O'Mahony L, Murphy L, et al. Probiotics: from myth to reality. Demonstration of functionality in animal models of disease and in human clinical trials. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 1999;76: 279–92.[Medline]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Med MicrobiolHome page
K. A. Ryan, A. M. O'Hara, J.-P. van Pijkeren, F. P. Douillard, and P. W. O'Toole
Lactobacillus salivarius modulates cytokine induction and virulence factor gene expression in Helicobacter pylori
J. Med. Microbiol., August 1, 2009; 58(8): 996 - 1005.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Appl. Environ. Microbiol.Home page
E. Jimenez, L. Fernandez, A. Maldonado, R. Martin, M. Olivares, J. Xaus, and J. M. Rodriguez
Oral Administration of Lactobacillus Strains Isolated from Breast Milk as an Alternative for the Treatment of Infectious Mastitis during Lactation
Appl. Envir. Microbiol., August 1, 2008; 74(15): 4650 - 4655.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Bacteriol.Home page
E. Denou, R. D. Pridmore, B. Berger, J.-M. Panoff, F. Arigoni, and H. Brussow
Identification of Genes Associated with the Long-Gut-Persistence Phenotype of the Probiotic Lactobacillus johnsonii Strain NCC533 Using a Combination of Genomics and Transcriptome Analysis
J. Bacteriol., May 1, 2008; 190(9): 3161 - 3168.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 MicrobiologyHome page
V. M. Sheehan, R. D. Sleator, C. Hill, and G. F. Fitzgerald
Improving gastric transit, gastrointestinal persistence and therapeutic efficacy of the probiotic strain Bifidobacterium breve UCC2003
Microbiology, October 1, 2007; 153(10): 3563 - 3571.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Bacteriol.Home page
Y. Li, C. Canchaya, F. Fang, E. Raftis, K. A. Ryan, J.-P. van Pijkeren, D. van Sinderen, and P. W. O'Toole
Distribution of Megaplasmids in Lactobacillus salivarius and Other Lactobacilli
J. Bacteriol., September 1, 2007; 189(17): 6128 - 6139.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Infect. Immun.Home page
J. S. Frick, K. Fink, F. Kahl, M. J. Niemiec, M. Quitadamo, K. Schenk, and I. B. Autenrieth
Identification of Commensal Bacterial Strains That Modulate Yersinia enterocolitica and Dextran Sodium Sulfate-Induced Inflammatory Responses: Implications for the Development of Probiotics
Infect. Immun., July 1, 2007; 75(7): 3490 - 3497.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
S. C. Corr, Y. Li, C. U. Riedel, P. W. O'Toole, C. Hill, and C. G. M. Gahan
From the Cover: Bacteriocin production as a mechanism for the antiinfective activity of Lactobacillus salivarius UCC118
PNAS, May 1, 2007; 104(18): 7617 - 7621.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Nutr.Home page
K. Ben Amor, E. E. Vaughan, and W. M. de Vos
Advanced Molecular Tools for the Identification of Lactic Acid Bacteria
J. Nutr., March 1, 2007; 137(3): 741S - 747S.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 MicrobiologyHome page
C. Canchaya, M. J. Claesson, G. F. Fitzgerald, D. van Sinderen, and P. W. O'Toole
Diversity of the genus Lactobacillus revealed by comparative genomics of five species.
Microbiology, November 1, 2006; 152(Pt 11): 3185 - 3196.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Am. Coll. Nutr.Home page
Z. Weizman and A. Alsheikh
Safety and tolerance of a probiotic formula in early infancy comparing two probiotic agents: a pilot study.
J. Am. Coll. Nutr., October 1, 2006; 25(5): 415 - 419.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J DAIRY SCIHome page
P. Ruas-Madiedo, M. Gueimonde, C. G. de los Reyes-Gavilan, and S. Salminen
Short communication: effect of exopolysaccharide isolated from "viili" on the adhesion of probiotics and pathogens to intestinal mucus.
J Dairy Sci, July 1, 2006; 89(7): 2355 - 2358.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Appl. Environ. Microbiol.Home page
J.-P. van Pijkeren, C. Canchaya, K. A. Ryan, Y. Li, M. J. Claesson, B. Sheil, L. Steidler, L. O'Mahony, G. F. Fitzgerald, D. van Sinderen, et al.
Comparative and Functional Analysis of Sortase-Dependent Proteins in the Predicted Secretome of Lactobacillus salivarius UCC118.
Appl. Envir. Microbiol., June 1, 2006; 72(6): 4143 - 4153.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
M. J. Claesson, Y. Li, S. Leahy, C. Canchaya, J. P. van Pijkeren, A. M. Cerdeno-Tarraga, J. Parkhill, S. Flynn, G. C. O'Sullivan, J. K. Collins, et al.
From the Cover: Multireplicon genome architecture of Lactobacillus salivarius
PNAS, April 25, 2006; 103(17): 6718 - 6723.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Appl. Environ. Microbiol.Home page
M. Begley, C. Hill, and C. G. M. Gahan
Bile salt hydrolase activity in probiotics.
Appl. Envir. Microbiol., March 1, 2006; 72(3): 1729 - 1738.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Appl. Environ. Microbiol.Home page
B. M. Corcoran, C. Stanton, G. F. Fitzgerald, and R. P. Ross
Survival of Probiotic Lactobacilli in Acidic Environments Is Enhanced in the Presence of Metabolizable Sugars
Appl. Envir. Microbiol., June 1, 2005; 71(6): 3060 - 3067.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 PediatricsHome page
Z. Weizman, G. Asli, and A. Alsheikh
Effect of a Probiotic Infant Formula on Infections in Child Care Centers: Comparison of Two Probiotic Agents
Pediatrics, January 1, 2005; 115(1): 5 - 9.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Appl. Environ. Microbiol.Home page
C. Desmond, G. F. Fitzgerald, C. Stanton, and R. P. Ross
Improved Stress Tolerance of GroESL-Overproducing Lactococcus lactis and Probiotic Lactobacillus paracasei NFBC 338
Appl. Envir. Microbiol., October 1, 2004; 70(10): 5929 - 5936.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Infect. Immun.Home page
M. Drakes, T. Blanchard, and S. Czinn
Bacterial Probiotic Modulation of Dendritic Cells
Infect. Immun., June 1, 2004; 72(6): 3299 - 3309.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Appl. Environ. Microbiol.Home page
G. E. Gardiner, P. G. Casey, G. Casey, P. B. Lynch, P. G. Lawlor, C. Hill, G. F. Fitzgerald, C. Stanton, and R. P. Ross
Relative Ability of Orally Administered Lactobacillus murinus To Predominate and Persist in the Porcine Gastrointestinal Tract
Appl. Envir. Microbiol., April 1, 2004; 70(4): 1895 - 1906.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Clin. Nutr.Home page
C. H Halsted
Dietary supplements and functional foods: 2 sides of a coin?
Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, April 1, 2003; 77(4): 1001S - 1007.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Infect. Immun.Home page
N. Ibnou-Zekri, S. Blum, E. J. Schiffrin, and T. von der Weid
Divergent Patterns of Colonization and Immune Response Elicited from Two Intestinal Lactobacillus Strains That Display Similar Properties In Vitro
Infect. Immun., January 1, 2003; 71(1): 428 - 436.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 PediatricsHome page
J. A. Vanderhoof and R. J. Young
Probiotics in Pediatrics
Pediatrics, May 1, 2002; 109(5): 956 - 958.
[Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dunne, C.
Right arrow Articles by Collins, J K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Dunne, C.
Right arrow Articles by Collins, J K.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Dunne, C.
Right arrow Articles by Collins, J K.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS