LECTURES IN PROBIOTICS physiologic & physiopathologic effects of the human microbiota GÖRAN MOLIN
LECTURES IN
PROBIOTICS
physiologic & physiopathologic
effects of the human microbiota
GÖRAN MOLIN
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
2
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
3
Lectures in
probiotics
Physiologic and physiopathologic effects
of the human microbiota
GÖRAN MOLIN
Lund 2013
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
4
Copying is prohibited
Second edition
© Copyright: Göran Molin, 2012, 2013
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
5
Contents
Preface - 11
I. Fundamentals – 13
Intention - 15
Probiotics - 15
Definitions - 15
Safety - 16
Who come up with the idea? - 16
Prebiotics - 18
Synbiotics - 19
Bacteria - 19
Classification and identification - 21
Definitions - 21
Taxonomy in historical perspective – 21
Essence theory - 21
Biological variation - 22
Evolution - 23
Operative taxonomic units - 24
Pure cultures – 24
Phenotypic characteristics – 25
Direct gene identification - 25
Hierarchical ranks - 27
Strain - 28
Type and pathogenic E. coli – 29
Typing - 29
E. coli - 29
RAPD-typing - 30
Species – 30
Definition - 30
DNA:DNA homology - 31
16S rRNA similarity - 32
Ribotyping - 32
Base pair composition - 33
Classification of genus and higher ranks – 34
Genus – 34
Phenetic and phylogenetic taxonomy - 34
Phylum – 35
Formalities – 36
To conclude - 36
References - 38
II. Dietary bacteria - 41
Intention - 43
Consumption of lactobacilli - 43
Lactic acid preservation - 44
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
6
Lactic acid bacteria - 46
What is a LAB - 46
Lactococcus - 47
Streptococcus - 47
Lactobacilli - 48
Leuconostoc - 48
Weissella - 48
Oenococcus – 48
Pediococcus - 48
Lactobacillus - 49
Bifidobacteria - 50
Two adverse genera wrongly regarded as LAB - 51
Enterococcus - 51
Carnobacterium - 51
Products and processes - 51
Simple technique - 51
Ethiopian kocho - 52
Sour salmon buried in the ground - 53
Fermentation in sealskin bags – 53
Plant material - 53
Fermented auk - 54
Salted gherkins - 54
Wine - 55
Lactic acid fermented capers - 56
Sauerkraut – 57
Korean kimchi - 58
Green olives in brine - 59
Nigerian ogi - 60
Tanzanian togwa - 61
Sour milk - 62
Yoghurt - 62
Filmjölk - 63
Kefir - 63
Antimicrobial properties of milk - 63
Cheese - 64
Lactic acid fermented sausages - 66
Lactobacillus spp. often used as probiotics - 68
Probiotic dose - 68
Lactobacillus casei and Lactobacillus paracasei - 69
Lactobacillus rhamnosus - 70
Lactobacillus acidophilus - 70
Lactobacillus johnsonii - 71
Lactobacillus salivarius - 71
Lactobacillus fermentum - 71
Lactobacillus reuteri - 71
Lactobacillus plantarum - 72
Phenolics – 73
ProViva: a probiotic food product - 74
To conclude - 76
References - 77
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
7
III. Gut microbiota (The bacterial flora of the gut) - 83
Intention - 85
Physiological and physiopathological effects - 85
Bacterial load of the digestive tract - 87
Viable count - 87
The bacterial core - 87
The bacterial flora - 88
Overview - 88
Mouth - 88
Stomach - 90
Jejunum - 90
Ileum - 90
Large intestine - 91
Taxonomic considerations - 92
Clostridium - 92
Bacteroides - 92
Adverse bacteria in the human microbiota - 93
A disturbed microbiota - 93
Lipopolysaccharides (LPS) - 94
Bacterial interaction - 95
Immune system - 95
The intestinal mucous membrane (mucosa) - 96
Barrier - 96
Leakage - 97
Variety and diversity - 99
Mammalians - 99
Mother and child axis - 99
The first bacteria - 99
Bacterial vaginosis - 101
Starting with E. coli - 101
Atopic eczema and bacterial diversity - 103
Old age – 105
Dietary factors affecting the gut microbiota - 106
To consider - 107
References - 108
IV. Effects - 115
Intentions - 117
Probiotic bacteria - 117
How to prove health beneficial effects – 119
Evidence based - 119
Koch’s postulates - 121
Medicine versus nutrition - 122
Immune modulation - 124
Virus - 125
Rotavirus diarrhoea - 125
Winter vomiting disease - 126
Common cold – 126
Bacterial balance and C. difficile - 127
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
8
Functional bowel disorders - 129
Dysfunctions without clear pathogenic explanations - 129
Irritable bowel syndrome - 130
Definition - 130
Treatment with B. animalis DN-173010 - 131
Treatment with B. infantis 35624 - 131
Treatment with L. plantarum 299v – 131
299v in freeze-dried preparation - 131
Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) - 133
Chronic inflammation - 133
Crohn’s disease - 133
Autoimmune disease - 133
Failures with probiotics - 134
Ulcerative colitis - 134
Inflammation driven by the microbiota - 134
Probiotic treatment - 135
Animal models against intestinal inflammation - 136
Animal models are needed - 136
Dextran sulphate sodium induced colitis - 137
Methotrexate induced enterocolitis - 137
Liver injuries - 139
Fibrosis and cirrhosis - 139
Minimal hepatic encephalopathy (MHE) - 140
Alcohol-related liver disease - 140
Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD) - 141
Accumulation of fat and inflammation - 141
Microbiota - 142
Probiotics - 142
Animal model for liver injury - 143
Patients in intensive-care - 145
Systemic inflammation - 145
Acute pancreatitis - 145
Metabolic syndrome - 147
Low-grade inflammation - 147
Overweight and obesity - 148
High energy yielding microbiota - 148
Pro-inflammatory microbiota - 150
To consider - 151
References - 153
Appendix A: Inflammation - 165
Defence reaction - 167
Acute, chronic and subclinical inflammation - 168
Immunoactive cells and components - 168
Gut-associated lymphoid tissue - 168
Macrophages – 169
Toll-like receptors - 169
NOD-like receptors - 169
Microfold cells – 170
Dendritic cells and intraepithelial lymphocytes - 170
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
9
IgA antibodies – 170
References - 170
Appendix B: Oxidative stress – 173
Reactive oxidative radicals and antioxidants - 175
Oxygen free radicals - 175
Antioxidative reactions - 176
References -177
Index - 179
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
10
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
11
Preface
The university as an abstract idea has a long historical tradition which has been
extremely successful in terms of societal progress. A distinguishing mark for this
concept is that the university is a place where newly acquired knowledge, or at least
knowledge that is considered to be the most well informed one for the time being, is
mediated by those who brought it to light (scholars) to those who search for it
(students). The short textbook you now have before your eyes originates from a
university-course labelled “Probiotics” (comprising 7.5 university credits) which is
given at the Faculty of Engineering at Lund University. The book covers in text, a series
of PowerPoint illustrated lectures that are given in blocks during the course.
I who wrote this have since 1976 when I took my PhD been involved in microbiological
research and from the late 1980ies primarily in probiotics and the gut microbiota.
During this time up to today I constantly have been involved in explaining my scientific
activities in the context of the results of other scientists to students, colleagues,
journalists, decision-makers and myself. Thus, I think I can say with some confidence
that I have experience of scientific learning (me) and teaching (others) which hopefully
is reflected in this short textbook. However, to be perfectly honest to you reader, the
focus of this book is set on the scientific subject-content and not on teaching methods
per se.
This can of course be seen as a major weakness in these days when so much effort is put
into the mission of teaching pedagogics to scholars. There seem to be a consensus
between university bureaucrats, politicians and many students that scholars are lousy
teachers without the necessary pedagogical knowledge. The Faculty of Engineering at
Lund University has therefore set out to change this undesired situation and make it
obligatory for scholars to attend specific courses where they are taught by distinguished
consultants in pedagogy about, for example, “constructivist-driven” teaching and
“constructive alignment” (for an overview see J. B. Biggs, Teaching for quality learning
at university. Buckingham: Open University Press, 1999). Constructive alignment is to
have coherence between assessment, teaching strategies and intended learning outcomes
in an educational programme, something that can sound evident and easy in theory but
it is for certain not that easy to implement in reality. But even the theory “constructive
alignment” as such has been harshly criticized by other scientists in pedagogy, for
example by Loretta M. Jervis and Les Jervis (What is the constructivism in constructive
alignment? Bioscience Education Journal 6: 2005.
http://www.bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk/journal/vol6/beej-6-5.aspx) and they state
amongst other things that “alignment and learning outcomes are the death of originality
and serendipity”. In the abstract of their paper they summarize and cite P. Bourdieu
(Science of Science and Reflexivity. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2004) “We would
identify our perspective not as that of constructivists, but rather as realists, accepting
that – science is a construction, but one in which discoveries are irreducible to the
construction and social conditions, which made them possible”. Dear reader, do you
understand? I don’t. I have major short-comings when it comes to the science of
pedagogics, but on the other hand, I also lack insight in, for example, the sciences of
mathematics and theology and my only excuse for this outrageous negligence is that my
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
12
own scientific field actually is microbiology and not pedagogy, mathematics or
theology. When it comes to the hard core of learning and teaching, my opinion is that
the most important factors are the quality of the content that is taught or learned and the
willingness of the scholar to teach and the student to learn, not so much how and in
what form the package of knowledge is given. Unfortunately, it will always be difficult
to evaluate the value of the knowledge package given/received at a course as its value
not necessarily is seen immediately but can come into use in someone’s mind long after
the course has been ended.
A scholar that was arguing for his form of “school” in his particular field of subject with
major success because he had absolute means for proving that he was right and his
opponent was wrong was the samurai Miyamoto Musashi that lived in Japan 1584
to1645. During Musashi’s lifetime new towns emerged in Japan and numerous Kendo
schools were founded. The different schools learned out different combat techniques
and strategies. Musashi early began his studies in ”the way of the sword” and won 60
single combats before he reached the age of 29, and when he settled down at the age of
50 he had participated in 6 wars. Beside his studies in single combat and war strategy
Miyamoto Musashi become a painter, priest and scholar. He lived the last years of his
life in a cave and wrote a short textbook "Go rin no sho” (A book of five rings) to his
pupil Teruo Nobuyuki. The book is about martial art and deals with both the strategy of
warfare and the methods of single combat. The book is however not a thesis on strategy,
but a guide for students who want to learn strategy, and actually this book is about
pedagogy in a rather pragmatic way. Musashi states that there are many different
schools in how to be successful in combat. The different schools are arguing about
different weapon designs, movements and attitudes. But these different forms of combat
are of minor consequence, he says. The conclusive and most important thing is
according to Musashi:”When you take up a sword, you must feel intent on cutting the
enemy”,”the one purpose of all is to cut the enemy”, and “you should only be concerned
with killing the enemy”. The weapon is not crucial, “you can win with a long weapon,
and you can also win with a short weapon”. In other words, the outward form is of small
consequence. It is the content, the achievement that matters. Musashi proved his point
by going from Kendo school to Kendo school, duelling and killing his opponents, and
around 1612 he even stopped using a real sword in the fights but used a wooden sword
instead, in order to prove the superiority of his art, and that the type of instrument was
unimportant as long as it fitted its purpose. He stated “my school is no school”.
I think it is important to remember in science as well as in learning/teaching that when
you set out to do something, be clear of the goal. The form, for example, “constructive
alignment” in pedagogy and what type of technique (apparatus) that is used in a
scientific experiment are just means to reach the goal, not the goal itself. So when you
take up a course you must feel intent on learning, the one purpose of all is to learn. You
can like or dislike the teacher, PowerPoint-presentations, lectures or textbook but if you
make that a major concern you will lose track on the final goal to achieve knowledge.
On the other hand, Musashi also said “do nothing that is of no use”. So, don’t attend
useless courses and don’t perform useless scientific experiments. The trick however, is
to know what is useless and what is not. If you can do that distinction, you have reached
a deeper understanding or should we call it enlightment.
Lund / Göran Molin
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
13
I. Fundamentals
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
14
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
15
Intention
The educational intention with Lecture-block I – Fundamentals – is to define the
concept of probiotics and put it into its scientific framework of biology in general and
bacteriology in particular. The term “probiotics” comprises bacteria of many different
sorts that are used for a specific purpose, and these bacteria interact not only with the
mammalian body but also with the highly complex community of different sorts of
bacteria occupying the ecological niche of the mammalian digestive tract. Thus, it is
meaningless to discuss and try to reach a deeper understanding of probiotics and the
interactions of the gut microbiota without knowledge of different bacterial taxa and the
major concepts of bacterial taxonomy. This learning-block labelled Fundamentals will
provide the reader with necessary tools for mental handling of the bacterial world, i.e. it
will give basic facts of bacteriological thinking. Furthermore, in an attempt to provide a
basis for more comprehensive understanding of the taxonomic tools, short notices are
given of the historical growth of the biological thought in the scientific community.
However, if you already are well oriented in biology and bacteriology you can regard
most parts of this block as a brief rehearsal.
Probiotics
Definitions
Originally, probiotics meant organisms or substances, which contribute to intestinal
microbial balance, in contrast to antibiotics that counteract microbial activity. However,
currently a widely accepted definition is that “probiotics are live microorganisms which
when administrated in adequate amounts confer a health benefit on the host” (Anon,
2002). In other words, the designation probiotics are referring to a function, and not to a
taxonomic unit. Lactobacillus paracasei and Bifidobacterium animalis are examples of
bacterial species where specific strains frequently are used commercially as probiotics.
Strain is bacterial cells with identical genome, and each bacterial species includes a large but unknown number of different strains
L. paracasei or Lactobacillus casei, (the taxonomists have disagreed in the past about
the nomenclature of these two species) are, for example, used as probiotics in the two
different products, Actimel (Danone) and Yakult (Yakult) while B. animalis, often
called Bifidobacterium lactis, is used in Activia (Danone). The different strains of these
three commercial products are on the packages labelled ‘defensis’, ‘Shirota’ and
‘bifidus regularis’, respectively. These three probiotic food-products are marketed
world-wide and are examples of major commercial successes.
When the word “probiotics” first was mentioned in scientific literature, it was used as
label for substances secreted by one microorganism to stimulate another (Lilley and
Stillwell, 1965). Later “probiotics” became organisms or substances, which contributed
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
16
to intestinal microbial balance (Parker, 1974) or “probiotics” are live microbial feed
supplements, which beneficially affects the host animal by improving its intestinal
microbial balance” (Fuller, 1989). An imbalance of the bacterial flora is sometimes
referred to as dysbiosis or dysbacteriosis.
A more recent definition of probiotics is that it is “living microorganisms, which upon
ingestion in certain numbers, exert health benefits beyond inherent basic nutrition”
(Schaafsma, 1996), and a more specified example is “probiotics are microbial dietary
adjuvants that beneficially affect the host physiology by modulating mucosal and
systemic immunity, as well as improving nutritional and microbial balance in the
intestine” (Naidu, 1999). The most frequently used definition today is linked to a
definition first launched by an international working group, i.e. “probiotics are live
microorganisms which when administrated in adequate amounts confer a health benefit
on the host” (Joint FAO/WHO Working group report on drafting guidelines for the
evaluation of probiotics in food, London, Ontario, Canada, April 30 and May 1, 2002).
There seems to day to be consensus about the meaning of the term probiotics. Thus
“probiotics are living microorganisms with health beneficial effects when administered
to the body”. Furthermore, it is more or less understood that these “health beneficial
effects” should have been proved scientifically. So far, the term probiotics is not
regulated by food legislation.
Probiotics are living microorganisms with scientifically proved health beneficial effects when administered to the body.
Safety
Health promotion is the leading theme in the probiotic concept which implies that there
should be no adverse effects linked to an intake of probiotics. Primarily, probiotics
should be seen as a food component and not as a medicine. Side effects can be accepted
by medicines provided that the beneficial effects are important enough, but as a health-
beneficial food component probiotics should be free from all type of pathogenic
activities. Thus, probiotics should not be dangerous to ingest for any category of
consumer, not even if they are very young or very old, or if they are
immunocompromised. In fact, the bacteria given as probiotics should be reasonably safe
even if they by some reason or another would enter into the circulation (blood stream).
It is also important that the probiotic strain don’t have qualifications for promoting
spread of antibiotic resistance or other unwanted features. Probiotics should not be
prone to function as vector for mobile genes.
Who came up with the idea?
When Louis Pasteur and Robert Koch in the second half of the 19th Century discovered
bacteria and demonstrated that bacteria both spoil food and give rise to diseases, the
emerging food industry started to look upon bacteria as a major problem. The obvious
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
17
solution was to eradicate all bacteria from food, for example, by heat treatment under
the axiom that “a good bug is a dead bug”. This is still a popular strategy, used by
today’s food industry to reduce, not only the bacterial hazards, but also to prevent
unexpected quality changes during storage.
However, there were early voices claiming that bacteria could be beneficial. One of
these was Elie Metchnikoff (1845-1916) who was a professor at the University of Paris
and won the Nobel prize 1908 for the discovery of phagocytosis. Metchnikoff argued
that certain components of the bacterial flora of the gut could be beneficial to the health
by counteracting bacteria with physiopathological effects (1901 in British Medical
Journal; 1907 in the book, The Prolongation of Life. Heinemann, London). Metchnikoff
suggested that the living bacteria in lactic acid fermented milk, as for example in
yoghurt, could have health beneficial effects after ingestion (Metchnikoff, 1907). This
view later underpinned the international launch of yoghurt, and up to recently, milk has
been the main carrier of probiotics.
Metchnikoff´s theory was that:”the intestinal flora not only influence the outcome of an
infection by a pathogen, but is also responsible for the insidiously chronic toxaemia that
hastens atrophy and ageing” (1901, British Medical Journal). Metchnikoff suggested:
"the introduction of this Bulgarian clotted milk into our diet may counteract, or at least
diminish, the injurious effect of the intestinal flora”, and a dairy in Paris launched
“yoghurt” for the first time outside Balkan, a sour milk product fermented with “la
Lactobacilline” à la Metchnikoff”, with a culture consisting of Streptococcus
thermophilus and Lactobacillus delbrueckii subspecies (subsp.) bulgaricus. The
fermentation with strains of these two taxa define yoghurt in many countries, e.g. Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) in United States of America (USA) defines yoghurt as
”a coagulated milk obtained by lactic acid fermentation, due to Lactobacillus
bulgaricus and Streptococcus thermophilus” (current taxonomy has reclassified L.
bulgaricus to L. bulgaricus delbrueckii subspecies bulgaricus).
It was later argued that the traditional yoghurt-culture had poor survival in the passage
of the acid condition of the stomach. In the 1930thies Lactobacillus acidophilus was
suggested in USA as a suitable complement to the yoghurt culture as L. acidophilus was
claimed to have higher resistance to low pH. In Japan during the 1930thies,
Lactobacillus casei strain Shirota was launched (the L. casei strain Shirota has later
been reclassified as Lactobacillus paracasei). The strain Shirota was isolated by the
scientist Minoru Shirota and is now the probiotic ingredient of the international product
Yakult. Another strain of L. paracasei, i.e. L. paracasei defencis (= DN-114001; also
called “immunitas” in the past) is used in the milk-based product Actimel (Danone).
In Sweden, the probiotic strain Lactobacillus plantarum 299v was launched 1994. L.
plantarum 299v was included in different fruits drinks with the brand name ProViva,
but is now marketed both in fruit drinks and freeze-dried in capsules.
Examples on some other commercially available Lactobacillus strains used as
probiotics are L. paracasei F19, L. rhamnosus GG, L. johnsonii La1 (Lj1), L. reuteri
SD2112, L. acidophilus DDS-1 and L. acidophilus NCFM.
In the 1950thies the idea to use Bifidobacterium strains as probiotics come up. The
background was that Bifidobacterium spp. (spp. stands for species in plural) to a high
degree seemed to dominate the faeces flora of breast-fed infants. The genus
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
18
Bifidobacterium is from a phylogenetic perspective very different from Lactobacillus
and most probably Bifidobacterium perform quite different actions in the human gastro-
intestinal tract. In contrast to Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium can grow without vitamins
and growth-factors and use inorganic nitrogen (ammonia) as the sole nitrogen source.
The genus Bifidobacterium was described for the first time 1900 by Tissier.
Bifidobacterium spp. frequently discussed in connection to probiotics are
Bifidobacterium bifidum, Bifidobacterium longum, Bifidobacterium infantis (which
currently have been reclassified as Bifidobacterium longum biovariant infantis), and
Bifidobacterium animalis and Bifidobacterium lactis (more correctly B. lactis should be
named Bifidobacterium animalis subspecies lactis).
The strain B. animalis BB12 is the most well-known probiotic strain of
Bifidobacterium. BB12 is often designated as B. lactis.
Prebiotics
In analogy with probiotics, the term “prebiotics” was invented by Gibson and Roberfoid
(1995), and aiming on dietary fibres that stimulated the multiplication of beneficial
bacteria in the gut. The conditions for a food component to be called prebiotics are that
(i) the substrate must not be hydrolysed or absorbed in the stomach or small intestine,
(ii) the substrate must be selective for beneficial bacteria in the colon by encouraging
the growth/metabolism of these organisms, and (iii) the substrate will alter the
microbiota to a healthy composition by inducing beneficial luminal/systemic effects
within the host.
Prebiotics are non digestible food ingredients that selectively stimulate the growth and/or activity of health beneficial components of the colonic microbiota.
The beauty of the prebiotic concept is that it utilise microorganisms already present in
the gut. It is much easier from a practical point of view to incorporate a dietary fibre in a
food product than living microorganisms, and dietary fibres are much easier to store for
prolonged times than living microorganisms.
The prebiotic concept also has its pitfalls: (i) if no beneficial bacteria are present in the
digestive tract, beneficial bacteria can’t be stimulated; (ii) are prebiotics selective
enough, i.e. do they only stimulate growth of beneficial bacteria or could they under
some circumstances also stimulate growth of adverse bacteria?
Dietary fibres in general are supposed to reach colon and there they are fermented by
the microbiota and converted into mainly butyric acid, propionic acid, acetic acid and
carbon dioxide. Butyric acid and propionic acid are general regarded to have beneficial
effects on the metabolism, and especially butyric acid is an important energy source for
the colonic epithelial cells.
Hypothetically, if a certain dietary fibre that is supposed to have prebiotic effects (i.e.
stimulate bifidobacteria and lactobacilli in colon after administration) also results in an
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
19
increased amount of butyric acid in the faeces (colon content) that must be regarded as
especially good as butyric acid is beneficial for the condition of the intestinal mucosa.
On the other hand, neither bifidobacteria nor lactobacilli are able to produce butyric acid
so this increase in butyric acid is not a marker for an increased content of lactobacilli
and bifidobacteria. But it can be a marker for an increase in Clostridium species (spp.)
as many clostridia are efficient producers of butyric acid. Many clostridia are also
harmless and some might even be beneficial but there is also Clostridium spp. that are
efficient producers of hydrogen sulphide (H2S) which is a compound with cell-toxic
effects. Thus, some Clostridium spp. can be harmful for the colonic mucosa, and a high
concentration of butyric acid in colon is no guarantee for a healthy colonic environment.
A major problem with prebiotics is to certify that only beneficial bacteria are stimulated
and not adverse ones.
Usually an increased amount of Bifidobacterium and lactic acid bacteria as
Lactobacillus in faeces after consumption of a dietary fibre is taken as proof of the
prebiotic capacity of the tested fibre.
Synbiotics
Supplementation with prebiotics or probiotics is both meant to affect the bacterial flora
(microbiota) of the gastro-intestinal tract in a beneficial way and impose physiological
health effects in the gut. Prebiotics suffer from the drawback that there can always be a
chance that they stimulate adverse components of the microbiota as well as the positive
ones, and if no positive bacteria are present in the gut, they can of course not be
stimulated.
Problems with probiotics can be that they have difficulties to establish themselves in
competition with the resident bacterial flora of the host, and the fact that neither
lactobacilli nor bifidobacteria are able to produce butyric acid, and hardly any
significant amounts of propionic acid. Hence, the obvious strategy to minimize the
hurdles would be to combine prebiotics with probiotics, a combination that sometimes
is called “synbiotics”. Synbiotics are mixtures of probiotics and prebiotics.
It should however be pointed out that probiotics not only have effects in the large
bowel. Probiotics also exercise immunological and other physiological effects on its
way down the digestive tract by direct contact with epithelial and immunological cells
(starting already in the mouth).
Bacteria
The gut harbours at least 1014
living bacteria, and this bacterial flora (microbiota)
represents more than 9 000 000 bacterial genes while the human body is only
represented by about 23 000 genes (Yang et al. 2009). In other words, the human
microbiota has a huge potential of different abilities that can be adjusted accordingly to
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
20
the existing conditions. Bacteria are functionally important for mammalian health by
protecting the host from colonization of pathogens and providing nutritionally
advantages, for example, by breaking down indigestible polysaccharides to short-chain
fatty acids and by producing vitamin K. It is also clear that specific members of the
digestive microbiota directly affect mucosal immunity (Feng and Elson 2011; Atarashi
et al. 2011). Furthermore, certain components of the microbiota can have effects on
systemic immunology and on the barrier function of the gastro-intestinal mucosa.
Bacteria are obviously important for us, and a fair question then arises, what sort of
organisms are actually these “bacteria”? An answer to the question can be that bacteria
are small ancient life-form. They are found as individual cells or cells aggregated
together as clumps. Bacteria have a single circular DNA chromosome that is found
within the cytoplasm. Bacteria don’t have a nucleus, and they lack intracellular
organelles.
Bacteria are an ancient domain, of small, usually unicellular organisms.
So far no human science or techniques have been able to create a living cell out of
cellular constituents. Thus, the living organism is so much more than its known
molecular building stones. An organism can be defined as an individual composed of
mutually dependent parts constituted for sub-serving vital processes. Some organisms
exist as a singular cell (unicellular organisms), which usually applies to bacteria.
One ordinary bacterial cell enclosed in one ml of water correspond to a concentration of
about one ppt (ppt = parts per trillion, i.e. 1 per 1012
), i.e. bacteria are very small
creatures. On the other hand, the numbers of bacteria in a certain ecological niche can
be very high, as it is in colon of humans and animals. Bacteria are one of the three
domains of organisms. The others are Archaea and Eucarya. Eucarya includes
protozoa, algae, fungi, slime fungi, plants, mosses and animals. Archaea are organisms
that on the surface look just as Bacteria. They are small and unicellular. However, there
are major differences under the surface, e.g. Archaea have C20-diethers in the cell
membranes. C20-diethers are present in 3.8 billion (109) years old sediments so initially
Archaea were supposed to be the oldest living form on earth. But it was soon concluded
that also traces of Bacteria could be found from the same time period. In other words,
bacteria have been around for long time, much longer than multi-cell eukaryotes.
Bacteria also have had plenty of time to evolve in different directions, and therefore the
phylogenetic differences between different sorts of bacteria can be huge.
Now and then it is stated that the bacterial flora of the gut is adapted to the human host.
But is it so? It seems more likely that human and other mammalian beings are adapted
to bacteria, considering the fact that bacteria have been around on earth in about 4x109
years while our own species, Homo sapiens doesn’t seem to have existed in its present
form for much more than 200 000 years. A key-question is then, what sorts of bacteria
have we been adapted to? Or put it in another way, what sorts of bacteria were present
in the dawn of mankind (or in the dawn of our mammalian predecessors) and started to
interact with us? An answer to that question will most probably also answer, what sort
of bacteria that are most beneficial for our well-being.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
21
Classification and identification
Definitions
The diversity of life is dealt within the academic discipline “systematics”, also called
“taxonomy”, even if taxonomy in the strict sense is the science of “classification” (the
division into groups according to similarity/relationship) while systematics includes all
aspects of the field, i.e. besides classification also such activities as identification (the
comparison of an unknown object with known ones) and the naming of organisms. It is
important to distinguish between classification and identification.
Systematics is the science about organism’s sort and diversity, and about all types of relationships between them. Taxonomy [from the Greek táxis (order, formation), and nómos (law)] is the science of classification. Classification is the division into groups according to similarity/relationship. Identification is the comparison of an unknown object with known ones.
Organisms can be classified in many different ways, and one way to do it is to divide
bacteria after how they utilize energy, i.e. organisms that are able to synthesise their
own organic material from inorganic molecules are called “autotrophes” while
organisms that utilise complex organic molecules for biomass synthesis and energy
generation are called “heterotrophes”, and then are the autotrophes subdivided into
photoautotrophes (use light as energy source) and chemoautotrophes (oxidase inorganic
molecules as NH3, H2, S or Fe).
Organisms can also be classified in accordance to their relation to oxygen. If they grow
in the presence of the oxygen in air, they are called aerobes, i.e. they have respiratory
energy metabolism. But if they are unable to grow in the presence of oxygen they are
called anaerobes, i.e. they have no respiratory energy metabolism. There are also
organisms that are said to be microaerophils, i.e. the organism can handle small
amounts of oxygen, or facultative anaerobes, i.e. aerobic organisms that can switch to
anaerobic metabolism when needed. The general anaerobic strategy to generate energy is
by fermentation which is an anaerobe oxidation of organic molecules where the role as terminal
electron acceptor is taken by other organic molecules.
In aerobic respiration, oxygen is utilised as the terminal electron acceptor (hydrogen acceptor).
However, some aerobic organisms can also run anaerobic respiration. In that case, oxygen is not
used as terminal electron acceptor. Instead can compounds as, for example, nitrate, sulphate or
carbon dioxide be used as terminal electron acceptor. To classify bacteria in accordance to
energy utilization or respiration is a superficial and actually artificial classification
without much relevance for the evolutionary relationships between organisms.
Taxonomy in historical perspective
Essence theory. The way of looking at biologic classification has changed through
History. The antique, Greek so called “essence theory” stated that all organisms can be
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
22
defined by their “essence” (a unique indivisible character). By the use of dichotomic
division of the different essences of organisms in nature, a classification system could
be established. This classification goes downward from the highest rank down to the
lowest one, sensu stricto. The principle was launched by Plato but Aristotle was the first
one to apply it for living organisms (Figure 1).
Figure 1. The antique, Greek essence theory states that all organisms can be defined by their “essence” (a unique indivisible character) and classification can be performed by dividing things into two (dichotomic classification).
A functional condition for dichotomic classification is that taxa (taxonomic groups) on
all hierarchical levels are “natural”. Natural classification means classification
according to the true and only valid classification system. This postulates that there is a
distinct essence for all taxa, on all hierarchical levels. However, this is not true for
organisms according to the current scientific knowledge. On the other hand, the
dichotomic system works well for identification purposes when a classification already
has been set up.
Biological variation. Much later a botanical classification system was set up by Andrea
Cesalpino (1583) where different plants were grouped together according to similarity
and then certain critical characters (essences) were pointed out as markers for the
different groups. These essences/markers were then used in a dichotomic identification
system.
The general problem to handle the biological variation within the theory of essence
became clear 1686 when John Ray suggested a sexual definition of the species, i.e.
parents that together can have off-springs belong to the same species. However, just a
sexual definition is not enough to identify a specific species in nature, and it is almost
impossible to point out single morphologic characteristics that coincides the sexual
definition. The obvious solution is to combine different morphological criteria when
defining a taxon (taxonomic unit). This was suggested by the French botanist, Pierre
Magnol in 1692. Another French botanist Michel Adanson questioned the dichotomic,
“downwards” classification 1764. He introduced an “upwards” classification where the
base was the species, and different species were lumped together into genera, and
genera into families etc. He also used a combination of different characters when he
Organism
Plant Animal
Tree Herb
Deciduous
tree
Conifer
long needles short needles
sensu stricto sensu stricto
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
23
described the species. Unfortunately, the ideas of Adanson were almost completely
neglected by his contemporaries, much due to the impact of the Swedish botanist Carl
Linnaeus (1707-1778; or Carl von Linné as his name become when he was raised to
nobility 1761).
Carl Linnaeus believed in the theory of essence and his classification system, “the
sexual system” of Linnaeus was much more premature than the classification systems
presented by John Ray and Michel Adanson. However, Linnaeus was good in marketing
his system and in spite of the shortcomings of the system he managed to intuitively
classify plants in a successful way. Many of the genera defined by Linnaeus in “Flora
Svecia” (1755) are still valid. Linnaeus arranged organisms in a system of different
hierarchical levels in accordance with the one we use today. Moreover, he introduced
uniform nomenclature-rules, i.e. to name the species by the genus name and a species
epithet, e.g. Rosa canina (dog-rose), Sus scrofa (pig) and Escherichia coli (coli-
bacterium). Carl Linnaeus launched his ideas: 1735 in “Systema naturae” and 1753 in
“Species plantarum”.
Evolution. The first scientist to suggest biological evolution was the French zoologist
Jean-Baptiste Lamarck. He presented his ideas in “Philosophie zoologique” (1809), but
without gaining much hearing for the idea. Maybe the lack of sympathy was because he
failed to give any good explanation for the evolution. Lamarck proposed that evolution
is caused by inherited experience which few believed in at the time, especially as the
general idea for the time was that Earth only was 6000 year old (calculated from the
Bible), i.e. too small time span to allow an evolutionary development.
However, recently it has been clear that in some cases it seems that environmental
experiences actually can be inherited. New findings in “epigenetics” agree to a certain
degree with the ideas of Lamarck. Inheritable but reversible changes in the DNA can
occur and those changes are independent of the sequence of nucleotides. Such changes
are, for example, DNA-methylation and modification of histones (proteins on the
chromosome). Thus, environmental factors that a pregnant mother and her foetus are
exposed for can induce traces in the DNA. An interesting question is if the bacterial
flora of the gut can have epigenetic effects, e.g. of relevance for the immune system?
That would mean that the bacterial flora of the mother could imprint immunological
characteristics in the off-spring.
All credit for the evolutionary idea went to Charles Darwin that 1859 published the
book “On the origin of species by means of natural selection”. Geologists had by then
proved that the Earth actually was by far older than expected earlier. Simplified, the
theory of Darwin consists of two theses, (i) successive (gradual) development and (ii)
natural selection. The theory of natural selection gives an explanation to the evolution.
The theory of natural selection was later further developed in the so called “Synthetic
theory” which postulates that (i) individuals in a population have genomic differences,
and (ii) individuals (genomes) with the most efficient reproduction will dominate the
population.
Individuals with the most efficient reproduction are not necessarily the best individuals
from a human perspective. It is important to hold in mind that the theory of evolution is
not a “natural law”. The theory of evolution cannot be used for broadcasting future
evolution. It can only give an explanation to what already has happen. However, the
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
24
theory of evolution is a well established scientific hypothesis with major impact on the
biological thought.
The concept Phylogenetic taxonomy which is much in use today was originally
launched by the German zoologist Willi Hennig in his book “Grunzüge einer Theorie
der Phylogenetischen Systematik” (1950). In this book he criticised the mixed phenetic
(classifying according to similarity; see below) and evolutionary view of taxonomy and
he wanted to purify the evolutionary way of thinking. Hennig made up taxonomic
working-rules based strictly on evolutionary principles. He introduced the terms
“phylogenetic” and “cladogram” (clados is branch in Greek). The latter is a diagram
(tree) of phylogenetic relationships between taxa.
Operative taxonomic units
Pure cultures
When characterizing bacteria, it is not individual cells that are characterized. It is
populations of living cells in a pure culture, or genes amplified to multiple copies, for
example, by “polymerase chain reaction” (PCR) that are studied. When a pure culture is
studied for taxonomic purposes it can be characterised with both phenotypic and
genotypic methods (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Traditional procedure for bacteriological characterization used for classification or identification.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
25
Phenotypic characteristics
The phenotypic characteristics are equal to the expressed characteristics of an organism,
or in other words, the characteristics that are visualised in reality. This is in contrast to
the genomic characteristics, i.e. the genotype, which are the structure, or the
construction of the genome.
Examples of different types of phenotypic characteristics are morphological,
physiological, biochemical, structural and immunological ones. Phenotypic
characteristics are crucial as they reflect the reality (what the organism actually can do)
but they can from a taxonomic stand point easily be misinterpreted. Morphology is
especially unreliable for bacteriological classification, but can be usable for
identification. In fact, traditional phenotypic features have been the most used way to
perform bacteriological classification and identification in the past.
Examples of phenotypic key tests often used for identification are the Gram reaction
(characteristics of the cell wall), morphology (for example, cell form in the microscope
as rods or cocci, and colony appearance on an agar plate), fermentation ability of
different carbohydrates, the oxidase reaction (“oxidase” is in this respect actually
aiming at cytochrome c and cytochrome oxidase that is the same as cytochrome a), the
catalase reaction, mobility, and growth under different specialised conditions (for
example, on Rogosa agar plates).
The Gram-staining was developed by Christian Gram (1884) and has proven to be an
important phenotypic character that is reflected in the phylogenetic relationships
between bacteria. Most members of the phyla Firmicutes and Actinobacteria are gram-
positive while all other phyla are gram-negative. In short, the cell wall of gram-positive
bacteria have one layer of cell membranes and a thick layer of peptido-glucane, while
the cell wall of Gram-negative bacteria have two layers of cell membranes and, in
between, a layer of peptido-glucane. Gram-staining is technically tricky to perform, and
an alternative way is to treat a colony with concentrated KOH and record if the cell-
walls break. Gram-negative bacteria are subjected to lysis. The KOH-method was
described by Gregersen (1978).
Many gram-negative bacteria have lipopolysaccharides (LPS) in the outer membranes
of the cell wall. LPS is regarded as an endotoxin and will activate the human immune
system if it comes in contact with it. Many types of bacterial LPS are strongly
proinflammatory, for example, LPS from E. coli. If LPS comes into the circulation
(blood stream), it causes immunological reactions that depending on concentration can
result in fever (in concentrations of nanograms), fall in blood pressure, internal
bleeding, coagulation of the blood and irreversible chock (death).
Direct gene identification
Direct gene identification is a way to avoid the bottleneck of culturing bacteria in pure
cultures in the laboratory when they shall be classified or identified. Instead all bacterial
genes in a sample are extracted and then identified (or classified). Direct gene
identification has up to now mostly been directed towards the 16S ribosomal RNA
(rRNA) gene but, lately, so called “shotgun” Sanger sequencing or massively parallel
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
26
pyrosequencing have also been used in an attempt to obtain unbiased samples of all
genes of a community (Eisen, 2007). The term “metagenomics” is frequently used as a
label for studies where more or less all the genetic material is recovered from
environmental samples and identified directly (Handelsman et al. 1998).
Biological taxonomy in general, and bacteriological taxonomy in particular, has during
the last decades been more and more built up around the molecules of ribosomal RNA
(rRNA), or in fact, the gene controlling the structure of the rRNA (rDNA) molecule.
rRNA is a relatively preserved molecule that only slowly has been changed through the
evolution and can thus be compared between different kinds of organisms in order to
trace the path of evolution. There are three kinds of rRNA in bacteria: 5S rRNA (120
nucleotides), 16S rRNA (1 540 nucleotides), and 23S rRNA (2 900 nucleotides).
Currently some of an golden standard for direct gene identification of the dominating
taxa in an environmental sample is to (i) extract all the 16S rRNA genes from the
sample (for example, faeces), (ii) PCR-amplify all the 16S rRNA genes with universal
primers, (iii) clone the amplified genes into Escherichia coli, (iv) PCR-amplify (PCR
stands for polymerase chain reaction) the cloned 16S rRNA gene, (v) sequence the
cloned 16S rRNA gene, and (vi) and identify the sequenced gene by compare it with
known gene-sequences using a data base (Figure 3).
Figure 3. A schematic procedure for direct 16S rRNA gene identification by PCR-amplification, cloning and sequencing.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
27
Hierarchical ranks
There are plenty of different methods for studying the genome in bacteria and to use
these methods in bacterial systematic (classification, identification and typing), e.g.
gene sequencing where especially the 16S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) gene has been
targeted, DNA:DNA-homology, restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLP) of
the 16S rRNA gene (Ribotyping), temporal temperature gradient gel electrophoresis
(TTGE), randomly amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) and restriction endonuclease
analysis (REA). Different methods are differently useful at different taxonomic ranks,
i.e. different hierarchical levels in taxonomy (Figure 4).
Figure 4. The different hierarchical levels (taxonomic ranks) used in bacterial taxonomy.
The operative taxonomic unit (OTU) for bacterial classification or identification
(bacterial taxonomy) is, either a pure culture originating from the multiplication of a
single cell by culturing (isolate), or a gene sequence. The procedure for identification is
to compare the unknown OTU with known ones, and when it then comes to
classification, also with other unknown OTUs. Closely related, singular sequences or
isolates (pure cultures) form a species; closely related species form a genus, and so on
(Figure 4). According to this and the nomenclature rules of bacterial systematic, the
different hierarchical designations of three strains belonging to three different phyla are
exemplified in Table 1.
Table 1. Taxonomic position of three different strains belonging to three different phyla ( T after the strain number marks that the strain is the type strain for the species).
Phylum Proteobacteria Firmicutes Actinobacteria
Class Gammaproteobacteria Bacilli Actinobacteria Order Enterobacteriales Lactobacillales Bifidobacteriales
Family Enterobacteriaceae Lactobacillaceae Bifidobacteriaceae Genus Escherichia Lactobacillus Bifidobacterium
Species Escherichia coli L. plantarum Bifidobacterium animalis Strain E. coli ATCC 11775
T L. plantarum 299v B. animalis BB12
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
28
Strain
The strain is the lowest hierarchical level bacterial systematic. Theoretically, the strain
is the same as a clone of cells, i.e. a population of bacterial cells with identical genome.
A prerequisite for the strain concept is that it must be possible to separate the individual
strain from other similar cells of the same species.
Strain (= clone) = a population of genetically identical cells
In practice it will be the quality of the method used to show genomic differences on a
low hierarchical level that will define the strain. The better the resolution capacity of the
method is the more precise will the strain definition become. The absolute method will
be to sequence all genomic material in the cell (plasmids and other mobile units
included). A more pragmatic method is to use “restriction endonuclease analysis” of the
total genome (REA). REA is schematically depicted in Figure 5.
Figure 5. Principle of restriction endonuclease analysis (REA) of the total chromosomal DNA, with the use of frequently cutting endonucleases and conventional agarose electrophoresis.
It is important to keep in mind that the bacterial strain theoretically should be a
population of genetically identical cells, but more pragmatic, the bacterial strain is a
taxonomic unit where the cell population is seen as almost identical individuals by a
method with a reasonable high capacity to resolve genomic differences. Thus, the
definition of a strain is dependent on what method that is used for the identification. For
example, pulsed field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) of chromosomal DNA digested with
restriction endonuclease has been somewhat of a golden standard for strain
identification/classification in clinical microbiology. However, PFGE is a technique for
the separation of relatively large pieces of DNA so the used restriction endonucleases
must cut the chromosomal DNA in relatively large fragments, i.e. PFGE has less
capacity than REA to visualise small differences in the genome, because in REA
frequently cutting restriction endonucleases can be used. On the other hand, PFGE is
from a technical point of view less complicated to run.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
29
The strain identity is given after the species epithet. There are no generally accepted
rules of how the strain identity should be given. Mostly it is given as a combination of
letters followed by a number, but it can sometimes be given as a name (especially in
commercial contexts). If the strain has been deposited in an international culture
collection, the strain identity will be given as capital letter notation linked to the name
of the culture collection, followed by a serial number. Examples of international culture
collections and their letter notations are, for example, American Type Culture
Collection (ATCC), Deutsche Sammlung von Mikroorganismen (DSM), Czech
Collection of Microorganisms (CCM) and Culture Collection University of Göteborg
(CCUG).
When a new bacterial species is described, a so called “type strain” must be sent in for
deposition in a recognised international culture collection, wherefrom it later can be
purchased. Then, the strain will get a number but it will also be recognised as the type
strain of that particular species, i.e. it will serve as a living identity key for the species.
To mark the type-strain identity, a T is put directly after the strain number, for example,
the type strain of the species Escherichia coli is Escherichia coli ATCC 11775T if it is
purchased from the American type culture collection. If the same strain instead is
purchased from Deutsche Sammlung von Mikroorganismen, the name of the type strain
is Escherichia coli DSM 30083T. The two differently labelled type strains are supposed
to be identical.
Type and pathogenic E. coli
Typing. Below the taxonomic rank of species and subspecies, but above the level of
strain, the concept of “type” is often used, especially in the clinical bacteriology and in
bacterial epidemiology. This is a concept that traditionally has been linked to pathogens
and virulence factors or how the immune system reacts towards different bacterial
populations of a certain species. That is, the typing-system is closely connected to the
method used for defining the type. Different methods or different target characteristics
of the bacteria give different typing-systems. Sometimes, the type can be close to the
strain, but mostly a certain type can include numerous different strains but with some
important characteristics in common.
E. coli. As an example, enterovirulent E. coli (EEC) are divided in at least four
subgroups or types of EEC that can cause gastro-enteritis in humans.
Enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC) produces a heat-stable toxin (st) and a heat-labile toxin
(lt). ETEC can cause gastro-enteritis (“traveller’s diarrhoea”), resulting in watery
diarrhoea and abdominal pain. It is a typical tourist’s disease. The infective dose is 108
to 1010
CFU, i.e. a quite high dose is needed for infection.
Enteropathogenic E. coli (EPEC) is defined as E. coli belonging to serogroups
epidemiolologically implicated as pathogens but whose virulence mechanism is
unrelated to the excretion of typical E. coli toxins. EPEC cause “infantile diarrhoea” and
is one of the most frequent causes to diarrhoea in children in underdeveloped areas. The
infective dose is low in children but above 106 CFU in adults. The mortality rate is up to
50% in children in underdeveloped countries without access to health care.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
30
Enteroinvasive E. coli (EIEC) can invade the epithelial cells of the intestine. EIEC
cause “bacillary dysentery” which often is mistaken for dysentery caused by Shigella.
Blood and mucous appear in the stool. The acute infection can be followed by
haemolytic uremic syndrome where the functions of the kidneys are failing. The
infective dose is low and even ten CFU can be enough to cause disease.
Enterohemorrhagic E. coli (EHEC) can produce verotoxins (VT) which is a shiga-like
toxin of two kinds, vt1 and vt2. EHEC mostly belongs to the E. coli serotype O157:H7
(explanation below). EHEC can cause diarrhoea (initially watery but becomes grossly
bloody) and severe cramping (abdominal pain). The acute infection can be followed by
haemolytic uremic syndrome. The infective dose is very low and can be even lower than
10 CFU. EHEC adhere to the colon mucosa, but it doesn’t invade (infect) the tissue.
EHEC produce toxins: The verotoxins (shiga-like toxins I and II) adhere to receptors
that are especially frequent in the capillaries of the kidneys. It can lead to HUS
(haemolytic uremic syndrome), i.e. the kidneys stop to function. HUS mostly hit
children and elderly. EHEC enterocolitis can also lead to TTP (thrombotic
thrombocytopenic purple) where the blood capillaries are blocked. TTP mostly hit
middle aged individuals. E. coli serotype O157:H7 is the most common serotype
amongst EHEC-strains.
E. coli strains are divided into different serotypes. The serotypes are in this case based
on three fundamental antigens, O, K and H. O-antigens are based on a polysaccharide
moiety, associated to the outer membrane. There are more than 170 different O-groups
of E. coli. K-antigens are based on polysaccharides that are part of the cell capsule.
There are three different K groups. H antigens are part of the flagella, i.e. only motile
strains can be H-typed. There are more than 50 H groups.
It can be pointed out that non-pathogenic E. coli often is present in high numbers in the
human gastro-intestinal tract, but even if they are non-pathogenic and normally don’t
cause infections, they must be regarded as a potential hazard. At high numbers also the
non-pathogenic E. coli can exercise adverse effects, e.g. having a pro-inflammatory
effect on the host.
RAPD-typing. A convenient method to type the genome of isolates is the method of
randomly amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD). This PCR-based method is easily
performed and can relatively quickly be run for large numbers of isolates. A draw-back
with the method is the low reproducibility between different PCR-machines and
laboratories. Depending on the actual species and laboratory protocol a RAPD-type can
be more or less close to the strain-level.
In short the procedure for RAPD is the following. (i) PCR is run on a crude cell extract
of an isolate (or purified DNA) at semi-stringent conditions using a few-mere primer.
(ii) Electrophoresis is used for showing fragment size of the amplified DNA. The
obtained band pattern on the electrophoresis gel (or an image of it) can be used as a
genomic fingerprint of the tested isolate.
Species
Definition. It is often said that there are between 500 to 1000 different bacterial species
in the gut (Sekirov et al. 2010). However, many of these species are present in low
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
31
numbers. The number of dominating species, making up 99% of total amount of
bacteria, is lower but the exact number can differ widely between individuals,
depending on the extent of diversity.
The total number of known bacterial species is for the time being about 6500, i.e. the
number of bacterial species that have been formally described and validated. These
bacterial species are distributed between 1500 different genera (about).
The species is by tradition the basic unit of systematics. In older days (for example in
the days of Carl Linnaeus), the species was regarded as a creation of God and the
scientist just discovered it. The current opinion is that the species is constructed by the
scientific community by the use of classification. This becomes especially evident in
bacteriology but is perhaps less obvious in zoology. The species concept differs also
between different biological disciplines. An example of species definition of animals is
the following by Mayr (1982): “A species is a reproductive community of populations
reproductively isolated from others that occupies a specific niche in nature”.
A more general, phylogenetically based species definition is: “A species is an
irreducible cluster of organisms, within which there is a parental pattern of ancestry and
descent, and which is diagnostically distinct from other such clusters” (Cracraft, 1987).
The zoological species-concept of, for example, Mayr (1982) seems fairly clear, but the
species concept becomes much more muddled when involving organisms with
vegetative reproduction. This is a problem that became especially pronounced in several
botanical cases. For example, the plant genus Taraxacum (dandelion;”maskros” in
Swedish) is divided into 500 to1000 different species (the exact number is dependent on
who the scientist is that has made the division); Rubus (blackberry;”björnbär” in
Swedish) is divided into 90 to 4000 species, and Hieracium (hawkweed;”fibbla” in
Swedish) into 2000-10 000 different species.
A consensus definition of species is that species are populations of organisms that have a high level of genetic similarity.
The genomic span between different populations (and strains) of bacteria within the
same species is much wider than for the botanical or zoological species. Historically
this depends on the fact that the morphology of bacteria are much less varied then for
plants and animals, and that the current bacterial species definition is based on a
methodology resulting in less homogenous species.
DNA:DNA homology. The generally accepted standard-method for species definition
in bacteriology is DNA:DNA-hybridization of the total genomic DNA. Unfortunately,
this method is a bit unreliable from a technical point of view. The method is work-
intensive and it can only be used for pair wise comparison. DNA:DNA-hybridization
can also be used for identification by the use of probes with DNA-sequences which are
known to be unique for a certain species or genus.
The DNA:DNA hybridization homology of different bacterial strains (or isolates) has to
be performed par wise. It is generally accepted that strains with a relative ratio of
binding of ≥70% DNA:DNA-homology at optimal and stringent re-association
temperatures are regarded to belong to the same species. Optimal temperature is a
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
32
temperature 25oC below the melting point of the DNA, and stringent temperature is the
temperature 15oC below the melting point of the DNA.
Genomic species concept of bacteria: Strains with a relative ratio of binding of ≥70% DNA:DNA-homology at optimal and stringent re-association temperature are regarded to be the same species.
20% to 30% DNA:DNA homology have sometimes been used to define a "mini-genus”,
e.g. in the family Enterobacteriaceae. However, homology values in the range 20-30%
are unreliable, and homology values below 20% are meaningless due to methodological
short-comings of the method.
It must be stressed that the bacterial species represents a much wider biological
variation than the zoological and botanical species. This can be demonstrated by the fact
that the 70% DNA:DNA-homology that defines the bacterial species does not work on
animals, e.g. the DNA:DNA-homology between a human and a Chimpanzee is close to
100%; man:Gibon about 90%; man:Capuchin about 80%; man:Lemur about 50%
Besides of providing the bacterial species with too wide lines of demarcation (too high
phylogenetic variation within the species), the DNA:DNA homology has
methodological short-comings. It is also highly impractical to just have results of
comparisons in pairs, and not having a final, absolute value for each strain that could be
stored in a data base and re-used when new strains are added into the species. The
DNA:DNA homology concept works in the way that every new strain has to be tested
on the laboratory against the type strain and all other strains that could be of interest.
Most probably the current DNA:DNA-homology concept will be exchanged in the
future with a better method for species definition.
16S rRNA-similarity. Today, 16S rRNA gene sequence similarity is often used to give
a tentatively species definition, but this method is unable to differentiate between
closely related species, i.e. the resolution capacity 16S rRNA gene sequence
determination is too low for species definition. Even if the similarity in 16S rRNA gene
is 100% between a test-strain and the types strain of a particular species (similarity
coefficient = 1.00), it is not certain that the isolate belongs to the species of the type
strain. It can belong to a closely related species. It has been suggested that a similarity
in 16S rRNA gene of >97% indicates closely related species (Stackebrandt and Goebel
1994). On the other hand, it has been statistically shown that there is only 50% chance
for two 16S rRNA genes to belong to the same species even if the similarity is >99.8%
(Keswanit and Whitman 2001).
Ribotyping. A more precise and reliable method than DNA:DNA-homology to use at
the levels of species and subspecies is the Restriction fragment length polymorphisms
(RFLP) of the 16S rRNA gene. When the method is used for the 16S rRNA gene the
method is called ribotyping. The principle of ribotyping is schematically outlined in
Figure 6.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
33
Figure 6. Schematically procedure for ribotyping, or restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLP) of the 16S rRNA gene.
Ribotyping is pointing out the number of 16S rRNA operons in the genome and give a
fingerprint that reflects the distribution of these operons. The phylogenetic relationships
are in this way fairly well reflected in the so called ribotype pattern.
Ribotyping is more easily performed, and more reproducible than DNA:DNA
hybridisation. Also a larger number of strains can be compared between each other and
not only pair-wise, i.e. the electrophoretic band pattern can numerically be compared
between each other and old patterns can be compared with more newly processed
patterns.
Some genomically homogenous species can be directly identified by ribotyping.
However, more heterogeneous species form, with ribotyping, several subgroups below
the species level, i.e. the species includes several different ribotypes. In other words, if
ribotyping should be the golden standard for species definition it would lead to more
bacterial species, bur less heterogeneous ones.
Base pair composition of DNA. A description of a new species or genus must include
a base pair composition of the DNA-nucleotides, i.e. the mol % guanine (G) + cytosine
(C) compared to the total amount of nucleotides in the genome.
It is important to understand that base pair composition (G+C ratio) can’t be used for
identification. It can only be used for classification. Thus, if two strains (or isolates)
have identical G+C ratio they are not necessarily similar. In contrast, if two strains have
different G+C ratio, they are truly different. The magnitude of the difference in G+C
ratios between taxa is important.
The G+C ratio within the whole domain Bacteria reaches from 22% (Clostridium
putrefaciens) up to 77% (e.g. Aurbacterium and Cellulomonas). This can be compared
with birds and mammalians that have a range of 40-44% and 32-46% (vertebrates 36-
46%; invertebrates 32-42%), respectively.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
34
The variation of the G+C ratio between bacterial strains within a well defined species
should not exceed 3 mol %, and the G+C ratio within an “authentic” bacterial genus
should not exceed 10 mol %.
The aberrations sp. or spp. after a genus name stands for one unnamed species or several unnamed species, respectively. For example, Escherichia sp. (sp. = species [one single species]), and Escherichia spp. (spp. = species [several species]).
Classification of genus and higher
ranks
Genus
Species with close phylogenetic relationships are gathered into genus, and ideally the
variation in G+C ratio within an “authentic” genus should not exceed 10 mol %. The
sequence of the 16S rRNA gene can be used for classifying or identifying on the genus
level and on all higher taxonomic ranks, i.e. from genus to phylum (Figure 3).
Strains with ≥97% similarity in the 16S rRNA gene can be regarded with reasonably certainty to be related to the same genus.
16S rRNA gene sequencing gives bacteriological systematics its backbone while
DNA:DNA-hybridisation defines the species.
Phenetic and phylogenetic taxonomy
Gene sequencing has lead to a bacterial taxonomy based on phylogeny and with the
intention that the classification into different taxonomic hierarchies truly reflects the
evolution. However, evolutionary connections are not always the same as apparent
similarity. Classification based on similarity is called phenetic taxonomy, and before the
success of gene technological methodology, phenetic taxonomy was the norm, even if it
was assumed to reflect the path of evolution, i.e. the phylogeny.
The terms “phenetic” and “phylogenetic” should not be mixed up with “phenotype”
(characteristics that are expressed and made visual by the organism) and genotype
(structure of the genome).
Phenetic taxonomy is relationships according to similarity. Phylogenetic taxonomy is relationships according to joint evolution.
A bacteriological example on the difference between phenetic and phylogenetic
taxonomy: Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium are two phenetically similar genera, e.g.
both are gram-positive rods, ferment sugars to lactic acid and acetic acid, and they live
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
35
in the human digestive tract. However, Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium are
phylogenetically very different and belong to different phyla (divisions), i.e. Firmicutes
and Actinobacteria, respectively.
Phylum
The number of bacterial species gradually increases as new ones are defined, and along
with the increasing number of different species also the number of different taxa at
higher hierarchical ranks increases, and so do the number of the highest hierarchical
ranks (phylum or as it is called in more traditional terminology, division). Different
bacterial phyla are shown in Table 2. Actinobacteria (gram-positive), Bacteroidetes
(gram-negative), Firmicutes (gram-positive), Fusobacteria (gram-negative),
Proteobacteria (Gram-negative) and Verrucomicrobia (gram-negative) are examples on
phyla (plural for phylum) frequently occurring in the human digestive tract.
Table 2. Different bacterial phyla (divisions).
Most gram-negative, food associated bacteria as, for example, the genera Pseudomonas,
Psychrobacter, Aeromonas and the family Enterobacteriaceae belong to the
Proteobacteria (the class Gammaproteobacteria).
Most gram-positive bacteria associated to food as, for example, the genera
Lactobacillus, Bacillus, Clostridium, Staphylococcus, Enterococcus and Lactococcus
belong to the phylum Firmicutes (Gram-positive bacteria with low guanine + cytosine
ratio of the DNA [G+C <55%]). Firmicutes occupies a dominating position in the
digestive tract, typically represented by genera as Clostridium, Ruminococcus and
Eubacterium. However, the gram-positive genus Bifidobacterium belongs to the phylum
Actinobacteria (gram-positive bacteria with a high guanine + cytosine content [G+C
>50%]).
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
36
Formalities
The official forum for the publication of new bacterial taxa from subspecies to phylum
is the International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology. This journal
publishes research papers and establishes novel bacterial names. New names are
summarised in a notification list. Each monthly issue also contains a compilation of
validated new names (the validation list), i.e. names and descriptions of taxa that have
been previously published in other scientific journals or books are listed in the
International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, provided the
descriptions and naming have been performed correctly. Publications relating to new
bacterial taxa, and validation of descriptions published elsewhere requires that a type
strain of the taxon in question have been deposited in two recognised public strain
collections in different countries.
The ICSP's International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes states that all bacterial
new names must be published or indexed in the International Journal of Systematic and
Evolutionary Microbiology to be deemed valid. So far the journal has officially
validated around 6500 species and 1500 genera. It was estimated in 2004 that over 300
new names had been published but not validated, i.e. these names are so far not valid.
All validly published names in bacterial systematic, with the original references,
together with the hierarchical structure for bacterial taxa from phylum to species can be
seen on a website with the title, LPSN; List of prokaryotic names with standing in
nomenclature. J.P. Euzéby: http://www.bacterio.cict.fr/index.html
To conclude
Bacteria make up a huge domain of widely diverse organisms with access to far more
metabolic means than mammalian cells. As human beings, we eat bacteria either as
unintentional dietary compounds or as probiotics, and furthermore, we harbour a dense
and diverse community of bacteria in our digestive tract and these bacteria interact in
different way with the dietary compounds we ingest, and with our body. Different
bacteria are doing different things in accordance with their inherent nature and the
prevailing environmental circumstances. In order to try to understand what is going on
in our bodies we must obtain knowledge about the different sort of bacteria, and
particularly about those that are used as probiotics and those that are resident in the
human digestive tract in high amounts. In the learning-block Fundamentals several
aspects of bacteria have been dealt with in a relatively condensed way, i.e. those are the
aspects that the author believes to be an important background for the understanding of
the subsequent learning-blocks. However, certain things can be more important to hold
in mind than others, and below follow some points of importance to think a bit extra on:
Catch 1. The term “probiotics” does not refer to any specific kind of taxa. “Probiotics”
is not a taxonomic unit. There are different definitions for probiotics but today the term
is used in the meaning that probiotics are living microorganisms with health beneficial
effects when administered to the body. The fact that probiotics is supposed to have
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
37
health effect imply that this health effect also has to be proven scientifically. Some
strains of relatively few species of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium are the ones
mostly used commercially as probiotics. Both Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium
include many different species and the phylogenetic difference between these two
genera is huge.
The probiotic concept should not be mixed-up with the concept of prebiotics.
Catch 2. There are many different bacteria around and when dealing with them, we
must know their characteristics, i.e. how they perform in different situations. In order to
get such information, we need know their names as the taxonomic name is the key to
the collected scientific knowledge of the bacterium in question. In search for the name,
we can isolate living bacteria from the sample and study them in pure cultures or we can
isolate bacterial genes directly from the sample and determine the nucleotide sequence.
Both strategies can be used for either identification or classification.
It is important to be aware of the logic difference between identification and
classification. The difference may appear self-evident, but nevertheless identification
and classification have often been confused, not the least in the history of science.
Classification is a purely scientific activity with the aim to characterize unknown
organisms and clarify their evolutionary (phylogenetic) relationships with known
(already described and ordered) organisms, or the order of nature if you so like. The
evolutionary relationships between organisms are visualised by the different
hierarchical levels in taxonomy where the ranks of genus and species are crucial, and
reflected in the scientific (taxonomic) name.
In the probiotic concept, the strain definition is important, because scientific attempt to
prove health-effects of probiotics will be performed on the strain. Health-effects can
vary a lot between different strains of the same species.
Catch 3. Traditionally, bacterial taxonomy has been based on phenotypical
characteristics (phenotypes), i.e. what the bacterial cell looks like in the microscope and
what metabolic or other features it can express in pure cultures. This makes sense as it is
these expressed characteristics that you primarily want to know about when trying to
figure out the role of bacteria in an environmental system, such as the digestive tract of
the body. On the other hand, the comparison of phenotypic features and ordering
different groups of bacteria according to similarity in phenotypic characteristics can
muddle the true phylogenetic (evolutionary) relationships between different bacteria as
phylogenetic distant taxa can have several easily measured phenotypic characteristics in
common, for example the genera Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium that both are gram-
positive rods producing lactic acid during fermentation of glucose. However, there can
be other less easily visualised phenotypic features that are strikingly different, in this
case for example the metabolic pathway used for the production of lactic acid from
glucose. The true differences and similarities (when all possible features are included)
are better reflected by the evolutionary (phylogenetic) relationships between the
different bacteria. It is difficult to trace the path of evolution by bacterial phenotypes but
considerably more successful to do it by comparing genomic nucleotide sequences and
the gene of 16S rRNA has been proved to be especially useful for tracing the phylogeny
of bacteria, i.e. to build the bacterial taxonomy.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
38
References
Atarashi, K., Tanoue, T., Shima, T., Imaoka, A. et al. (2011). Induction of colonic
regulatory T cells by indigenous Clostridium species. Science 331: 337-341.
Anon (2002). Joint FAO/WHO Working Group Report. Guidelines for the Evaluation
of Probiotics in Food. London, Ontario, Canada.
CraCraft, J. (1987). Species concepts and the ontology of evolution. In Biology and
Philosophy 2. Philpapers Online research in philosophy.
http://philpapers.org/rec/CRASCA
Eisen, J.A. (2007). Environmental shotgun sequencing: its potential and challenges for
studying the hidden world of microbes. PLoS Biol. 5: e82.
Feng, T. and Elson, C.O. (2011). Adaptive immunity in the host-microbiota dialog.
Mucosal Immunol. 4: 15-21.
Fuller, R. (1989). Probiotics in man and animals. Journal of Applied Bacteriology 66:
365-368.
Gibson, G.R. & Roberfoid, M.B. (1995). Dietary modulation of the human colonic
microbiota: introducing the concept of prebiotics. Journal of Nutrition 125:1401-1412.
Gregersen, T. (1978). Rapid method for distinction of gram-negative from gram-
positive bacteria. European Journal of Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 5,
123-127.
Handelsman, J.; Rondon, MR.; Brady, S.F.; Clardy, J.; Goodman, R.M. (1989).
Molecular biological access to the chemistry of unknown soil microbes: a new frontier
for natural products. Chem. Biol. 5: 245–249.
Keswanit, J. & Whitman, W.B. (2001). Relationship of 16S rRNA sequence similarity
to DNA hybridization in prokaryotes. Int J System Evol Microbiol; 51: 667-78.
Lilley, D.M. & Stillwell, R.H. (1965). Probiotics: growth promoting factors produced
by microorganisms. Science 147:747-748.
Mayr, E. (1982). The growth of the biological thought. Harvard University Press,
Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Naidu, A.S., Bidlack, W.R. & Clemens, R.A. (1999). Probiotic spectra of lactic acid
bacteria (LAB). Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 38:13-126.
Parker, R.B. (1974). Probiotics, the other half of the antibiotic story. Animal Nutr.
Health 29:4-8.
Schaafsma G. (1996). Significance of probiotics in human diets. SOMED, XXIst
International Congress on Microbial Ecology and Disease, Paris 23-30 October.
Abstract no. 117, p 38.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
39
Sekirov, I., Russell, S.L., Antunes, L.C.M., Finlay, B.B. (2010). Gut microbiota in
health and disease. Physiol. Rev. 90: 859-904.
Stackebrandt E, Goebel B. (1994). Taxonomic note: a place for DNA-DNA
reassociation and 16S rRNA sequence analysis in the present species definition in
bacteriology. Int J Bacteriol 44: 846-849.
Yang, X., Xie, L., Li, Y. & Wei, C. (2009). More than 9,000,000 unique genes in
human gut bacterial community: Estimating gene numbers inside a human body. PLoS
ONE 4: e6074
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
40
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
41
II. Dietary bacteria
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
42
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
43
Intention
The educational intention with Lecture-block II – Dietary bacteria – is to provide
information of harmless bacteria that have been consumed in high numbers by humans
for considerable length of time, and of food products that by tradition have been based
on the activity of these bacteria. In principle, all the foods described below could be
matrixes for probiotics if a probiotic strain able to multiply in the product is used as
starter culture. The traditional fermented foods are empirically developed food-concepts
that have proved their value for generations of humans. It is the author’s believes that
research and development (R&D) managers can use this knowledge successfully in the
development of new probiotic foods. Probiotics can be marketed as more or less pure
bacteria in form of capsules, tablets or powders, but in a combination of actively
metabolising bacteria and nutritionally beneficial food components the strength of the
probiotic concept can be enhanced.
Consumption of lactobacilli
Traditional, so called lactic acid fermented foods normally contain high numbers of live
bacteria (“lactic acid bacteria”), but can also contain dietary fibres (some with prebiotic
effects) and compounds as flavonoids, vitamin E and vitamin C, able to protect from
oxygen free radicals (antioxidants). Both prebiotics and antioxidants can protect and
support the live bacteria in the food, but can also add to the health beneficial effects of
the probiotics. Hence, the traditional lactic acid fermented foods can be a good starting
point for product development of probiotic foods with health benefits (probiotic
functional foods).
Consumption of live lactic acid bacteria (LAB) included in lactic acid fermented foods
has been a regular part of the food intake of humans for a long time. In fact, there are
archaeological indications that humans have used this technique from the beginning of
time. This technique was presumably invented 1.5 million years ago by the early
humanoids (Figure 7).
Humans have obviously consumed large numbers of live LAB for a long time, and
presumably those LAB associated to plant material were consumed before those
associated to milk. Lactic acid fermentation is the simplest way to preserve food, and if
it is made correctly, presumably also the safest way. Before the Industrial Revolution,
lactic acid fermentation was applied just as much in Europe as it still is in rural areas of
Africa, South America, and several parts of Asia. In fact, it could very well be that the
human digestive tract evolved to adapt to a more or less daily supply of live LAB. This
supply ceased in industrialized countries during the twentieth century, which eventually
may have lead to gastro intestinal (GI) problems, and maybe also to immunologically
dependant dysfunctions.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
44
Figure 7. A suggested time scale for human developments, showing when the technique of lactic acid fermentation probably came into use.
In Sweden, as in the rest of North Europe, lactic acid fermented vegetables have been
widely consumed up to modern times. For example, a Swedish cookery book from 1755
carefully describes procedures how to make sauerkraut, fermented spinach and
fermented sorrel (“Cajsa Wargs kokbok”). However, when the emerging food industry
of Europe gradually took over the food production and discovered new technical means
to process and preserve food in the nine-teen century, the significance of lactic acid
fermentation decreased. Furthermore, Louis Pasteur proved that milk turned sour by the
activity of bacteria (1857) and Robert Koch showed that cholera was caused by bacteria
(1883). Thus, living bacteria in food were looked upon with suspicion by both the
Industry and the Society. So with the best of intentions of saving consumers from
pathogenic bacteria, and also to control the storage stability of the products, the food
industry started to systematically kill all microorganisms in food.
Lactic acid preservation
The general principle of lactic acid fermentation is that a raw-material containing
carbohydrates is stored under conditions restricting the access of air (oxygen). Bacteria
and yeast that contaminate the raw-material will spontaneously multiply, the oxygen
tension in the material will decrease, carbon dioxide will accumulate, the pH will
decrease, and in the end, the product will be completely dominated by LAB (and
occasionally also by yeast).
The final pH in lactic acid fermented products usually is between 3.5 and 4.0, i.e.
growth of most bacteria is inhibited by the low pH. However, the product can be
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
45
covered by moulds on the surface if the surface is exposed for air (oxygen). Yeast can
also grow in the product and affect the eating quality in positive or negative direction
depending on the type of product. Yeast produces ethanol by fermentation of
carbohydrates which contributes to the preservation.
Generally the lowest pH for growth in food is for: Bacteria >3.0 Moulds >1.6 Yeasts >1.4
The pH-susceptibility for different bacterial taxa frequently found in foods increases in
the order Pseudomonas (most sensitive) < Enterobacteriaceae < Bacillus <
Enterococcus < Leuconostoc < Pediococcus < Lactobacillus (highest resistance against
low pH).
Lactic acid bacteria as Leuconostoc, Pediococcus and Lactobacillus have inhibitory
effects on several other bacteria, primarily on gram-negative bacteria as, for example,
Enterobacteriaceae, Pseudomonas and Aeromonas, but also some gram-positive taxa as
Clostridium and Listeria. Examples on taxa that occasionally can be a problem in lactic
acid fermented foods if the pH isn’t low enough are Bacillus cereus and Enterococcus.
Different inhibitory factors can be produced by lactic acid bacteria (LAB) and released
into the food environment, e.g. (i) carboxylic acids, (ii) hydrogen peroxide, (iii) nitrogen
oxide, and (iv) ”bacteriocins”. The carboxylic acids are mostly lactic acid and acetic
acid which lower the pH, but carboxylic acids have apart from the pH-effect,
antimicrobial affects by themselves, and especially in un-dissociated form, i.e. at low
pH.
Many LAB over-produce hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) if they are exposed to oxygen.
Hydrogen peroxide has powerful oxidation capacity and therefore possesses strong
antimicrobial effects. Just as hydrogen peroxide, nitrogen oxide (NO) also has strong
oxidative properties which are deleterious to microorganisms. NO is produced by the
limited number of LAB that are able to break-down the amino acid arginin.
Finally, bacteriocins are compounds, often peptides (but not always), with antibiotic
effects. Most bacteriocins produced by LAB are active against a relatively narrow
spectrum of closely related organisms. Different bacteriocins are produced by different
species and strains. A well-known bacteriocin is nisin that is produced by Lactococcus.
Nisin has antimicrobial effects against a relatively wide range of different bacterial taxa.
Nisin is produced by the starter culture in the Swedish sour milk “filmjölk”
(Lactococcus lactis strains).
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
46
Lactic acid bacteria
What is a LAB?
The organisms performing the conversion of carbohydrates to carboxylic acids in
fermented foods, mainly lactic acid, are by tradition called Lactic acid bacteria (LAB).
The term “lactic acid bacteria” was used early by food microbiologists, and 1919 the
Danish bacteriologist Orla-Jensen tried to define key-features of LAB. He said “the true
lactic acid bacteria form a large natural group of non-motile, non-spore-formers, Gram-
positive cocci and rods that at fermentation of sugar mainly produce lactic acid”.
Followers have added new key-features to the list and these criteria are frequently cited
in textbooks. Thus, a typical list of determinative criteria for the description of LAB are
that they should be: (i) Gram-positive, (ii) able to ferment sugars to mainly lactic acid,
(iii) catalase negative, (iv) non-motile, (v) unable to form endospores (a endospore is a
spore formed within the cell), (vi) able to grow at low pH (<5.5), and (vii) non-
pathogenic. However, it must be stressed that these key-criteria are of poor relevance as
LAB isn’t a “natural group” (natural taxonomic unit) as Orla Jensen assumed. When
dealing with LAB, it is to be preferred to refer to the actual genera and/or species in
question. Unfortunately, based on this old fashioned, artificial taxonomy, different
systematically defined taxa have been included in the group LAB. But, in reality some
of these taxa as for example Bifidobacterium and Enterococcus are not supposed to
dominate in lactic acid fermented foods, either they can’t be found (Bifidobacterium) or
they can ruin the edibility (Enterococcus). Thus, LAB is not a systematically defined
group based on evolutionary relationships as the old bacteriologists assumed, currently
it is a term used by food microbiologist when they refer to bacteria responsible for the
fermentation of lactic acid fermented foods.
LAB is a functional group and applies to bacteria that are harmless to both food quality and human health, and that occurs spontaneously in high numbers in traditional lactic acid fermented foods.
From the systematic point of view, LAB means a relatively wide variety of bacterial
groups. How many genera and species that should be included into the LAB-concept
depend much on how many different types of food that are included and how strict the
quality requirements are set for these foods. For example, the higher the eating quality
is for a lactic acid fermented food product, the fewer types of bacteria are generally
involved in the final fermentation. In a product of poorer quality, all types of more or
less unwanted organisms can be present in the final product and in fairly high numbers,
but those organisms should of course not be regarded as LAB just because they happen
to contaminate and multiply in a lactic acid fermented product.
The only absolute condition for the organisms involved in lactic acid fermentation of
food must be that they produce lactic acid and that they are harmless to consume in high
numbers, even for consumers with underlying sicknesses that weaken their
immunological defence. The taxa frequently occurring in high numbers in traditional,
and spontaneously fermented lactic acid fermented foods, are species of the genera
Lactobacillus, Pediococcus, Weissella, Leuconostoc, Oenococcus, Lactococcus, and the
species Streptococcus thermophilus and closely related species to S. thermophilus.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
47
The genera Lactobacillus and Pediococcus belong to the family Lactobacillaceae which
also includes the relatively new genera Paralactobacillus and Sharpea. They can all be
included in the trivial expression "lactobacilli”.
Leuconostoc, Weissella and Oenococcus belong to the family Leuconostocaceae
together with the genus Fructobacillus.
Lactococcus and S. thermophilus have from the phylogenetic point of view relatively
little in common with Lactobacillaceae and Leuconostocaceae even if they all are
included in the order Lactobacillales. Thus, they are members of the same general
branch of evolution. The order Lactobacillales belongs to the phylum (division)
Firmicutes with the characteristics in common of being gram-positive and having a low
ratio of guanine and cytosine in their genome.
The functional concept, LACTIC ACID BACTERIA (LAB), includes primarily the following taxa: Lactococcus Lactobacillus Leuconostoc Oenococcus Pediococcus Weissella Streptococcus thermophilus
Bifidobacterium, Enterococcus and Carnobacterium are now and then wrongly
regarded as LAB. However, Bifidobacterium is a health promoting genus and are
frequently used as probiotics. In contrast, Enterococcus and Carnobacterium are
dubious from a health perspective and should be avoided in foods.
Lactococcus
The genus Lactococcus which includes 9 different species ferments carbohydrates to
lactic acid. Lactococcus possesses superoxide-dismutase and menaquinone, i.e. systems
for efficient utilization of oxygen in the metabolism. Lactococcus and particularly the
species Lactococcus lactis is traditionally used as starter culture in the Swedish sour
milk product ”Filmjölk”, and in most types of European cheeses. Phylogenetically,
Lactococcus is, as mentioned, only distantly related to Lactobacillus.
Streptococcus
The species S. thermophilus forms together with three other Streptococcus species, a
taxonomic unit that is relatively distantly related to most other Streptococcus species. S.
thermophilus ferments carbohydrates to lactic acid, and is traditionally included in the
starter culture for yoghurt. S. thermophilus grows rapidly in milk at temperatures
around 45oC. In nature, S. thermophilus is found associated to mucous membranes of
animals. The high growth temperature of S. thermophilus could give a hint that they are
more connected to birds than humans as birds generally has a relatively high body
temperature (around 40oC).
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
48
The genus Streptococcus includes more than 90 different species, and several
Streptococcus spp. are pathogenic, e.g. Streptococcus pyogenes. Many Streptococcus
species are associated to the mucous membranes of man and animals. Streptococcus
pyogenes (Group A streptococci = GAS) is a notorious pathogen and cause septic
throat, scarlet fever and other pyogenic and septicemic infections. The infective dose
can be less than 1000 colony forming units (CFU), and the incubation period is 1–3
days. Symptoms are sore throat, pain on swallowing, tonsillitis, high fever, headache,
nausea, vomiting, malaise and rhinorhea. On the other hand, S. thermophilus and those
Streptococcus spp. closely related to S. thermophilus are non-pathogenic and could be
regarded as LAB.
Lactobacilli
The genera Lactobacillus, Pediococcus, Leuconostoc, Weissella and Oenococcus have a
relatively close phylogenetic relationship. They can all be included in the more trivial
expression “lactobacilli”.
Leuconostoc. The genus Leuconostoc includes 25 species. Leuconostoc are coccoid
cells but occasionally rod-like. Leuconostoc ferments carbohydrates to lactic acid,
always with a heterofermentative product pattern, i.e. they ferment glucose to lactic
acid, ethanol, carbon dioxide, and depending on circumstances, also to acetic acid.
Leuconostoc is spontaneously occurring in high numbers in lactic acid fermented milk,
and is often dominating the initial fermentation of plant material. In nature, Leuconostoc
is probably often associated to insects and snails. The species Leuconostoc
mesenteroides has been isolated from human intestinal mucosa.
Weissella. The genus Weissella includes13 species. Weissella appears in the microscope
in the forms of rods or cocci. Weissella ferments carbohydrates to lactic acid, and
always with a heterofermentative product pattern. Weissella is spontaneously occurring
in high numbers in many lactic acid fermented foods, and it can be found associated to
human mucous membranes.
Oenococcus. The genus Oenococcus includes two species, Oenococcus oeni and
Oenococcus kitaharae. Oenococcus is a coccoid or ellipsoidal cell, fermenting
carbohydrates to lactic acid, always with a heterofermentative product pattern.
Oenococcus is spontaneously occurring in high numbers in wine and beer. Oenococcus
can grow at low pH and in 10% ethanol.
Pediococcus. The genus Pediococcus includes 15 species. Pediococcus-cells appear
under the microscope as cocci in pair or in tetrahedrons. Pediococcus ferments
carbohydrates to lactic acid, and is commercially used as starter culture in smoked,
fermented sausages. Pediococcus is often isolated from fermented vegetables and
cereals, and from beer. Pediococcus can be regarded as facultatively heterofermentative.
Phylogentically, Pediococcus is closely related to Lactobacillus. In fact the different
Pediococcus spp. are in phylogentic trees (cladograms) mixed with different
Lactobacillus spp. Pediococcus and Lactobacillus have by tradition been regarded as
different genera due to the easily recognised differences in cell morphology.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
49
Lactobacillus. The genus Lactobacillus includes more than 90 different species and
subspecies. Lactobacillus-cells are rod-formed, and ferments carbohydrates to lactic
acid. Lactobacillus is spontaneously dominating most traditional lactic acid fermented,
foods. Lactobacillus is associated to mucous membranes of the oral cavity, gastro-
intestinal tract and vagina of animals and man.
Food microbiologists have since long divided the different Lactobacillus spp. into two
functional groups based on what end-products that they form during fermentation of
hexoses, i.e. during growth on, for example, glucose without access to oxygen. If lactic
acid is the only end-product from glucose, the lactobacilli are said to be
homofermentative (catabolism through the fructose-1,6-biphosphate pathway), but if
also carbon dioxide and ethanol and/or acetic acid is formed together with the lactic acid
the lactobacilli are said to be heterofermentative. The word fermentation stands for
growth/catabolism in absence of oxygen.
There is also some homofermentative Lactobacillus spp. that are able to ferment
pentoses. Fermentation of pentoses yields lactic acid and acetic acid. Some
homofermentative Lactobacillus spp, can also ferment malic acid to lactic acid and
carbon dioxide, and/or, ferment citrate to diacetyl, acetoin and carbon dioxide. These
basically homofermentative lactobacilli are said to be facultatively heterofermentative
and the true heterofermentative lactobacilli are then said to be obligatory
heterofermentative.
Homofermentative Lactobacillus: glucose >>>>> lactic acid Heterofermentative Lactobacillus: glucose >>>>> lactic acid, CO2, ethanol (acetic acid)
Some homofermentative Lactobacillus are labelled facultatively heterofermentative because they can ferment: pentoses >>>>>>> lactic acid + acetic acid malic acid >>>>>> lactic acid + CO2 citrate >>>>>>>>> diacetyl + acetoin + CO2
Facultatively heterofermentative lactobacilli growing on glucose in the presence of
oxygen (aerobic conditions) produce beside lactic acid also acetic acid, diacetyl and
acetoin.
The division of lactobacilli into the three functional groups: (i) the obligatory
homofermentatives, (ii) the facultatively heterofermentatives and (iii) the obligatory
heterofermentatives is of pragmatic relevance for food technologists as the catabolic
end-products can affect the food characteristics (quality). Carbon dioxide can be a food
technological problem, especially in connection with packed products and too much
acetic acid in the product can give the product a sticky taste. Ethanol has it’s specific
qualities, unwanted in some products but most wanted in others.
Phylogenetically, Lactobacillus is a heterogeneous genus with a guanine + cytosine
(G+C) mol% content varying in the interval 32-53%. This range is about twice as large
as normally accepted for a well defined genus. The type species of Lactobacillus is
Lactobacillus delbrueckii, which is an obligatory homofermentative organism. The mol
% G+C for L. delbrueckii is 49-51. Paradoxically, the mol % G+C for some of the other
well known obligatory homofermentatives, such as Lactobacillus acidophilus,
Lactobacillus crispatus, Lactobacillus jensenii and Lactobacillus gasseri are only 32-
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
50
37%, 35-38%, 35-37% and 33-35%, respectively, i.e. much lower than that of the type
species.
Taxonomic efforts to understand the phylogenetic relationships within the genus
Lactobacillus have been directed towards comparative analysis of primarily the 16S
ribosomal ribonucleic acid (rRNA) gene (rDNA) sequences (Schleifer and Ludwig
1995; Vasques et al. 2004), but later also towards an extended numbers of other genes
(Makarovaa et al. 2006; Zhang et al. 2011), and based on whole-genome alignments
(Canchaya et al. 2006). These analyses show an extreme divergence of the
Lactobacillus genome and support the recognition of new subgeneric divisions, i.e. the
genus Lactobacillus can be divided into several genomic groups on the genus-level.
Furthermore, several of the facultatively heterofermentative Lactobacillus spp. are
closely related to Pediococcus spp.
The Lactobacillus spp. have been divided phylogenetically into three groups that are not
altogether in agreement with the traditionally, phenotypically-based, subgroups
(fermentation-groups). Thus, many of the obligatory homofermentatives (for example,
L. delbrueckii, L. acidophilus, L. crispatus, L .jensenii and L. gasseri) form one group.
This rDNA-group has been called the “L. delbrueckii-group”. The second group,
including Lactobacillus spp. of all three fermentation-groups and also some
Pediococcus spp., has been called the “L. casei group”. And the third group, the
“Leuconostoc group” included Leuconostoc spp., some obligatory heterofermentative
Lactobacillus spp. and Weissella spp. (Schleifer and Ludwig 1995).
However, Lactobacillus can be further subdivided into at least six different groups, i.e.
(i) the L. acidophilus group (L. delbrueckii is linked to this group but is somewhat
atypical), (ii) the L. salivarius group, (iii) the L. reuteri group, (iv) the L. brevis group,
(v) the L. plantarum group and (vi) the L. casei group.
Bifidobacteria
The genus Bifidobacterium includes more than 45 different species of bifidobacteria.
Bifidobacterium ferments carbohydrates to acetic acid and lactic acid and follows a
unique catabolic pathway. Also, Bifidobacterium assimilates inorganic nitrogen
(ammonium) for growth and biosynthesis. Bifidobacterium is sensitive to oxygen.
Bifidobacterium is usually present in high numbers in the ileum and colon.
Bifidobacterium does not usually occur spontaneously in lactic acid fermented foods.
Bifidobacterium has an optimum pH for growth at 6.5-7.0, and the genus doesn’t
usually grow below pH 4.5.
Phylogenetically, Bifidobacterium is totally different from both Lactobacillus and
Lactococcus. Bifidobacterium belongs to the phylum Actinobacteria while
Lactobacillus and Lactococcus belong to Firmicutes.
Bifidobacterium has a high guanine + cytosine mol % (55-66%).
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
51
Two adverse genera sometimes wrongly called LAB
Enterococcus. The genus Enterococcus includes about 40 species. It is a tough gram-
positive bacterium that frequently is present in high number in faeces. Enterococcus can
occur spontaneously in different kinds of foods, for example in cheese, and now and
then are non-pathogenic strains of Enterococcus faecium even included in sour-milk
products and cheese with the claim of being probiotic or beneficial for the taste,
respectively.
On the other hand, Enterococcus is frequently causing urinary tract infections.
Enterococcus is easily acquiring antibiotic resistance, and it is frequently causing sepsis
in hospitalised patients. Even enterococcal food poisoning may occur due to production
of enterotoxin if Enterococcus is allowed to grow to high numbers (>107 CFU per g) in
the food. Symptoms are then diarrhoea, abdominal cramps, vomiting and fever. The
duration of the symptoms is 2 to 36 hours.
Carnobacterium. The genus Carnobacterium that today includes around 10 species was
formed 1987 after a discovery that some former Lactobacillus species (“Lactobacillus
carnis”; “Lactobacillus piscicola” and “Lactobacillus divergens”) didn’t belong to the
genus Lactobacillus (Collins et al. 1987). Carnobacterium is rod formed, and ferments
carbohydrates to lactic acid, but can’t grow at pH 5.5 or lower. Carnobacterium is
frequently found spontaneously growing to high numbers on vacuum-packed meat and
meat products (or in other types of packages with modified atmosphere).
Carnobacterium can produce biogenic amines and has a relatively close phylogenetic
relationship with Enterococcus.
Products and processes
Simple technique
The reason for letting food undergo lactic acid fermentation can vary between different
applications. The primary goal with the lactic acid fermentation can be to (i) increase
the shelf-life and microbial safety of the product; (ii) increase the control and the safety
of a food processing step; (iii) improve the taste and the consistency of the product; (iv)
achieve health beneficial effects.
An ancient and simple technique for fermentation with the prime goal to keep the food
from spoiling is to dig a hole in the ground, fill in the raw food material and put a cover
on top, preferably with some weights in order to press out as much air as possible.
The same technique, to use a hole in the ground and with the main purpose to prevent
spoilage was up to modern time used for the preservation of forage-plants in Sweden.
Today the farmers normally do not use pits in the ground, they use silo-tanks or large
(usually white) plastic bags. However, for example, a large producer of “organic” milk
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
52
in Skåne has gone back to the pit-concept, but in a more modern form, i.e. huge basins
of concrete. Generally it takes 1-2 weeks for the fermentation of the forage-plants, for
example grass, and for the pH to drop to 3.9-4.2 in the silage.
Sometimes starter cultures are used to control the forage fermentation (Pediococcus spp.
and/or Lactobacillus spp.) or the raw-materials are pre-treated with formic acid (to
lower the pH and select for lactic acid bacteria). But today, usually large bundles of
tightly pressed forage are individually wrapped and sealed in plastic foil, and no starter
cultures are added.
Ethiopian kocho
Ensete ventricosum is a perennial, banana like, starchy root crop which grows in
Ethiopia at altitudes of 1500 to 3000 m above sea level. The height of the plant when
harvested can reach 6 to 8 m (6-8 years after planting). It is a leading staple crop for
about 10 million Ethiopian inhabitants. The plant is traditionally processed as follows
(Figure 8):
The pseudo stem and corm are pulverized with a long wooden pestle, and pounded into
a pulp from which the fibres are removed. The remaining scrapings, the pulp and the
inner corm, are kneaded together, rolled into balls and wrapped in fresh enset leaves.
The leave-wrapped packages with fresh enset mash are packed in a pit in the ground
that has been completely lined with leaves, and the packages are left for pre-
fermentation for two to five days. After this pre-fermentation, the packages are opened
and the mash is once again mixed and thoroughly kneaded, rolled into balls and
wrapped in new fresh enset leaves. The new packages are pressed into the pit. Some of
the waste mash and cellulosic material from the production is put on top to create a
cover, and stones are put on top of this cover. The aim is to limit the access of air into
the pit. The major fermentation takes about 2 weeks at a temperature 15-18oC, but the
kocho can be left in the closed pit for 6 months up to years (in the colder regions of
Ethiopia). It can be pointed out that this is the same temperature interval that is used for
the fermentation of sauerkraut in Europe.
In the colder regions of Ethiopia, the general belief is that the quality of the kocho
improves with storage time. In the warmer regions, it gets too sour and becomes
discoloured if it is stored too long. Kocho is mainly baked into bread or cooked and
eaten alone or in combination with various indigenous foods. High quality kocho or
variants of kocho are also eaten unheated and are considered by the public to posses
beneficial health effects.
In the beginning of the kocho-fermentation (first days), the fermentation is typically
dominated by Leuconostoc mesenteroides, but after approximately a week Lactobacillus
spp. reach similar numbers. After two weeks both Lactobacillus and Leuconostoc are
present in high numbers (about 5x109 CFU per g). The viable count of Lactobacillus
remains high for months, while the count of Leuconostoc declines. The same sequential
pattern for Leuconostoc and Lactobacillus has been described for both sauerkraut and
salted gherkins. A controlling factor can be the pH. Leuconostoc is less resistant than
Lactobacillus to low pH, and the species Lactobacillus plantarum is especially hardy at
low pH. The dominating LAB in kocho bought in markets in Ethiopia are often
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
53
Lactobacillus plantarum, Weissella minor (earlier classified as Leuconostoc) and
Pediococcus pentosaceus (Gashe 1987; Nigatu 1998).
Figure 8. Flow scheme of the production of Ethiopian kocho.
Sour salmon buried in the ground
The technique of digging a hole in the ground was in the old days also used in the North
of Sweden for the preservation of salmon; the so called “gravad lax” (buried salmon, in
Swedish). During the summer, fresh-caught salmon were salted and buried in the sandy
river banks at the mouth of rivers, and left for spontaneous fermentation. The sour
salmon could then be fetched for consumption during the winter season.
Fermentation in sealskin bags
Plant material. One example of the importance of lactic acid fermented plant material
for indigenous living people is constituted by the Tschuktscer people living in Siberia
on the Tschuktsch peninsula along the seashore of the North polar sea. The Tschuktscer
people were described by the Swedish explorer A.E. Nordenskiöld during his expedition
around Asia in his voyages through the North-East Passage (1878-1880). At this time,
the Tschuktscer was a primordial society of hunters and fishermen, and a major
component in their diet was lactic acid fermented plant material. During the summer-
months they collected different kinds of plant material, such as leafs from osier (Salix)
and the plant Rhodiola. After being picked, the plant material was pressed into sealskin
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
54
bags that were sealed and left for spontaneous fermentation during the summer months.
During the autumn, the content froze in the form of the out-stretched bags. The frozen
mass was cut in pieces and eaten as it was, or together with meat or fish, or it could also
be used in hot soups. Nordenskiöld speculated that the observed consumption of lactic
acid fermented plant material could mimic the human diet during the Stone Age.
Fermented Auk. Fermentation in sealskin bags of whole birds of the species Alle alle
(Little auk; in Swedish “Alekung”) results in the traditional Greenlandic food kiviak.
The auks are caught in the spring stuffed in a hollowed-out body of a seal with around
300 to 500 auk birds per seal-pouch. The seal-pouch is sewn up, sealed with fat, put
under a pile of rocks on the permafrost ground and left to ferment for 3 to 18 months. In
older days the fermented auk birds become a food resource during the winter.
Salted gherkins
Cucumbers (Cucumis sativis) contain a higher proportion of water and, hence are highly
susceptible to microbial spoilage. Field-cultivated cucumbers for the food industry are
harvested during a short season in the autumn and are used mainly for the production of
different sorts of pickles. Only a relatively small proportion is marketed as salted
gherkins, the traditional lactic acid fermented product. In Sweden, the production of
salted gherkins to be used in the food industry as raw material for pickles, is around
2000 tons per year, but can be up to 7000 tons depending on the harvest. The production
in, for example, the USA is at least 100 times as high.
The cucumbers used for the lactic acid fermentation often become heavily contaminated
by microorganisms from the soil in the field. A typical aerobic viable count of bacteria
can be 5x106 colony forming units (CFU) per g cucumber; the viable count of
Enterobacteriaceae can typically be 106 CFU/g while the count of lactobacilli mostly is
fairly low, for example, 5x103 CFU/g. Thus, the odds for a successful preservation of
the cucumbers by spontaneous lactic acid fermentation apparently seem to be quite low.
But surprisingly enough, by the use of some salt (NaCl) it is feasible to control the
fermentation and get a safe product with long shelf-life (Figure 9).
In Sweden, the cucumbers are put into a brine to achieve a final concentration of 5%
NaCl. Traditionally this occurs in open containers of wood holding 25 ton cucumber
each, and situated outdoors. After fermentation the container is covered with a tarpaulin.
In warmer countries, the salt concentration is usually higher during the fermentation (up
to 8% NaCl), and after the completed fermentation, the salt concentration is increased
from 8% to 16% NaCl to ensure a long shelf-life of the product. In this way, salted
gherkins can be stored for at least one year.
Malic acid fermentation: malic acid >>>>>> lactic acid + CO2
Under the conditions that the salt concentration in the brine isn’t too high, the first LAB
to increase to a dominating position are Leuconostoc, and as the fermentation proceeds
they will be succeeded by Lactobacillus; generally the same succession as has been seen
in Ethiopian kocho and in European and American sauerkraut. A typical bacterial
species found in high numbers at the end of fermentation is L. plantarum, both in salted
gherkins and in sauerkraut. However, when used as a starter culture, L. plantarum can
cause gas pockets of carbon dioxide in the cucumbers. This gas vacuoles are caused by
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
55
so called malic acid fermentation, i.e. malic acid is catabolised to lactic acid and carbon
dioxide.
Figure 9. Flow scheme of the traditional production of salted gherkins. The sugar in the cucumbers consists mainly of glucose and fructose.
Wine
Red wines undergo malic acid fermentation which is performed by lactobacilli after the
yeast had produced the alcohol. In wine-fermentation, it is of course a requirement that
(i) yeasts (Saccharomyces) convert sugar into alcohol, but in red wine it is also
important that (ii) malic acid is converted to lactic acid and carbon dioxide which is
done by lactobacilli, and (iii) the conversion of different phenolic compounds derived
from the grapes, e.g. polyphenoles as tannins. This polyphenol conversion is also
performed by lactobacilli (Figure 10).
The malolactic fermentation affects the taste and the conversion of polyphenoles affects
especially the colour of the wine but also the taste. The polyphenoles in young red wine
(900-1400 mg per litre wine) can consist of, for example: 70% anthocyanins, 15%
flavanols, 6% hydroxybenzoic acid and derivates, 3.8% phenolic alcohols, 3.6%
flavonols, 1.1% hydroxycinnamic acid and derivates, and 0.5% stilbenes (Garcia-Ruiz
et al. 2008).
It has been shown in a small randomized, crossover controlled intervention study on
humans that a moderate intake of red wine affected the composition of the bacterial
flora of the gut (measured in faecal samples), and decreased the blood pressure and the
concentration of triglycerides, total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol and C-reactive
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
56
proteins (CRC) in the blood. The decrease was linked to an increase in bifidobacteria
(Queipo-Ortuno et al. 2012). It was shown that it was the polyphenols in the wine that
was the active component, not the alcohol.
Figure 10. Production-scheme for wine. The process-steps are as described by Pérez-Serradilla and Luque de Castro (2008).
Lactic acid fermented capers (caper berries)
Caper berries are the fruits of Capparis spp. (mainly Capparis spinosa L.). Capparis is
a Mediterranean shrub cultivated for its buds and fruits. The main producers of
fermented caper berries are Mediterranean countries, especially Greece, Italy, Turkey,
Morocco and Spain. The fermentation is often done by traditional, manual procedures.
The fruits are collected from the shrubs during June and/or July and immersed in tap
water, where the fermentation takes place spontaneously for approximately 5 to 7 days
at a temperature range of 23oC to 43
oC (Figure 11). After the fermentation, the capers
are placed in brine to a final NaCl-concentration of around 10% (w/v). The fermentation
can take place in vats (for example, 150 litres) and the pH fall below 4, and typically
stop around 3.3.
The total aerobic count of the harvested berries immersed in water can be around 1000
CFU per ml and after the fermentation, the total count (and the lactobacilli count) goes
up to 108 CFU per ml. Typically the bacterial flora after the fermentation is dominated
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
57
by L. plantarum (around 50% of cases), but also by, for example, Pediococcus
pentosaceus, Lactobacillus brevis, Lactobacillus fermentum and Lactobacillus pentosus
can occur in high numbers (Pulido et al. 2005).
Figure 11. Production-scheme for the lactic acid fermentation of Capers (caper berries).
Sauerkraut
In a Swedish cookery book from 1755, the procedure to make sauerkraut is described.
Sauerkraut should be made according to the following description: “The bottom of a
tight barrel is covered with the white cabbage leaves and then it is filled with good
measure of finely chopped white cabbage which gradually is pressed down with a
wooden pole until the cabbage is immersed in juice. Into the barrel also a few barberry
berries, some salt, a few roasted peas and dill where the seed have been carefully
removed are thrown in. Some caraway is put on the top and then all is covered with
cabbage leaves, and a barrel lid that can go down into the barrel is put on top and
pressed down into the barrel with heavy stones. The barrel is left for fermentation in a
room that is neither too hot nor too cold. When the fermentation is ended the stones are
removed and a lid put on the barrel that is stored as cold as possible” (Cajsa Wargs
Kokbok, 1755).
Sauerkraut has since long a reputation of being healthy. This is reflected by the fact that
the English captain James Cook during his voyage around the world (1768-1780) forced
his crew to eat sauerkraut. James Cook became famous not only for his geographic
discoveries but also for his extraordinary record of high survival of the seamen on his
ships.
One example of current industrial sauerkraut production has been described from
Wisconsin (USA) where the fermentation takes place in cement tanks of about 100 m3
volume (Plengvidhya et al. 2007). The fermentation is carried out with 2.3 % NaCl
(final equilibrated concentration). The salt is added by a dry salting process using
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
58
shredded cabbage. The cabbage is manually spread in the tanks, covered with plastic
sheeting, and initially weighted down with water on top of the plastic sheeting (Figure
12). The fermentation temperature is not controlled, but it is typically around 18oC.
Glucose and fructose are the primary fermentable sugars in the cabbage and are from
the start present in concentrations between 1.5% (w/w) and 2.2%.
Figure 12. Industrial sauerkraut fermentation in Wisconsin (USA) as described by Plengvidhya et al. (2007).
The fermentation is run for about 14 days and during this time, pH drops to 3.4-3.7,
lactic acid and acetic acid are produced to concentrations of about 130 and 50 mM,
respectively (Plengvidhya et al. 2007). Originally cabbage has a total viable count of
about 5 x 106 CFU/g and a count of Enterobacteriaceae of about 10
6 CFU/g. During the
first week of fermentation, there is a rapid decrease in Enterobacteriaceae and an
increase in LAB. Initially Leuconostoc mesenteroides is the dominating species of LAB
but already after 3-7 days different species of Lactobacillus (but also some Weissella
and Pediococcus) reach substantial numbers. After 14 days, the sauerkraut is heavily
dominated by L. plantarum (80-100% of the bacterial flora; Plengvidhya et al. 2007).
Korean kimchi
A popular lactic acid fermented product in Korea is kimchi. Kimchi is processed in
similar ways as sauerkraut, but it is based on different kind of vegetables and spices.
There are hundreds of different varieties of kimchi in Korea but major components are
Chinese cabbage and radish, and often used spices are red pepper, garlic, green onion
and ginger. The ingredients are salted to 2% to 3% NaCl and usually fermented for 2 to
3 days at temperatures around 20oC. In the beginning of the fermentation Leuconostoc
is the dominating taxa in the product but gradually replaced by Lactobacillus, Weissella
and Pediococcus. The load of bacteria in the final product is 108-10
9 CFU LAB per
gram, and the pH is usually between 3.6 and 4.5. Kimchi seems to be increasingly
known outside Korea, and may be a food concept with international potential.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
59
Green olives in brine
The lactic acid fermentation of green olives (Spanish-style) starts with a pre-treatment
with lye (1.3-2.6 [w/w] of NaOH) for 5 to 7 hours to hydrolyze and remove some of the
bitter tasting phenolics (mostly ortho-diphenols and their glucosides). Then, the olives
are put in a brine solution and subjected to spontaneous lactic acid fermentation (Figure
13). After the fermentation is finished, the salt in the brine is increased to 8% (w/w) to
ensure the keeping qualities of the olives for extended storage periods
L. plantarum is normally found in high numbers at the end of the fermentation. They are
thought to be coexisting with a yeast flora. The yeast is believed to release B-vitamins
that are utilized by the lactobacilli.
From a nutritional perspective it is important to note that lactic acid fermentation often
reduces phytates and tannins which are compounds that might reduce the bioavailability
of essential minerals as iron, zinc and calcium.
Phytates are often reduced in lactic acid fermented products mainly due to enzymes
(phytases) present in the plant material. The plant-derived phytases become activated by
the decreasing pH. However, also yeast growing together with the lactobacilli produces
phytases, and hence can brake-down phytates.
In contrast, tannins can be digested by some LAB. L. plantarum and the genomically
related species, L. paraplantarum and L. pentosus are able to brake-up tannins, and they
can also digest flavonoids and phenolic acids. Pediococcus normally lack tannases but
can break-up flavonoids.
Figure 13. Flow scheme of traditional production of green olives in brine.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
60
Nigerian ogi
Ogi is a traditional lactic acid fermented cereal-based product from Nigeria. It is used as
a weaning food to children (gruel), but also widely consumed by adults as porridge, for
example, at breakfast, or as a cooked stiff gel (agidi) eaten together with stews, soups or
fried bean-cakes (Figure 14).
Ogi can be made from maize, sorghum or millet, but most popular is that made from
maize (Zea mays) and sorghum (Sorghum bicolor or Sorghum dabar). Maize is
frequently used for the ogi-gel (agidi) while the red sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) often is
preferred in weaning food. Red sorghum generally gives gruel of lower viscosity than
maize, which is advantageous when the consumers are young children, as the bulking
effect of maize will reduce the intake.
Figure 14. Flow scheme of the traditional wet-milling procedure for ogi production.
Ogi is traditionally produced by a work-intensive procedure. The cereal grains are
cleaned and steeped in water for 1-3 days, where the first spontaneous fermentation
occurs. After the water is poured off, the grains are wet-milled and wet-sieved through a
cloth or a fine wire-mesh. The pomace, mostly consisting of hulls, is discarded and can
be used as animal feed. The remaining flour suspension is left for sedimentation for 1-3
days (Figure 14). During this step, spontaneous lactic acid fermentation occurs. When
the ogi is sour enough, the supernatant is decanted and the flour cake is stirred with
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
61
boiling water or with the decanted supernatant to form gruel or porridge. The ogi can
also be cooked in water into a thick gel (agidi) that traditionally is put in leaf packages.
Paradoxically in view of the fact that red sorghum is preferred in weaning food, the
content of tannins is high in red sorghum, and tannins can react with proteins which
make them indigestible in the gut. However, the protein digestibility of high-tannin
sorghum is significantly improved by the lactic acid fermentation. Interestingly, L.
plantarum are able to degrade tannins and L. plantarum are frequently a dominate part
of the bacterial flora in ogi. Furthermore, it has been shown that L. plantarum can be
used as a single-strain starter for producing high quality ogi. Also Weissella confusa
seems frequently be present in high numbers in spontaneously ferment ogi.
Tanzanian togwa
Togwa is a cereal-based, lactic acid fermented beverage, consumed in Tanzania as
refreshment, and given to infants as a weaning food. Togwa is mostly made from flour
of maize (Zea mays), sorghum (Sorghum bicolour) or finger millet (Eleusine coracana).
Rice (Oryza sativa) and cassava (Manihot esculenta) flour or mixtures of cassava and
cereals are also used in some areas. Sorghum-based togwa seems to be preferred by
many consumers. The different steps in the preparation of togwa are summarized in
Figure 15 (Kingamkono et al. 1999).
Figure 15. Flow-scheme of the production of Tanzanian togwa.
The flour for making togwa is mixed with water (1 part flour and 9 parts of water) and
the gruel is cooked for 10 to 20 minutes, and then cooled down to about 35oC. At his
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
62
point 10% (v/v) old togwa is mixed into the gruel (back slopping), together with 5%
(w/v) flour made of malted grains.
Malt flour is made from sorghum or millet. The malt-flour is prepared by soaking the
grains for 12 h, then the grains are drain-dried, spread out and on, for example, green
leaves, trays or jute mats. The grains are covered with wet cloths and allowed to
germinate at about 30oC for 3 to 6 days. After sun-drying and milling of the germinated
grains, the malt flour is ready for use.
Heat treated gruel, malt flour and old togwa (used as a starter culture) are mixed, and
left for 9 h to 24 h for lactic acid fermentation. Togwa has a pH of 3.2 to 4.0, and often
contains high levels of L. plantarum. It has been shown that togwa made by using L.
plantarum as single-strain starter culture, equals spontaneously fermented togwa in
eating quality (Kingamkono et al. 1999).
In spite of the fact that togwa often is produced under poor hygienic conditions, where
inferior water quality and the malting procedures expose the product to considerable
hygienic obstacles, togwa is not known for causing food-borne outbreaks of disease
(Kingamkono et al. 1999). On the contrary, togwa has been shown to lower the
incidence of enteropathogenes in the faeces of children, and it has been shown to
improve the condition of the intestinal mucosa in children with acute diarrhoea
(Kingamkono et al. 1999).
Sour-milk
Yoghurt. Yoghurt is according to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in United
States of America ”a coagulated milk obtained by lactic acid fermentation, due to
Lactobacillus bulgaricus (L. delbrueckii subspecies bulgaricus) and Streptococcus
thermophilus”. The different production-steps for yoghurt are shown in Figure 16.
Figure 16. Flow-scheme for the production of yoghurt.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
63
The high initial heating temperature of the milk will kill-off contaminating bacteria, but
will also help to improve the consistency of the final product (make it thicker).
It should be noticed that the fermentation temperature of yoghurt is relatively high (40-
45oC). A consequence of the high fermentation temperature is that the production time
can be kept short. This is an advantage from an industrial perspective. It also follows
from the high fermentation temperature that the starter culture must be able to grow at
such a high temperature.
The high temperature will have effects on the flavour development in the product.
Examples of aroma compounds formed in yoghurt during fermentation are acetaldehyde
(2-40 parts per million, ppm), acetone (1-4 ppm), acetoin (2-4 ppm) and diacetyl (up to
10 ppm).
Filmjölk. The Swedish sour-milk “filmjölk” is produced in similar manner as yoghurt
(Figure 16). The major differences are (i) the lower fermentation temperature (19-22oC)
and thereby the longer fermentation time (18-20 h), and (ii) the use of another type of
starter culture, i.e. a mixed starter culture of Lactococcus lactis and Leuconostoc. The
typical starter culture for filmjölk is not only a mixture of the species Lactococcus lactis
subspecies lactis, Lactococcus lactis subspecies cremoris, Leuconostoc mesenteroides
subspspecies cremoris and Leuconostoc lactis, but also a complex mixture of different,
undefined strains of each species. The same type of starter culture is mostly used in the
production of Swedish semi-hard cheese.
The sugars in the milk (lactose [4.8%], glucose and galactose) are fermented to lactic
acid by mainly Lactococcus lactis. Milk also contains citrate (1.8 g per litre) and the
citrate is catabolised by the Leuconostoc strains and some specific strains of
Lactococcus lactis (previously designated Lactococcus diacetolactis) to acetic acid,
carbon dioxide and diacetyl. Diacetyl is then partly converted to acetoin. The diacetyl
provides Filmjölk with much of its characteristic taste, a taste distinctly different from
yoghurt.
Kefir. Kefir is a fermented milk beverage that has been fermented by a mixture of
yeast’s and lactic acid bacteria. These organisms are established in the so called “kefir
grain” which is a structure that spontaneously is formed in the fermenting milk. The
kefir grain consists of polysaccharides, proteins, yeast cells and bacteria. Lactobacillus
kefir and Lactobacillus kefiranofaciens are examples of organisms producing the
polysaccharides of the kefir grain. Lactic acid, ethanol and carbon dioxide (together
with smaller amounts of diacetyl and acetoin) are produced during the fermentation.
Antimicrobial properties of milk. Milk contains natural components with
antimicrobial effects. For example, antibodies directed against bacteria or bacterial
components, a low iron content combined with an efficient complex-binder of iron
(lactoferrin) and the enzyme lactoperoxidase (Figure 17).
There is about 30 mg lactoperoxidase per ml of milk. When this enzyme comes in
contact with hydrogen peroxide, the hydrogen peroxide is reduced with the help of
electrons donated from thiocyanate (natural component in milk; up to 5 ppm) (Figure
17). The intermediary, instable, highly oxidative products of thiocyanate (HOSCN) are
strongly bacteriocidic (kills bacteria). The thiocyanates are especially active against
gram-negative bacteria, such as Proteobacteria. Macrophages generate hydrogen
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
64
peroxide to kill bacteria and the presence of lactoperoxidase enhances the killing
efficiency. Hydrogen peroxide can also be produced by many lactic acid bacteria.
Figure 17. The lactoperoxidase reaction in milk. HOSCN is strongly bacteriocidic.
Cheese
More than 50 different cheese varieties were made in Sweden in the year of 2001. The
oldest and most popular varieties are Herrgårdsost, Prästost, Västerbotten, Svecia and
Hushållsost. Examples of internationally well-known, semi-hard cheeses are Cheddar
(British), Emmentaler (Swish) and Jarlsberg (Norwegian). Cheese consumption is
increasing internationally, mainly due to the increased use of cheese as a food
ingredient.
The manufacture of cheese comprises a chain of operations, which concentrates and
preserves the milk by fermentation, dehydration and salting. The principal steps in the
manufacture of Swedish semi-hard cheese are shown in Figure 18. However, it should
be emphasised that each cheese variety has its own traditional specific manufacturing
protocol.
The raw milk for cheese manufacturing is separated and its microflora is reduced by
pasteurisation (70 oC to 73
oC for 15s to 20 s). Bactufugation or microfiltration can also
be used to remove bacterial spores. The reduction of the contaminating microorganisms
is crucial, as the risk of potential pathogens and product spoilers in the final cheese must
be kept to a minimum. It is also important that large-scale, reproducible, cheese
production takes place under strictly controlled conditions in order to maintain a
controlled quality. Common quality-reducing bacteria are Clostridium tyrobutyricum,
which cause excessive gas formation and also cause off-flavour by production of butyric
acid. C. tyrobutyricum can form endospores.
The milk is fermented by a starter culture. The starter cultures in Swedish, semi-hard
cheese, are usually undefined, i.e. the included strains are not defined. This type of
culture is called “mesophilic LD culture” with mixed species. LD stands for L lactic
acid and D lactic acid. Both forms of lactic acids are produced by the starter culture.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
65
The acid producers in the culture are mainly Lactococcus lactis subspecies lactis and
Lactococcus lactis subspecies cremoris, which catabolise lactose to lactic acid. The
flavour producers are primarily Lactococcus lactis subsp. lactis biovariant diacetylactis
and Leuconostoc mesenteroides subsp. cremoris, which metabolise citrate to carbon
dioxide, diacetyl, acetoin and 2,3 butanediol. The starter culture usually contains an
unknown number of different strains of each species. This is regarded as a protective
action against the treat of phage infections. Bacteriphages can kill the bacteria of the
starter culture but bacteriphages are strain specific so a mixture of strains certify the
function of the starter even if a phage-infection should take place.
Figure 18. Flow scheme of the main steps in the manufacturing of semi-hard cheese. The “cooking” is usually between 38oC and 40oC during 20 to 40 min. The whole procedure to the step of salt brining takes 1 to 1.5 day. The ripening usually proceeds at about 12oC for 3 to 12 months.
The rate at which lactic acid is produced is one of the factors controlling the moisture
content of the cheese and it is regulated by the starter culture. The final pH of the cheese
is controlled by water addition, i.e. by indirectly controlling the amount of lactose in the
cheese. The type of starter and the “cooking” temperature also affect pH. Mesophilic
starter cultures have optimal growth temperatures around 26oC and do not multiply at
temperatures above 38-40oC. The cheese should be depleted of lactose and citrate after
about one week after the initiation of fermentation.
Coagulation is accomplished by the addition of calf rennet (“löpe” in Swedish), which
mainly consists of the enzyme chymosin. This enzyme cleaves the -casein that is
responsible for the micelle stability in milk and this in combination with added CaCl2,
coagulates milk. When the coagulation is complete the gel is cut into cubes and
converted into curd grains through the combined action of stirring, heating and
decreasing pH. Moisture control is of major importance for the final characteristics of
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
66
the cheese. The curd grains are collected in moulds, pressed to shape and then brine
salted (Figure 18).
The above described sequential unit operations set the conditions for the subsequent
maturation during which the sensory characteristics of the cheese develop. Swedish
semi-hard cheese are consumed as “mild” (“mild” same word as in Swedish) after
approximately 3 months of ripening and as “very mature” (“stark” in Swedish) after
about 12 months of ripening.
During the process, the starter culture reaches about 109 CFU per g after 1-2 days, but
then during ripening, gradually decline in numbers. Instead there is a spontaneous
growth of contaminating bacteria in the cheese during the ripening period. These
bacteria are called “non-starter lactic acid bacteria” and consist in Scandinavian semi-
hard cheeses (made with pasteurised milk) mainly of Lactobacillus paracasei. In
Mediterranean cheeses also Lactobacillus plantarum is occurring frequently, especially
in cheeses made with unpasteurised milk. Non-starter lactic acid bacteria reach a
number of about 106 to 10
8 CFU per g cheese after about 5 months. This spontaneous
growing Lactobacillus affect the flavour development during ripening, sometimes in a
positive direction, but sometimes in a negative way, all depending on the characteristics
of the dominating strain. Both L. paracasei and L. plantarum are frequently found in the
human digestive tract.
Lactic acid fermented sausages
There is different kind of lactic acid fermented sausages with different processing times
(Table 3). It is the drying of sausages that takes time, and the time is reflecting the
dryness of the product.
There are two major categories of lactic acid fermented sausages: (i) “semidry”
sausages with a water content of 40-60% and a water activity of 0.93-0.98, and (ii)
“dry” sausages with a water activity of 20-40% and a water activity of 0.80-0.90. The
water activity, aW = p/p0, where, p = steam pressure over the product, and, p0 = steam
pressure over pure water. The water activity over pure water is 1.0, and the relative
humidity (RH) in per cent, in the gas phase, is the same as aW x 100.
Table 3. Different types of high-quality lactic acid fermented sausages.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
67
Examples on lowest aw -limit of growth for some different groups of bacteria are: 0.97
for Pseudomonas; 0.95 for Enterobacteriaceae; 0.93 for Lactobacillus; 0.85 for
Staphylococcus.
For bacteria in general, the lowest water activity of growth in food is mostly 0.93 (but
the extremes can grow down to a pH of 0.85), while the corresponding lowest water
activity for yeast is 0.85 (extremes, down to 0.80), and for moulds 0.75 (extremes down
to 0.60).
Lactic acid fermentation occurs spontaneously in the beginning of cold smoking or at
the start of a drying process. Gradually the pH of the product decreases down to
somewhere between 4.2 and 4.7 (Figure 19).
Figure 19. Flow diagram of the main steps in the manufacture of lactic acid fermented sausage (in Swedish “kallrökt korv”).
The bacterial load of the raw material after mixing is often between 105 CFU and 10
8
CFU per g meat mixture. The starter culture usually gives the mixture a concentration of
106 CFU starter bacteria per g meat mixture (Figure 19).
Examples of taxa used as starter cultures for lactic acid fermented sausages are:
Pediococcus pentosaceus, especially at higher fermentation temperatures (40-45oC), and
L. plantarum or Lactobacillus sake that are used mostly at cold smoking at temperatures
around 30oC and below.
A strain of the genus Staphylococcus is sometimes used for improving the colour of the
cold smoked products. The rationale behind this is that Staphylococcus produces
catalase, and catalase catalyses the break-down of hydrogen peroxide that can be
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
68
produced by Lactobacillus growing in the product. Hydrogen peroxide can react with
the meat pigment yielding green-greyish spots in the product.
Lactobacillus often used as probiotics
Probiotic dose
Humans ingest bacteria together with food, both unintentionally and on purpose. The
unintentionally eaten bacteria could have adverse effects on the health if the food is
contaminated with pathogenic bacteria, or if the food is contaminated with spoilage
bacteria that perhaps not are directly pathogenic but can exercise negative health effects
when eaten in high numbers (food close to spoilage). However, also beneficial bacteria,
“dietary bacteria” can be eaten unintentionally when fermented foods are consumed.
Especially lactic acid fermented foods can contain high amounts of live bacteria and
bacteria of the same species that are used for probiotics, i.e. intentionally eaten bacteria.
But, the amount of live bacteria that can be ingested by traditional fermented products
depends much on the type of product, e.g. a traditional yoghurt may contain up to 108
to109 CFU per ml and a consumption of 100 ml will give a final dose of 10
10 to10
11
CFU of LAB while cheese may contain around 107 CFU per g and a consumption of 20
g will in this case yield a dose of 2x108 CFU. However, it should be pointed out that
many commercially available, traditionally fermented products today are heat-treated
after the fermentation in order to prevent uncontrolled fermentation during storage, i.e.
no living LAB are left in the product.
Generally, a daily dose of probiotics ought to be around 109 CFU (preferably 10
10 CFU)
to show effects. There is no upper limit in numbers. The higher the daily intake is the
better are the chances to obtain desired effects. It can be pointed out that the human
digestive tract contains at least 1014
CFU, and a dose of 109 CFU only makes up 0.001%
of the total number of bacteria in the human gut.
The commercially most frequently used food-carrier for probiotics is yoghurt or
yoghurt-like products. Some examples of these milk-based products are: Actimel
(Danone), Yakult (Yakult), Lc1 (Nestlé), Gefilac (Valio), Cultura (Arla) and Verum
hälsoyoghurt (Norrmejerier). These types of milk-based products usually contain 105-
108 CFU of the probiotic Lactobacillus-strain per ml product. The numbers is to a high
degree dependant on the hardiness of the particular strain.
Bifidobacterium are generally more difficult to keep alive in products, and the viable
count is low in many products. It seems as Bifidobacterium animalis is a hardier species
than the most other Bifidobacterium spp., and unusually tough against exposure to
oxygen (for being a bifidobacteria). Especially hardy against storage is the strain
Bifidobacterium animalis BB12.
Examples of Lactobacillus spp. frequently used as probiotics are Lactobacillus casei,
Lactobacillus paracasei, Lactobacillus rhamnosus, Lactobacillus acidophilus,
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
69
Lactobacillus johnsonii, Lactobacillus salivarius, L. fermentum, Lactobacillus reuteri
and Lactobacillus plantarum. Phylogenetically, L. casei, L. paracasei and L. rhamnosus
are related, and L. acidophilus is related to L. johnsonii.
L. salivarius, L. fermentum, L. reuteri and L. plantarum are neither especially closely
related to the other mentioned Lactobacillus spp. nor to each other. They represent
different phylogenetic subgroups within the genus Lactobacillus. Most of these
Lactobacillus species are also frequently found in the human digestive tract (Figure 20).
Figure 20. Lactobacillus species frequently occurring in the human gut and in some cases, also frequently found in traditional lactic acid fermented products.
Lactobacillus casei and Lactobacillus paracasei
The species Lactobacillus casei (casei, of cheese) was described and given its name
1916 by a Danish bacteriologist, Orla-Jensen. However, the original type strain was lost
and a new type strain (neotype strain) was selected by Hansen and Lessel (1971).
Unfortunately, the neotype of L. casei had relatively low similarity to most L. casei-like
strains isolated from, for example, cheese. Because of this, a new species named L.
paracasei was described based on atypical L. casei strains found in foods (Collins et al.
1989). But some scientist objected to the description of L. paracasei and argued for
keeping the original classification of L. casei (with several subspecies), and they
assigned a new neotype strain for L. casei that was more similar to environmental
isolates than the neotype strain of Hansen and Lessel from 1971. This proposal was later
turned down by the Judicial Commission of the International Committee on Systematics
of Bacteria, deciding that L. paracasei should remain (Tindall 2008). The consequence
of this has been that the majority of strains, before labelled L. casei, today should be
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
70
named L. paracasei. True L. casei strains seem to be relatively rare in the environment,
at least in foods and in the gastro-intestinal tract.
L. paracasei grow spontaneous during lactic acid fermentation of dairy products, and
mostly constitute the dominating flora in cheese, especially in semi hard cheese made
from pasteurised milk (106 – 10
8, CFU per g cheese). L. paracasei are also frequently
found in the human digestive tract. L. paracasei is a facultatively heterofermentative
lactobacilli.
The Yakult culture (Yakult, Japan), “Lactobacillus casei Shirota” was isolated 1930 by
the Japanese scientist Minoru Shirota. This strain should be designated Lactobacillus
paracasei. Also the strain “L. casei defencis” (= DN-114001; also called “immunitas”
in the past) that is included in the yoghurt-like product Actimel (Danone, France)
should be designated Lactobacillus paracasei. A third example on a L. paracasei strain
commercially used as probiotics is Lactobacillus paracasei F19 that mostly is included
in different yoghurt-like products (Arla, Denmark).
Lactobacillus rhamnosus
Lactobacillus rhamnosus was originally classified and named L. casei subspecies
rhamnosus (Hansen 1968), but later reclassified and named L. rhamnosus (Collins et al.
1989). L. rhamnosus has been used as probiotics since the 1970s. Especially one strain,
L. rhamnosus GG (Valio, Finland) has been used a lot, all over the word. GG stands for
Gorbach and Goldin which were the two scientists that originally isolated and patented
the strain. In the beginning, this strain was wrongly identified as L. acidophilus. L.
rhamnosus GG differ from the majorities of L. rhamnosus strains by lacking the ability
to ferment lactose.
L. rhamnosus is facultatively heterofermentative, and grows spontaneously and quickly
during lactic acid fermentation of milk. L. rhamnosus are frequently found in the gastro-
intestinal tract of humans, and especially in breast fed babies. Some strains have now
and then been accused for causing infections, but the evidences for this are weak.
Lactobacillus acidophilus
Lactobacillus acidophilus was described by Moro (1900) and has been used in lactic
acid fermented milk as probiotics since the 1930s. L. acidophilus has in the past often
been mixed up with other obligatory homofermentative Lactobacillus species as
Lactobacillus amylovorus, Lactobacillus crispatus, Lactobacillus gallinarum,
Lactobacillus gasseri, Lactobacillus jensenii or Lactobacillus johnsonii (Fujisawa et al.
1992).
L. acidophilus grows poorly in milk if not additional growth factors are added, e.g. in
the form of yeast extract. L. acidophilus is not normally found in spontaneously
fermented food products, but is frequently found in the gastro-intestinal tract of man
and animals.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
71
Lactobacillus johnsonii
Lactobacillus johnsonii was described by Fujisawa et al. (1992). L. johnsonii produces
hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) when exposed to oxygen, and is often a dominating part of
the resident microbiota in vagina, but can also be found in the digestive tract of humans
and animals. L. johnsonii is not usually found in spontaneously fermented food
products.
The strain L. johnsonii La1 (= NCC533; Nestlé) that has been used in the probiotic
product LC1, was originally identified as L. acidophilus.
Lactobacillus salivarius
L. salivarius was described by Rogosa (1953). It is traditionally regarded as obligatory
homofermentative. However, the species contains both homofermentative and
facultatively heterofermentative strains. Most strains produce L-lactic acid from
available hexoses by homofermentation. Heterofermentative end-products (lactic acid,
acetic acid and ethanol) are produced from hexoses by some strains that also can
ferment ribose. L. salivarius is frequently isolated from the mammalian digestive tract
A relatively well characterized strain with probiotic impact is Lactobacillus salivarius
UCC118 (University College Cork, Ireland). This strain is facultatively
heterofermentative.
Lactobacillus fermentum
Lactobacillus fermentum was described by Beijerink (1901). L. fermentum is an
obligatory heterofermentative Lactobacillus. L. fermentum has, compared to many other
Lactobacillus spp., an unusual high mol % guanine+cytosine of the DNA (52-54%),
which clearly points out that L. fermentum is phylogenetically very different from most
other Lactobacillus spp. On the other hand, the type species of the genus Lactobacillus,
Lactobacillus delbrueckii also has a relatively high mol % guanine + cytosine of the
DNA, i.e. 49-51%.
L. fermentum is frequently found in high numbers in spontaneously fermented foods,
and in the digestive tract of humans and animals.
Examples of commercially available strains of L. fermentum with probiotic claims are
L. fermentum PCC (Probiomics Ltd, Australia), and L. fermentum ME-3 (University of
Turku, Estonia).
Lactobacillus reuteri
Lactobacillus reuteri is an obligatory heterofermentative Lactobacillus that was
described by Kandler et al. (1980; Anon 1982). Many Lactobacillus reuteri strains
produce the anti-microbial substance, reuterin (b-hydroxy-propionaldehyde) which is an
inter-mediate in the glycerol dissimilation (Axelsson et al. 1989).
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
72
L. reuteri does not normally grow spontaneously in lactic acid fermented foods, and has
poor storage stability, presumably due to low oxygen tolerance. L. reuteri is frequently
found in the digestive tract of humans and animals.
Different strains of L. reuteri are marketed as probiotics (BioGaia AB, Sweden); one is
L. reuteri ATCC 55730. The company also market strains named “Protectis” and
“Prodentis”, but it is unclear if these are different names for ATCC 55730.
Lactobacillus plantarum
Lactobacillus plantarum (plantarum means “of plants”) was described by Orla-Jensen
(1919) and Bergey et al. (1923). L. plantarum frequently occurs spontaneously, in high
numbers, in most lactic acid fermented foods, especially when the foods are based on
plant material, for example, in brined olives (Fernández Gonzalez et al.1993), capers
(caper berries; Pulido et al. 2005), sauerkraut (Dedicatoria et al.1981; Plengvidhya et al.
2007), salted gherkins (McDonald et al. 1993), sour-dough (Lönner and Ahrné 1995),
Nigerian ogi (made from maize or sorghum) (Johansson 1995a), Ethiopian kocho (made
from starch from Ensete ventricosum) (Gashe 1985; Nigatu 1998), Ethiopian sour-
dough made out of tef (Eragrostis tef) (Gashe 1987; Nigatu 1998) and cassava
(Oyewole and Odunfa 1990; Moorthy and Mathew 1998). Furthermore, L. plantarum
occurs in grape juice and wine (Vaquero et al. 2004). Thus, it is obvious that individuals
consuming lactic acid fermented products of plant origin also consume large amounts of
L. plantarum. And in view of this, it is not surprising that L. plantarum frequently
occurs on the human mucosa of the digestive tract, from the mouth to the rectum (Molin
et al. 1993; Ahrné et al. 1998).
L. plantarum have a high tolerance to low pH (Daeschel and Nes 1995). The fact that L.
plantarum frequently predominate in spontaneously, lactic acid fermented foods where
the pH usually is below 4.0, and also survive the passage through the acid conditions of
the human stomach (Johansson et al. 1993), points to its high resistance to acid
conditions. L. plantarum can ferment many different carbohydrates and has a relatively
large genome, indicating that L. plantarum has abilities to adapt in many different
environments (Kleerebezem et al. 2003).
L. plantarum has a growth requirement for manganese and can accumulate high
intercellular levels of manganese (Archibald and Fridovich 1981b). Manganese provides
a defence for L. plantarum against oxygen toxicity by the reduction of oxygen radicals
to hydrogen peroxide (Archibald and Fridovich 1981a). The produced H2O2 can then be
converted to O2 and water by manganese cofactored pseudocatalase (Kono and
Fridovich 1983a, 1983b).
L. plantarum and the genomically related species, Lactobacillus paraplantarum and
Lactobacillus pentosus are able to brake-up tannins (Osawa et al. 2000; Vaquero et al.
2004), and can metabolise flavonoids and phenolic acids (Barthelmebs et al. 2000;
Barthelmebs et al. 2001).This is a relatively rare ability among LAB. However, also
Pediococcus can metabolise flavonoids, even if Pediococcus seems to lack the ability to
brake-up tannins.
A well known, and commercially available probiotic strain in many countries is L.
plantarum 299v (=DSM 9843) that originally has been isolated from human intestinal
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
73
mucosa (Probi AB, Lund, Sweden). A probiotic strain that scientifically also is well
characterized is L. plantarum WCFS1 (= NCIMB 8826).
Phenolics
Plants synthesise a complex variety of phenolics. There are polyphenoles as tannins,
lignans and lignins, and polyphenols only containing a two-phenolic ring structures as
flavonoids and stilbenes. There are also phenolic acids, for example gallic acid and
ellagic acids. In the plant, the phenolics have many physiological functions but they can
also protect the plant from parasites. Often they are difficult to digest, both for animals
and microbes, and they can possess powerful antimicrobial activities. Polyphenols are
well-known for their anti-nutritional effects in obstructing the absorption of iron and
reducing the availability of aminoacids which in nutritional terms must be seen as
negative, however, polyphenols may also slow down the up-take of sugars and lipids
which in situations of overeating and gormandizing must be regarded as advantageous.
A potential health beneficial ability of phenolics is their anti-oxidative properties, i.e.
the scavenging of electrons from oxygen free radicals. Flavanoids are often powerful
antioxidants, and especially powerful are the anthocyanines, present in for example
darkly coloured fruits, for example blueberry, blackcurrant, blackberry and red grapes.
L. plantarum and closely related species as L. pentosus and L. paraplantarum can split
up tannins into flavanoids, and flavanoids into phenolic acids. Pediococcus spp. don’t
normally posses tannase and are then unable to split up tannins into flavanoids, but
some pediococci can convert flavanoids into phenolic acids.
In their native form, many polyphenols can’t be absorbed in the small intestine and
instead they go to colon where they can be converted by the intestinal bacterial flora to
compounds that more easily are absorbed. An example of such a group of polyphenols
which are hard to digest is the anthocyanins. These compounds are especially difficult
to brake-up and are not absorbed in the gastro-intestinal tract in their original form. But
if they have been converted by the bacterial flora to compounds as phenyl valeric acids,
phenyl propionic acids, phenyl acetic acids and benzoic acid derivates, they are
absorbed and are transported to the liver (Scalbert et al. 2002; Figure 21). Phenolics
reaching the liver and other organs can have: (i) antioxidative capacity per se, but they
can also mediate (ii) metabolic effects of anti-inflammatory consequences. Phenolic
metabolites that are released from the liver are further transported via the systemic
circulation through the body and finally to the kidneys where they are discharged in the
urine.
Many polyphenols can be regarded as dietary fibres. They are indigestible and reach the
colon where they can be split by colonic bacteria (Figure 21). Polyphenols can even
have prebiotic effects as they can possess antimicrobial effects that affect different
bacterial groups differently. Especially some phenolic metabolites as, for example,
benzoic acid derivates have powerful antimicrobial effects.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
74
Epidemiological studies points at strong correlations between high consumption of
fruits and vegetables and decreased risk for cardiovascular diseases and cancer.
Furthermore, animal models prove causal connections between the consumption of
fruits and diseases as type 2 diabetes and cancer. An interesting question is if the
protective capacity of fruits and vegetables are dependent on the composition of the
bacterial gut-flora, i.e. if the presence of certain, polyphenole-converting taxa in the gut
enhance the disease-preventive effects of fruits and vegetables? This question remains
to be answered.
Figure 21. Polyphenols digested in colon and phenolic metabolites transported through the portal blood to the liver.
ProViva: a probiotic food product
A commercially successful probiotic food product with the brand name ProViva was
developed and launched in Sweden 1992. ProViva was from the beginning and until
2011 produced and marketed by Skånemejerier (Malmö). Today ProViva is marketed
and produced by ProViva AB (Lunnarp, Sweden), with Danone as the majority
shareholder. In USA, products of the same concept are marketing by NextFoods under
the brand name GoodBelly. However, the holder of the rights to the probiotic strain, L.
plantarum 299v included in these products, and the ones granting the quality of the
active probiotic strain (L.plantarum 299v) which is used as starter culture in ProViva is
the public company Probi AB (Lund, Sweden).
ProViva is based on a relatively unorthodox design-concept, and probably is this design
one reason for the commercial success. The base in ProViva is a lactic acid fermented
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
75
oatmeal beverage (gruel) that is fermented with L. plantarum 299v (Figure 22), and this
gruel is then mixed into different fruit drinks. During the lactic acid fermentation L.
plantarum 299v multiplies in the oatmeal gruel and reaches about 109 CFU of per ml
gruel. The lactic acid fermented oatmeal gruel is an integral part of ProViva, where 5%
fermented oatmeal gruel is mixed with different types of fruit drinks, e.g. rose hip,
strawberry, blueberry and blackcurrant. In the final product (ProViva), there is about 5 x
107 CFU of L. plantarum 299v per ml of fruit drink. The product is refrigerated.
Figure 22. Flow scheme from 1992 of the production of lactic acid fermented oatmeal gruel to be used in ProViva.
The viscosity of the oatmeal gruel in Figure 22 is during the process lowered by a
supplement of malt flour (malted barley). The supplement of malt in combination with
the heat treatment and the gradual decrease in pH during the lactic acid fermentation
results in a decreased viscosity. The fermented oatmeal beverage was originally
intended as a base for a nutritional formula for enteral feeding (nasogastric feeding),
where a low viscosity and high energy liquid are prerequisites. Without added malt
flour, the oat meal gruel with the stated concentration of flour (18.5%; w/w) will form a
thick porridge impossible to administer through a thin tube. The decrease in viscosity is
presumably in large part due to degradation of starch. Malt is rich in amylases. There is
also an increased solubility of β-glucans, and if higher amounts of malt are used, or
extra malt flour is added after the heat treatment, there is also a substantial reduction in
total amount of β-glucans. However, the β-glucans are considered valuable as they are
believed to delay intestinal absorption and beneficially affect cholesterol and glucose
metabolism. The process as it is seen in Figure 22 does only cause a relatively small, if
any, reduction of the total content of β-glucans even if the viscosity is significantly
affected.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
76
To conclude
So far relatively few species of mostly the two genera Lactobacillus and
Bifidobacterium have been used commercially as probiotics. A few strains of L.
paracasei, L. plantarum, L. reuteri and B. animalis have been used successfully in
different foods and food supplements in an international scale. Considering the vast
amount of untried species and strains there seems to be a huge unexploited potential in
finding new probiotic strains.
In a safety perspective, it can be wise to keep the selection of potential probiotic strains
from such species that have been eaten by humans for long time and in high numbers,
i.e. the species dominating the flora of dietary bacteria in traditionally fermented foods.
These dietary bacteria are dominated by lactic acid bacteria (LAB). It is important to
consider the fact that among the LAB there are many different taxonomic unities
(genera, species and strains) with highly different characteristics, and that the human
body respond differently on these different characteristics. The human immune system
recognises the differences.
By comparing the different examples of traditional lactic acid fermented foods given in
this lecture-block certain similarities can be perceived (i) in how to control of the
fermentation and (ii) in the spontaneous succession of different sorts of LAB during the
process. It becomes obvious that certain LAB species occurs irrespectively of the
geographical location of the fermentation. An important controlling factor for the
selection of what sorts of LAB that will occur in high numbers in the fermentation is the
type of raw material that are fermented, cereals and vegetables give rise to a certain
profile of LAB, while milk give another, and meat a third. Also the fermentation
temperature may influence the LAB-profile in the product. Important factors for the
actual selection of LAB in the fermentation, is the restricted access to air and the falling
pH along with the fermentation. The restriction to air means primarily a shortage of
oxygen, but equally important is the increased concentrations of carbon dioxide that are
produced by the bacteria and gradually enriched in an enclosed environment. Also
frequently used for controlling the fermentation is salt (NaCl).
LAB that are found in high numbers in fermented products are by obvious reasons
thriving fairly well and have good survival in the product, i.e. these taxa can favourably
be combined with these food products. Using a probiotic strain in a food environment
that it is suited for also means that the probiotic bacterium can be added to the food as
starter culture and then by its own ability multiply to high numbers. The commercial
advantage with this is that it is cheaper than adding freeze dried bacteria to the product
in its final concentration. A functional advantage in letting the probiotics multiply in the
carrier (food) is that the probiotics presumably are more metabolic active when eaten. A
draw-back can be that the actively growing probiotics in a negative way may change the
eating quality of the food, for example, by producing carbon dioxide and acetic acid as
heterofermentative LAB tend to do. On the other hand, the probiotics may by
interaction with food components increase the health benefits and nutritional value of
the food product. From the point of view of efficiency, a high number of active
probiotics in the product is desirable. In other words, there are several aspects to take
into account when probiotics are mixed into foods.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
77
The Swedish product ProViva can be taken as example of a modern probiotic food
concept that basically is designed in a similar way as a traditional lactic acid fermented
food product, i.e. the fermented oatmeal gruel of ProViva has much in common with the
Tanzanian togwa. Furthermore, the probiotic strain of ProViva belongs to the species L.
plantarum which frequently is dominating in traditional fermented foods based on
cereals and other raw materials of plant origin. In other words, the probiotic strain can
be used as starter culture in the product and by its own account multiply up to high
numbers in the product.
An interesting and relatively new field in Nutrition is the physiological effects of
phenolics in, for example, fruits and tea. Polyphenols are to high degree passing
undigested through the small intestine but can be digested by some bacterial taxa in
ileum and colon and the phenolic metabolites can then be absorbed. However, it is a
limited number of taxa in the gut-microbiota that are able to digest polyphenols and if
those taxa should be absent, the host would not be able to absorb much phenolic
metabolites and will of course neither be able to make full use of the antioxidative and
anti-inflammatory properties of the phenolics. In such individuals, it would be
especially interesting to combine intake of polyphenol-rich food with probiotics able to
digest polyphenols. However, only a few LAB have this ability but L. plantarum is one
of them. L. plantarum 299v in ProViva has a certain ability to handle the content of
phenolic compounds in fruits. This can improve the survival of the bacterium in a fruit
drink, but the ability to digest polyphenols can also lead to absorption of phenolic
metabolites with physiological capacities in the digestive tract of the consumer.
References
Ahrné, S., Nobaek, S., Jeppsson, B., Adlerberth, I., Wold, A., and Molin, G. (1998).
The normal Lactobacillus flora of healthy human rectal and oral mucosa. J. Appl.
Microbiol. 85: 88-94.
Anon (1982), Validation of the publication of new names and new combinations
previously effectively published outside the IJSB. International Journal of Systematic
Bacteriology 32: 266-268.
Barthelmebs, L., Divies, C., and Cavin, J-F. (2000). Knockout of the p-coumarate
decarboxylase gene from Lactobacillus plantarum reveals the existence of two other
inducible enzymatic activities involved in phenolic acid metabolism. Appl. Environ.
Microbiol. 66: 3368-3375.
Barthelmebs, L., Divies, C., and Cavin, J-F. (2001). Molecular characterization of the
phenolic acid metabolism in the lactic acid bacteria Lactobacillus plantarum. Lait, 81:
161-171.
Beijerink, M. W. (1901). Sur les ferments lactiques de l’industrie. Arch
Ne´erl Sci Exactes Nat Se´rie II 7: 212–243.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
78
Canchaya, C., Claesson, M.J., Fitzgerald, G.F., van Sinderen, D. and Paul O’Toole, W.
(2006). Diversity of the genus Lactobacillus revealed by comparative genomics of five
species. Microbiology 152:3185–3196; DOI 10.1099/mic.0.29140-0
Collins, M.D., Farrow, J.A.E., Phillips, B.A., Fursu, S. and Jones, D. (1987).
Classification of Lactobacillus divergens, Lactobacillus piscicola, and some catalase-
negative, asporogenous, rod-shaped bacteria from poultry in a new genus,
Carnobacterium. International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology 37: 310-316.
Collins M.D., Phillips, B.A. and Zanoni, P. (1989). Deoxyribonucleic acid homology
studies of Lactobacillus casei, Lactobacillus paracasei sp. nov., subsp. paracasei and
subsp. tolerans, and Lactobacillus rhamnosus sp. nov., comb. nov. Int. J. Syst.
Bacteriol. 39: 105-108.
Daeschel, M.A. and Nes, I.F. (1995). Lactobacillus plantarum: physiology, genetics and
applications in foods, in Food Biotechnology Microorganisms, Hui, Y.H. and
Khachatourians, G.G., Eds., VCH Publishers, Inc., New York, chap. 21, pp. 721-743.
Dedicatoria, R.F., Aspiras, R.B., and Sanchez, P.C. (1981). The fermentation
inoculation with lactic acid bacteria to increase the nutritive value of sauerkraut.
Kalikasan 10: 214-219.
Fernández Gonzalez, M.J., García, P.G., Fernández, A.G., and Quintana, M.C.D.
(1993). Microflora of the aerobic preservation of directly brined green olives from
Hojiblanca cultivar. J. Appl. Bacteriol. 75: 226-233.
Fujisawa T., Benno Y., Yaeshima T. and Mitsuoka T. (1992). Taxonomic study of the
Lactobacillus acidophilus group, with recognition of Lactobacillus gallinarum sp. nov.
and Lactobacillus johnsonii sp. nov. and synonymy of Lactobacillus acidophilus group
A3 (Johnson et al. 1980) with the type strain of Lactobacillus amylovorus (Nakamura
1981). Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol. 42: 487-491.
Gashe, B.A. (1985). Involvement of lactic acid bacteria in the fermentation of tef
(Eragrostis tef), an Ethiopian fermented food. J. Fd. Sci. 50: 800-801.
Gashe, B.A. (1987). Kocho fermentation, J. Appl. Bacteriol. 62: 473-74.
Hansen, P.A. and Lessel, E.F. (1971). Lactobacillus casei (Orla-Jensen) comb. nov.
International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology 21 (1): 69-71.
Hessle C., Hansson, Å. and Wold, A.E.. (1999). Lactobacilli from human
gastrointestinal mucosa are strong stimulators of IL-12 production. Clin. Exp. Immunol.
116: 276-282.
Johansson, M.L. (1995a). Systematics and starter culture selection of Lactobacillus for
human intestine and Nigerian ogi, with special reference to Lactobacillus plantarum.
Ph.D. thesis, Division of Food Technology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Johansson, M.-L., Molin, G., Jeppsson, B., Nobaek, S., Ahrné, S., and Bengmark, S.
(1993). Administration of different Lactobacillus strains in fermented oatmeal soup: In
vivo colonization of human intestinal mucosa and effect on the indigenous flora. Appl.
Environ. Microbiol. 59: 15-20.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
79
Kandler, O., Stetter, K-0. and Kohl, R. (1980). Lactobacillus reuteri sp. nov., a new
species of heterofermentative lactobacilli. Zentralbl. Bakteriol. Parasitenkd.
Infektionskr. Hyg. Abt. 1 Orig. C1:264-269.
Kingamkono, R., Sjögren, E., and Svanberg, U. (1999). Enteropathogenic bacteria in
faecal swabs of young children fed on lactic acid-fermented cereals. Epidemiol. Infect.
122: 23-32.
Kleerebezem, M., Boekhorst, J., van Kranenburg, R., Molenaar, D., Kuipers, O.P., Leer,
R., Tarchini, R., Peters, S.A., Sandbrink, H.M., Fiers, M.W.E.J., Stiekema, W.,
Lankhorst, R.M.K., Bron, P.A., Hoffer, S.M., Groot, M.N.N., Kerkhoven, R., de Vries,
M., Ursing, B., de Vos, W.M. and Siezen, R.J. (2003). Complete genome sequence of
Lactobacillus plantarum WCFS1. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 100: 1990-1995.
Kono, Y. and Fridovich, I. (1983b). Functional significance of manganese catalase in
Lactobacillus plantarum J. Bacteriol. 155: 742-746.
Lönner, C. and Ahrné, S. (1995). Lactobacillus: Baking, in Food Biotechnology
Microorganisms, Hui, Y.H. and Khachatourians, G.G., Eds., VCH Publishers Inc.,
Eureka, California, 797-844.
Makarovaa, K., Slesarevb, A. Wolfa et al. (2006). Comparative genomics of the lactic
acid bacteria. PNAS 103:15611–15616.
Marcos, A. et al. (2004). Milk fermented with yoghurt cultures plus L. casei DN-
114001 on the immune response of subjects under academic examination stress. Eur. J.
Nutr. 43: 381-389.
McDonald, L.C., Shieh, D.H., Fleming, H.P., McFeeters, R.F., and Thompson, R.L.
(1993). Evaluation of malolactic-deficient strains of Lactobacillus plantarum for use in
cucumber fermentations. Food Microbiology 10: 489-99.
Molin, G., Jeppsson, B., Ahrné, S., Johansson, M.-L., Nobaek, S., Ståhl, M., and
Bengmark, S. (1993). Numerical taxonomy of Lactobacillus spp. associated with
healthy and diseased mucosa of the human intestines. J. Appl. Bacteriol. 74: 314-323.
Moorthy, S.N., and Mathew, G. (1998). Cassava fermentation and associated changes in
physicochemical and functional properties, Crit. Rev. Fd. Sci. Nut. 38: 73-121.
Nigatu, A. (1998). Systematics of Lactobacillus and Pediococcus isolated from
fermented tef (Eragrostis tef) and kocho (Ensete ventricosum) and microbiological
status of baked products, Ph.D. thesis, School of Graduate Studies, Addis Ababa
University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Osawa, R., Kuroiso, K., Goto, S., and Shimzu, A. (2000). Isolation of tannin-degrading
lactobacilli from humans and fermented foods. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 66: 3093-
3097.
Oyewole, O.B. and Odunfa, S.A. (1990). Characterization and distribution of lactic acid
bacteria in cassava fermentation during fufu production, J. Appl. Bacteriol. 68: 145-152.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
80
Pérez-Serradilla, J.A.and Luque de Castro, M.D. (2008). Role of lees in wine
production: A review. Food Chemistry 111:447-456.
Plengvidhya, V., Breidt, F., Lu, Zhongjing and Fleming, H.P. (2007). DNA
fingerprinting of lactic acid bacteria in sauerkraut fermentation. Applied and
Environmental Microbiology 73: 7697-7702.
Pulido, R.P., Omar, N.B., Abriouel, H., López, R.L., Canamero, M.M. and Gálvez
(2005). Microbiological study of lactic acid fermentation of caper berries by molecular
and culture dependant methods. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 71: 7872-
7879.
Queipo-Ortuno, M.I., Boto-Ordonez, M., Murri, M., Gomez-Zumaquero, J.M.,
Clemente-Postigo, M., Estruch, R., Diaz, F.C., Andrés-Lacueva, C. and Tinahones, F.J
(2011). Influence of red wine polyphenols and ethanol on the gut microbiota ecology
and biochemical biomarkers. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. doi: 10.3945/ajcn. 111.027847
Rogosa, M., Wiseman, R. F., Mitchell, J. A., Disraely, M. N. and Beaman, A. J. (1953).
Species differentiation of oral lactobacilli from man including description of
Lactobacillus salivarius nov. spec. And Lactobacillus cellobiosus nov. spec. J.
Bacteriol 65: 681–699.
Scalbert, A., Morand, C., Manach, C. and Rémésy, C. (2002). Absorption and
metabolism of polyphenols in the gut and impact on health. Biomedicine and
Pharmacotherapy 56: 276-282.
Schleifer, K.H. and Ludwig, W. (1995). Phylogenetic relationships of lactic acid
bacteria. In: The lactic acid bacteria. Vol 2, The genera of lactic acid bacteria. Eds.
B.J.B. Wood and W.H. Holzapfel. Blackie Academic & Professional, an imprint of
Chapman & Hall, Glasgow.
Vaquero, I., Marcobal, A. and Muñoz, R. (2004). Tannase activity by lactic acid
bacteria isolated from grape must and wine. International Journal of Food
Microbiology 96: 199-204.
Vásquez, A., Ahrné, S. and Molin, G. (2004). Phylogenetic analysis of the genus
Lactobacillus: a taxonomic platform of probiotic lactobacilli. In PhD-thesis: Vásquez
Moreno, A., Systematics of Lactobacillus spp. of probiotic potential. Food hygiene,
Department of Food Technology, Engineering and Nutrition, Lund University, 2004.
Zhang, Z-G., Ye1, Z-Q., Yu, L. and Shi, P. (2011). Phylogenomic reconstruction of
lactic acid bacteria: an update. BMC Evolutionary Biology 11:1
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/11/1
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
81
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
82
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
83
III. Gut microbiota The bacterial flora of the gut
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
84
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
85
Intention
The educational intention with Lecture-block III – Gut microbiota – is to provide an
overview of the complex community of bacteria living in the digestive tract of humans
and how the composition of this microbiota (bacterial flora) is affected by different
factors. The intention is also to point at the two major targets (or hot spots) for the
interaction of the different components of the microbiota with the body, i.e. the mucosal
barrier function and the immune system. Crucial scientific questions are to sort out
which components of the microbiota that have physiological effects (beneficial for the
well-being) for the host and which ones that have physiopathological (adverse) effects,
and the mechanisms behind these different interactions. For the time being this is to a
high degree a huge white area but some conclusions can nevertheless be drawn,
especially when it comes to the obviously harmful taxa. This is reflected in learning-
block III.
A prerequisite for a relevant discussion around the role of the diverse microbiota in the
human body is access to a sound bacterial taxonomy where the natural taxa of the
microbiota have been made clear and can be used as keys in the search for a deeper
understanding of the role of the microbiota in health and disease.
Physiological and physiopatholgical
effects
Humans ingest bacteria with the food, but humans also harbour huge amounts of
resident bacteria (domestic bacteria) on the mucous membranes, from the moth to the
rectum, and also in the lumen of the digestive tract. Additionally, females harbour dense
populations of bacteria in the vagina. Both ingested bacteria and resident bacteria can,
depending of sort, have different effects on the human body. The bacteria can have (i)
physiological effects, i.e. effects that are consistent for normal functioning of the body,
or they can have (ii) physiopathological effects, i.e. adverse effects that impose
functional changes associated with injury and disease. In other words, some resident
bacteria of the digestive tract and the vagina may aggravate injuries or dysfunctions
while others may work the other way around and suppress or even have a healing effect
on injuries and dysfunctions (Figure 23).
The original idea of probiotics is that by ingesting wholesome bacteria (probiotics) the
beneficial bacteria of the GI-tract can be promoted, and the balance between beneficial
bacteria (suppressors) and adverse ones (aggravators) can be altered in an advantageous
direction for the human health (Figure 23). However, probiotics can do more than
affecting the balance of the microbiota. Thus, besides affecting (i) the composition of
the resident microbiota on the mucosa and in lumen, probiotics can affect (ii) the
epithelial cells by direct cell-to-cell contact, (iii) the immune system by contact with
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
86
immune-competent cells (macrophages, dendritic cells, B-lymphocytes, and T-
lymphocytes found in Peyer's patches and other gut-associated lymphoid tissue) and
antibodies, and (iv) the digestion by interaction with lumen-constituents (originating
from both the food and the body). On the other hand, direct cell to cell contact with the
epithelial cells and with immune-competent cells, together with interaction with lumen-
constituents are activities that can be valid not only for probiotics but also for all the
different bacterial components making up the microbiota. Thus, by a direct intervention
towards the composition of the microbiota, ingestion with probiotics may indirectly,
through changes in the composition of the microbiota, lead complex physiological
effects.
Figure 23. Schematic representation of the hypothesis that certain bacteria in the gut have physiological effects and may suppress injuries as, for example, inflammation (suppressors), while certain bacteria tend have physiopathological effects and may aggravate injuries (aggravators).
The bacterial flora of the digestive tract is mostly complex and this even if only those
taxa present in a dominating position are taken into account. So far, the relevance for
physiological or physiopathological potential is still unknown for the majority of the
taxa making up the microbiota of the digestive tract. Exceptions are bacteria that belong
to taxa with well-known pathogenic, or taxa with probiotic, potentials. These groups can
with some certainty be judge as adverse or as beneficial for the health, respectively.
Strains of certain species of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium have in intervention
studies in animals and humans proved to possess beneficial health effects, and these two
genera are generally regarded as beneficial components of the bacterial flora in the
digestive tract. Lactobacillus is perhaps more prominent in the small intestine while
Bifidobacterium more abundant in the large intestine. There is also some causal
evidence of health beneficial effects of Faecalibacterium prausnitzii (Sokol et al. 2008).
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
87
When it comes to adverse components of the bacterial flora of the gut, two adverse
species often abundantly found in the digestive tract are Escherichia coli and
Bacteroides fragilis. Many strains of these two species are well-known pathogens. Even
if the pathogenic strains not usually are a normal part of the resident flora, the non-
pathogenic strains of these species have so much in common with their pathogenic
relatives that they, in high numbers, are likely to impose a negative stress on the host.
Bacterial load of the digestive tract
Viable count
The human microbiota of the digestive tract starts already in the mouth, which harbours
a viable count of 108–10
10 colony forming units (CFU) of resident bacteria per g saliva.
These bacteria are constantly fed to the GI-channel by the swallowing reflex. The
numbers are reduced in the stomach (around 103 CFU/g gastric juice) due to the low
pH, and the numbers remain low in the duodenum and the jejunum (102–10
4 CFU/g
content) where there is a high intestinal motility and the flow of gastric juices are strong
(bile and enzymes originating from pancreas). Then, the bacterial concentration
increases steeply in the ileum and colon to around 1010
CFU/g content in the ileum and
1010
–1012
CFU/g content in the colon. These are extremely high densities of living
bacteria, and such high concentrations can’t be found anywhere in nature outside the
distal part of the digestive tract of mammalians.
The bacteria in the digestive tract are of different kinds and, traditionally, attempts to
identify them have been done by pure-culture technique. In pure-culture technique
isolates are cultured at the laboratory and both phenotypic and genotypic characteristics
of the bacterial population can be studied. Currently however, methods are more
directed towards direct gene-identification. Mostly the identification is targeting the 16S
ribosomal RNA (rRNA) gene but, lately, so called shotgun Sanger sequencing, or
massively parallel pyrosequencing have also been used in an attempt to obtain unbiased
samples of all microbial genes of a community (Eisen 2007). The entirety of the
microbial genes belonging to the microbiota is called the microbiome.
The term “metagenomics” is frequently used as a label for studies where more or less all
the genetic material is recovered and identified directly from environmental samples
(Handelsman et al. 1998). For example, metagenomics was used on 124 samples of
faeces from different individuals, and each one of the individuals was shown to harbour
at least 160 prevalent bacterial species (Qin et al. 2010).
The bacterial core
Some species of the gut microbiota are found in many individuals and some are only
found in a few persons. In an attempt to establish the existence of a phylogenetic “core”
of the microbiota common for a majority of individuals, Tap et al. (2009) obtained more
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
88
than ten-thousand 16S rRNA gene sequences by PCR-amplification and cloning from
faeces of 17 individuals. Three-thousand-one-hundred-eighty operational taxonomic
units (OTUs) were detected, but most of these only appeared in a few individuals, and
only 2.1% of the OTUs were present in more than 50% of the individuals. On the other
hand, most of the OTUs belonged to the phyla Firmicutes (about 80%), Bacteroidetes
(about 20%), Actinobacteria (about 3%), Proteobacteria (1%) and Verrucomicrobia
(0.1%). Consequently, when bacteria are identified on higher hierarchical levels of
taxonomy such as phylum (division) and class, the individual differences between
persons appear to be smaller, while the differences between habitats within the same
individual are more pronounced. For example, there is a significant difference in the
composition of the microbiota between the oral cavity and rectum (Costello et al. 2009),
and between jejunum and colon within the same individual (Wang et al. 2005).
Furthermore, the general profile of the gut-microbiota of an individual seems to be
reasonably stable over time (Costello et al. 2009).
Faecalibacterium, included in Firmicutes, is an example of a genus present in high
levels in most individuals (Stearns et al. 2011). Faecalibacterium is an efficient
producer of butyric acid and is presumably high levels of Faecalibacterium in the gut
have physiological and health beneficial effects.
The bacterial flora
Overview. Most data of the microbiota of the human gut are founded on faecal samples.
Faecal samples reasonably well reflect the colonic flora but it doesn’t tell much about
the bacterial flora of the small intestine. Frequently dominating genera in the human
digestive tract are summarised in Table 4. Generally in humans and other mammalians
the most frequently occurring and dominating phyla of bacteria are Firmicutes (gram-
positive) and Bacteroidetes (gram-negative). Other frequently occurring phyla are
Proteobacteria (gram-negative), Actinobacteria (gram-positive), Verrucomicrobia
(gram-negative), Fusobacteria (atypical gram-negative) and Spirochaetes (gram-
negative). More recently reported phyla are Tenericutes and Synergistetes that can
occur in lower frequencies (Koren et al. 2012).
Table 4 reflects genera within the different phyla that frequently can be found in high
numbers in the human digestive tract.
Mouth. The bacterial diversity seems to be higher in the mouth than in any other part of
the digestive tract (Stearns et al. 2011). The dominating phyla in the oral cavity are
Firmicutes, Proteobacteria, Actinobacteria, Fusobacteria, Bacteroidetes and
Spirochaetes (Huyghe et al. 2008; Lazarevic et al. 2009; Stearns et al. 2011).
Frequently identified genera are Streptococcus, Prevotella, Veillonella, Neisseria,
Haemophilus, Rothia, Porphyromonas and Fusobacterium (Nasidze et al. 2009). The
most frequent genus of all in the saliva is Streptococcus.
There is a high bacterial diversity in the mouth and huge differences between people,
but mostly there seem to be relatively minor geographic differences. However, different
members of the family Enterobacteriaceae can vary significantly in frequency between
different geographic locations (Nasidze et al. 2009).
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
89
Table 4. Taxa dominating the bacterial microbiota of the digestive tract (1,2).
Phyla/Division Class Family Genus Gram(3)
Actinobacteria Actinobacteria Micrococcaceae Rothia * +
Actinobacteria Actinobacteria Bifidobacteriaceae Bifidobacterium +
Firmicutes Bacilli Streptoccaceae Streptococcus +
Firmicutes Bacilli Lactobacillaceae Lactobacillus +
Firmicutes Bacilli Enterococcaceae Enterococcus +
Firmicutes Negativicutes Veillonellaceae Veillonella (−)
Firmicutes Negativicutes Veillonellaceae Dialiser (−)
Firmicutes Clostridia unclassified Mogibacterium * +
Firmicutes Clostridia Peptostreptococcaceae Peptostreptococcus * +
Firmicutes Clostridia Lachnospiraceae Coprococcus +
Firmicutes Clostridia Lachnospiraceae Dorea +
Firmicutes Clostridia Lachnospiraceae Roseburia (−)
Firmicutes Clostridia Lachnospiraceae Butyrivibrio (−)
Firmicutes Clostridia Ruminococcaceae Ruminococcus +
Firmicutes Clostridia Ruminococcaceae Faecalibacterium +
Firmicutes Clostridia Ruminococcaceae Anaerotruncus +
Firmicutes Clostridia Ruminococcaceae Subdoligranulum +
Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiaceae Clostridium +
Firmicutes Clostridia Clostridiaceae Blautia +
Firmicutes Clostridia Eubacteriaceae Eubacterium +
Firmicutes Clostridia unclassified Collinsella +
Firmicutes Erysipelotrichia Erysipelotrichaceae Holdemania +
Proteobacteria Betaproteobacteria Alcaligenaceae Sutterella -
Proteobacteria Betaproteobacteria Neisseriaceae Neisseria -
Proteobacteria Deltaproteobacteria Desulfovibrionaceae Bilophila -
Proteobacteria Gammaproteobacteria Pasteurellaceae Haemophilus * -
Proteobacteria Gammaproteobacteria Enterobacteriaceae Enterobacter * -
Proteobacteria Gammaproteobacteria Enterobacteriaceae Serratia * -
Proteobacteria Gammaproteobacteria Enterobacteriaceae Escherichia -
Proteobacteria Gammaproteobacteria Enterobacteriaceae Klebsiella -
Proteobacteria Gammaproteobacteria Moraxellaceae Acinetobacter -
Proteobacteria Gammaproteobacteria Pseudomonadaseae Pseudomonas * -
Proteobacteria Gammaproteobacteria Cardiobacteriaceae Cardiobacterium -
Bacteroidetes Bacteroidia Prevotellaceae Prevotella * -
Bacteroidetes Bacteroidia Porphyromonadaceae Porphyromonas * -
Bacteroidetes Bacteroidia Porphyromonadaceae Parabacteroides -
Bacteroidetes Bacteroidia Bacteroidaceae Bacteroides -
Bacteroidetes Bacteroidia Rikenellaceae Alistipes -
Fusobacteria Fusobacteria Fusobacteriaceae Fusobacterium -
Spirochaetae Spirochaetes Brachyspiraceae Brachyspira -
Verrucomicrobia Verrucomicrobiae Verrucomicrobiaceae Akkermansia -
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
90
Notes for Table 4. (1) Data from Pettersson et al. (2003), Wang et al. (2005), Hayashi et al. (2005), Bik et al. (2006), Lazarevic et al. (2009), Li et al. (2009), Nasidze et al. (2009), Turnbaugh et al. (2009) and Qin et al. (2010).
(2) Genus identification has been made by direct gene identification, mostly of the 16S rRNA gene by cloning and sequencing. (3) Gram = Gram-reaction. Negative gram-reaction within parenthesis means that the reaction is negative or variable. It has been shown for Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens that the negative gram-reaction is due to a thin cell wall and that the cell wall has Gram-positive characteristics (Cheng et al. 1977). Presumably, this is also the case for the other Butyrivibrio spp. and perhaps also for other Firmicutes with gram-negative reaction, i.e., they presumably do not contain lipopolysaccharides (LPS) and are usually associated with a gram-positive cell wall. * Taxa typically found dominating in the upper GI tract (mouth to jejunum) but mostly much less pronounced in the distal GI tract (ileum to rectum).
Stomach. The stomach is a relatively harsh environment for bacteria and due to the low
viable counts found there, it can always be debated whether these bacteria are resident
or transient. On the other hand, Helicobacter pylori that is the causative agent of gastric
ulcers, is definitely a resident bacteria of the stomach.
An adult person produces about two litres of gastric juice daily and the pH in lumen is
below 2 under fasting conditions, but close to the epithelial cells due to the mucus layer
pH is conderably higher, i.e.5 to 6. Resident or transient, the most frequently occurring
phyla in the stomach are Proteobacteria, Firmicutes, Actinobacteria, Bacteroidetes, and
Fusobacteria. Frequently occurring genera are Helicobacter, Streptococcus, Prevotella,
Neisseria, Haemophilus and Porphyromonas (Bik et al. 2006; Li et al. 2009).
Jejunum. The mucosal microbiota of jejunum is typically dominated by the phylum
Firmicutes, and to a lesser extent by Proteobacteria, Bacteroidetes, Fusobacteria and
Actinobacteria (Wang et al. 2005). Streptococcus is often the most abundant genus with
species as, for example, Streptococcus mitis, Streptococcus salivarius, Streptococcus
oralis, Streptococcus parasanguinis and Streptococcus anginosus. Other Firmicutes
than Streptococcus can, for example, be Veillonella, Mogibacterium and
Peptostreptococcus (Wang et al. 2005). Sometimes Lactobacillus can be found in a
dominating position in the jejunum (Hayashi et al. 2005).
Gammaproteobacteria that can be expected to be found are Haemophilus, Escherichia,
Acinetobacter and Pseudomonas (Wang et al. 2005). The Bacteroidetes can typically be
represented by Prevotella.
Ileum. The mucosal microbiota of ileum is typically dominated by the phyla of
Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes, but also Verrucomicrobia, Proteobacteria and
Fusobacteria can be expected to be found (Wang et al. 2005). Firmicutes is in ileum, in
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
91
contrast to jejunum, usually dominated by different, so called, Clostridium clusters
(defined by Collins et al. 1994), including genera as Clostridium, Coprococcus, Dorea,
Ruminococcus, Roseburia, Faecalibacterium and Dialiser (Wang et al. 2005).
Occasionally, also the amount of Lactobacillus can be relatively high in ileum (Hayashi
et al. 2005).
The Bacteroidetes in ileum is mostly of the genus Bacteroides, and example of often
abundant species are Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron, Bacteroides vulgatus and
Bacteroides uniformis (Wang et al. 2005).
Large intestine. In colon and rectum, the mucosal microbiota is mostly dominated by
the two phyla Firmicutes and Bacteroidetetes. Firmicutes is often represented by
different species included in the so called “Clostridium clusters XIVa” (defined by
Collins et al. 1994) which contains species as, for example, Eubacterium halii,
Eubacterium eligens, Dorea formicigenerans, Ruminococcus lactaris, Ruminococcus
gnavus, Ruminococcus torques, Ruminococcus obeum, Clostridium leptum, Clostridium
symbiosum, Clostridium boltei and Roseburia intestinalis (to mention some). But there
will most probably also be species of the “Clostridium cluster IV” , for example
Faecalibacterium prausnitzii and Clostridium orbiscindens; “Clostridium cluster IX” ,
for example Dialister invisus; “Clostridium cluster XIVb”, for example Clostridium
lactatifermentans (Wang et al. 2005; Zhang et al. 2009; Turnbaugh et al. 2009; Qin et
al. 2010).
The phylum Bacteroidetetes can be represented by the more or less frequently occurring
species Bacteroides vulgatus, Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron, Bacteroides ovatus,
Bacteroides stercoris, Bacteroides caccae, Bacteroides putredinis, Bacteroides merdae
Parabacteroides distasonis (former Bacteroides distasonis), Roseburia intestinalis,
Alistipes putredinis (former Bacteroides putredensis), Bacteroides uniformis and
Bacteroides fragilis (Wang et al. 2005; Zhang et al. 2009; Turnbaugh et al. 2009; Qin et
al. 2010).
Less frequent but still present in the large intestine are normally also the phyla
Verrucomicrobia, for example the species Akkermansia muciniphila; Proteobacteria,
for example E. coli, Acinetobacter johnsonii, Sutterella wadsworthensis and Neisseria
subflava; Actinobacteria, for example Bifidobacterium longum; Fusobacteria, for
example, Fusobacterium varium (Wang et al. 2005; Zhang et al. 2009; Turnbaugh et al.
2009; Qin et al. 2010).
The microbiota is mostly heterogeneous and differs widely between individuals with
regard to both composition and diversity. However, now and then a person without
clinical symptoms can be grossly dominated by E. coli (Pettersson et al. (2003).
Opportunistic pathogens that frequently can be found in high numbers in the large
intestine of individuals without obvious clinical symptoms are Bacteroides fragilis,
Escherichia coli, Bilophila wadsworthia and Sutterella wadsworthensis. Less frequently
found opportunistic pathogens, found in relatively high amounts of the large intestine
are Acinetobacter baumannii, Brachyspira aalborgi, Cardiobacterium hominis,
Clostridium perfringens, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Veillonella parvula (Pettersson et
al. 2003).
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
92
Taxonomic considerations
Clostridium. The so called Clostridium clusters of Collins et al. (1994) include species
from different genera, for example, Clostridium symbiosum, Eubacterium
formicigenerans, Roseburia intestinalis, Ruminococcus obeum, Clostridium
aminophilum, Eubacterium halii, Clostridium oroticum, Ruminococcus torques,
Faecalibacterium prausnitzi, Clostridium leptum, Oscillospira quilliermondii,
Clostridium orbiscindens, Dialister invisus, Propionispira arboris, Clostridium
aminobutyricum, Peptostreptococcus anaerobius and Clostridium lactatifermentas. All
are designated to the phylum Firmicutes (Firmicutes consists for the time being of 6
different classes, 9 orders and 36 families). The system to divide Clostridium and
related genera in different so called Clostridium-clusters, where each cluster is on the
hierarchical level of class, was introduced by Collins et al. (1994). Phylogenetical
classification of bacteria based on the 16S rRNA gene was at that time a new thing, and
doing so, it becomes obvious that many Clostridium spp. were misclassified. Collins et
al. (1994) divided the different Clostridium spp. and related taxa into “Clostridium-
clusters” on a hierarchical class-level and labelled the different groups Clostridium
cluster I through XVIII.
The old definition of the genus Clostridium that now has been shown to be artificial was
based on phenotypic traits, i.e. the genus Clostridium was defined as strictly anaerobic
rods that were able to form endospores. The fact that the genus Clostridium is
heterogeneous is also reflected by the wide range of guanine+cytosine mol% of 22 to
55% which is a far too wide span to represent a natural genus. The pathogenic species
Clostridium perfringens and Clostridium botulinum belong to the Clostridium-cluster I
of Collins et al. (1994), and Clostridium difficile belongs to Clostridium-cluster X1.
Generally clostridia often produce acetate and butyrate, and sometimes propionate in
colon.
Bacteroides. Bacteria classified to the phylum Bacteroidetes consists often when found
in ileum and colon of the gram-negative genus Bacteroides. The phylum Bacteroidetes
includes for the time being 3 different classes, 3 orders and 15 families. The genus
Bacteroides includes a lot of different species but some of the more, frequently
occurring ones in the digestive tract are B. vulgatus, B. uniformis, B. thetaiotaomicron,
Bacteroides ovatus, B. stercoris, B. caccae, B. putredinis, B. merdae, B. fragilis, B.
intestinalis, B. pectinophilus, B. finegoldii, B. eggerthii, B. capillosus, B. dorei and B.
xylanisolvens.
The most aggressive Bacteroides species and the one that most frequently is involved in
secondary infections of the abdominal is Bacteroides fragilis. Some B. fragilis strains
can produce toxins. Those toxinogenic strains have been suggested to be involved in the
initiation of colorectal cancer. Furthermore, it has been shown that patients suffering
from inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have a higher proportion of B. fragilis on the
intestinal mucosa than healthy individuals (Swidsinski et al. 2005).
B. fragilis is the type species of the genus Bacteroides. Closely related species to B.
fagilis are B. caccae, B. distasonis, B. eggerthii, B. merdae, B. ovatus, B. stercoris, B.
thetaiotaomicron, B. uniformis and B.vulgatus. Bacteroides often produce acetate and
butyrate in the digestive tract, and sometimes also propionate.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
93
Adverse bacteria in the microbiota
A disturbed microbiota
For some chronic diseases, the pathologic agent might be a disturbed microbiota
(dysbiosis) rather than an individual organism, and this presumably means a decreased
bacterial diversity and/or different degrees of overgrowth by more aggressive fractions
of resident bacteria, i.e., bacteria inducing an inflammatory response by the immune
system. Species that are well-known to include pathogenic or opportunistically
pathogenic strains, and that also have been found as a substantial part of the gut
microbiota of apparently healthy individuals, are E. coli and B. fragilis. Increased
proportions of E. coli and B. fragilis in the gut have been linked to inflammatory bowel
disease (IBD) (Kleessen et al. 2002; Swidsinski et al. 2005; Wang et al. 2007).
Which components of the bacterial flora that have health beneficial effects and which
components that have adverse effects, is are interesting questions. True pathogens as,
for example, Salmonella and Shigella, are of course highly damaging to the body and
the immune system of the body responds violently, and try to counteract the offenders
with a strong inflammation. However, these true pathogens are not normally part of
healthy individuals gut microbiota (true pathogens seldom are). On the other hand,
bacteria not being clearly pathogenic but phylogenetically related to pathogens can be
part of a normal resident microbiota, and these non-pathogenic relatives may share
adverse characteristics with their pathogenic counterparts. This makes them more likely
to exercise adverse effects when present in high numbers on the mucosa.
Examples of opportunistically pathogenic species that can occur as a substantial part of
the resident microbiota are E. coli, Klebsiella pneumonia (both belonging to the class
Gammaproteobacteria), Sutterella wadsworthensis (Betaproteobacteria), Bilophila
wadswothia (Deltaproteobacteria), Fusobacterium varium (Fusobacteria), Bacteroides
fragilis (Bacteroidetes), Prevotella melaninogenica (Bacteroidetes), Vellionella parvula
(Firmicutes), Streptococcus pneumonia (Firmicutes), Streptococcus anginosus
(Firmicutes) and Clostridium perferingens (Firmicutes).
An attempt to look for correlation between systemic inflammation and faecal microbiota
showed that about 10% of the total variability of the microbiota was related to the pro-
inflammatory cytokines IL-6 and IL-8 (Biagi et al. 2010). All taxa that showed a
slightly positive correlation with either IL-6 or IL-8 belonged to the phylum
Proteobacteria (Biagi et al. 2010).
IL stands for “interleukin” which is a cytokine. IL-6 initiates production of acute phase proteins and takes part in finish-off the acute inflammation. IL-6 is produced by macrophages and T-cells. IL-8 activates white blood cells to pass out from the blood vessels and is produced by macrophages and epithelial cells after stimulation of bacteria or bacterial products. “Acute phase reaction” is the response of the “acute phase proteins” in inflammation. The concentration of acute-phase proteins in plasma either increase or decrease in inflammation.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
94
Lipopolysaccharides
Gram-negative bacteria contain lipopolysaccharide (LPS) as the major constituent in the
outer leaflet of the outer cell membrane. LPS contains large, variable regions of
polysaccharides and oligosaccharides and a relatively conserved lipid region (lipid A),
which is the endotoxic and biologically active moiety. The interaction of LPS with
macrophages results in the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as TNF-alpha,
IL-6, and IL-1, and can lead to endotoxic shock, which is an often fatal outcome of
sepsis.
TNF (tumour necrosis factor) alpha is a pro-inflammatory cytokine that is produced by monocytes/macrophages and activated T-cells. IL-1 (interleukin-1) is a group of three pro-inflammatory polypeptides (IL-1-α, IL-1β and IL-1Ra) involved in immune regulation and inflammatory response.
The gram-reaction of different taxa relevant for the digestive tract is a factor of
importance as gram-negative bacteria can be expected to contain LPS (Table 4). For
example, both the facultatively aerobic E. coli and the strictly anaerobic B. fragilis
contain LPS, but the chemical structure is somewhat different between the two species.
The mammalian immune system reacts differently towards the different LPS types
(Lindberg et al. 1990). The endotoxic activity of LPS of B. fragilis is relatively low
compared with LPS from E. coli and other Enterobacteriaceae (Poxton et al. 1995), but,
nevertheless, LPS from Bacteroides is a potent stimulator of the innate immune system
(Berezowa et al. 2009). The immune response to LPS can differ also between LPS from
different species of Bacteroides (Kasper et al. 1977; Berezowa et al. 2009).
Gram-negatives that typically contaminate food, and therefore are ingested on a more or
less regular basis and sometimes in high quantities, are Gammaproteobacteria, e.g. the
families Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonadaceae. However, different diet
components can also affect the gut microbiota, e.g. a high-fat diet can increase the
proportion of gram-negatives in the gut but also increase the leakage of LPS through the
intestinal barrier out into the body (Cani et al. 2007). It is not known why gram-
negative components of the microbiota should be stimulated by a fat-rich diet, or why
the barrier function of the mucosa should decrease. However, one speculation could be
that a fat-rich diet increases the amount of bile in the gut, and bile has strong
antimicrobial effects, but some taxa have higher resistance against bile than others, e.g.,
Enterobacteriaceae and Bacteroides that are known for their comparably high bile
resistance. Furthermore, bile is a powerful detergent which might have effects on the
permeability of the intestinal mucosa and, thus, mediates an increased leakage of LPS.
It should be stressed that it is not only gram-negatives and LPS that can induce
inflammation; other cell components and metabolites can be involved, and there are also
several gram-positive pathogenic and opportunistic pathogenic bacteria that can induce
inflammation (González-Navajas et al. 2008). One example of the latter is
Enterococcus, which is frequently found as a contaminant in foods, and Enterococcus is
also frequently found in the GI-tract.
It should also be borne in mind that, in combination, different taxa of the microbiota,
can enhance each other’s adverse effects. This has been demonstrated in animal models,
e.g. in a rat models for intra-abdominal sepsis that cause a two-phase disease process
consistent with intra-abdominal sepsis in humans: It was shown that a combination of
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
95
obligate anaerobes such as B. fragilis or Fusobacterium varium and facultative aerobes
such as E. coli or Enterococcus faecalis cause early peritonitis and mortality, and
abscess development (Onderdonk 2005). In this case, E. coli was necessary for the
mortality, and a combination of E. coli and B. fragilis was needed for the abscess
development (Onderdonk et al. 1976; Onderdonk 2005).
Bacterial interaction
Immune system
There are complex relationships between the intestinal immune system and the resident
microbiota of the digestive tract. It is crucial for the epithelial cells and the mucosal
immune system to distinguish between pathogenic and non-pathogenic agents. Intestinal
epithelial cells are capable of detecting bacterial antigens and initiating and regulating
both innate and adaptive immune responses. Signals from bacteria can be transmitted to
adjacent immune cells such as macrophages, dendritic cells and lymphocytes through
molecules expressed on the epithelial cell surface, e.g. Toll-like receptors (TLRs).
TRLs are so named because of their similarity to a receptor first identified in the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster by German scientists, a protein coded by the Toll-gene (“toll” means fantastic in German). At least ten types of human TLRs are known. TLRs are expressed in most tissues in healthy adult individuals.
Interaction of TLRs and bacterial molecular patterns results in activation of an
intracellular signalling cascade, up-regulation of inflammatory genes, production of pro-
inflammatory cytokines and interferons, and recruitment of blood cells other than
lymphocytes (myeloid cells). Interaction with TLRs also stimulates expression of co-
stimulatory molecules required to induce an adaptive immune response of antigen
presenting cells.
The presence of bacteria with inflammation-inducing capabilities in the digestive tract
can cause an increased inflammatory tone. The inflammation can be local in the mucosa
but can also involve the whole body (systemic). Systemic inflammation over prolonged
time increases the risk for many diseases, e.g. heart and cardio-vascular diseases,
diabetes type 2, non alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and obesity. Inflammation in
digestive tissue over prolonged periods increases the risk for cancer.
The immune system consists of different types of white blood cells and proteins. The white blood cells are of different kind:
Monocytes are big white blood cells in the blood stream. Monocytes are produced by stem-cells in the bone marrow.
Macrophages are white blood cells within tissue. Macrophages are converted monocytes, and they perform phagocytosis.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
96
Dendritic cells are also converted monocytes. They are messengers between the innate and adaptive immune systems. Dendritic cells present antigens.
There are three major types of lymphocytes, T-cells, B cells and NK cells. T-cells are lymphocytes where the binding capacity to body-components has been evaluated by a selection process in thymus.
B cells are lymphocytes that produce antibodies, present antigens and can develop into memory cells. They are essential component of the adaptive immune system.
NK cells are cytotoxic lymphocytes. They are large granular lymphocytes, and are a major component of the innate immune system.
Neutrophil granulocytes (neutrophil or polymorphonuclear neutrophil = PMN) are the most abundant type of white blood cells and form an essential part of the innate immune system. Neutrophils are highly motile, and phagocytic. They express and release cytokines, and have a key-role in the defence against invading pathogens. Neutrophils can disarm and kill many types of microbes.
Eosinophil granulocytes (eosinophils) are white blood cells that produce granule proteins, reactive oxygen species, lipid mediators, enzymes, growth factors and cytokines. They are active against multicellular parasites and virus, and control mechanisms associated with allergy and asthma.
Basophil granulocytes (basophils) are white blood cells that are susceptible to staining by base dyes and contain large cytoplasmic granules. They appear in many inflammatory reactions, particularly in allergy. Basophils contain heparin (prevents blood from clotting) and histamine (promotes blood flow to tissues).
Mast cells (mastocytes) are immune cells resident in several types of tissue and contain many granules rich in histamine and heparin. They are intimately involved in wound healing and the defence against pathogens. Mast cells play a role in allergy and anaphylaxis (hypersensitivity).
The intestinal mucous membrane (mucosa)
Barrier. The mucosa of the digestive tract functions as the local defence barrier that
prevents the invasion and systemic spread of bacteria and other unwanted compounds,
such as LPS. The mucosa consists of a single layer of epithelial cells, and confers
selective permeability through either a route straight through the epithelial cells
(transcellular) or between them (paracellular). The transfer of small molecules, for
example short-chain fatty acids, amino acids, electrolytes and sugars are transporter-
mediated through cells while medium-sized hydrophilic compounds are transferred
paracellularly. Protein-sized molecules are normally prohibited from paracellular
transport (Groschwitz and Hogan 2009; Keita and Söderholm 2010). The paracellular
barrier function is brought about by complex structures of proteins supervising and
selectively blocking the entry to the narrow gap between the epithelial cells. These gap-
structures are called the “tight junctions” or in other words, the tight junction is the
closely associated area between two cells whose membranes join together. The tight
junctions are responsible for the paracellular, barrier function (Shen et al. 2009). The
tight junctions also take part in the transfer of external stimuli to the epithelial cells,
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
97
governing the proliferation and differentiation of the epithelial cells (González-Mariscal
et al. 2008). Examples of tight junction proteins are occludin and claudin with an intra-
cellular connection to the zonulin.
The epithelial tissue in the mucosa of the digestive tract produces mucin that clings
tightly to the epithelial surface, but mucin also is released into the lumen. The mucin
layer of the mucosa protects the epithelial cells against aggressive bacteria and
unfavourable substances. Depending on sort of bacterium, bacterial interaction can
stimulate the mucin production of the mucosa, e.g. some Lactobacillus can stimulate
mucin production when they adhere to epithelial cells of the mucosa. The mucin
production of the mucosa is also increased when the mucosa is attacked and become
inflamed.
There are bacterial groups in the microbiota of the digestive tract with ability to brake-
down and digest mucin, e.g. Akkermansia muciniphila and Ruminococcus torques.
Mucins are high molecular weight, heavily glycosylated proteins that most bacteria are
unable to brake-down. A key characteristic of mucins is their ability to form gels and
bind to pathogens, and thus the mucins become a part of the defence system of the
body. The genus Akkermansia which belongs to the phylum Verrucomicrobia can be
found in varying numbers in most adult individuals. Akkermansia seems to be a marker
for an intestinal system in ecological balance, i.e. low number is an indication of a
disturbed ecology. It is unclear if Akkermansia has any health beneficial effects on its
own account. On the other hand, no taxa of the phylum Verrucomicrobia are known to
be pathogenic.
Leakage. Under certain conditions, intestinal barrier function can be impaired or
overwhelmed, allowing bacteria and LPS within the digestive tract to reach systemic
organs and tissues, a process termed bacterial translocation, i.e. translocation is the
passage of viable bacteria through the epithelial mucosa into lamina propria and then to
the mesenteric lymph nodes and possibly other tissue (Berg and Garlington, 1979). Also
parts from microorganisms or products of microorganisms are sometimes included in
the expression “translocation”, for example bacterial components as LPS. The status of
the mucosa is critical for several categories of patients, for example, those (i) at risk for
multiple organic failure; (ii) undergoing chemo or radiotherapy; (iii) with HIV; (iv)
undergoing abdominal surgery; (v) undergoing transplantation.
Bacterial translocation is the passage of viable bacteria through the epithelial mucosa into the lamina propria and then to the mesenteric lymph nodes and possibly other tissues
Furthermore, there are a variety of human diseases in which it has been suggested that
abnormal permeability of the mucosa is important. These diseases include autoimmune
diseases, e.g. type 1 diabetes, celiac disease, multiple sclerosis, rheumatological
diseases and Crohn’s disease. But also in atopic dermatitis and irritable bowel syndrome
(IBS) it seems as the permeability of the intestinal mucosa is increased.
In contrast, bacterial translocation is not necessarily occurring only in connection with
trauma and disease, there is evidence that portal vein endotoxaemia of gut origin in
minute amounts is a normal physiological phenomenon (Jacob et al. 1977; Nolan 1981).
During normal conditions, this low-grade endotoxaemia of gut origin is rapidly cleared
by the cells of the reticuloendothelial system of the liver (Mathison and Ulevitch 1979;
Ruiter et al. 1981). Through the portal blood flow draining the digestive tract, intestinal
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
98
bacteria and bacterial products, such as LPS, reach the liver and the parenchymal cells
(hepatocytes) and the non-parenchymal cells (encompassing endothelial cells, Kupffer
cells, hepatic stellate cells and Pit cells; Pit cells are liver-specific natural killer cells),
help to sustain normal physiology and homeostasis, and participate in systemic, as well
as in local inflammation and immune response (Ishibashi et al. 2009).
High amounts of LPS-synthesizing bacteria (gram-negative bacteria) in the gut can
cause low-grade systemic inflammation by a continuous leakage (translocation) of LPS
to the liver (Figure 24). A high proportion of E. coli in the human gut microbiota is not
unusual in persons living in urban societies, and high loads of E. coli is most likely
something that ought to be avoided from a health perspective.
Figure 24. Translocated bacteria and bacterial components (e.g. lipopolysaccharides) will by the portal blood come to the liver that will respond with inflammation in order to eliminate them.
It has been shown in human adults that there is a link between metabolic diseases and
bacterial populations in the gut (Larsen et al. 2010). In a study including 36 male adults
with a broad range of age and body-mass indices (BMIs), among which 18 subjects
were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes, the proportions of the class Clostridia were
significantly less in the diabetic group compared to the control group, while the class
Beta-proteobacteria was highly enriched in diabetic subjects compared to the non-
diabetic ones (Larsen et al. 2010). Similar results were found in a study involving 345
Chinese individuals, i.e. patients with type two diabetes had a certain degree of
unbalanced microbiota (dysbiosis) compared to healthy individuals (Qin et al. 2012).
The abundance of clostridial taxa, including genera as Faecalibacterium and Roseburia
was decreased in the diabetes patients, and the abundance of opportunistic pathogens as
Bacteroides caccae, Eggerthella lenta and E. coli was increased (Qin et al. 2012).
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
99
Generally, more and more evidence are gathered pointing in the direction that the many
members of the different classes of Proteobacteria are negative for the health and
making up harmful parts of the resident microbiota of the human digestive tract. Hence,
it is an obvious opportunity to use probiotics and other dietary regimes for counteracting
Proteobacteria in the digestive tract and get beneficial, long-term health effects as a
result.
Variety and diversity
Mammalians
Inheritance and diet are in the long run the two most important factors for influencing
the composition the gut microbiota of an individual. When the bacterial composition of
106 faecal samples, from 60 different mammalians (including humans) was compared,
it was concluded that both the diet and phylogeny influenced the bacterial diversity (Ley
et al. 2008). The bacterial diversity was highest in herbivorous animals (plant eating
animals) and lowest in carnivorous animals (meat eating animals). The bacterial
diversity of omnivorous animals (eating all kind of foods) was in between that of the
strictly plant-eating and the meat-eating ones. It was also obvious from this study that
the microbiota between different kinds of animals was surprisingly similar when
compared at the hierarchical level of phylum (division). The major variations are seen at
lower hierarchical levels, where variations between individuals, even individuals from
the same geographical area, eating the same type of diet, sometimes can be larger than
that between different mammalian species.
No statistically significant overall difference in diversity could be seen between Korean
and American adults, even if significant differences in the composition of the bacterial
flora could be seen (Lee et al. 2011). However, there were no differences between
African Americans and European Americans suggesting the importance of the diet for
the composition of the microbiota. Interestingly, within each country (South Korea and
USA, respectively) the differences in composition of the microbiota were significantly
greater for individuals in different families than those within the same family (Lee et al.
2011).
Mother and child axis
The first bacteria. Adult humans carry about 1 kg bacterial biomass in the digestive
tract. In fact, the bacterial density of the human large bowel is as high as it can be in
nature, and from a bacterial perspective, humans and other mammalians can be
considered as mobile, high-efficiency fermenters, producing bacteria at a high rate, and
spreading them around. The “baby-fermenter” is inoculated with its first bacteria at
birth, and due to the fact that the gut-microbiota participates in shaping and tuning of
the immune system of the individual, the pioneer microbiota of an infant can be of
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
100
special importance as it can be of consequence for the future health of the individual.
The foetus has during the pregnancy only indirectly come in contact with bacteria
through the blood-bound immune system of the mother. But during birth the new-borne
infant becomes directly exposed to the mother’s microbiota, and this contact usually
continues during the upbringing of the child. Thus, normally a child inherits the
microbiota of its mother.
At birth, the baby become contaminated with bacteria originating mainly from the
mother’s (i) vagina, (ii) rectum and (iii) skin, and as soon as the mother starting to
cuddle the baby, (iv) also from the mouth, and if breast fed (v) from the nipples and
milk-canals of the mothers breasts. It seems as the factor overruling all other factors in
determining the composition of the microbiota is the link to the mother (Turnbaugh et
al. 2009). However it is not clear if it is the genetic inheritance from the mother or if it
is the actual direct transfer of the microbiota from the mother that is most important for
this establishment of the microbiota of an individual. The bacterial exchange with the
mother can also continue as a gradual long-term effect when the child lives in close
contact with the mother, also after weaning, and chairing diet with the mother. The
bacterial diversity of the child’s gut microbiota is generally increasing with age up to
adulthood (Yatsunenko et al. 2012).
Anyway, the first live bacteria the child will meet at a normal birth will be the vaginal
bacteria of the mother. In view of the fact that a healthy vagina normally are nearly
totally dominated by lactobacilli or bifidobacteria and that breast milk contains
components with prebiotic effects, i.e. breast milk stimulates the growth of lactobacilli
and bifidobacteria in the gut, it seems reasonable to assume that lactobacilli and
bifidobacteria somehow are meant to be present in high numbers in breast-fed children
and to be amongst the first ones to come in direct contact with the immune system of
the baby. The lactobacilli that most frequently dominating the vagina of fertile women
are homofermentative species of Lactobacillus, such as Lactobacillus gasseri,
Lactobacillus crispatus, Lactobacillus iners, Lactobacillus johnsonii and Lactobacillus
jensenii (Vásquez et al. 2002; Ravel et al. 2011). Some women are dominated by
Bifidobacterium or a combination of lactobacilli and bifidobacteria. The pH of the
vagina normally is in the range 4-5 and the bacterial population has a density of about
108 cells per ml of vaginal secretion (Ravel et al. 2011). Usually one or two strains of
Lactobacillus are dominating in the individual woman.
The lactobacilli-flora in vagina differs often somewhat from that of the digestive tract.
All the above mentioned Lactobacillus spp. typical for the vagina can also occur in the
digestive tract, but more frequently occurring in the digestive tract are Lactobacillus
rhamnosus, Lactobacillus plantarum, Lactobacillus paracasei, Lactobacillus reuteri,
Lactobacillus fermentum, Lactobacillus salivarius, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Weissella
confusa and Leuconostoc mesenteroides. Not surprisingly, lactobacilli in levels of at
least 108
16S rRNA gene copies per gram faeces can be found one to two days after
birth in all naturally born infants (neonates; Karlsson et al. 2011). However,
bifidobacteria were after the same time only occurring in around 20% of the children.
The microbiota was mostly dominated by a one to three genera, and even if lactobacilli
were present in reasonably high numbers in all neonates, the faecal flora could be
dominated by another genera (higher copy numbers), e.g. by Escherichia (30% of the
neonates) and Bacteroides (14% of the neonates; Karlsson et al. 2011). Measurements
from the mucosa of the small intestine instead of faeces had probably given samples
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
101
with higher abundance of Lactobacillus as lactobacilli generally are more dominating
on the mucosa and also higher up in the digestive tract.
The occurrence of different bacteria in the faecal microbiota of children, not only in
Sweden but also in Italy and England, and this time one week after birth, showed that
bifidobacteria now could be found in more children (65%), but the occurrence of
lactobacilli was lower (12%) (Adlerberth et al. 2007). Staphylococci were found in all
children, and also the potentially pathogenic one, Staphylococcus aureus could be found
(in 17% of the children), and E. coli was frequently isolated (42%). Hence, an obvious
question to ask is: why so few lactobacilli and bifidobacteria and why so many adverse
bacteria in European children? One answer may be that many mothers either have a
corrupted microbiota in the vagina or in the digestive tract, or both.
Bacterial vaginosis. It is widely recognised that the vaginal bacterial flora can be
disturbed, leading to the syndrome of bacterial vaginosis. Actually, bacterial vaginosis
is defined as loss of lactobacilli-dominance in the vagina and a foul smell. Bacterial
vaginosis increases the risk for (i) urinary tract infection, (ii) miss-carriage, and (iii)
preterm delivery. Bacterial vaginosis can also increase the risk for fungal infections.
Examples of bacteria dominating in vagina at bacterial vaginosis are Prevotella,
Atopobium, Eggerthella, Gardnerella, Megasphaera, Leptotrichia and Sneathia (Thies
et al. 2007; Ferris et al. 2007; Fredricks et al. 2007; Ravel et al. 2011). These bacteria
often originate from colon and some of them are included in the class “Clostridium
cluster XI” and the phyla Fusobacteria and Bacteroidetes, but also members of
Enterobacteriaceae can be involved. At least Enterobacteriaceae and Prevotella can be
characterised as pro-inflammatory.
In the United States of America the prevalence of bacterial vaginosis 2001-2004
(National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey Data) was 29% of U.S. fertile
women (14 – 49 years of age) (Allsworth and Peipert 2007). Interestingly, bacterial
vaginosis has been associated with a high-fat diet (Neggers et al. 2007), and it was
concluded that “increased dietary fat intake is associated with increased risk of bacterial
vaginosis” (Neggers et al. 2007).
Probiotics for the treatment of bacterial vaginosis has proven to be effective for certain
probiotic strains (Falagas et al. 2007). There are clinical trials that show that oral
administration of L. acidophilus or L. rhamnosus GR-1 and L. fermentum RC-14 for
two months resulted in the cure of bacterial vaginosis. However, there are also reported
trials that didn’t found any significant differences in the cure rate (Falagas et al. 2007).
Starting with E. coli. If a mother has a disturbed microbiota in the digestive tract
and/or in the vagina, this corrupted microbiota can be inherit by the baby. One example:
the development of the faecal microbiota in a naturally born, Swedish baby was one
week after birth totally colonised with E. coli, i.e. this baby started life with a relatively
aggressive microbiota (Figure 25). Presumably, the mother of the child harboured a
somewhat twisted microbiota at the time of birth.
It is obvious that a young child have a much less diverse microbiota than an adult
individual, but already after weaning the microbiota becomes more complex and after
one year it starts to resemble the adult microbiota (Figure 25). However, the particular
baby of Figure 25 had a tough introduction to bacteria as it started with a more or less
pure E. coli microbiota, and then after two months the E. coli was supplemented with
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
102
Bacteroides fragilis. Both E. coli and B. fragilis possess LPS and must be regarded as
pro-inflammatory bacteria. Further, these two species include true pathogenic strains.
Thus, there is an obvious risk that this child gets an elevated tone of inflammation
which might have negative health-consequences later in life.
Figure 25. Dominating bacterial flora in faeces of a breast fed infant, one week of age, two months of age and still breast fed, and one year of age (not breast fed any longer). The bacterial flora was identified by direct analysis of 16S rRNA genes by PCR-amplification, cloning and sequencing. Data have been taken from Wang et al. (2004).
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
103
A high amount of E. coli in newborns can originate from the mother. It has been shown
in rats that a high amount of E. coli in the gut of the rat dam (rat mother) can increase
the systemic inflammatory tone in her off-springs (Fåk et al. 2007). Pregnant rat dams
were administered either broad-spectrum antibiotics, three days prior to parturition, or
E. coli in the drinking water one week before parturition and during 14 d of lactation.
Both procedures resulted in an increased level of E. coli in faeces. It was shown in both
groups of rat dams with increased proportion of E. coli gave birth to pups with elevated
systemic inflammation, i.e. they had increased haptoglobin levels in the blood (Fåk, et
al. 2007).
In contrast, if pregnant and lactating rat dams were administered L. plantarum 299v in
the drinking water until their pups had reached 14 d of age, no increase in haptoglobin
occurred. Instead, the gut-growth was stimulated and the barrier function of the gut was
improved (Fåk et al. 2008).
Haptoglobin (Hp) is an acute phase protein that binds free haemoglobin (released from erythrocytes), and thereby inhibits oxidative stress. The Hp-haemoglobin complex is removed by the reticuloendothelial system (RES), mostly in spleen.
RES (reticuloendothelial system) is part of the immune system, i.e. phagocytic cells, primarily monocytes and macrophages, accumulated in lymph nodes and spleen. Also the Kupffer cells are included in RES.
C-reactive protein (CRP) is an acute phase protein. CRP binds to certain bacteria and to the surface of dead or dying cells in order to activate macrophages and the complement system.
The complement system is a biochemical cascade that helps antibodies to clear pathogens from the organism. It is part of the innate immune system that is not adaptable and does not change over the course of an individual's lifetime.
Atopic eczema and bacterial diversity
In a study of the faecal microbiota of 35 infants from Göteborg (Sweden), London
(England) and Rome (Italy), the microbiota was followed from the first week after birth
to one year of age (Wang et al. 2008). The microbiota of one of these children is
depicted in Figure 25. Naturally, the composition varied within wide limits between
different children, but in the particular child showed in Figure 25, E. coli was
dominating in the start of life (one week of age) and then the microbiota gradually
developed towards a higher diversity, and a composition relatively typical also for adult
individuals (after 1 year). Unfortunately, this specific child developed atopic eczema
(diagnosis at 18 month of age). Atopic eczema is an inflammation of the skin that
usually starts in early childhood (most children grow out of it). “Atopic” describes
individuals with allergic tendencies, and individuals getting atopic eczema have an
increased risk of developing other atopic conditions such as asthma and hay fever later
in life.
The negative effect of E. coli for the risk of getting atopic eczema has been
demonstrated in an epidemiological study where more than 900 infants were followed
from one month to two years of age. It was demonstrated that the presence of E. coli at
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
104
one month of age was associated with a higher risk of developing eczema at the age of
two years, and this risk was increased with increasing numbers of E. coli (Penders et al.
2007). Also, colonisation with Clostridium difficile was associated with a higher risk of
developing eczema (Penders et al. 2007).
High presence of E. coli and C. difficile indicates an unbalanced (biased) gut-microbiota
(dysbiosis), and it seems as early overgrowth with E. coli can be a contributing factor to
the atopic eczema. Overgrowth and an unbalanced microbiota mean that fewer
organisms dominate the flora, i.e. the bacterial diversity has decreased to a lower value.
It was shown in the 35 children from Göteborg, London and Rome (see above) that
infants with low bacterial diversity at one week of age got atopic eczema in a higher
frequency after 18 months than infants with high bacterial diversity at one week of age
(Wang et al. 2008). The diversity was in this case measured with a method called
Terminal Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphis (T-RFLP). T-RFLP is
schematically shown in Figure 26. This method that is directed towards the 16S rRNA
genes in a bacterial community is well suited for measuring bacterial diversity in
samples of complex bacterial communities.
A low bacterial diversity in the digestive tract is a negative factor by itself,
irrespectively of what groups of bacteria that are dominating the flora (Wang et al.
2008). Interestingly, it has been shown that the bacterial diversity in faeces of children
from a rural African village in Burkina Faso was higher than in faeces from European,
urbanized, children (De Filippoa et al. 2010). The diet and living conditions in the rural
African village are presumably more similar to that of ancient human settlements than
that of the current European community. Furthermore, the European children had a
higher proportion of Enterobacteriaceae in the gut than the African ones. Similar results
were seen in both children and healthy adults from rural Malawi (Afica) when they were
compared with subjects from metropolitan United States of America, i.e. the diversity
was lower for the American subjects (Yatsunenko et al. 2012).
It has been shown that administration of the probiotic strain L. paracasei F19 can
reduce eczema in weaning infants (West 2008). One-hundred-seventy-nine infants, four
month of age, were randomized to a daily intake of L. paracasei F19 (dose 108 CFU per
day) for 9 months. The probiotic treatment reduced the risk for eczema with 50% and
enhanced the Th1/Th2 ratio. It was concluded that “the reduction of eczema might be
explained by probiotic effects on both T cell-mediated immune responses and
reinforced gut microbial function” (West 2008).
T- helper cells (Th-cells) are a sub-group of lymphocytes that are involved in establishing and maximizing the capabilities of the immune system. They have no cytotoxic or phagocytic activity. Proliferating Th-cells differentiate into two major subtypes, Th1 and Th2. The different subtypes produce different cytokines, and affect different lymphocytes.
When it comes to probiotics and diversity, an obvious question is: Eating a single
probiotic strain, doesn’t that lower the bacterial diversity in the gut? And perhaps
somewhat unexpected the answer is no, not necessarily. It has been shown in adults,
eating the single strain L. plantarum 299v that the bacterial diversity on the rectal
mucosa actually was increased by the probiotic administration (Karlsson et al. 2010).
Thus, consumption of probiotics can be a strategy to favour a more diverse intestinal
microbiota. On the other hand, this is presumably not true for all types of probiotics. An
explanation to the increased diversity may be that L. plantarum 299v improved the
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
105
environment of the digestive tract in such a way that it opens up for the coexistence of
bacterial groups that had been suppressed by a suboptimal environment.
Figure 26. Principle of the PCR-based method Terminal Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphis (T-RFLP). The target gene for the analysis is the 16S rRNA gene. The method that normally reflects the dominating bacterial taxa at the hierarchical family-level is suitable for evaluation of bacterial diversity.
Old age
Age as such seems only to have an influence on the composition of the human
microbiota in very young or in very old individuals, i.e. no conclusive differences in the
gut microbiota could be seen in humans between 25 years and 78 years of age (Biagi et
al. 2010). However, humans between 99 and 104 years old were shown to have lower
diversity and an increased proportion of Proteobacteria compared to subjects between
25 and 78 years (Biagi et al. 2010). This shift in microbiota in these extremely old
individuals is probably due to a failing health-status. The gut microbiota in older people
correlates with health status, and the diversity is lower in hospitalized individuals than
in community dwellers (Claesson et al. 2012).
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
106
On the other hand, the ageing process is known to adversely affect the immune system
(Goodwin 1995; Kalache 1999), so perhaps an active intervention with probiotics can
be fruitful. For example, thirty healthy elderly volunteers were given a dietary
supplement of a probiotic drink containing Bifidobacterium lactis for three weeks.
Several markers for the function of the immune system were improved by the treatment.
Thus, the proportion of mononuclear leukocytes staining positively for CD3+ (T
lymphocytes), CD4+ (MHC II–restricted T cells), CD25+, and CD56+ (NK cells) as
well as the phagocytic capacity of mononuclear and polymorphonuclear phagocytes and
the tumoricidal activity of NK cells increased significantly in blood after the probiotic
administration. The greatest relative increase in immune function occurred in
individuals with poor immune response before the intervention (Gill et al. 2001).
Dietary factors affecting the gut
microbiota
One purpose of eating probiotics is to affect the bacterial flora of the digestive tract in a
beneficial direction, i.e. to increase the proportion of beneficial bacteria and decrease
the amount of adverse bacteria. For the time being, lactobacilli, bifidobacteria,
Faecalibacterium and maybe Ruminococcus are seen as beneficial components of the
gut-microbiota while opportunistic pathogens and pro-inflammatory bacteria are
regarded as adverse. Additionally, a high bacterial diversity in the gut is beneficial for
the health while a low diversity is linked to physiopathological effects.
It is clear that diet can affect both the composition of the gut microbiota (Claesson et al.
2012) and the diversity (Wu et al. 2011). The abundance of singular taxa can be
detected within 24 hours after initiating a new diet, but more thorough changes of the
microbiota needs a long-term dietary regime (Wu et al. 2011; Claesson et. al 2012).
A well-known negative factor is antibiotics that decrease diversity and promote
overgrowth of adverse bacteria. A dietary factor with negative effects is fat that in high-
fat diets decrease diversity and promote pro-inflammatory bacteria.
Dietary factors with beneficial effects on the bacterial flora are, besides probiotics and
lactic acid fermented foods with high numbers of live lactobacilli, dietary fibres in
general, but especially those with more substantial prebiotic effects as, for example,
inulin and fructo-oligosaccharides. There are also dietary sources of polyphenols that
possess prebiotic effects, e.g. in green tea and in red wine.
The knowledge of what singular dietary compounds that actually can affect the bacterial
flora of the digestive tract in positive or in negative directions is still highly limited. It is
however clear that a varied diet with a high content of fibres and a low content of fat
over time increase the diversity of the microbiota of the digestive tract (Claesson et al.
2012). The negative effects of an adverse microbiota (low diversity and an increased
proportion of proinflammatory taxa) are less obviously seen in younger and middle
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
107
aged adults, but become more clearly demonstrated in older individuals (Claesson et al.
2012).
To consider
It is important for a relevant discussion around the role of the microbiota in the human
body to be aware of the different bacterial taxa that are involved, and a prerequisite for
being able to take part in such a discussion is to know these taxa by their scientific
names. Making the microbiota more apprehensible, it is fruitful to have knowledge
about the evolutionary relationships between the different taxa because phylogenetic
relationships reflect much of the characteristics different taxa may share (or not share)
with each other. Phyla as Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, Proteobacteria, Actinobacteria and
Verrucomicrobia are seen frequently whenever the human gut microbiota is mapped
and especially Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes are often making up major parts of the
colonic microbiota. Firmicutes represents many different genera as for example,
Streptococcus, Clostridium, Ruminococcus, Eubacterium, Faecalibacterium and
Veillonella. Streptococcus is more prominent in the mouth and the upper part of the
small intestine (jejunum) and the others more prominent in the lower part of the small
intestine (ileum) and in colon. Bacteroidetes is mostly represented by Prevotella and
Porphyromonas in the mouth and by Bacteroides in the colon.
E. coli belongs to the family Enterobacteriaceae which is a family included in the class
of Gamma-proteobacteria in the phylum Proteobacteria. The load of E. coli differs
widely between individuals, and it can also change with time. Overgrowth of E. coli is a
negative factor for the health status and can lead to increased permeability of the
mucous membrane and to low-grade systemic inflammation.
Bifidobacterium belong to the phylum Actinobacteria and can reach high colonic loads,
especially in young individuals. Bifidobacterium is a positive factor for the health
status. Gens from Verrucomicobia are often seen both in human samples and in samples
from the environment, but relatively few of these genes can be identified to known
species. The reason is that the bacteria these genes belong to often are difficult to grow
in pure cultures in the Laboratory. An exception is Akkermansia which is known for its
ability to digest mucin. Akkermansia is found in the intestine of both humans and other
mammalians and seems to be a marker for an intestinal ecology in balance. No known
pathogens belong to the phylum Verrucomicrobia.
It is recommended that the Table 4 is studied in some detail.
The effects of the microbiota on human homeostasis (homeostasis is the ability or inclination of an organism to maintain internal equilibrium by adjusting its physiological
process) became most clear in neonates (babies) where the bacterial flora consists of just
a few taxa and the immune system of the very young individual is having its first direct
experiences of bacteria. In other words, the pioneer gut microbiota can affect the health-
status of the growing individual but may also have consequences for the health status
later in life. Obviously, there is a close relationship between a mother and her baby and
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
108
it is the mother that primarily contaminates the new borne baby with her own
microbiota. Hence, a mother with a disturbed intestinal microbiota and/or vaginosis can
transfer a pioneer microbiota with negative consequences for the baby.
Low-bacterial diversity, an overgrowth of E. coli, and/or a high proportion of
Bacteroides fragilis can have negative consequences for health status of the human host,
while high diversity and high proportions of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium are
beneficial factors. Both E. coli and B. fragilis are gram-negative bacteria with
lipopolysaccharides (LPS) associated to the cell wall. LPS and especially LPS from E.
coli and related taxa in the family Enterobacteriaceae have strong pro-inflammatory
capacity.
References
Adlerberth, I., Strachan, D.P., Matricardi, P.M., Ahrné, S., Orfei, L., Åberg, N., Perkin,
M.R., Tripodi, S., Hesselmar, B., Saalman, R., Coates, A.R., Bonanno, C.L., Panetta, V.
and Wold, A.E. (2007). Gut microbiota and development of atopic eczema in 3
European birth cohorts. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 120: 343-350.
Allsworth, J.E. and Peipert, J.F. (2007). Prevalence of bacterial vaginosis 2001–2004
National health and Nutrition examination survey data. Obstetrics & Gynecology 109:
114-120.
Berezowa, A.B., Ernst R.K., Coats, S.R., Brahamc, P.H., Karimi-Naser, L.M. and
Darveau, R.P. (2009). The structurally similar, penta-acylated lipopolysaccharides of
Porphyromonas gingivalis and Bacteroides elicit strikingly different innate immune
responses. Microb. Pathog. 47: 68–77.
Berg, R.D. and Garlinton, A.W. (1979). Translocation of certain indigenous bacteria
from the gastrointestinal tract to the mesenteric lymph nodes and other organs in a
gnotobiotic mouse model. Infect. Immun. 23: 403–411.
Biagi, B., Nylund, L., Candela, M., Ostan, R., Bucci, L., Pini, E., Nikkila, J., Monti, D.,
Satokari, R., Franceschi, C. et al. (2010). Through ageing, and beyond: Gut microbiota
and inflammatory status in seniors and centenarians. PLoS One 5: e10667.
Bik, E.M., Eckburg, P.B., Gill, S.R., Nelson, K.E., Purdom, E.A., Francois, F., Perez-
Perez, G., Blaser, M.J. and Relman, D.A. (2006). Molecular analysis of the bacterial
microbiota in the human stomach. PNAS (Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA) 103: 732–737.
Cani, P.D., Amar, J., Iglesias, M.A., Poggi, M., Knauf, C., Bastelica, D., Neyrinck,
A.M., Fava, F., Tuohy, K.M., Chabo, C. et al. (2007). Metabolic endotoxemia initiates
obesity and insulin resistance. Diabetes 56: 1761–1772.
Cheng, K.J.and Costerton, J.W. (1977). Ultrastructure of Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens: A
gram-positive bacterium? J. Bacteriol. 129: 1506–1512.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
109
Claesson, M.J., Jeffery, I.B., Conde, S. et al. (2012). Gut microbiota composition
correlates with diet and health in the elderly. Nature 488: 178-184.
Collins, M.D., Lawson, P.A., Willems, A., Cordoba, J.J., Fernandez-Garayzabal, J.,
Garcia, P., Cai, J., Hippe, H., and Farrow, J.A. (1994). The phylogeny of the genus
Clostridium: Proposal of five new genera and eleven new species combinations. Int. J.
Syst. Bacteriol. 44: 812–826.
Costello, E.K., Lauber, C.L., Hamady, C., Fierer, N., Gordon, J.I. and Knight, R.
(2009). Bacterial community variation in human body habitats across space and time.
Science 326: 1694–1697.
De Filippoa, C., Cavalieria, D., Di Paolab, M., Ramazzottic, M., Poulletd, J.P.,
Massartd, S., Collinib, S., Pieraccinie, G. and Lionettib, P. (2010). Impact of diet in
shaping gut microbiota revealed by a comparative study in children from Europe and
rural Africa. PNAS 107: 14691–14696.
Eisen, J.A. (2007). Environmental shotgun sequencing: Its potential and challenges for
studying the hidden world of microbes. PLoS Biol. 5: e82.
Fåk F, Ahrné S, Molin G, Jeppsson B, Weström B. (2007) Microbial manipulation of
the rat dam results in changed colonization and altered properties of the gut in her
offsprings. American Journal of Physiology – Gastrointestinal and Liver Physiology
294: 148-154.
Fåk F, Ahrné S, Molin G, Jeppsson B, Weström B. (2008) Maternal consumption of
Lactobacillus plantarum 299v affects gastrointestinal growth and function in the
suckling rat. British Journal of Nutrition 100: 332-338.
Falagas, M. E., Betsi1, G. I. and Athanasiou, S. (2007). Probiotics for the treatment of
women with bacterial vaginosis. Clinical Microbiology and Infection 13: 657-664.
Ferris, M.J., Norori, J., Zozaya-Hinchliffe, M. and Martin, D.H. (2007). Cultivation-
independent analysis of changes in bacterial vaginosis flora following metronidazole
treatment. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 45: 1016-1018.
Fredricks, D.N., Fiedler, T.L., Thomas, K.K., Oakley, B.B. and Marrazzo, J.M. (2007).
Targeted PCR for detection of vaginal bacteria associated with bacterial vaginosis.
Journal of Clinical Microbiology 45: 3270-3276.
Goodwin, J.S. Decreased immunity and increased morbidity in the elderly. (1995). Nutr.
Rev. 53: S41–S44.
González-Mariscal, L., Tapia, R. and Chamorro, D. (2008). Crosstalk of tight junction
components with signalling pathways. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1778: 729–756.
González-Navajas, J.M., Bellot, P., Francés, R., Zapater, P., Munoz, C., García-Pagán,
J.C., Pascual, S., Pérez-Mateo, M., Bosch, J. and Such, J. (2008). Presence of bacterial-
DNA in cirrhosis identifies a subgroup of patients with marked inflammatory response
not related to endotoxin. Journal of Hepatology, 48: 61–67.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
110
Groschwitz, K.R. and Hogan, S.P. (2009). Intestinal barrier function: Molecular
regulation and disease pathogenesis. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 124: 3–20.
Handelsman, J., Rondon, M.R., Brady, S.F., Clardy, J. and Goodman, R.M. (1998).
Molecular biological access to the chemistry of unknown soil microbes: a new frontier
for natural products. Chem. Biol. 5: 245–249.
Håkansson, Å. and Molin, G. (2011). Gut microbiota and inflammation. Nutrients 3:
637-682; doi:10.3390/nu3060637
Hayashi, H., Takahashi, R., Nishi, T., Sakamoto, M. and Benno, Y. (2005). Molecular
analysis of jejunal, ileal, caecal and rectosigmoidal human colonic microbiota using 16S
rRNA gene libraries and terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism. J. Med.
Microbiol. 54: 1093–1101.
Huyghe, A., Francois, P., Charbonnier, Y., Tangomo-Bento, M., Bonetti, E.J., Paster,
B.J., Bolivar, I., Baratti-Mayer, D., Pittet, D. and Schrenzel, J. (2008). Novel
microarray design strategy to study complex bacterial communities. Appl. Environ.
Microbiol. 74: 1876–1885.
Ishibashi, H., Nakamura, M., Komori, A., Migita, K. and Shimoda, S. (2009). Liver
architecture, cell function, and disease. Semin. Immunopathol. 31: 399–409.
Jacob, A.I., Goldberg, P.H., Bloom, D., Degenshein, G.A. and Korin, P.J. (1977).
Endotoxin and bacteria in portal blood. Gastroenterology 72: 1268–1270.
Karlsson C, Ahrné S, Molin G, Berggren A, Palmquist I, Nordin Fredrikson G, and
Jeppsson B. (2010). Probiotic therapy to men with incipient arteriosclerosis initiates
increased bacterial diversity in colon: A randomized controlled trial. Atherosclerosis
208: 228–233.
Karlsson, C.L.J, Molin, G., Cilio, C.M. and Ahrné, S. (2011). The pioneer gut
microbiota in human neonates vaginally born at term - a pilot study. Pediatric Research
70: 282-286.
Kasper, D.L., Hayes, M.E., Reinap, B.G., Craft, F.O., Onderdonk, A.B. and Polk, B.F.
(1977). Isolation and identification of encapsulated strains of Bacteroides fragilis. J.
Infect. Dis. 136: 75–81.
Keita, Å.V. and Söderholm, J. (2010). The intestinal barrier and its regulation by
neuroimmune factors. Neurogastroenterol. Motil. 22: 718–733.
Kleessen, B., Kroesen, A.J., Buhr, H.J. and Blaut, M. (2002). Mucosal and invading
bacteria in patients with inflammatory bowel disease compared with controls. Scand. J.
Gastroenterol. 37: 1034–1041.
Koren, O., Goodrich, J.K., Cullender, T.C., Spor, A., Laitinen, K., Kling Bäckhed, H.,
Gonzalez, A., Werer, J.J., Angenent, L.T., Knight, R., Bäckhed, F., Isolauri, E.,
Salminen, S. and Ley, R.E. (2012). Host remodelling of the gut microbiome and
metabolic changes during pregnancy. Cell 150: 470-480.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
111
Larsen, N., Vogensen, F.K. van den Berg, F.W.J. Nielsen, D.S., Andreasen, A.S.,
Pedersen, B.K., Al-Soud, W.A., Sørensen, S.J., Hansen, L.H. and Jakobsen, M. (2010).
Gut microbiota in human adults with type 2 diabetes differs from non-diabetic adults.
Plos One 5 (2): e9085.
Lazarevic, V., Whiteson, K., Huse, S., Hernandez, D., Farinelli, L., Østerås, M.,
Schrenzel, J. and François, P. (2009). Metagenomic study of the oral microbiota by
Illumina high-throughput sequencing. J. Microbiol. Methods 79: 266–271.
Lee, S., Sung, J., Lee, JE. and Ko, GP. (2011). Comparison of gut microbiotas of
healthy adult twins living in South Korea and the United states. Applied and
Environmental Microbiology 77: 7433-7437.
Ley, R.E., Hamady, M., Lozupone, C., Turnbaugh, P.J., Ramey, R.R., Bircher, J.S.,
Schlegel, M.L., Tucker, T.A., Schrenzel, M.D., Knight, R. and Gordon, J.I. (2008).
Evolution of mammals and their gut microbes. Science 320: 1647-1651.
Li, X.X., Wong, G.L.H., To, K.F., Wong, V.W.S., Lai, L.H., Chow, D.K.L., Lau,
J.U.W., Sung, J.J.Y. and Ding, C. (2009). Bacterial microbiota profiling in gastritis
without Helicobacter pylori infection or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use.
PLoS One 4: e7985.
Lindberg, A.A., Weintraub, A., Zahringer, U. and Rietschel, E.T. (1990). Structure-
activity relationships in lipopolysaccharides of Bacteroides fragilis. Rev. Infect. Dis. 12:
S133–S141.
Mathison, J.C. and Ulevitch, R.J. (1979). The clearance, tissue distribution and cellular
localization of intravenously injected lipopolysaccharide in rabbits. J. Immunol. 123:
2133–2143.
Nasidze, I., Li, J., Quinque, D., Tang, K. and Stoneking, M. (2009). Global diversity in
the human salivary microbiome. Genome Res. 19: 636–643.
Neggers, J.H., Nansel, T.R., Andrews, W.W., Schwebke, J.R., Yu, F., Goldenberg, R.L.
and Klebanoff, M.A. (2007). Dietary intake of selected nutrients affects bacterial
vaginosis in women. Journal of Nutrition 137: 2128-2133.
Nolan, J.P. (1981). Endotoxin, reticuloendothelial function and liver injury. Hepatology
1: 458–465.
Onderdonk, A.B. (2005). Animal models simulating anaerobic infections. Anaerobe 11:
189–195.
Onderdonk, A.B., Bartlett, J.G., Louie, T., Sullivan-Seigler, N. and Gorbach, S.L.
(1976). Microbial synergy in experimental intra-abdominal abscess. Infect. Immun. 13:
22–26.
Penders, J., Thijs, C., van den Brandt, P.A., Kummeling, I., Snijders, B., Stelma, F.,
Adams, H., van Ree, R. and Stobberingh, E.E. (2007). Gut microbiota composition and
development of atopic manifestations in infancy: The KOALA Birth Cohort Study. Gut
56: 661–667.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
112
Pettersson, B., Ahrné, S., Wang, M., Jeppsson, B., Uhlén, M. and Molin, G. (2003). The
mucosa-associated bacteria from the sigmoid colon of nine healthy 60-year-old
individuals, identified by bacterial 16S rDNA; Lund University Publications (LUP);
Lund, Sweden.
Poxton, I.R. and Edmond, D.M. (1995). Biological activity of Bacteroides
lipopolysaccharide-reappraisal. Clin. Infect. Dis. 20: S149–S153.
Qin, J., Li, R., Raes, J., Arumugam, M., Burgdorf, K.S., Manichanh, C., Nielsen, T.,
Pons, N., Levenez, F., Yamada, T., et al. (2010). A human gut microbial gene catalogue
established by metagenomic sequencing. Nature 464: 59–65.
Qin, J., Li, Y., Cai, Z. et al. (and 53 more authors) (2012). A metagenome-wide
association study of gut microbiota in type 2 diabetes. Nature
www.nature.com/doifinder/10.1038/nature11450
Ravel, J., Gajer, P., Abdo, Z., Schneider, G.M., Koenig, S.S.K., McCulle, S.L.,
Karlebach, S., Gorle, R., Russell, J., Tacket, C.O., Brotman, R.M., Davis, C.C., Ault,
K., Peralta, L. and Forney, L.J. (2011). Vaginal microbiome of reproductive-age
women. PNAS 108: 4680-4687.
Ruiter, D.J., van der Meulen, J., Brouwer, A., Hummel, M.J., Mauw, B.J., van der
Ploeg, J.C. and Wisse, E. (1981). Uptake by liver cells of endotoxin following its
intravenous injection. Lab. Invest. 45: 38–45.
Shen, L., Su, L. and Turner, J.R. (2009). Mechanisms and functional implications of
intestinal barrier defects. Dig. Dis. 27: 443–449.
Sokol, H., Pigneur, B., Watterlot, L., Lakhdari, O., Bermudez-Humara, L.G.,
Gratadoux, J.J., Blugeon, S., Bridonneau, C., Furet, J-P., Corthier, G., et al. (2008).
Faecalibacterium prausnitzii is an anti-inflammatory commensal bacterium identified
by gut microbiota analysis of Crohn disease patients. PNAS 105: 16731–16736.
Stearns, J.C., Lynch, M.D.J., Senadheera, D.B., Tennebaum, H.C., Goldberg, M.B.,
Cvitkovotch, D.G., Croitoru, K., Moreno-Hagelsieb, G. and Neufeld, J.D. (2011).
Bacterial biogeography of the human digestive tract. Scientific Reports 1: doi:
10.1038/srep00170
Swidsinski, A., Weber, J., Loening-Baucke, V., Hale, L.P. and Lochs, H. (2005). Spatial
organization and composition of the mucosal flora in patients with inflammatory bowel
disease. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 43: 3380-3389.
Tap, J., Mondot, S., Levenez, F., Pelletier, E., Caron, C., Furet, J.P., Ugarte, E., Muñoz-
Tamayo, R., Paslier, D.L.E., Nalin, R., et al. (2009). Towards the human intestinal
microbiota phylogenetic core. Environ. Microbiol. 11: 2574–2584.
Thies, F.L., König, W., König, B. (2007). Rapid characterization of the normal and
disturbed vaginal microbiota by application of 16S rRNA gene terminal RFLP
fingerprinting. Journal of Medical Microbiology 56: 755-761.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
113
Turnbaugh, P.J., Hamady, M., Yatsunenko, T., Cantarel, B.L., Duncan, A., Ley, R.E.,
Sogin, M.L., Jones, W.J., Roe, B.A., Affourtit, J.P. et al. (2009). A core gut microbiome
in obese and lean twins. Nature 457: 480–484.
Yatsunenko, T., Rey, F.E., Manary, M.J. (and 18 more authors) et al. (2012). Human
gut microbiome viewed across age and geography. Nature 486: 222-228.
Wang, M., Ahrné, S., Jeppsson, B. and Molin, G. (2005). Comparison of bacterial
diversity along the human intestinal tract by direct cloning and sequencing of 16S rRNA
genes. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 54: 219–231.
Wang, M., Molin, G., Ahrné, S., Adawi, D. and Jeppsson, B. (2007). High proportions
of proinflammatory bacteria on the colonic mucosa in a young patient with ulcerative
colitis as revealed by cloning and sequencing of 16S rRNA genes. Dig. Dis. Sci. 52:
620–627.
Vásquez, A., Jakobsson, T., Ahrné, S., Forsum, U. and Molin, G. (2002). Vaginal
Lactobacillus flora of healthy Swedish women. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 40:
2746-2749.
West, C. (2008). In: Effects on adaptive immunity and gut microbial function,
Ph.D. thesis, Umeå University.
Wu, G.D., Chen, J., Hoffmannn, C., Bittinger, K., Chen, Y.Y. Keilbaugh, S.A., Bewtra,
M., Knights, D., Walters, W.A., Knight, R., Sinha, R., Gilroy, E., Gupta, K.,
Baldassano, R., Nessel, L., Li, H., Bushman, F.D. and Lewis, J.D. (2011). Linking long-
term dietary patterns with gut microbial enterotypes. Science 334: 105-108.
Zhang, H., DiBaise, J.K., Zuccolo, A., Kudrna, D., Braidotti, M., Yu, Y.,
Parameswaran, P., Crowell, M.D., Wing, R., Rittmann, B.E., et al. (2009). Human gut
microbiota in obesity and after gastric bypass. PNAS 106: 2365–2370.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
114
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
115
IV. Effects
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
116
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
117
Intention
The Lecture-block IV “Effects” is regarding to the text volume, the far largest block.
Lecture-block IV is divided into different subparts, first an introductionary one, then
different aspects of probiotic effects on the digestive tract, including the upper
respiratory tract, and finally, more systemic effects involving liver, pancreas, and effects
on dysfunctions associated with the metabolic syndrome.
The prime intention with block IV is to give an account of different health beneficial
effects of probiotics and the gut microbiota on different functions and organs in the
human body. Attempts are also made to give reasonable explanations to the observed
effects. Though, it should be held in mind that probiotics and the influence of the gut
microbiota on the body are subjects that until relatively recently either was minimized
or derided by the medical and nutritional establishment. An increasingly number of new
scientific reports are gradually changing the opinion towards acceptance but still the
knowledge about effects and the more detailed explanations for many of these observed
effects are still insufficient. The field of probiotics is scientifically complicated due to
the biological complexity. Just the vast numbers of different kinds of living bacteria, all
with different characteristics that are involved, make simplified generalisations difficult.
For the time being there is a wealth of suggested effects of probiotics and of the gut
microbiota on human homeostasis and dysfunctions, but the suggestions are mostly
based on few or even solitary scientific reports. Many observations come from animal
studies, and the majority of the reported human studies include relatively few
individuals, i.e. the clinical trials are small compared with studies evaluating effects of
pharmaceuticals. In other words, there is often no general consensus in the scientific
community for many of the reported effects. This lack of generally accepted truths can
lead to confusion. Lecture-block IV should not be regarded as a complete review of all
available reports in the area, neither as a testimony of basic, generally accepted
knowledge. Lecture-block IV provides in parts, short accounts of selected scientific
studies that either points on interesting observations or on reports judged as being good
evidence for a certain effect.
Another important aim of lecture-block IV is to give examples how different health
effects can be scientifically visualised, e.g. design of studies, markers of health and
disease and end-points for animal and human studies. Presented facts are to a high
degree given with references so the reader will be able to find and make her/his own
judgement of the relevance of the reported effects.
Probiotic bacteria
Genera such as Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium have been identified as beneficial to
the human health. Popular species to be used commercially as probiotics are, for
example, Lactobacillus paracasei, Lactobacillus rhamnosus, Lactobacillus acidophilus,
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
118
Lactobacillus johnsonii, Lactobacillus fermentum, Lactobacillus reuteri, Lactobacillus
plantarum, Bifidobacterium longum and Bifidobacterium animalis. However, it should
be held in mind that the phylogenetic difference is extremely wide between the two
genera Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium as they belong to different phyla, but there
can also be considerable differences between different Lactobacillus species, e.g.
between L. acidophilus, L. fermentum, L. reuteri and L. plantarum. Even within
different strains of the same species, the genomic differences can be considerable due to
the wide limits of the bacterial species concept. Consequently, due to major genetic
differences between different probiotic strains, it is to be expected that both the human
body and the gut microbiota will respond differently to different probiotic strains. This
also stresses the fact that it is of crucial importance to know both the species name and
the strain identity of probiotics.
Originally, “probiotics” meant organisms or substances that contribute to intestinal
microbial balance, in contrast to antibiotics that counteract microbial activity (Lilley and
Stillwell 1965; Parker 1974). However, the currently widely accepted definition is that
probiotics are live microorganisms which when administrated in adequate amounts
confer a health benefit on the host. Thus, the traditional idea, which is reflected in the
early definitions of probiotics, presumes a balance between beneficial and adverse
bacteria in the gut and as long as the beneficial bacteria are present in adequate numbers
they strengthen gut-health, while excessive growth of adverse bacteria creates problems.
Consumption of probiotics affects this balance in a positive direction by increasing the
amount of beneficial bacteria in the gut, and hence, affects the balance in a beneficial
direction. However, this indirect way of affecting the human body through the
composition of the gut microbiota is not the only option for probiotics to affect the
body. Ingested bacteria will pass through the digestive tract and hit the lining of
epithelial cells covering an estimated area of about 250 m2. The ingested bacteria will
also come into contact with immune-cells, i.e. macrophages, dendritic cells, B-
lymphocytes, and T-lymphocytes found in Peyer's patches and other gut-associated
lymphoid tissue (GALT). These interactions between ingested probiotics, presumably
starting already in the mouth, carry on through the system as the probiotics pass down
the gastro-intestinal (GI) tract.
Ingested bacteria can trigger major effects also when passing through the upper, lowly
populated parts of the GI-tract. For example, it has been shown in healthy volunteers
that exposure to the probiotic strain L. plantarum WCFS1 in duodenum
(“tolvfingertarmen” in Swedish; duodenum is situated directly after the stomach) that an
exposure for L. plantarum WCFS1 during a relatively short time (i) regulated epithelial
tight junction proteins (Karczewski et al. 2010), and (ii) induced immune responses
(van Baarlena et al. 2009). In the former case, it was shown that the scaffold protein
ZO-1 and the transmembrane protein occludin were significantly increased in the
vicinity of the tight-junction structures, which leads to an improved mucosal barrier
function of the mucosa (Karczewski et al. 2010).
Concerning the immune response, L. plantarum WCFS1 caused a response in the
duodenal mucosa of healthy volunteers, and it was shown that the gene expression
induced in the intestinal tissue by live L. plantarum WCFS1 correlated with that of
immune tolerance via the NFkappa-B (NF-κB) pathways (van Baarlena et al. 2009).
Interestingly, heat-killed and live L. plantarum cells induced different expression
profiles in the epithelial cells.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
119
NF-κB stands for “nuclear factor kappa-light-chain-enhancer of activated B cells”. NF-κB is a protein complex that controls the transcription of DNA. NF-κB plays a key role in regulating the immune response to infections. Incorrect regulation of NF-κB is linked to cancer, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases, septic shock, viral infection, and improper immune development.
L. plantarum 299v has been shown to increase mucin (MUC2 and MUC3) expression
level in epithelial cells originating from colon (HT-29 cells; Mack et al. 1999; Mack et
al. 2003). Mucins make up the slimy surface of the mucosa and protect the mucosa from
aggressive microorganisms and unwanted compounds.
Considering the different ways that probiotics can affect the body, one of the most
important outcomes for health is that probiotics can improve the condition of the
mucosa and thus strengthen the epithelial barrier function of the mucosa. A decreased
barrier function of the mucosa and, consequently, an increased leakage through the
mucosa is a problem linked to many different diseases and dysfunctions.
It should be held in mind that probiotics are living organisms and as such they can
exercise several fundamentally different actions on different target-functions in the
body.
Probiotics can: 1) Modulate the immune response, 2) strengthen the tight-junctions between the epithelial cells in the mucous membrane, 3) stimulate the epithelial cells of the mucous membrane to produce more mucin, 4) decrease the proportion of adverse bacteria in the gut, 5) improve the digestion, by for example, increasing the absorption of iron and other essential metals, and breaking down indigestible carbohydrates and polyphenols.
All probiotic strains are not able to fulfil all sorts of missions. The capacity of different
strains for acting on the different target-function can vary. A rational for combining
different probiotic strains in a mixture could be that they are differently good in
affecting the different function, e.g. one strain can be especially good in modulating the
immune system through dendritic cells and T-cells while another can have a strong
influence on the epithelial barrier function of the mucosa.
How to prove beneficial health effects
Evidence based
Probiotics are living microorganisms with scientifically demonstrated health beneficial
effects when administered to the body. A crucial question is then how these health
beneficial effects should be proved? A prerequisite for the Natural sciences is that they
should be evidence-based. Evidence-based means that rules for proving an explanation
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
120
should be set up before-hand and then followed. It is not in line with the idea of Natural
science to have a preconceived explanation and then search for proofs to support this
explanation and in the process neglecting data speaking against it. Furthermore, it is
important in evidence-based science that any trained scientist should come to the same
conclusion when mimicking the study and following the rules that have been set up.
In evidence based medicine, evidences obtained from different types of studies are
ranked differently. Highest value in proving the effect of a certain treatment in medicine
is the (i) “randomized, placebo-controlled trial (often abridged, RCT)”, (ii) secondly
ranked is the “cohort study” and then following in order: (iii) “case control study”, (iv)
“case report”, (v) “expert opinion”, (vi) “animal models” and (vii) “in vitro studies”. It
may seem odd that expert opinions are ranked higher than animal studies. However, this
is medicine where the object always is the patient and the expert in this case is a trained
and experienced physician that during his daily work comes in contacts with a lot of
patients and clinical situations, i.e. the expert opinion is based on empirically gained
knowledge from observations of the reality. In many other fields of Natural sciences as
for example nutrition, a well-designed animal study must be regarded to have a much
higher explanation-value than the opinion of an individual scientist in nutrition or an
individual nutritionist.
In the expression “randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled trial”: “double blind”
imply that all subjects in the study get a product where they are unaware if it contains
the active compound or not, i.e. the administrated products are coded and not only the
study-subjects but also the operators of the study, and the ones performing the analyses
are unaware of which individuals that receive the active product or which ones that
receive the placebo. Placebo is the seemingly similar product without the active
compound). “Randomised” implies that test persons at random are divided into different
test groups, i.e. it is not allowed to select certain persons for certain test groups.
Sometimes so called “cross over” is applied on RCTs, meaning that after a certain run-
time of the study, the volunteers that got the placebo instead get the active product, and
vice versa.
In a so called open-label trials, both the researchers and participants know which
treatment that is being administered. Open-label trials may be appropriate for comparing
two, very similar treatments to determine which one that is most effective. An open-
label trial may still be randomized.
A cohort is a group of subjects who share a common characteristic or experience within
a defined period. A “cohort study” (sometimes also called “panel study”) is an
observational study. Cohort studies can either be conducted prospectively (in the future)
or retrospectively (looking backwards) from archived records.
A “case-control study” identifies factors that may contribute to a condition by comparing
subjects who have that condition (the cases), with subjects who are without the studied
condition, but otherwise similar (the controls).
“Case report” is used in medicine to describe, in detail the symptoms, signs, diagnosis,
treatment, and follow-up of an individual patient.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
121
All trials have an endpoint (end-point) or a primary outcome, i.e. a mark of termination
or completion. In clinical or nutritional trials, the endpoint refers to the sign that defines
the final outcome of the trial.
Evidence-based medicine can be defined as the integration of high quality research-
evidence with clinical expertise and patient values. The concept of evidence based
medicine has been transferred to the field of nutrition, i.e. evidence-based nutrition.
Thus also in nutrition, including probiotics, the randomized, placebo-controlled trial
(RCT) has the greatest weight of proof, because RCT is the only design that permits
strong causal (implying an effect) inference (the act of conclude from evidence).
Koch’s postulates
The classical way to prove the pathogenic ability of an organism and link it to a
particular disease is to follow the different steps in the so called Koch’s postulates that
were set up by Robert Koch in 1884:
1) The microorganism can always be found in association with a particular disease, but not in healthy individuals. 2) The microorganism can be grown in the laboratory in pure culture. 3) This pure culture will produce the same disease when inoculated into a new, susceptible individual. 4) The microorganism can be recovered from the infected, diseased individual and grown again in pure culture in the Laboratory.
Should the postulates of Koch be converted for proving the health beneficial effect of a
probiotic organism it may be:
1) The microorganism can be found in association with healthy individuals.
2) The microorganism can be grown in the Laboratory in pure culture.
3) This pure culture will exercise health beneficial effects when placed into a new
subject.
4) The microorganism can be recovered from the inoculated subject and grown again in
pure culture in the Laboratory.
However, there are some general difficulties to apply the modified Koch’s postulates on
probiotics: One obstacle is to isolate and identify the probiotic strain from the digestive
tract where a wide range of similar, related organisms may be present. This requires a
method where individual bacterial strains can be identified and distinguished from other
bacterial strains of the same species.
In contrast to true pathogenic organisms which only are found in diseased individuals,
probiotic bacteria are not necessarily limited to healthy individuals. They may very well
be present in diseased individuals where the probiotic bacteria do not managed to cure
the disease.
And last but not least, from a medical point of view it is relatively easy to measure how
a patient is cured from a disease, or getting a disease after being infected with a
pathogenic agent. It is much more difficult to prove improvement of health in non
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
122
diseased individuals, or the prevention of future diseases, by the consumption of a
specific nutritional compound.
Medicine versus nutrition
In medicine, the endpoint is a disease or at least a dysfunction with a diagnosis and the
treatment aim to counteract the disease or dysfunction. If the treatment involves a
substance administrated orally, it means that the subject will be eating a drug. Usually, a
drug will be a defined and powerful substance that is active in low concentrations.
Hence, the effects of the drug can be noted after relatively short time of treatment and if
a randomised placebo-controlled trial (RCT) is to be designed for proving the
efficiency, the individuals in the placebo group will never come in contact with active
compound.
This is in sharp contrast to the situation in nutrition, where the endpoints are
improvement of health-status or prevention of future dysfunctions and diseases.
Furthermore, the test substance (the active food component) should preferably be tested
in primarily healthy individuals. Food components that are supposed to be wholesome
without side effects are usually less powerful than drugs and the health-improving or ill-
preventing effects are often not seen at first, but need prolonged exposure periods to be
made visual. Furthermore, if a RCT is set up, it is in nutrition often difficult to have a
placebo group where the individuals never come in contact with the active compound as
the is a dietary compound, and test persons in the placebo group can’t stop eating, and
must include essential components in the diet. The problem becomes especially
troublesome if the study should be run over long time-periods.
Nutritional factors can affect the health status from birth to death. However, when a
disease has emerged, it is the responsibility of Medicine to mitigate developed
dysfunctions. This is exemplified in Figure 27. Nutritional knowledge and dietary
means can be applied to prevent the metabolic syndrome, and to a certain degree
Nutrition can also contribute by suppressing symptoms of the metabolic syndrome.
However, if the dysfunctions became substantial or if a disease related to the metabolic
syndrome emerges, it becomes a medical problem. The proof of efficiency of drugs
against diseases, in this case for example, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, obesity, type
2 diabetes and/or cardiovascular diseases, are preferably achieved through RTCs
(Figure 27).
Drugs are powerful, active at low concentrations and show effects after relatively short
exposure time. In contrast, if we believe that supplement of a certain dietary compound,
let’s say multivitamins, through life decrease the risks for developing high blood
pressure in the age of 55, how should that be evaluated by a RCT? It becomes too
complicated, too expensive and ethically totally impossible to have a RCT going for
years and where the placebo group are denied important food components as, for
example, vitamins. What then must be done instead of a RCT is to set up a cohort study.
This in order to see if there are any negative correlation between the consumption of the
dietary compound (in this case multivitamins) and the disease or dysfunction (in this
case high blood pressure). If such correlation is found it remains to be proved that the
consumption of multivitamin also is the actual cause for the blood pressure reducing
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
123
effect, and not just a consequence caused by some other factor than the vitamins.
However, such causal evidence can be collected with the use of animal models. On the
other hand, this proof of concept is weaker than a RCT, but in many cases is the only
feasible way. With this in mind, results from short-time RCT within the field of
nutrition that in spite of all the muddling circumstances actually points at significant
improvements in health status should not be easily dismissed, especially if several
studies point in the same direction.
Figure 27. An individual can through the years acquire the metabolic syndrome, which increases the risk for diseases as non alcoholic fatty-liver disease, type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. Nutritional factors can have long-term effects and decrease the risk of developing the metabolic syndrome, and they can mitigate the symptoms of the metabolic syndrome which lower the risk for developing disease. The diseases are treated with drugs within the scientific field of Medicine. The effects of drugs are preferably proved in randomised, double blind, placebo controlled studies (RCTs). The long-term effect of dietary components is difficult to study with RTC, instead Cohort studies and animal models have to be used for proving causal effects.
Probiotics are dietary supplements and probiotics are primarily aiming to improve the
health-status and prevent dysfunction and diseases. A general problem in evaluating the
probiotic effect in RCT is that the same bacterial strain or strains with similar effects as
the test-strain can be spontaneously present in some of the test subjects without any
administration of the active product. The probiotic strain or similar strains can also
occur spontaneously in lactic acid fermented foods that the subject might be eating
during the study time, or test persons can be contaminated with the test-strain from
other individuals by direct contact. Furthermore, it is impossible in a RCT aiming to test
a specific probiotic strain to get rid of the disturbing influence of the test person’s own
microbiota of resident bacteria, and it is extremely difficult to exclude all influence of
environmental bacteria contaminating the test person during the study time.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
124
Immune modulation
Probiotics can affect the immune system which can be seen by following changing
levels of different immunological agents in blood and tissue, and these agents can be
used as markers for the function of the immune system. One key factor in the immune
system is the T-regulatory cells which are involved in the regulation of immune
response, maintaining immunological self-tolerance and immune homeostasis, and also
the control of autoimmunity and cancer surveillance. T cells can be characterised by the
expression of FoxP3 (fork head box P3) which is a protein with a comprehensive
function for regulatory T cells. The number of regulatory T cells and especially those
expressing FoxP3 is important for describing different types of diseased states.
Consequently, immune markers as, for example, the regulatory T cells are highly
interesting to follow in clinical trials with probiotics in order to give an explanation to
observed effects on dysfunctional or diseased conditions or prevention of a diseases.
The use of immunological markers in order to explain a studied effect on a dysfunction
is exemplified in the following study where it was shown that administration of the
probiotic strain L. paracasei F19 reduced eczema in weaning infants (West 2008). One-
hundred-seventy-nine infants, four month of age, were randomized to a daily intake of
L. paracasei F19 (dose 108 CFU per day) for 9 months. The probiotic treatment reduced
the risk for eczema with 50% and enhanced the ratio of two phenotypes of T-helper
cells (Th), i.e. the ratio of Th1 and Th2. It was concluded that “the reduction of eczema
might be explained by probiotic effects on both T cell-mediated immune responses and
reinforced gut microbial function” (West 2008). In conclusion, the authors saw a
substantial preventive effect on a disease and could provide an explanation to the effect
by following critical immunological markers in form of T-helper cells.
T-helper cells (Th) are a sub-group of lymphocytes involved in establishing and maximizing the capabilities of the immune system. Th-cells have no cytotoxic or phagocytic activity. Proliferating Th-cells differentiate into two major subtypes, Th1 and Th2. The different types produce different cytokines, and affect different lymphocytes.
In contrast to the above referred study, many human studies on probiotic effects only
demonstrate effects on immunological markers without link to effects on a particular
dysfunction of the body, i.e. the change of the immunological marker become the end-
point of the study without direct connection to a dysfunction or a disease.
This can be exemplified by a study where the following claim was given as a conclusion
of the study “Milk fermented with yoghurt cultures plus L. casei DN-114001 was able
to modulate the number of lymphocytes and CD56 cells in subjects under academic
examination stress” (Marcos et al. 2004). The study was a prospective, randomized,
controlled and parallel one, where university students were allocated to one of two
groups, receiving during 6 weeks (3 weeks prior to, as well as the 3-week duration of
the examination period) either: a glass (200 ml) of semi-skimmed milk each day
(control group, n=63) or two 100 ml portions per day (treatment group, n=73) of
fermented milk (Actimel, Danone) containing Lactobacillus delbrueckii subspecies
bulgaricus (107 CFU/ml) and Streptococcus thermophilus (10
8 CFU/ ml) and
Lactobacillus casei (paracasei) DN-114001 (108 CFU/ml). Anxiety and immunological
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
125
measurements were monitored at the baseline (start of treatment) and at the end of study
(6 weeks later at the end of the examination period). The anxiety would have been a
nice end-point in this study but unfortunately no significant effects were reached in
anxiety. Among several measured blood parameters, significant changes were only seen
for the number of lymphocytes and CD56 (Marcos et al. 2004). The practical relevance
for the health status by this change in immune parameters remains unclear. The immune
system is highly complex with a waste number of different markers that often are
related to each other and where a comprehensive and full knowledge of function and
interplay is lacking, or at least highly muddled.
CD stands for “clusters of differentiation”. CD56 positive cell means a T-cell with the membrane protein CD56 on the surface. CD56 is the same as NCAM (Neural Cell Adhesion Molecule) which is a binding glycoprotein expressed on the surface of neurons, glia, skeletal muscle and natural killer cells. NCAM has been implicated in cell-cell adhesion, neurite outgrowth, synaptic plasticity, and learning and memory.
In general, immunological markers are insufficient end-points. On the other hand,
combined with endpoints revealing undisputable health improvements, immunological
markers can be helpful to explain causes and mechanisms. Good endpoints in the study
referred to above had been if the students drinking the product have had better results in
the exam or less anxiety during the exam-period.
Virus
Rotavirus diarrhoea
Probiotics can have effects against viral diarrhoea, which primarily have been shown for
rotavirus gastroenteritis (Huang et al., 2002). Thus, probiotics do not only targeting
components of the bacterial flora of the digestive tract, but also viruses in the small
bowel. Rotavirus is one of several viruses that cause the type of infections that in every
day talk are referred to as “stomach flu”. Rotavirus gastroenteritis is usually an easily
managed disease in childhood, but nevertheless, worldwide more than 500 000 children
younger than 5 years die each year due to rotavirus infection, as a result of dehydration
due to the vomiting and diarrhoea which is a consequence of the disease.
The name rotavirus refers to the wheel-like appearance of the virus that is a double-
stranded RNA-genome. Rotavirus is the major cause of viral gastroenteritis in infants
and young children. The infection is spread by the faecal-oral route, and rotavirus
infects the epithelial cells lining the small intestine with an incubation period of 1-2
days. The duration is 4-7 days, and the symptoms are vomiting, diarrhoea, fever and
pain, and as said, rotavirus gastroenteritis can lead to severe dehydration in small
children.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
126
Especially, the probiotic strain L. rhamnosus GG (Valio, Finland) has proved to have
effects towards the symptoms of rotavirus diarrhoea. L. rhamnosus GG mitigates the
symptoms and reduces the duration of rotavirus gastroenteritis (Marteau et al. 2001). It
seems that L. rhamnosus GG activates the unspecific immunological defence during the
infection, and increases the level of specific antibodies in the following-up period. Thus,
it appears as the probiotic effect against rotavirus primarily is an effect mediated by the
immune system. However, also probiotic derived effects on the mucosa (improved
mucosal status) can contribute to a higher resistance against the infection and decreased
symptoms of the disease.
Winter vomiting disease
In perspective of the effects of probiotics against rotavirus gastroenteritis, a relevant
question is: Do probiotics also help against winter vomiting disease (calicivirus
gastroenteritis)? Calicivirus gastroenteritis, also called winter vomiting disease or
“stomach flu” is caused by a RNA virus of the genus Norovirus and family
Caliciviridae. Calisivirus is preferably transmitted in institutional settings and by
contaminated food and water. Clinical features of calicivirus gastroenteritis are
diarrhoea and vomiting, generally without fever, after an incubation period of 2-3 days
(the duration is one to eleven days). No specific therapy exists, but rehydration can be
mitigated by replacing fluid losses and correcting electrolyte disturbances.
The question remains: Do probiotics help against winter vomiting disease? And not
much to an answer can currently be find in the literature. In one open cased-controlled
study on elderly in a service facility in Japan, it was concluded that during a treatment
period of one month during an outburst of norovirus gastroenteritis no significant
difference in the incidence of norovirus gastroenteritis occurred between a treatment
group consuming Lactobacillus casei Shirota in milk (39 individuals) and a non-
administered control group (38 individuals) (Nagata et al. 2011). On the other hand, the
mean duration of fever, here defined as a body temperature above 37oC, after the onset
of gastroenteritis was 1.5 days in the probiotic group and 2.9 days in the non-treated
group, i.e. the probiotic treatment reduced the duration of fever with almost 50%.
Common cold
Common cold, or just cold, is a viral upper respiratory tract infection (also called acute
viral rhinopharyngitis or acute coryza) that can be caused by several different viruses,
i.e. rhinoviruses (in about 30–50% of cases), coronaviruses (10–15%) and influenza
virus (5–15%), but common cold can also be caused by other viruses as human
parainfluenza viruses, human respiratory syncytial virus, adenoviruses, enteroviruses or
metapneumovirus. Cold is the most frequent, human infectious disease. Adults have on
average 2 to 4 infections per year and children have 6 to12 infections per year. Due to
the fact that there are so many different types of viruses and that the viruses tend to
mutate, it is impossible to become immune to all colds.
Without specifying which viruses that have been active and responsible for the
infection, consumption of probiotics has in some cases been proved helpful in
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
127
mitigating common cold (de Vresea et al. 2005; de Vresea et al. 2006; Berggren et al.
2011).
There were two double blind, randomized, controlled trials on common cold, using a
probiotic study-product in form of tablets containing Lactobacillus gasseri PA 16/8,
Bifidobacterium longum SP 07/3 and Bifidobacterium bifidum MF 20/5 (Merck,
Consumer Health Care). Together the three strains made up a dose of 5x107 CFU (per
tablet). In the first study, 454 healthy volunteers (age 18–67) consumed 1 tablet per day
for 3 months (de Vresea et al. 2005), and in the second study 479 healthy volunteers
(age 18–67) consumed 1 tablet per day for 3 to 5 months (de Vresea et al. 2006). Both
studies resulted in shorter common cold episodes and reduced severity of symptoms.
However, the intake of the study product had no effect on the incidence of common
cold.
In contrast, the study of Berggren et al. (2011) showed a reduction in the incidence of
common cold episodes. Also, the number of days with symptoms was reduced together
with a reduction of the “total symptom score” and a reduction of the pharyngeal
symptoms. In this study, the two probiotic strains L. plantarum HEAL9 and L.
paracasei 8700:2 were used in a dose of 109 CFU (Probi AB). The bacteria were in
form of a lyophilised powder in malto-dextrine, packet in sachets. The placebo
contained malto-dextrine without bacteria (Berggren et al. 2010). 272 healthy
volunteers (age 18 to 65) were eating the product (a sachet per day) for 12 weeks. The
product is sold on the Swedish market both as food supplements (tablets with the brand
name “Probi frisk”). The probiotic strains have also been included in a food product
where the bacteria are mixed in fruit juices under the brand name “Friscus”
(Skånemejerier, Malmö). However, this product was dropped from the Swedish market
after some years. A somewhat similar product with the same probiotic strains was
launched 2012 in Australia as a breakfast juice (www.goldencircle.com.au).
The traditional view on probiotics is that it is beneficial for the gut. In the case of
common cold however, it is beneficial for the upper respiratory tract. On the other hand,
the common cold viruses infect the mucous membranes even if they are situated in the
upper respiratory tract instead of the intestines, and probiotics administrated orally will
for certain reach the mouth and throat, and presumably also, indirectly to some extent
reach the mucous membranes of the nose. And, if probiotics can be beneficial for the
condition of the mucosa in the gut and for the immune system, it is perhaps not so
surprising that it also can have effects on the mucosa of the upper respiratory tract.
Bacterial balance and C. difficile
An example of application of probiotics that is well in line with the original idea that
probiotics can improve the balance of the bacterial flora of the gut is when probiotic
therapy successfully has been used against Clostridium difficile. C. difficile (belongs to
Clostridium cluster XI; class Clostidia) can cause colonic inflammation. C. difficile is
an anaerobic, spore forming rod that frequently is found in minor (and then harmless)
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
128
amounts in colon of healthy individuals, but can cause colitis when it multiply to high
amounts.
Antibiotics can disturb the bacterial balance of the gut which leads to “antibiotic
associated diarrhoea”. Antibiotic associated diarrhoea (also called pseudomembranous
colitis) is an infection in the colon caused by an unfavourable change in the gut-
microbiota due to the antibiotic treatment. C. difficile is the major cause of antibiotic
associated diarrhoea (C. difficile colitis). The incidence of antibiotic associated
diarrhoea in hospitalized patients is reported to be 3-29 % and C. difficile accounts for
20-60 % of these diarrhoeas (Wiström et al. 2001; McFarland 1993). Over time there
has been an increase in the incidence of C. difficile diarrhoea (McFarland 1993; Pépin et
al. 2003; Ricciardi et al. 2007). Furthermore, to make thing worse, a highly virulent C.
difficile type (ribotype 027) with increased morbidity (morbidity is the incidence of ill
health) and mortality (mortality is the incidence of death in a population) has emerged
(McDonald et al. 2005; Loo et al. 2005). C. difficile produces several virulence factors,
i.e. enterotoxin, cytotoxin and an inhibitor for bowel motility. Clinical symptoms range
from mild diarrhoea to toxic megacolon which in turn may lead to bowel perforation. C.
difficile associated diarrhoea is usually treated with the antibiotics metronidazole or
vancomycin.
In several studies and with treatment by different probiotic organisms, probiotics have
been proved effective against antibiotic associated diarrhoea and C. difficile induced
diarrhoea, (D’Souza 2002). Especially, the preventing effect is obvious (Hickson et al.
2007; Klarin et al. 2008). In the study of Hickson et al. (2007), 100 g product (active
product in form of Actimel, Danone, or a placebo product) were given twice per day
during antibiotic treatment of 135 hospital patients (mean age 74 years) and one week
after termination of the antibiotic treatment. The product (Actimel) contained L. casei
(L. paracasei) DN-114001, (108 CFU/ml Actimel), Streptococcus thermophilus (10
8
CFU/ml Actimel) and L. delbrueckii subspecies bulgaricus (107
CFU/ml Actimel). Only
seven out of 57 (12%) of the patients in the probiotic group developed diarrhoea
associated with the use of antibiotics, compared with 19 out of 56 (34%) in the placebo
group. No one in the probiotic group and 9 out of 53 (17%) in the placebo group had
diarrhoea caused by C. difficile. The conclusion was that Actimel can reduce the
incidence of antibiotic associated diarrhoea and C. difficile associated colitis (Hickson et
al. 2007). This is an interesting study as it is relatively large, and with clear and useful
endpoints. The study is also performed with a commercially available product.
In a study of Klarin et al. (2008), 100 ml of a treatment product containing L. plantarum
299v in an oatmeal gruel (109 CFU/ml) was given as enteral feeding (a thin tube
through the nose) twice per day for the first 2 days and then 50 ml per day to 22 patients
in intensive care (mean age 65 years). A corresponding control group got the oat meal
gruel without probiotics. Colonisation with C. difficile was detected in 19% of the
controls but in none of the patients treated with L. plantarum. The conclusion was that
enteral administration of L. plantarum 299v to critically ill patients treated with
antibiotics reduced the colonisation with C. difficile (Klarin et al. 2008). Drawbacks
with the study are that it is small and that the endpoint just is the presence of C. difficile,
not prevention from colitis caused by C. difficile. Interesting is however that this study
was performed in severely sick patients, and no side effects of the massive
administration of L. plantarum 299v could be noticed in this vulnerable category of
patients.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
129
The ability of L. plantarum 299v to prevent from antibiotic-associated diarrhoea and
presence of C. diffficile-toxin in faeces was evaluated in a randomized, double-blind,
placebo-controlled study on 163 patients treated for infections at an infectious diseases
clinic (Lönnermark et al. 2010). The patients were either administrated 200 ml per day
of L. plantarum 299v in ProViva (blueberry; 5x107 CFU per ml) or the same amount of
a placebo without probiotics. The treatment ran during the antibiotic treatment and for
seven days after termination of the antibiotic treatment. The primary outcome of the
study was negative, i.e. no statistically significant changes in the proportion of patients
developing diarrhoea or with C. difficile-toxin in faeces could be seen. However, the
overall risk of developing loose or watery stools was decreased by the probiotic
treatment, and furthermore, the risk of developing nausea was also decreased
(Lönnermark et al. 2010).
Even if it is almost consensus in the scientific community about certain advantages of
probiotics in connection to antibiotic therapy, there are also critical voices pointing at
studies where no effects have been found. For example, in a huge randomised, double-
blind, placebo-controlled study where 1470 inpatients received a probiotic mixture of L.
acidophilus NCIMB 30157, L. acidophilus NCIMB 30156, Bifidobacterium bifidum
NCIMB 30153 and Bifidobacterium lactis NCIMB 30172 during antibiotic therapy
while 1471 patients received placebo (Allen, et al. 2013). The author’s conclusion of
the study is as follows “We identified no evidence that lactobacilli and bifidobacteria
was effective in prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea or Clostridium difficile
diarrhoea”, i.e. no outcomes of the study were fulfilled. This appears at least on the
surface as a highly reliable study, not the least for the inclusion of so many patients. But
the study has some major flaws: 1) Formulation of the conclusion reveals
bacteriological ignorance of the authors. They seem to believe that two strains of L.
acidophilus and two strains of Bifidobacterium generally can represent all available
species and strains of “lactobacilli” and “bifidobacteria”. The study has of course only
shown the lack of effect of a mixture of the four tested strains. 2) The time schedule for
probiotic treatment and antibiotic treatment in relation to the evaluation of disease is
unclear. The timing between antibiotic therapy, probiotic treatment and evaluation of
the outcome of the treatment is absolutely crucial for the reliability of the study. 3) The
compliance has been low, e.g. it appears as 25% of patients have got less than 2/3 of the
probiotic dose. 4) The frequency of C. difficile diarrhoea was low in the study, i.e. only
12 patients in the probiotic group got C. difficile diarrhoea (0.8%) and 18 patients in the
placebo group (1.2%): Thus, even if many patients were included, the number of
diseased patients was low which makes reliable evaluation of the effects of probiotic
treatment uncertain. Nevertheless, the probiotic treatment reduced the C. difficile cases
with 33% which shouldn’t be neglected.
Functional bowel disorders
Dysfunctions without clear pathogenic explanations
Examples of common transient symptoms of intestinal disorders are bloating and
flatulence, abdominal pain, diarrhoea and constipation. However, if these conditions are
of more chronic nature (they have occurred for at least 6 months, and they are present
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
130
for more than 3 days per month during a period of 3 months) the medical diagnosis
becomes “functional bowel disorder” (FBD). FBD is then subdivided into irritable
bowel syndrome (IBS), functional bloating, functional constipation, and functional
diarrhoea. These different gut associated conditions are solely diagnosed by their
symptoms and may be caused by different reasons, or according to medical thermo
logy, they can have multiple aetiologies (Longstreth et al. 2006). The criteria of FBD
and IBS are consensus criteria that gradually have been worked out by the “Rome
foundation” which is an independent organization that provides support for activities
designed to create scientific data and educational information to assist in the diagnosis
and treatment of functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs). The “Rome criteria”
have been evolving from the first set of criteria issued in 1989 (The Rome Guidelines
for IBS) through the Rome Classification System for FGIDs (1990), or Rome-1, the
Rome I Criteria for IBS (1992) and the FGIDs (1994), the Rome II Criteria for IBS
(1999) and the FGIDs (1999) to the more recent Rome III Criteria (2006).
Due to the fact that functional bowel disorder (FBD) is a frequently occurring
phenomenon in urban populations and that it cause discomfort in otherwise healthy
citizens, makes these individuals an interesting target-group for the probiotic market. If
a company want to make a more general claim that a certain probiotic food-product is
good for the gut health this claim can be backed up by studies in FBD-persons. FBD is a
diagnosis of discomfort and, formally, not a disease. This makes it possible to use data
from FBD-studies as argument in connection to functional foods without risking to be
accused by the authorities to market a pharmaceutical drug (which must be registered as
such and is then not allowed in the food segment).
Irritable bowel syndrome
Definition. Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a functional bowel disorder in which
abdominal pain or discomfort is associated with defecation or a change in bowel habit,
and with features of disordered defecation. IBS is a commonly occurring syndrome of
disorders of unknown cause. The absence of strict pathogenic features has for long
made IBS to a disease without a proper diagnosis. Attempts have been made to develop
criteria for a positive diagnosis of IBS (Manning et al. 1978; Thompson et al. 1992).
IBS is a chronic relapsing condition that perhaps occurs in most adults at some point in
their lives. Symptoms begin before the age of 35 in 50% of patients, and 40% of
patients are aged 35-50 (Maxvell et al. 1997). IBS was in the 1990:s found in 18% of
the adult population in the Bristol area of United Kingdom (Heaton et al. 1992).
Throughout the world, about 10%–20% of adults and adolescents have symptoms
consistent with IBS. In most countries more females then men suffer from IBS.
IBS is currently defined according to the so called “Rome-III-criteria” which is a system
that has been developed to classify the functional gastrointestinal disorders based on
clinical symptoms. The Rome III criteria for IBS are as follows: Recurrent abdominal
pain or discomfort at least 3 days/month in 3 months associated with two or more of the
following:
1) improvement with defecation,
2) onset associated with a change in frequency of stool,
3) onset associated with a change in form (appearance) of stool.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
131
Treatment with Bifidobacterium animalis DN-173010. Effect of a fermented milk
containing Bifidobacterium animalis DN-173010 (Activia, Danone) on the health-
related quality of life and on symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) in adults in
primary care has been shown in a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial (Guyonnet
et al. 2007). 274 adults with constipation-predominant IBS consumed 125 g Activia per
day (dose: 1010
CFU Bifidobacterium animalis) for 6 weeks. The study showed a
beneficial effect on discomfort (score) and increased stool frequency in those subjects
that had less than 3 stools per week at the start of the treatment (Guyonnet et al. 2007).
On the package and in advertisements, the company (Danone) calls the strain
Bifidobacterium animalis DN-173010 for “BIFIDUS REGULARIS” and claims that
Activia “help regulate the digestive system” and “help with slow intestinal transit”.
Treatment with Bifidobacterium infantis 35624. Treatment with Bifidobacterium
infantis 35624 alleviated symptoms in IBS. With the aim to compare the response of
symptoms in IBS, and to compare the symptom-response with cytokine ratios, 77
individuals with IBS were randomized to receive either Lactobacillus salivarius
UCC4331 or Bifidobacterium infantis 35624, each in a dose of 1010
CFU in a malted
milk drink for 8 weeks (or the malted milk drink alone as placebo)(O’Mahony et al.
2005). The symptoms of IBS were recorded and blood was sampled for estimation of
peripheral blood mononuclear cell release of the cytokines interleukin (IL)-10 and IL-12
were performed at the beginning and at the end of the treatment. Symptoms connected
to abdominal pain/discomfort, bloating/distension, and bowel movement difficulty were
reduced during treatment with B. infantis 35624. At start, patients with IBS
demonstrated an abnormal ratio of IL-10 to IL-12, indicative of a proinflammatory, Th-
1 state. This ratio was normalized by treatment with B. infantis 35624. Hence, B.
infantis 35624 alleviates symptoms in IBS, and this symptomatic response was
associated with a normalization of the ratio of an anti-inflammatory cytokine (IL-10) to
a proinflammatory cytokine (IL-12) (O’Mahony et al. 2005). In contrast, the tested L.
salivarius strain of O’Mahony et al. (2005) did not showed any substantial effect
against IBS.
Treatment with Lactobacillus plantarum 299v in fruit drink. Lactobacillus
plantarum 299v has in a couple of studies been shown to counteract IBS. L. plantarum
299v in the fruit drink ProViva (ProViva AB, Lunnarp, Sweden) was administrated to
patients with IBS in two, double blinded, placebo controlled studies, one in Poland
(Niedzielin et al. 2001) and one in Sweden (Nobaek et al. 2000). In both studies the
patients were divided into two groups, one was given L. plantarum 299v in ProViva
rosehip (active product) and the other a similar rosehip drink without L. plantarum 299v
(placebo). In the Swedish study, patients with slight to moderate symptoms, mainly
bloating and pain, were included (Nobaek et al. 2000) while the Polish study requited
patients that besides bloating and pain also had problems with irregularity in defecation
and stool consistency (Niedzielin et al. 2001).
The results of the Polish study were that the magnitude of several of the experienced
IBS symptoms decreased in the L. plantarum group, and a higher proportion of the
patients became free from symptoms in the treatment group than in the placebo group
(Niedzielin et al. 2001). In the Swedish study, L. plantarum 299v significantly
decreased the subjectively experienced bloating during the treatment period (Nobaek et
al. 2000). Pain was significantly reduced in both the treatment-group and in the
placebo-group, but the decrease was more rapid and more pronounced in the L.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
132
plantarum group. Twelve months after the treatment, the patients given L. plantarum
299v in the study, still experienced a better overall gastrointestinal function than the
patients that had got the placebo (Nobaek et al. 2000).
The bloating and pain experienced by IBS-patient might be due to abnormal colonic
fermentation giving rise to an excess of gas production, especially of hydrogen (King et
al. 1998). In a small randomised placebo controlled study on L. plantarum 299v in
ProViva, the gas production and composition of different gases were measured after 4
weeks consumption. However, no difference was seen between the placebo and the
treatment group (Sen et al. 2002). On the other hand, if the patients were provoked by
consuming 20 g lactulose, the hydrogen in the breath was significantly decreased in the
group pre-treated with L. plantarum 299v. Thus, probably the composition of the
intestinal microbiota had been changed in a favourable way by the probiotic treatment.
It should be pointed out that the study of Sen et al. (2002) was performed with a cross-
over design that in this case might disfavour differences between the groups.
Furthermore, in a randomized, placebo controlled, double blinded study in perfectly
healthy volunteers that consumed L. plantarum 299v in ProViva (1010
CFU/day for 3
weeks) experienced a decrease in flatulence during the treatment period (Johansson et
al. 1998). At the same time, the total level of carboxylic acids in faeces increased due to
an increase in the concentration of acetic acid and propionic acid (Johansson et al.
1998). The carboxyl acids are produced by the gut microbiota, and this change in acid
composition points at significant changes in the composition of the microbiota. L.
plantarum 299v are not known to be able to produce propionic acid. The increased
concentration of especially propionic acid must be regarded as beneficial from a health-
perspective. Propionic acid is utilized as an energy source by the epithelial cells of the
intestine. Short-chain fatty acids are in fact the major energy source of the colonic
epithelial cells. An increased level of short-chain fatty acids in the lumen is therefore
beneficial for the condition of the mucosa. Moreover, absorbed propionic acid comes
via the portal blood to the liver where it can have positive effects on both the lipid
metabolism and has anti-inflammatory effects in the liver.
The original health claim on the package of ProViva was that it “mitigates abdominal
gas production”, a claim that was approved by the Swedish authorities after an
assessment of an expert-group. This was before the European Union (EU) decided to set
up European rules for health claims for foods. ProViva with L. plantarum 299v was the
first probiotic product that proved to have effects against IBS.
Treatment with L. plantarum 299v in freeze-dried preparation: Freeze-dried L.
plantarum 299v in a capsule was given to subjects between 18-70 years with IBS in a
double blind, placebo controlled, parallel-designed study (Ducrotté et al. 2012). In total
214 IBS patients were recruited to the study by general practitioners in four clinical
centres in India. The test product contained 1010
CFU per capsule in potato starch while
the placebo product just contained potato starch. Patients consumed one capsule per day
for 4 weeks. The primary endpoint of the study was improvement of the frequency of
abdominal pain episodes, and secondary endpoints were changes in severity of
abdominal pain, changes in frequency and severity of abdominal bloating and in feeling
of incomplete rectal emptying. L. plantarum 299v significantly decreased both pain
severity and daily frequency of pain episodes. Similar results were obtained for
bloating. The conclusion of the authors were that “a 4 week treatment with L. plantarum
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
133
299v provided effective symptom relief, particularly of abdominal pain and bloating, in
IBS patients fulfilling the Rome II criteria” (Ducrotté et al. 2012).
Inflammatory bowel diseases
Chronic inflammation
Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic inflammation along the gastro-intestinal
(GI) tract. It can be limited to the large bowel (ulcerative colitis) or it can be situated
anywhere along the GI-tract (Crohn’s disease). Ulcerative colitis is a relatively
superficial ulcerative inflammation, while Crohn’s disease is a transmural,
granulomatous inflammation. There are also several other forms of IBD, but they are
occurring less frequently and they are in some cases not so well defined. Examples of
other forms of IBD than ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease are collagenous colitis,
lymphocytic colitis, ischemic colitis, diversion colitis, Behçet's syndrome and
indeterminate colitis. IBD is thought to be due to an abnormal and uncontrolled immune
response to normally occurring constitutes of the intestine. The aetiology of IBD is
unknown. Microbial agents appear to be involved in the pathogenesis of IBD, and
intestinal bacteria seem to be an important factor in development and chronicity. Hence,
there is a complex interaction between bacteria, mucosa and immune system but this
interaction is far from clear.
Probiotics may have a potential for mitigating inflammation in IBD patients. For
example, it was shown in twenty IBD patients (15 with Crohn’s disease and 5 with
ulcerative colitis) that ingestion of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GR-1 and L. reuteri RC-14
in yoghurt for 30 days was associated with significant anti-inflammatory effects, or at
least changes in different immunological markers that pointed at a suppressed
inflammation (Baroja et al. 2007).
Crohn’s disease
Autoimmune disease. Crohn’s disease was first described 1932 and is regarded as an
autoimmune disease. It usually hits at 15-25 of age (prevalence, 30-50 individuals per
100 000), and can appear anywhere in the digestive tract, from mouth to anus. Though,
it often starts in terminal ileum. The exact cause of Crohn’s disease is unknown. The
idea is that it is a combination of environmental factors and genetic predisposition that
coincides, and results in a malfunction in the innate immune systems where chronic
inflammation being caused by adaptive immunity that tries to compensate for the
reduced function of the innate immune system. There is no known cure for Crohn’s
disease. Treatment is restricted to controlling symptoms, maintaining remission and
preventing relapse, and here can perhaps probiotics be of some help, for example by
counteract pro-inflammatory bacteria in the digestive tract.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
134
It is clear that the microbiota of the digestive tract can aggravate the inflammation,
especially certain aggressive components of the microbiota as Escherichia coli and
Bacteroides fragilis. For example, the immune response of the human epithelial cells in
intestinal mucosal samples taken from patients with Crohn's disease was seen to differ
considerably when the mucosa was exposed to Escherichia coli (strain ATCC 35345) or
Lactobacillus casei (strain DN-114001) (Llopis et al. 2009): An exposure to L. casei
decreased the secretion of TNF-alpha, IFN-gamma, IL-2, IL-6, IL-8, and CXCL1, and
down regulated expression of IL-8, IL-6, and CXCL1 in the human tissue while, in
contrast, an exposure to E. coli up-regulated the expression of all the cytokines (Llopis
et al. 2009). Live L. casei counteracted the pro-inflammatory effects of E. coli on
inflamed mucosa by specific down-regulation of key pro-inflammatory mediators.
Pro-inflammatory cytokines (cytokine = interleukin, IL): TNF (tumour necrosis factor) alpha is produced by monocytes/macrophages and activated T-cells. IFN (interferon) gamma is a key cytokine in chronic inflammation (originally, proteins that increase the resistance of body cells against viruses). IL-2 stimulates the growth of T-cells (and is also produced by T-cells). IL-6 initiates production of acute phase proteins and takes part in finish-off the acute inflammation (produced by macrophages and T-cells). IL-8 activates white blood cells to pass out from the blood vessel (produced by macrophages and epithelial cells after stimulation of bacteria or bacterial products). CXC-chemokines binds to neutrophlic granulocytes and have similar effects as IL-8.
Failures with probiotics. In a small study including only 11 patients with Crohn's
disease, the patients received L. rhamnosus GG for six months and they were also given
antibiotics one week before the treatment started. The endpoint of the study was
sustained remission, but no significant difference in median time to relapse was
observed between placebo and treatment group (Schultz et al. 2004).
In another study, children with Crohn's disease in remission were given L. rhamnosus
GG in addition to standard therapy in order to try to prolong the remission, but no
prolongation was obtained (Bousvaros et al. 2005). Neither was any effect reached by
administration of L. johnsonii LA1 to patients with Crohn's disease after surgical
resection in order to keep-up the remission (Marteau et al. 2006; Van Gossum et al.
2007) or by administration of L. rhamnosus GG to adult Crohn's patients (Prantera et
al. 2002). Hence, it seems that neither L. rhamnosus GG nor L. johnsonii LA1 are the
best choices to give to patients with Crohn's disease.
Ulcerative colitis
Inflammation driven by the microbiota. Ulcerative colitis causes ulcers, or open sores
in colon, and gives diarrhoea mixed with blood (prevalence is 10-100 per 100000
persons). Ulcerative colitis starts from below and moves upwards in colon. It usually
debuts at 20-40 years of age. Ulcerative colitis increases the risk for malignant
transformation, i.e. colorectal cancer. Ulcerative colitis has no known cause, but
presumably it has a genetic component to susceptibility that can be triggered by
environmental factors. Ulcerative colitis is often treated as an autoimmune disease, but
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
135
there is no consensus about ulcerative colitis being an autoimmune disease. Ulcerative
colitis is characterized by periods of remission marked by episodes of clinical relapse
caused by acute colonic and/or rectal inflammation. Treatment is primarily aimed at
reducing inflammation during relapse and secondarily at prolonging the time spent in
remission of clinical symptoms.
During the acute phase of inflammation, macrophages, neutrophils and eosinophils are
infiltrating the lamina propria of the colonic mucosa. Aggregating neutrophils lead to
the formation of abscesses (Asakura et al. 1999). Activated dendritic cells and
macrophages secrete cytokines that trigger and differentiate T cells, and activating the
adaptive immune response.
Patients with ulcerative colitis seem to have a higher numbers of bacteria associated to
the mucosa than healthy persons. The intestinal microbiota in patients with active
ulcerative colitis has been shown to be less diverse than in healthy subjects (Nishikawa
et al. 2009). Enterobacteriaceae might be involved in the pathogenesis of ulcerative
colitis. High proportions of Enterobacteriaceae (E. coli and Enterobacter) and of
Bacteroides fragilis, together with substantial amount of Pseudomonas aeruginosa,
Haemophilus parainfluenzae and Clostridium difficile were found on the inflamed
colonic mucosa taken during surgery from a 12-year-old girl suffering from acute
ulcerative colitis (Wang et al. 2007).
Hydrogen sulphide has been implicated in the pathogenesis of ulcerative colitis (Pitcher
et al. 2000), and sulphate-reducing bacteria have received attention due to their ability
to reduce sulphate to sulphide as a by-product of their respiration. Hydrogen sulphide is
cell toxic and freely permeable to cell membranes and inhibits butyrate oxidation in
colonocytes (Rowan et al. 2009).
The number of lactobacilli seems to be relatively low at active ulcerative colitis (Fabia
et al. 1993). However, lactobacilli were predominantly detected in inactive patients, and
lactobacilli were suggested to have a role in the induction of remission (Andoh et al.
2007). It has been hypothesized that the changing condition in the intestine may
influence the amount of Lactobacillus and the sort of Lactobacillus (Zoetendal et al.
2002; Zhang et al. 2007).
Probiotic treatment. Probiotics has been given to patients suffering from ulcerative
colitis, and it seems as some efficiency has been reached, both in intervention and
maintenance therapy. A meta-analysis to evaluate the induction of remission and
maintenance of probiotic therapy was accomplished by Sang et al. (2010) on thirteen
randomized, controlled studies. It was concluded that probiotics were more effective
than placebo in maintaining remission.
A probiotic mixture of strains of L. casei, L. plantarum, L. acidophilus, L. delbrueckii
subspecies bulgaricus, Bifidobacterium longum, Bifidobacterium breve,
Bifidobacterium infantis and Streptococcus thermophilus (the mixture is labelled
VSL#3) has been used for treatment of mild-to-moderate active ulcerative colitis (Sood
et al. 2009). Six weeks of probiotic treatment resulted in a significantly higher
percentage of patients with more than 50 % improvement in “ulcerative colitis disease
activity index” score, and after 12 weeks, significantly more patients achieved remission
(Sood et al. 2009).
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
136
Several species and strains of bacteria with claimed probiotic potential have been used
in clinical trials, e.g. the a mixture VSL#3 (including L. casei, L. plantarum, L.
acidophilus, L. delbrueckii subspecies bulgaricus, Bifidobacterium longum,
Bifidobacterium breve, Bifidobacterium infantis and Streptococcus thermophilus)
(Bibiloni et al. 2005; Sood et al.2009), a mixture of L. rhamnosus and L. reuteri, L.
rhamnosus GG (Zocco et al. 2006), B. breve strain Yakult and B. bifidum strain Yakult
(Kato et al. 2004) and L. acidophilus (Baroja et al. 2007). Probiotics have shown effects
in treatment of active mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis by decreasing clinical activity
index, preventing relapse, and induction of remission.
Also, bifidobacteria has been used against ulcerative colitis: Improvements of
histological scores and increases in faecal butyrate, propionate and short-chain fatty acid
concentrations were registered after administration of bifidobacteria (Kato et al. 2004).
Consumption of three strains of Bifidobacterium (brand name BIFICO) by patients with
ulcerative colitis induced depressed activation of the transcriptional factor NF-kappa-B,
decreased expressions of TNF-alfa and IL-1β, while the expression of IL-10 was
elevated, which indicates a anti-inflammatory action by the probiotic treatment (Cui et
al. 2004).
A combination of inulin-oligofructose with prebiotic properties and a strain of
Bifidobacterium longum with probiotic properties were given daily for one month to
patients with active ulcerative colitis (2x1011
CFU of B. longum and 6 g fructo-
oligosaccharide/inulin mix, brand name Synergy 1, Orafti, Tienen, Belgium) (Furrie et
al. 2005). The trial that was double-blind, randomised and placebo controlled and
involved 18 patients with active ulcerative colitis. Nine patients were assigned to the
test group and nine to the placebo group. Rectal biopsies revealed that the test group
had reduced inflammation and regeneration of epithelial tissue compared to the control.
Thus, short term treatment with a bifidobacteria and inulin-oligofructose of active
ulcerative colitis resulted in improvement of the full clinical appearance of chronic
inflammation in patients. These results are convincing (Furrie et al. 2005). However, it
should be held in mind that this is a pilot study that needs to be repeated in a larger scale
for verification of the results.
Animal models for intestinal inflammation
Animal models are needed. Animal models are helpful means for comparing the
causal effects between different probiotic strains in vivo, and for clarifying mechanisms
of action and certifying safety. Mice and rats are the two most frequently used animal
species for in vivo tests. The interpretation of test results from animals can never be
directly transferred into human settings, and the interpretation must always be done with
considerably caution. However, an animal model is always much closer to the
biological reality than in vitro models.
The effect of probiotics on inflammation in the intestine can be studied in many
different types of animal models. An example of a well-established and frequently used
model is the dextran sulphate sodium (DSS) induced colitis, and another example, less
used model, is to induce enterocolitis with methotrexate. Below follow examples of
how these two models have been used in order to evaluate effects of probiotics.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
137
Dextran sulphate sodium (DSS) induced colitis. DSS is a non-genotoxic sulphated
polysaccharide used to induce experimental chronic colitis (Cooper et al. 1993). The
precise mechanism by which DSS induces colonic inflammation is unknown.
Administration of DSS through the oral route results in an acute inflammation in colon
(colitis), with lesion resembling those of human ulcerative colitis, symptomatically and
histologically.
This model applied in rats was, for example, used by Osman et al. (2004) for evaluating
and comparing the ability of different strains of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium to
counteract colitis. Rats were in this case fed probiotics daily for 7 days before the start
of the DSS-administration, and the probiotic feeding continued during the DSS-
administration that went on for 10 days. 5% DSS dissolved in water was given by
orogastric tube (can also be given in the drinking water or in the food). The health status
of the animal were recorded by a Disease Activity Index calculated on body weight
change, stool consistency and bleeding from anus. This index that reflects the severity
of the colitis is an obvious primal end-point of the model (severity of disease), but
preferably also different inflammatory markers and histological examination of the
colonic mucosa can be added to the examination scheme.
It was seen in the particular study of Osman et al (2004), where 3 different
Lactobacillus strains and two different Bifidobacterium strain were compared for their
efficiency to mitigate colonic inflammation (colitis), that three of the test-strains
reduced inflammation and severity of the colitis. The tested strain of L. paracasei and
the test-strain of L. gasseri, did not show any effect on the disease activity index. Best
in this comparison was Bifidobacterium longum subspecies infantis DSM 15158,
followed by L. plantarum 299v.
The DSS concept works well in both mice and rats. The major reason to choice rats
before mice is that the former are larger which makes surgery and the taking of
specimens more easy, and also bigger samples can be taken, for example, more blood.
Methotrexate induced enterocolitis. Methotrexate is a drug used in treatment of
cancer, autoimmune diseases and as an abortifacient (a substance that induces abortion)
in the induction of medical abortions. Methotrexate acts by inhibiting the metabolism of
folic acid. Methotrexate can also cause inflammation in the intestinal mucosa which is a
negative side effect when it is used in therapy, but an effect that is utilised in the
enterocolitis animal model. Thus, the animal gets methotrexate in a daily dose that
induces and maintains a mucosal inflammation (Mao et al. 1996a). This inflammation
will engage both the small and the large bowel (enterocolitis).
Methotrexate induced enterocolitis in rats was used as model in one of the first animal
studies that clearly demonstrated the potential of probiotics to mitigate intestinal
inflammation (Mao et al. 1996a). In this particular study it was shown in rats with
enterocolitis that the probiotic strain L. plantarum 299v mitigated the mucosal
inflammation induced by the chemotherapy (methotrexate). This could be measured in
different ways: The most obvious way is to compare the decrease in body weight
between the treatment group and a control group where the percentage of body weight
loss after 3 days was almost four times higher in the control than the probiotic treatment
group (Mao et al. 1996a).
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
138
A marker for inflammation in the mucosa is myeloperoxidase (MPO) and the more
severe the inflammation becomes the higher the MPO concentration will be. MPO
catalyse the formation of hypochlorous acid from hydrogen peroxide (see formula of
reaction on the right) (Figure 28). The HOCl molecule is instable and the formed
hypochlorite ion is highly reactive, and it is also cytotoxic. Hypochorite is used by the
neutrophils to kill bacteria and other pathogens, and high numbers of active neutrophils
will result in elevated levels of myeloperoxidase. Thus, myeloperoxidase becomes a
marker for infiltration of neutrophils in the tissue, i.e. inflammation in the tissue. The
MPO level in both ileal and colonic mucosa of the methotrexate treated rats was
significantly decreased by L. plantarum 299v (Mao et al. 1996a).
Figure 28. Myeloperoxidase (MPO) catalysing the conversion of hydrogen peroxide to the highly bacteriocidal hypochlorite.
MPO is a peroxidase enzyme that is most abundantly present in neutrophil granulocytes. MPO has a haem pigment, which gives a green colour to secretions rich in neutrophils. HOCl is cytotoxic, and is used by the neutrophils to kill bacteria and other pathogens.
It was also shown by Mao et al. (1996a) that healthy rats had a viable count of
lactobacilli on the ileal mucosa of about 108 CFU per g mucosal tissue while the count
of Enterobacteriaceae was considerably lower, i.e. around 104 CFU per g mucosal
tissue. However, in the enterocolitic rats, the Enterobacteriaceae count increased and
reached the same level as that for lactobacilli (108 CFU per g mucosal tissue).
Treatment with L. plantarum 299v suppressed the increase in Enterobacteriaceae.
Increased levels of Enterobacteriaceae means also elevated levels of
lipopolysaccharides (LPS), which can increase the leakage of LPS through the mucosal
barrier, especially if the mucosal barrier function has been decreased due to
inflammation. It was seen in the methotrexate model that compared to the enterocolite-
control the concentration of LPS in blood decreased by the treatment with L. plantarum
299v.
One important factor for the defence in the gut is IgA antibodies secreted out in the
lumen. IgA antibodies bind to the cell surface of bacteria and block their attachment to
the mucosa, and mitigate their penetration of the mucosa. In the methotrexate induced
enterocolitis model it was demonstrated that secretory IgA antibodies in ileum and
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
139
colon was depressed by the inflammation and that treatment with L. plantarum 299v
increased the amount of IgA antibodies compared to the enterocolite-control (Mao et
al. 1996b).
15-20% of the antibodies in blood are IgA. IgA antibodies are the dominating antibodies in secretion, as slime, saliva, tears, milk and sweat. IgA antibodies bind to bacteria outside the mucosa and prohibit binding to epithelial cells.
Liver injuries
Fibrosis and cirrhosis
The gut and the liver are closely connected. A well functioning link between the gut and
the liver is dependent on both an intact intestine and a liver in balance with respect to
immunologic response and metabolism of endogenous and exogenous compounds. The
liver is an important site for bacterial phagocytosis and clearance as it contains the
largest population of tissue macrophages.
Macrophages in the liver are called Kupffer cells.
Chronic liver injury is associated with the development of fibrosis, since repeated and
continuous cellular damage of liver cells leads to the activation of hepatic stellate cells
and their production of extracellular matrix proteins. An advanced stage of hepatic
fibrosis is cirrhosis, in which functional liver tissue is largely replaced by scar tissue and
regenerating nodules. Cirrhosis is mostly caused by alcoholism, hepatitis B and C, and
fatty liver disease.
Fibrosis can promote bacterial overgrowth, weakened barrier function through restricted
intestinal motility, decreased bile acid production, and decreased nutrient absorption and
availability. Disturbances of the gut-microbiota are prevalent in patients with chronic
liver disease. Patients with chronic liver disease can be expected to suffer from
intestinal bacterial overgrowth and increased bacterial translocation, in combination
with failure of immune defence mechanisms, and predisposition to bacterial infections.
Thus, clinical studies suggest an increased translocation of enteric bacteria to mesenteric
lymph nodes in cirrhotic patients, together with an enhanced intestinal permeability, and
endotoxins in portal and systemic circulation. Also, ultrastructural abnormalities in the
epithelial layer of the small intestine and a decreased gut barrier function can be seen in
patients with cirrhosis (Such et al. 2002; Zuckerman et al. 2004). Consequently, an
impaired gut barrier function might contribute to the progression of chronic liver
damage. There is also a strict relationship between altered intestinal permeability and
portal hypertension, i.e. high blood pressure in the portal vein (Xu et al. 2002).
An adverse gut microbiota seems to be able to induce liver disease by means of
increased portal delivery of lipopolysaccharides (LPS) and other endotoxins, which
leads to activation of the stationary macrophages in the liver (Kuppfer cells) and
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
140
induction of production of “transforming growth factor beta”, and subsequent activation
of hepatic stellate cells. Stellate cell is a star shaped nerve cell.
Minimal hepatic encephalopathy
Minimal hepatic encephalopathy (MHE) is a disorder in patients with cirrhosis, and a
disorder that seriously can impair daily functioning and quality of life. Increased level
of ammonia in the blood is most probably a key factor in the pathogenesis.
Treatment for 30 days with a probiotic mixture consisting of four different strains of the
species Pediococcus pentosaceus, Leuconostoc mesenteroides, L. paracasei and L.
plantarum along with dietary fibres was administrated to MHE-patients (Liu et al.
2004). The patients had unusually high faecal loads of E. coli and Staphylococcus spp.,
and the probiotic supplementation with the preparation of probiotics and fibres led to
reduction of the viable count of E. coli and Staphylococcus, but also to a reduction of
Fusobacterium (Liu et al. 2004). Furthermore, the treatment led to decreased ammonia
levels in the blood, together with a reduction in the circulating levels of endotoxins (Liu
et al. 2004). Also the concentrations of serum bilirubin and alanine aminotransferase
(ALT) were decreased compared to pre-treatment values (Liu et al. 2004).
Alterations of the intestinal flora, improvement of the clinical status and lowered blood
ammonia levels by the ingestion of probiotics have also been seen without fibre-
supplementation, i.e. for a strain of L. acidophilus (Macbeth et al. 1965; Read et al.
1966) and for a “probiotic yoghurt” (Bajaj et al. 2008).
Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) is an indicator for the damage of liver cells (hepatocytes). Aspartate aminotransferase (AST) is an indicator for the damage of liver cells, but AST can also be found in the heart and different muscle tissues. Bilirubin is a product from destroyed red blood cells that will increase if the liver is failing, and is a measure of hepatic transport function and the severity of jaundice (icterus).
Alcohol-related liver disease
Chronic ethanol consumption causes changes in the liver, e.g. fatty liver, inflammation
and cirrhosis. Cirrhosis is characterized by replacement of liver tissue by fibrosis, scar
tissue and regenerative nodules. Inflammation associated to accumulated fat in the liver
is called steatohepatitis and is characterised by infiltration of monocytes, macrophages,
neutrophils, and lymphocytes, occurring as a consequence of activation of inflammatory
mediators. During alcoholic steatohepatitis, serum TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-8 levels are
increased and correlate with markers for the acute-phase response, liver function, and
clinical outcome (McClain et al. 1999).
Alcoholic steatohepatitis also lead to an increase in the load of gut-bacteria and a
change in the composition of the microbiota, which may result in overgrowth,
endotoxaemia, and increased bacterial production of acetaldehyde from ethanol.
Acetaldehyde is more toxic than ethanol, and an increased concentration of
acetaldehyde can accentuate the liver damage. Moreover, ethanol and acetaldehyde
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
141
affect intracellular signal-transduction pathways leading to the disruption of epithelial
tight junctions, which increases the paracellular permeability of macromolecules.
Hence, an impaired gut barrier function might be a contributing factor in the progression
of chronic liver damage.
Beneficial effects of probiotics on mild alcoholic induced hepatitis has been reported in
an open-label, prospective, randomized, clinical trial with analyses before treatment
(“baseline”) and after treatment (Kirpich et al. 2008). The aim with this study was to
clarify the effects of probiotics on the gut microbiota, and alcohol-induced liver injury.
Patients (66 adult Russian male) with the diagnosis alcoholic psychosis were
randomized to receive Bifidobacterium bifidum (no strain label are given) and L.
plantarum 8PA3 for 5 days (32 patients), versus standard therapy alone (abstinence plus
vitamins; 34 patients). The average daily volume of alcohol consumed 1 to 2 weeks
before the recruitment was approximately 750 ml per day of Russian vodka (40%
ethanol). Stool cultures and measurements of liver enzymes were performed at baseline
and again after termination of therapy. Results were compared between groups and with
24 healthy, matched controls who did not consume alcohol. The treatment resulted in
reduction of the levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase
(AST), gamma glutamyl transpeptidase, lactate dehydrogenase, and total bilirubin in the
blood. Also the faecal microbiota was affected by the alcohol consumption, i.e. the level
of lactobacilli and bifidobacteria were lower in the alcoholic patients than the non-
alcoholic control group (Kirpich et al. 2008).
In another open-label trial, 12 patients with alcoholic cirrhosis received L. casei Shirota
three times daily for 4 weeks (Stadlbauer et al. 2008). Data were compared with 13
healthy subjects and 8 cirrhotic patients who did not receive probiotics. Neutrophil
oxidative burst, phagocytosis, toll-like-receptor (TLR) expression, plasma-cytokines
and ex vivo endotoxin-stimulated cytokine production were measured.
The baseline for neutrophil phagocytic capacity in the cirrhotic patients was
significantly lower compared to the healthy controls, but was normalized at the end of
the study by the probiotic treatment. TLR2, TLR4 and TLR9 were over-expressed on
the surface of neutrophils in the cirrhotic patients compared to the healthy controls, but
normalised by the treatment (Stadlbauer et al. 2008). Normalization of the expression of
TLR4 is especially interesting in view of the fact that TLRs detects lipopolysaccharides
(LPS).
Oxidative burst (respiratory burst) is the rapid release of reactive oxygen species (superoxide radical and hydrogen peroxide) from cells as neutrophils and monocytes when they come into contact with microorganisms. Toll-like receptors (TLRs) are a class of protein s that play a key role in the innate immune system. TRL receptor 4 (TRL4) detects lipopolysaccharides and activates the innate immune system (TLR4 = CD284).
Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease
Accumulation of fat and liver inflammation. Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease
(NAFLD) is an inflammation in the liver due to accumulation of fat, when the fat
accumulation not is due to excessive alcohol consumption. NAFLD is related to insulin
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
142
resistance and the metabolic syndrome. NAFLD is a comprehensive term for a chain of
conditions with successively increasing severity, i.e. steatosis, steatohepatitis (non-
alcoholic steatohepatitis; NASH), liver fibrosis, cirrhosis with failing liver function, and
hepatocellular carcinoma (carcinoma is any malignant cancer that arises from epithelial
cell).
Steatohepatitis is characterized by inflammation and with concurrent fat accumulation
in the liver. NAFLD is strongly linked to obesity and type 2 diabetes. The mildest form
of NAFLD is steatosis (fat accumulating in the liver). Hence, NAFLD comprises a
spectrum of diseases ranging from simple steatosis to non-alcoholic steatohepatitis
(NASH), fibrosis and cirrhosis. In its initial phase, the healthy liver becomes steatoic
mainly as a consequence of peripheral resistance to insulin. The insulin resistance
increases the transport of fatty acids from adipose tissue to the liver. Steatosis renders
hepatocytes susceptible to further obstacles. Once steatosis is established there are
several factors that can lead to an inflammatory process with hepatocellular
degeneration and fibrosis as result, such negative factors are LPS leaking out from the
intestinal microbiota to the liver, ethanol, oxidative stress and cytokines aggravating
dysfunction of liver cells (Medina et al. 2004).
NAFLD is associated with a number of diseases such as obesity, type 2 diabetes,
hyperlipidaemia (too much fat in the blood), coeliac disease, exposure to different
medications and environmental toxins, total parenteral nutrition and surgical procedures
as for example bypass of jejunum or ileum and other operations in the digestive tract
(Younossi et al. 2002; Lirussi et al. 2007). About 30% of the adult population in USA
and about 25% in Italy suffer from NAFLD (Bellentani and Marino 2009).
Microbiota. An endogenous factor that may contribute to the pathogenesis of NAFLD
is the microbiota of the digestive tract. Hepatic oxidative stress may be increased by
enhanced endogenous production of ethanol. It has been shown that obese female
NASH patients have higher levels of ethanol in the breath (Nair et al. 2001). This may
be caused by small intestinal bacterial overgrowth, which has been shown in patients
with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (Wigg et al. 2001). Gram-negative bacteria in the gut
may also affect hepatic oxidative stress through release LPS, leading to production of
inflammatory cytokines by stimulation of luminal epithelial cells and Kupffer cells.
Kupffer cells are the main producers of TNF-α, a central mediator in the pathogenesis
(development) of NASH (Pessayre et al. 2002).
Probiotics. It can be speculated whether probiotics might counteract the development of
NAFLD, for example, by replacing aggravating bacteria in the digestive tract, which in
turn can decrease the production of proinflammatory cytokines like TNF-α. An
alternative could be that the probiotic bacteria might improve the epithelial barrier
function and thereby avoid exposure beyond the normal limit of LPS and ethanol to the
liver. However, despite the rationale for the possible therapeutic role of probiotics, no
placebo controlled trials have been performed so far in patients with NAFLD/NASH
(Lirussi et al. 2007).
Therapeutic effect of probiotics on different liver diseases, including a small group of
NAFLD patients, was shown in a prospective study (Loguercio et al. 2005). A mixture
of probiotic strains (VSL#3) containing strains of L. casei (should presumably be L.
paracasei), L. plantarum, L. acidophilus, L. delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus, B. longum,
B. brevis, B .infantis and Streptococcus thermophilus were given to patients with (i)
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
143
non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD; 22 patients); (ii) alcoholic liver cirrhosis
(AC; 20 patients) and (iii) hepatitis C virus infection (HCV; 36 patients) in a dose of
totally 5x1011
CFU per day for 3 months. Different markers of the liver function,
oxidative stress and inflammation were measured before the start of the probiotic
treatment and after 3 months of treatment. Aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine
aminotransferase (ALT) and bilirubin decreased in all patient categories. In the NAFLD
and the AC patients the probiotics decreased the oxidative stress (the markers
malondialdehyde and 4-hydroxynonenal was decreased) as well as in the AC patients
also the inflammatory markers were improved (TNF-alfa, IL-6 and IL-10) (Loguercio et
al. 2005).
Malondialdehyde (MDA = CH2(CHO)2 ) is a marker for oxidative stress. Reactive oxygen species degrade poly-unsaturated lipids, forming MDA, which cause toxic stress in cells and form covalent protein adducts.
Animal model for liver injury
The ability of probiotics to block translocation from the intestines out into the body
(primarily to the liver) can be followed and scrutinised in different type of animal
models. One way to do this is to start the translocation of bacteria from the gut by
harming the liver. For example, this can be done by starting an inflammation in the liver
by an intraperitoneal injection of D-galactosamine (Adawi et al. 1997). When the liver
become inflamed the barrier capacity of the gut mucosa is weakened and bacteria in the
gut start to leak out into the body. Translocating bacteria and components from bacteria
will through the portal blood reach the liver and aggravate the liver inflammation.
(Figure 29).
Figure 29. A vicious circle of weakening barrier function of the gut mucosa due to liver inflammation leads to successively increasing liver injury.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
144
Using the liver injury model in rats, it has been demonstrated that a pre-treatment with
different strains of Lactobacillus or Bifidobacterium can decrease the permeability of
the mucosa (i.e. increase the barrier effect of the mucosa) and, hence, the number of
intestinal bacteria that are able to translocate to the liver can be decreased, which in turn
results in a less inflamed liver. Thus, some probiotics can break the vicious circle
depicted in Figure 29 by improving the barrier function of the intestinal mucosa.
However, the capacity to do this differs between different species and strains of both
Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium. It is obvious that different probiotic strains are
differently good in increasing the barrier function of the mucosa in the digestive tract.
L. plantarum 299v and Bifidobacterium longum subspecies infantis CURE19 have in
this rat model shown to decrease the translocation of gut derived bacteria to the liver
(Figure 30), and at the same time they reduced the concentration of alanine
aminotransferase (ALT), asparagines aminotransferase (AST) and bilirubin in the blood
(Adawi et al. 1997; Osman et al. 2005). AST and ALT concentration in blood are
frequently used as markers for liver injury in both humans and animals. The
concentration of these enzymes in the blood increases when the liver is injured.
Figure 30. Rats were orally administered different strains of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium, twice daily for 8 days, before injection with D-galactosamine that started an inflammation in the liver. The bright red column to the left shows translocation of intestinal bacteria to the liver in animals that had not been pre-treated with lactobacilli or bifidobacteria (liver injury control); *marks a statistically significant decrease compared to the liver injury control (P<0.05). Data are taken from Osman et al. (2005).
The animal model used to obtain the results of Figure 30 is a well established and is a
model that is relatively easy to run for studying bacterial translocation from the
intestines. The model can preferably be used to test the effects different dietary
compounds, for example different probiotic strains, on the barrier function of the
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
CF
U p
er
g liv
er
tis
su
e
Co
ntr
ol
wit
ho
ut
pro
bio
tics
L.p
lan
taru
m 2
99v
L.p
ara
case
i 8700:2
L.g
ass
eri
5B
3
Bif
idobact
eriu
m s
p.
3B
1
Bif
idobact
. in
fan
tis
CU
RE
19
**
*
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
145
intestinal mucosa. The status of the mucosa can be differently affected by different
dietary components.
Patients in intensive-care
Systemic inflammation
Intensive-care medicine (critical-care medicine) is a discipline dealing with the support
of life maintenance and organ support in patients who are critically ill. It is obvious that
there are many factors to watch out for in these situations, but one factor of relevance
for probiotics is the problem with a leaky gut leading to an exadurated inflammation
that can be of danger for the patient.
A decrease in systemic inflammation by administration of L. plantarum 299v has been
seen in critically ill patients in the form of a decreased level of IL-6 in the blood
(McNaught et al. 2005). Thus, 103 critically ill patients were randomised to receive L.
plantarum 299v in ProViva (strawberry) in addition to conventional therapy. The
median value of the daily volume of ProViva was 213 ml, corresponding to a dose of
about 1010
CFU of L. plantarum 299v per day. The median for the duration of intake
was 9 days. It was found that enteral administration of L. plantarum 299v to critically ill
patients was associated with a late attenuation of the systemic inflammatory response
(decreased levels of IL-6; McNaught et al. 2005).
Acute pancreatitis
Pancreatitis is in its acute form a severe inflammatory condition. In pancreatitis,
pancreatic enzymes are activated and attack tissue which leads to ischemia and
reperfusion. This condition generates oxygen free radicals that mediate inflammation
and tissue injury. The resulting systemic inflammation weakens the barrier function of
the intestinal mucosa, and gut bacteria can start to translocate into the body. This
becomes a vicious cycle that can result in multi-organ failure and/or sepsis.
Pancreatitis is mostly trigged by gall-stones or alcohol. 15-20% of the patients with
acute pancreatitis develop severe acute pancreatitis, with a mortality rate of 9-27%. It is
assumed that enteral administration of probiotics (tube feeding) can help the patients by
decreasing the bacterial translocation and eventually suppress the systemic
inflammation. This has been shown in an animal model for acute pancreatitis where the
rats were treated with L. plantarum 299v (Mangiante et al. 2001), but also in patients
with acute pancreatitis (Olah et al. 2002; Qin et al. 2008). The referred human studies
were both performed with L. plantarum as probiotics but with different strains (Olah et
al. 2002; Qin et al. 2008).
In contrast, in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial over the eventual
probiotic prophylaxis in severe acute pancreatitis, a mixture of strains of other species
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
146
than L. plantarum was used (Besselink et al. 2008). The mixture with the brand name
Ecologic 641 (Winsclowe Bio Industries, Amsterdam, Netherlands) consisted of strains
of L. acidophilus, L. casei (presumably it should be L. paracasei), L. salivarius,
Lactococcus lactis, Bifidobacterium bifidum and Bifidobacterium lactis (= B. animalis).
The outcome of this study was negative, and nine patients in the probiotic group
developed bowel ischemia (eight with fatal outcome), compared with none in the
placebo group (Besselink et al. 2008).
In the study of Besselink et al. (2008), describing the failure of using the bacterial
mixture Ecologic 641 for helping patients with acute pancreatitis, the explanation of the
authors was that the administrated bacteria may have increased the oxygen metabolism
in the mucosa, and hence, the production of oxygen free radicals which caused the local
inflammation leading to ischemia.
Ischemia (= restriction in blood supply) results in tissue damage because of lack of oxygen and nutrients and the build-up of metabolic waste.
Oxygen free radicals: O2-
. HO2
.
. OH H2O2
If this assumption is correct, it would be of interest to know if this effect was caused by
a certain strain (or strains) of the mixture or if all strains were to blame. Of the species
included into the study by Besselink et al. (2008), Lactococcus lactis is the most likely
one to consume oxygen due to the fact that this species has an efficient aerobic
metabolism. However, some Lactobacillus strains and especially strains of certain
species (for example L. acidophilus and L. crispatus) are well known producers of
hydrogen peroxide. Often these strains lack catalase or other means to convert hydrogen
peroxide to water which results in an accumulation of hydrogen peroxide in the
environment of the bacteria. This could be beneficial in some situation, for example
fighting of E. coli on a vaginal mucosa, but can be a negative feature in a critically ill
patient at risk for an over-reacting inflammatory response. In this situation, it is
beneficial if the probiotic strain have an efficient means to convert the hydrogen
peroxide to water, for example the mangane-pseudocatalese of L. plantarum.
Bifidobacterium bifidum is the most unlikely one of the strains in the Ecologic 641
mixture to produce oxygen free radicals because this is a strictly anaerobic organism,
unable to metabolise oxygen. The failed clinical trial of Besselink et al. (2008), stress
the importance of using well defined bacterial strains with well-known characteristics in
probiotic applications. For example, if a probiotic strain should be given to critically ill
patients, the strain must have documented anti-inflammatory capacity in vivo. In other
words, the strain must be carefully evaluated in animal inflammation-models before it is
given to severely sick humans. In this case, the ability of the different strains to cause
oxidative stress and inflammation ought to have been more carefully evaluated
beforehand.
It can be noted that the two successful studies to counteract side effects of acute
pancreatitis (Olah et al. 2002; Qin et al. 2008) both used a single strain of L. plantarum
while this species was absent in the mixture of strains called Ecologic 641 in the study
of Besselink et al. (2008).
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
147
Metabolic syndrome
Low-grade inflammation
The metabolic syndrome is a combination of disorders that increase the risk of
developing cardiovascular disease and type-2 diabetes. Factors contributing to the
syndrome are increased triglycerides in the blood, decreased HDL cholesterol in the
blood, increased blood pressure, increasing fasting plasma glucose and central obesity.
The metabolic syndrome is characterised by a systemic, low-grade inflammation and
increased insulin resistance.
Lipopolysaccharides (LPS) leaking out into the body from the gram-negative part of the
intestinal microbiota may be the triggering factor for the low-grade inflammation
(“subclinical inflammation”) (Pendyala et al. 2012). A low-grade inflammation means
that there is a slight elevation of different inflammatory markers in the blood compared
to the normal levels.
Oral administration of probiotics can be a strategy to improve the gut barrier function
and suppress gram-negative bacteria in the digestive tract. A decreased level of
lactobacilli in the gut of elderly persons has been shown to be linked to the count of
white blood cells, blood glucose and content of oxidised low-density lipoprotein (ox-
LDL), all risk markers in the pathogenesis of inflammation, metabolic syndrome and
cardiovascular disease (Mikelsaar et al. 2010).
The ability of many Lactobacillus strains to counteract, for example, E. coli is well
known, and the ability of certain probiotic strains, for example, L. plantarum 299v, to
mitigate bacterial translocation from the gut has been proved in rats (Adawi et al. 1997;
Kasravi et al. 1997; Adawi et al. 1999; Wang et al. 2001; Osman et al. 2005) but it has
also been tentatively shown in humans (McNaught et al. 2005; Klarin et al. 2008).
Furthermore, it has been demonstrated in healthy humans that L. plantarum WCSF1
increased the relocation of the proteins occludin and ZO-1 into the tight junction area
between duodenal epithelial cells which ought to result in a tighter mucosa (Karczewski
et al. 2010).
Type-2 diabetes and obesity are characterised by a low-grade inflammation but it is still
unclear if the inflammation is the cause of the condition or just a consequence of it.
The microbiota of the digestive tract is important in relation to inflammation, and a
favourable influence on the composition of the gut microbiota by, for example,
administration of probiotics can be a strategy to mitigate inflammation. As been said
before, ingesting probiotics can affect the composition of the resident gut microbiota,
but probiotics may also have more direct effects on the immune system and the
permeability of the mucosa. The better the barrier function of the mucosa is the smaller
is the risk of translocation of pro-inflammatory bacteria and pro-inflammatory
components of bacterial origin.
In a small, doubled blind, randomised placebo controlled study it was shown in male
volunteers with a slightly elevated cholesterol level in the blood, that a dose of 2x1010
L.
plantarum 299v per day for 6 weeks (400 ml per day of ProViva rosehip), decreased the
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
148
concentrations of cholesterol and fibrinogen in serum (Bukowska et al. 1998). The
placebo in this study was a corresponding fruit drink without probiotics.
The same probiotic rosehip drink (ProViva) as in the study of Bukowska et al. (1998),
were given in the same amount and during the same length of time to “healthy” smokers
(Naruszewicz et al. 2002). Due to the smoking, smokers suffer from a systemic low-
grade inflammation. The treatment-product was compared with a placebo in form of a
rosehip-drink without probiotics. The treatment with L. plantarum 299v for 6 weeks
decreased the levels of fibrinogen, F2-isoprostanes and IL-6 in the blood.
Fibrinogen is an acute phase protein that is produced in the liver at inflammation. Fibrinogen is a marker for inflammation, and it is an independent risk factor for thrombosis. IL-6 is a pro-inflammatory cytokine that regulates the production of fibrinogen. F2-isoprostanes are biochemical markers of lipid peroxidation and oxidative stress.
The treatment with L. plantarum 299v for 6 weeks also decreased the systolic blood
pressure and serum-concentration of leptin in the smokers (Naruszewicz et al. 2002).
Leptin is produced by fat tissue and in smaller amounts by other peripheral organs, and
there seems to be a close relation between fastening insulin concentrations, leptin and
systolic blood pressure. Primarily leptin is a marker for fat-tissue (amount of fat in the
body) but it can also be regarded as a marker for inflammation. Thus, the finding of
Naruszewicz et al. (2002) that probiotic treatment for 6 weeks significantly lowered a
marker for body fat (leptin) was a quite new and remarkable one.
Leptin (from the Greek “leptos”; meaning thin) came to attention when the obesity gene and its product leptin were discovered. Leptin is a hormone-like messenger protein encoded by the obese (ob) gene. Leptin is primarily produced by adipose tissue and in smaller amounts by other peripheral organs. It is a messenger substance with a complex signalling pattern, interacting with many organs and also signalling to the immune system. Leptin levels in the blood are increased at food intake, infections, fever and systemic inflammation, but are decreased at starvation, weight loss and anorexia nervosa (La Cava et al. 2004).
Overweight and obesity
High-energy yielding microbiota. The human intestinal microbiota contains around
1011
colony forming units (CFU) of bacteria per g colonic content, i.e. the gut contains
at least 1014
live bacterial cells that make up about 1 kg of biomass. These bacteria,
centrally located in the body, interact with the host and with food constituents in the gut,
and they can, for example, be important for how much energy a human can utilise from
food.
It has been shown in mice that the gastro-intestinal microbiota was essential for the
processing of dietary polysaccharides (Bäckhed et al. 2004). Furthermore, it was shown
that in adult germ-free mice, inoculated and colonized with a normal mouse gut
microbiota produce a 60% increase in body fat content within 14 days (Bäckhed et al.
2004). However, this “bacterial organ” the microbiota, does also exercise physiological
effects and some components of the microbiota can have physiopathological effects.
Thus, the germ free mice that were colonized with a normal gut microbiota, not only
showed an increased accumulation of fat, they also got increased insulin resistance,
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
149
increased metabolic rate (oxygen consumption) and increased leptin levels (Bäckhed et
al. 2004).
In a follow-up study, the microbiota of male leptin-deficient mice (lacking the gene for
leptin) was compared with siblings with intact leptin gene (Ley et al. 2005). It was
shown that leptin-deficient mice consumed more feed and became heavier, and got
higher epididymal fat-pad weights (the epididymis is part of the male reproductive
system and the associated fat pad can be used as marker for fatness). The fat, heavy
mice showed a reduction in the proportion of bacterial taxa belonging to the phylum
Bacteroidetes and a proportional increase in taxa of Firmicutes (Ley et al. 2005). The
conclusion of the authors was that bacteria of the phylum Firmicutes were linked to
obesity.
To test the findings in mice, the same group of scientists performed a study in faeces
from obese and lean humans (Ley et al. 2006). Here it was shown that the relative
proportion of Bacteroidetes in comparison with Firmicutes was lower in obese humans
than in lean humans and that the proportion of Bacteroidetes increased with time in
obese individuals put on a low-calorie diet. In this study (Ley et al. 2006), an increasing
abundance of Bacteroidetes correlated with percentage loss of body weight (Ley et al.
2006). Furthermore, the same group of scientists presented results demonstrating that
germ-free mice that were inoculated with a microbiota rich in Firmicutes exhibited
higher percentage-increase in body fat over 2 weeks than mice colonized with a
Bacteroidetes-rich flora (Turnbaugh et al. 2006). The mice receiving a Firmicutes-rich
microbiota got that from obese, leptin-deficient mice, while the mice inoculated with the
Bacteroidetes-rich microbiota got that from lean, leptin-intact mice (Turnbaugh et al.
2006). The authors speculated that “the bacterial flora of the gut may be a new
therapeutic target for people suffering from obesity”.
On the other hand, the above findings about the GI-microbiota and obesity raise at least
three questions:
1) Are the observed differences in microbiota really the cause of obesity? The obesity
can just as well have been a marker of a more efficient and better functioning ecological
system.
2) Is the high proportion of Firmicutes unique for obese individuals?
3) The genus Lactobacillus belongs to the phylum of Firmicutes, does that mean that
administration of Lactobacillus as probiotics and in lactic acid fermented foods leads to
overweight and obesity?
The first question is a difficult one and for the time being, there is no clear answer to it,
even if a guess can be that the Firmicutes-rich microbiota is a somewhat healthier one
than the Bacteroidetes-rich microbiota, and therefore will lead to better appetite growth
and fat accumulation. But, the two following questions are easily answered, i.e. both
answers are negative: Bacteria of the phylum of Firmicutes are not unique for obese
individuals, and you will not be fat by eating Lactobacillus.
It should be hold in mind that Firmicutes includes a wide spectrum of different
organisms, i.e. the phylum Firmicutes includes six different classes, nine different
orders, 36 different families, more than 240 different genera and more than 1500
different species. Some species are well-known pathogens as Bacillus anthracis,
Streptococcus pyogenes, Listeria monocytogenes and Clostridium difficile, causing
specific and very different diseases, and some are well-known dietary bacteria safely
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
150
ingested with lactic acid fermented food, for example, Lactobacillus and Lactococcus.
Pathogens and lactobacilli have very different effects on the human body, and it is
misleading to place them under the same umbrella. It has even been demonstrated that
rats given a so called “western diet” (a diet rich in sugar and fat) for 6 months (a
relatively long time in the life span of a rat) come out somewhat leaner and in better
condition when the diet had been supplemented with the probiotic strain L. plantarum
HEAL19 (Karlsson et al. 2011).
Pro-inflammatory microbiota. An alternative explanation to how the GI-microbiota
can affect fattening has been launched by Cani et al. (2007). It is an established fact that
type-2 diabetes and obesity are characterized by insulin resistance and low-grade
inflammation. Obese individuals have elevated levels of inflammatory markers such as
CRP and Il-6 in the blood, but also the concentration of leptin is increased. Leptin is a
pro-inflammatory messenger to macrophages and T-cells, and leptin can amongst other
things be regarded as a marker for inflammation. Cani et al. (2007) showed that
lipopolysaccharides (LPS) originating from the microbiota in the GI-tract (gram-
negative bacteria) were the triggering factor for inflammation and obesity in mice, and a
high-fat diet increased the LPS-concentration in the blood, and also the proportion of
LPS-containing bacteria in the gut. It was proposed on the basis of experiments in mice
that changes in the gut microbiota towards a microbiota with a higher proportion of
LPS-producing taxa (for example from the phyla Proteobacteria and Bacteroidetes) can
be caused by a high-fat diet. This can in turn and perhaps also in combination with the
high-fat diet, causes endotoxemia (LPS in the blood) which induces systemic
inflammation. The inflammation will initiate a process leading to fat accumulation that
overtime can lead to overweight, obesity and type-2 diabetes (Cani et al 2008; Figure
31).
Figure 31. A leaky gut mucosa leads to translocation of pathological agents, e.g. lipopolysaccharides (LPS), and the consequence is inflammation. Long-term inflammation increases the risk for many diseases and may trigger fat accumulation which can lead to overweight and obesity.
A high fat diet has also been shown to increase the level of LPS in human blood
originating from bacteria in the gut (Pendyala et al. 2012). Then of course a reasonable
question would be: Why should fat in the diet stimulate elevated levels of LPS in the
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
151
blood? However, it is not fully clarified why gram-negative components of the
microbiota seem to be stimulated by a fat-rich diet, or/and why the barrier function of
the mucosa seems to decrease. A speculation could be that a fat-rich diet increases the
amount of bile in the gut, and bile has strong antimicrobial effects but some taxa have
higher resistance against bile than others, e.g. Enterobacteriaceae and Bacteroides are
known for their high bile resistance. Furthermore, bile is a powerful detergent which in
excess might have effects on the permeability of the mucosa and mediate an increased
leakage of LPS.
Nevertheless, there are indications that the composition of the gut microbiota in the long
run can have effects on the metabolic syndrome and associated disease, and fat persons
have been shown to have a less diverse gut microbiota than lean individuals (Lee et al.
2011), and obese and overweight preschool children harboured a higher proportion of
Enterobacteriaceae in the gut than children of normal weight (Karlsson et al. 2012).
Furthermore, when the faecal microbiota of 169 obese Danish individuals were
compared with that of 123 non-obese ones, it was seen that individuals with low number
of bacterial genes had more overall adiposity, higher insulin resistance and
dyslipidaemia and higher inflammatory status (Le Chatelier et al. 2013). The number of
bacterial genes is here taken as a measure of the “richness” of the microbiota (richness
is a straight forward, but somewhat coarse measure of diversity). The low-diversity
microbiota was characterized by the genera Bacteroides, Parabacteroides,
Ruminococcus, Campylobacter, Dialister, Porphyromonas, Staphylococcus and
Anaerostipes while the high-diversity microbiota was characterized by
Faecalibacterium, Bifidobacterium, Lactobacillus, Butyrivibrio, Alistipes, Akkermansia,
Coprococcus and Methanobrevibacter (Methanobrevibacter belongs to the kingdom
Archaea) (Le Chatelier et al. 2013).
In conclusion, there ought to be a potential for probiotics against these dysfunctions,
especially probiotics with abilities to strengthen the barrier effect of the GI mucosa and
to mitigate inflammation. Disorders in the lipid metabolism can cause hypertension, and
hypertension is often linked to hypercholesterolemia. There have been probiotics on the
market with the claim of affect blood cholesterol. For example, yoghurt supplemented
with L. acidophilus and B. longum increased the beneficial HDL cholesterol (Kiessling
et al. 2002), and the blood pressure could be decreased in elderly hypertensive subjects
by intake of a sour-milk fermented with Lactobacillus helveticus together with the yeast
Saccharomyces cerevisiae (Hata et al. 1996).
To consider
Probiotics can improve the status of the mucosa and strengthen the mucosal barrier
effect. Thus, probiotics can (i) modulate the response of the immune system; (ii)
strengthen the tight-junctions of the epithelial cell in the mucous membrane; (iii)
stimulate the epithelial cells of the mucous membrane to produce more mucin; (iv)
decrease the proportion of adverse bacteria in the gut; (v) improve the digestion.
Different probiotic strains may have different capacity to fulfil different missions.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
152
It is difficult and requires a lot of resources to prove an effect of a drug against a
specific disease, but it is even more difficult to prove health beneficial effects of dietary
compounds in non-diseased subjects. In the latter it is often the prevention of a disease
that shall be proved, and randomised placebo controlled studies ought to be run for long
time periods to prove the preventative effect. However, when it comes to testing of
dietary compounds, it may be impossible to run placebo controlled trial, as the running
time will be too long and it may be impossible to provide an acceptable placebo. Instead
cohort studies backed up with animal studies to prove the causal connection can be an
accessible way. On the other hand, if the dietary compound to be tested is powerful
enough to give short time effects, and the test-compound can be excluded from the
placebo, it is feasible to apply placebo controlled studies for the testing of dietary
compounds, e.g. the effect of a probiotic strain. The value of evidence of such short
time studies is much dependant on the quality of the endpoints of the study. The best
endpoints are those of improvement or prevention of dysfunctions. The value of
evidence for improvement of biomarkers is much weaker and the relevance of
biomarkers can always be called in question. However some biomarkers are more
established and reliable than others. For example, cholesterol in the blood is a well
established biomarker in the metabolic syndrome for predicting the risk for
cardiovascular diseases. There are many immune-related compounds that at least
theoretically can be used as biomarkers for the status of the immune system and as such
giving hints about the health-status. However, there are often different opinions in the
scientific community about how they should be interpreted.
There are good evidences from randomised, placebo controlled studies that some
probiotics can mitigate antibiotic associated diarrhoea, and colitis due to C. difficile. It
is also well documented that some probiotic strain can mitigate rotavirus enterocolitis.
These are diseases and they are frequently occurring in certain groups of populations,
i.e. outbreaks can be fortelled and placebo controlled studies can be set up during the
right seasons and in subjects with increased risk for the disease. Thus, the effect of the
probiotic treatment can be measured with relevant endpoints, as the duration of the
disease and severity of symptoms.
It can be noted that probiotics can act both against pathogenic bacteria and pathogenic
virus, and be active both in the small intestine (rotavirus infects in the small intestine)
and in the large intestine (C. difficille infects the large intestine). And there is also
reliable placebo controlled studies, showing that some probiotics are able to counteract
common colds in the upper respiratory tract, i.e. virus infecting the mucosa in the
mouth, nose and throat. The reason for this broad working ability of probiotics is
presumably that the probiotics can improve the status of the mucosa and/or upgrade the
efficiency of the immune system. Both protection functions can be expected to have
relevance for the power of resistance against mucosal infections, irrespectively of
location and sort of infectious agent.
Functional bowel disorders are frequently occurring problems in urbanised populations.
A disorder as the irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is not linked to a specified disease.
There is convincing evidence in form of randomised, placebo controlled studies that
different sort of probiotics can mitigate the symptoms of IBS, particularly pain and
bloating. When it comes to inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), probiotics might have a
role in mitigate symptoms, but are not likely to affect the actual disease. The
inflammation in IBD is enhanced by unfavourable changes in the gut microbiota
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
153
towards a higher proportion of more aggressively pro-inflammatory bacteria. Probiotics
can counteract these pro-inflammatory bacteria and can presumably have a somewhat
inflammation suppressing effect on the immune system. Attempts to suppress symptoms
in IBD patients have been more promising in ulcerative colitis than in Crohn’s disease.
From animal models it is clear that probiotics can improve the barrier effect of the
mucosa at severe intestinal inflammation and at liver injury. In liver injury, it is
especially important to block translocation of gut bacteria as those, through the portal
blood will reach the liver and enhance the inflammation in the liver. Unfortunately,
there are for the time being not much human evidences for the effect of probiotics on
liver status. Otherwise this seems to be a promising field for future probiotic research
and developments.
There are interesting evidence for the capability of probiotics to decrease markers for
systemic low-grade inflammation. This is presumably, in some way or another
dependent on decreased leakage of bacteria or bacterial components through the
intestinal mucosa. It has also been pointed out, mainly based on animal models that the
starting point of overweight and obesity can be an increased leakage of proinflammatory
bacteria and their components through the GI-mucosa, leading to low-grade systemic
inflammation. The systemic inflammation can in turn lead to the metabolic syndrome,
obesity, type-2 diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. A high proportion of
Proteobacteria (for example E. coli and other taxa of the family Enterobacteriaceae) in
the gut microbiota is suggested to be the driving force of such a development.
Proteobacteria are generally proinflammatory due to the association of immune-
aggravating lipopolysaccharides (LPS) in the cell wall.
Concerning overweight and obesity, it has been pointed out that different compositions
of the gut microbiota are differently efficient to harvest energy from indigestible
polysaccharides. A high ratio of Firmicutes to Bacteroidetes in the gut microbiota has
been suggested to be correlated with overweight and obesity. However, it seems not
likely that this is the cause of the fat accumulation. Probably a high proportion of
Firmicutes in the gut microbiota is a marker for a good intestinal ecology, and hence, an
efficient energy-generating system.
References
Adawi D., Kasravi F.B., Molin G. and Jeppsson B. (1997). Effect of Lactobacillus
supplementation with and without arginine on liver damage and bacterial translocation
in an acute liver injury model in the rat. Hepatology 25: 642-647.
Adawi, D., Molin, G., Ahrné, S., and Jeppsson, B. (1999). Modulation of the colonic
bacterial flora affects differently bacterial translocation and liver injury in an acute liver
injury model. Microb. Ecol. Health Dis. 11: 47-54.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
154
Allen, S.J., Wareham, K., Wang, D., Bradley, C., Hutchings, H., Harris, W., Dhar, A.,
Brown, H., Foden, A., Gravenor, M.B. and Mack, D. (2013). Lactobacilli and bifi
dobacteria in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea and Clostridium difficile
diarrhoea in older inpatients (PLACIDE): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-
controlled, multicentre trial. Lancet http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61218-0
Andoh, A, Sakata, S., Koizumi, Y., Mitsuyama, K., Fujiyama, Y. and Benno, Y. (2007).
Terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis of the diversity of faecal
microbiota in patients with ulcerative colitis. Inflamm. Bowel. Dis. 13: 955-962.
Asakura, H., Suzuki, A., Ohtsuka, K., Hasegawa, K. and Sugimura, K. (1999). Gut-
associated lymphoid tissues in ulcerative colitis. J. Parenter. Enteral. Nutr. 23: 25-28.
Bäckhed, F., Ding, H., Wang, T., Hooper, L.V., Koh, G.Y., Nagy, A., Semenkovich,
C.F. and Gordon, J.I. (2004). The gut microbiota as an environmental factor that
regulates fat storage. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A 101: 15718-15723.
Bajaj, J.S., Saeian, K., Christensen, K.M., Hafeezullah, M., Varma, R.R., Franco, J.,
Pleuss, J.A., Krakower, G. Hoffmann, R.G. and Binion, D.G. (2008). Probiotic yogurt
for the treatment of minimal hepatic encephalopathy. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 103: 1707–
1715
Baroja, L.M., Kirjavainen, P.V., Hekmat, S. and Reid, G. (2007). Anti-inflammatory
effects of probiotic yogurt in inflammatory bowel disease patients. Clin. Exp. Immunol.
149: 470–479.
Berggren, A., Ahrén, I.L., Larsson, N. and Önning, G. (2011). Randomised, double-
blind and placebo-controlled study using new probiotic lactobacilli for strengthening the
body immune defence against viral infections. European Journal of Nutrition 50: 203-
210.
Bibiloni, R., Fedorak, R.N., Tannock, G.W., Madsen, K.L., Gionchetti, P, Campieri, M.,
De Simone, C. and Sartor, R.B. (2005). VSL#3 probiotic-mixture induces remission in
patients with active ulcerative colitis. Am. J. Gastroenterol.100: 1539-1546.
Bousvaros, A., Guandalini, S., Baldassano, R.N., Botelho, C., Evans, J., Ferry, G.D.,
Goldin, B., Hartigan, L., Kugathasan, S., Levy, J., Murray, K.F., Oliva-Hemker, M.,
Rosh, J.R., Tolia, V., Zholudev, A., Vanderhoof, .JA. and Hibberd, P.L. (2005). A
randomized, double-blind trial of Lactobacillus GG versus placebo in addition to
standard maintenance therapy for children with Crohn's disease. Inflamm. Bowel Dis.
11: 833-839.
Bellentani, S. and Marino, M. (2009). Epidemiology and natural history of non-
alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Annals of Hepatology 8: S4-S8.
Bukowska, H., Pieczul-Mróz, J., Jastrzebsk, K., Chelstowski, K., and Naruszewicz, M.
(1998). Significant decrease in fibrinogen and LDL-cholesterol levels upon
supplementation of the diet with Lactobacillus plantarum (ProViva) in subjects with
moderately elevated cholesterol concentrations. Atherosclerosis 137: 437-438.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
155
Cani, P.D., Amar, J., Iglesias, M.A., Poggi, M., Knauf, C., Bastelica, D., Neyrinck,
A.M., Fava, F., Tuohy, K.M., Chabo, C., Waget, A., Delmee, E., Cousin, B., Sulpice,
T., Chamontin, B., Ferrieres, J., Tanti, J.F., Gibson, G.R., Casteilla, L., Delzenne, N.M.,
Alessi, M.C. and Burcelin, R. (2007). Metabolic endotoxemia initiates obesity and
insulin resistance. Diabetes 56, 1761-1772.
Cani, P.D., Bibiloni, R., Knauf, C., Waget, A., Neyrinck, A.M., Delzenne, N.M. and
Burcelin R. (2008). Changes in gut microbiota control metabolic endotoxemia-induced
inflammation in high-fat diet-induced obesity and diabetes in mice. Diabetes 57: 1470-
1481.
Cooper, H.S., Murthy, S.N., Shah, R.S. and Sedergran, D.J. (1993). Clinicopathologic
study of dextran sulphates sodium experimental murine colitis. Lab. Invest. 69: 238-
249.
Cui, H.H., Chen, C.L., Wang, J.D., Yang, Y.J., Cun, Y., Wu, J.B., Liu, Y.H., Dan, H.L.,
Jian, Y.T. and Chen, X.Q. (2004). Effects of probiotic on intestinal mucosa of patients
with ulcerative colitis. World J. Gastroenterol. 10: 1521-1525.
De Vresea, M., Winklera, P., Rautenberg, P., Harder, T., Noahb, C., Laue, C., Ott, S.,
Hampee, J., Schreibere, S., Heller, K., and Schrezenmeir, J. (2005). Effect of
Lactobacillus gasseri PA 16/8, Bifidobacterium longum SP 07/3, B. bifidum MF20/5 on
common cold episodes: A double blind, randomized, controlled trial. Clinical Nutrition
24: 481–491.
De Vresea, M., Winklera, P., Rautenberg, P., Harder, T., Noahb, C., Laue, C., Ott, S.,
Hampee, J., Schreibere, S., Heller, K., and Schrezenmeir, J. (2006). Probiotic bacteria
reduced duration and severity but not the incidence of common cold episodes in a
double blind, randomized, controlled trial. Vaccine 24: 6670–6674.
D’Souza, A. L., Rajkumar; C., Cooke, J. and Bullpitt, C. J. (2002). Probiotics in
prevention of antibiotic associated diarrhoea: meta-analysis. Brit. Med. J. 324: 1361-
1374.
Ducrotté, P., Sawant, P. and Jayanthi, V. (2012). Clinical trial: Lactobacillus plantarum
299v (DSM 9843) improves symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome. World Journal of
Gastroenterology 18: 4012-4018.
Fabia, R., Ar'Rajab, A., Johansson, M.L., Andersson, R., Willén, R., Jeppsson, B.,
Molin, G. and Bengmark, S. (1993). Impairment of bacterial flora in human ulcerative
colitis and experimental colitis in the rat. Digestion 54: 248-255.
Furrie, E., Macfarlane, S., Kennedy, A., Cummings, J.H., Walsh, S.V., O’Neil, D.A.
and Macfarlane, G.T. (2005). Synbiotic therapy (Bifidobacterium longum/Synergy 1)
initiates resolution of inflammation in patients with active ulcerative colitis: a
randomised controlled pilot trial. Gut 54: 242–249.
Gill, H.S., Rutherfurd, K.J., Cross, M.L. and Gopal, P.K. (2001). Enhancement of
immunity in the elderly by dietary supplementation with the probiotic Bifidobacterium
lactis HN019. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 74: 833–839.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
156
Guyonnet, D., Chassany, O., Ducrotte, P., Picard, C., Mouret, M., Mercier, C.-H. and
Matuchansky (2007). Effect of a fermented milk containing Bifidobacterium animalis
DN-173010 on the health-related quality of life and symptoms in irritable bowel
syndrome in adults in primary care: a multicentre, randomized, double-blind, controlled
trial. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 26: 475-486.
Johansson, M-L., Nobaek, S., Berggren, A., Nyman, M., Björck, I., Ahrné, S., Jeppsson,
B., and Molin, G. (1998). Survival of Lactobacillus plantarum DSM 9843 (299v), and
effect on the short-chain fatty acid content in faeces after ingestion of a rose-hip drink
with fermented oats. International Journal of Food. Microbiology 42: 29-38.
Hata, Y., Yamamoto, M., Ohni, M., Nakajima, K., Nakamura, Y. and Takano, T.
(1996). A placebo-controlled study of the effect of sour milk on blood pressure in
hypertensive. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 64: 767–771.
Heaton, K.W., Creed, F., Drossman, D.A., Heaton, K.W., and Mazzacca, G. (1992).
Symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome in a British urban community: consulters and
non consulters. Gastroenterology 102: 1962-1967.
Hickson, M., D’Souza, A.L., Muthu, N., Rogers, T.R., Want, S., Rajkumar, C. and
Bulpitt, C.J. (2007). Use of probiotic Lactobacillus preparation to prevent diarrhoea
associated with antibiotics: randomised double blind placebo controlled trial. British
Medical Journal 335: 80-80.
Huang, J.S, Bousvarous, A., Lee, J.W., Diaz, A. and Davidson, E.J. (2002). Efficacy of
probiotic use in acute diarrhoea in children: A meta-analysis. Digestive Diseases and
Sciences 47: 2625-2634.
Kalache, A. (1999). Active ageing makes the difference. (1999). Bull. World Health
Organ. 77: 299.
Kasravi, F.B., Adawi, D., Molin, G., Bengmark, S., and Jeppsson, B. (1997). Effect of
oral supplementation of lactobacilli on bacterial translocation in acute liver injury
induced by D-galactosamine, J. Hepatol. 26: 417-424.
Karczewski, J., Troost, F.J., Konings, I., Dekker, J., Kleerebezem, M., Brummer, R-J.
M., and Wells, J.W. (2010). Regulation of human epithelial tight junction proteins by
Lactobacillus plantarum in vivo and protective effects on the epithelial barrier. Am. J.
Physiol. Gastrointest. Liver Physiol. 298: G851–G859.
Karlsson, C., Molin, G., Fåk, F., Johansson Hagslätt, M-L., Jakesevic, M., Håkansson,
Å., Jeppsson, B., Weström, B. and Ahrné, S. (2011). Effects on weight gain and gut
microbiota in rats given bacterial supplements and a high-energy dense diet from foetal
life through six months of age. British Journal of Nutrition 106: 887–895.
Karlsson, C. L.J., Önnerfält, J., Xu, J., Molin, G., Ahrné, S. and Thorngren-Jerneck, K.
(2012). The microbiota of the gut in preschool children with normal and excessive body
weight. Obesity 20: 2257–2261. doi:10.1038/oby.2012.110.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
157
Kato, K., Mizuno, S., Umesaki, Y., Ishii, Y., Sugitani, M., Imaoka, A., Otsuka, M.,
Hasunuma, O., Kurihara, R., Iwasaki, A. and Arakawa, Y. (2004). Randomized
placebo-controlled trial assessing the effect of bifidobacteria-fermented milk on active
ulcerative colitis. Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. 20: 1133-1141.
King, T.S., Elia, M., and Hunter, J.O. (1998). Abnormal colonic fermentation in
irritable bowel syndrome. Lancet 352: 1187-1189.
Kirpich, I.A., Solovieva, N.V., Leikhter, S.N., et al. (2008). Probiotics restore bowel
flora and improve liver enzymes in human alcohol-induced liver injury: a pilot study.
Alcohol 42: 675–682.
Kiessling, G., Schneider, J. and Jahreis, G. (2002). Long-term consumption of
fermented dairy products over 6 months increases HDL cholesterol. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr.
56: 843–849.
Klarin, B., Wult, M., Palmquist, I., Molin, G., Larsson, A. and Jeppsson B. (2008).
Lactobacillus plantarum 299v reduces colonisation of Clostridium difficile in critically
ill patients treated with antibiotics. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica 52: 1096-
1102.
La Cava, A., Alviggi, C. and Matarese, G. (2004). Unraveling the multiple roles of
leptin in inflammation and autoimmunity. J. Mol. Med. 82: 4-11.
Le Chatelier, E., Nielsen, T., Qin, J. et al. (2013). Richness of human gut microbiome
correlates with metabolic markers. Nature 500: 541-546. doi:10.1038/nature12506
Lee; S., Sung, J., Lee, J. and Ko, G. (2011). Comparison of the gut microbiotas of
healthy adult twins living in South Korea and the United States. Applied and
Environmental Microbiology 77: 7433-7437.
Ley, R.E., Bäckhed, F., Turnbaugh, P., Lozupone, C.A., Knight, R.D. and Gordon, J.I.
(2005). Obesity alters gut microbial ecology. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102: 11070-
11075.
Ley, R.E., Turnbaugh, P.J., Klein, S. and Gordon, J.I. (2006). Microbial ecology:
human gut microbes associated with obesity. Nature 444: 1022-1023.
Lilley, D.M. and Stillwell, R.H. (1965). Probiotics: Growth promoting factors produced
by microorganisms. Science 147: 747–748.
Lirussi, F., Mastropasqua, E., Orando, S. and Orlando, R. (2007). Probiotics for non-
alcoholic fatty liver disease and/or steatohepatitis. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev.
CD005165; doi:10.1002/14651858.CD005165.pub2.
Liu, Q., Duan, Z.P., Ha, D.K., Bengmark, S., Kurtovic, J. and Riordan, S.M. (2004).
Synbiotic modulation of gut flora: Effect on minimal hepatic encephalopathy in patients
with cirrhosis. Hepatology 39: 1441–1449.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
158
Llopis, M., Antolin, M., Carol, M., Borruel, N., Casellas, F., Martinez, C., Espin-
Basany, E., Guarner, F. and Malagelada, J-R. (2009). Lactobacillus casei downregulates
commensals’ inflammatory signals in Crohn's disease mucosa. Inflammatory Bowel
Diseases 15: 275-282.
Loguercio, C., Federico, A., Tuccillo, C., Terracciano, F., D’Auria, M.V., De Simone,
C. and Del Vecchio Blanco, C. (2005). Beneficial effects of a probiotic VSL#3 on
parameters of liver dysfunction in chronic liver diseases. J. Clin. Gastroenterol. 39:
540–543.
Longstreth, G.F., Thompson, W.G., Chey, W., Houghton, L.A., Marin, F. and Spiller,
R.C. (2006). Functional bowel disorders. Gastroenterology 130: 1480-1491.
Lönnermark, E., Friman, V., Lappas, G., Sandberg, T., Berggren, A. and Adlerberth, I.
(2010). Intake of Lactobacillus plantarum reduces certain gastrointestinal symptoms
during treatment with antibiotics. Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology 44: 106-112.
Loo, V.G., Poirier, L., Miller, M.A., Oughton, M., Libman, M.D., Michaud, S.,
Bourgault, A.M., Nguyen, T. Frenette, C., Kelly, M., Vibien, A., Brassard, P., Fenn, S.,
Dewar, K., Hudson, T.J., Horn, R., René, P., Monczak, Y., and Dascal, A. (2005). A
predominantly clonal multi-institutional outbreak of Clostridium difficile–associated
diarrhea with high morbidity and mortality. N. Eng. J. Med. 353: 2442-2449.
Macbeth, W.A., Kass, E.H. and McDermott, W.V., Jr. (1965). Treatment of hepatic
encephalopathy by alteration of intestinal flora with Lactobacillus acidophilus. Lancet
1: 399–403.
Mack, D.R., Michail, S., Wei, S., McDougall, L. and Hollingsworth, M.A. (1999).
Probiotics inhibit enteropathogenic E. coli adherence in vitro by inducing intestinal
mucin gene expression. Am. J. Physiol. 276: G941-G950.
Mack, D.R., Ahrne, S., Hyde, L., Wei, S. and Hollingsworth, M.A. (2003). Extracellular
MUC3 mucin secretion follows adherence of Lactobacillus strains to intestinal
epithelial cells in vitro. Gut 52: 827-833.
Mangiante, G., Colucci, G., Canepari, P., Bassi, C., Nicoli, N., Casaril, A., Marinello,
P., Signoretto, C. and Bengmark, S. (2001). Lactobacillus plantarum reduces infection
of pancreatic necrosis in experimental acute pancreatitis. Digestive Surgery 18: 47-50.
Manning, A.P., Thompson, W.G., Heaton, K.W., and Morris, A.F. (1978). Towards
positive diagnosis of the irritable bowel. British Medical Journal 2: 653-654.
Mao Y., Nobaek S., Kasravi B., Adawi D., Stenram U., Molin G., and Jeppsson B.
(1996a). The effect of Lactobacillus strains and oat fiber on methotrexate-induced
enterocolitis in rats. Gastroentereology 111: 334-344.
Mao Y, Ljungh Å, Molin G, Jeppsson B. (1996b). Intestinal immune response to oral
administration of Lactobacillus reuteri R2LC, Lactobacillus plantarum DSM 9843,
pectin and oatbase on methotrexate-induced enterocolitis in rats. Microbial Ecology in
Health and Disease 9:261-270.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
159
Marcos A. Wärnberg, J., Nova, E., Gómez, S., Alvarez, A., Alvarez, A., Mateos, J.A.
and Cobo, J.M. (2004). The effect of milk fermented by yogurt cultures plus
Lactobacillus casei DN-114001 on the immune response of subjects under academic
examination stress. European Journal of Nutrition 43: 381-389.
Marteau, P.R. de Vrese, M., Cellier, C.J. and Schrezenmeir, J (2001). Protection from
gastrointestinal diseases with the use of probiotics. American Journal of Clinical
Nutrition 73(suppl): 430S–436S.
Marteau, P., Lemann, M., Seksik, P., Laharie, D., Colombei, J.F., Bouhnik, Y., et al.
(2006). Ineffectiveness of Lactobacillus johnsonii LA1 for prophylaxis of postoperative
recurrence in Crohn's disease: a randomised, double blind, placebo controlled GETAID
trial. Gut 55: 842-847.
Maxvell, P.R., Mendall, M.A. and Kumar, D. (1997). Irritable bowel syndrome, Lancet
350: 1691-1695.
McClain, C.J., Barve, S., Deaciuc, I., Kugelmas, M. and Hill, D. (1999). Cytokines in
alcoholic liver disease. Semin. Liver Dis. 19: 205–220.
McDonald, L.C., Killgore, G.E., Thompson, A., Owens, Jr. R.C., Kazakova, S.V.,
Sambol, S.P., Johnson, S. and Gerding, D.N. (2005). An epidemic, toxin gene–variant
strain of Clostridium difficile. N. Eng. J. Med. 353: 2433-2441.
McFarland, L.V. (1993). Diarrhoea acquired in the hospital. Gastroenterol. Clin. North
Am. 22: 563-577.
McNaught, C.E., Woodcock, N.P., Anderson, A.D.G. and MacFie, J. (2005). A
prospective randomised trial of probiotics in critically ill patients. Clinical Nutrition 24:
211-219.
Medina, J., Fernández-Salazar, L.I., García-Buey, L. and Moreno-Otero, R. (2004).
Approach to the pathogenesis and treatment of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Diabetes
Care 27: 2057-2066.
Mikelsaar, M., Stsepetova, J., Hütt, P., Kolk, H., Sepp, E., Lõivukene, K., Zilmer, K.
and Zilmer, M. (2010). Intestinal Lactobacillus sp. is associated with some cellular and
metabolic characteristics of blood in elderly people. Anaerobe 16: 240–246.
Nagata, S., Asahara, T., Ohta, T., Yamada, T., Kondo, S., Bian, L., Wang, C.,
Yamashiro, Y. and Nomot, K. (2011). Effect of the continuous intake of probiotic-
fermented milk containing Lactobacillus casei strain Shirota on fever in a mass
outbreak of norovirus gastroenteritis and the faecal microflora in a health service facility
for the aged. British Journal of Nutrition 106: 549–556.
Nair, S., Cope, K., Risby, T.H. and Diehl, A.M. (2001). Obesity and female gender
increase breath ethanol concentration: potential implications for the pathogenesis of
nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 96: 1200-1204.
Naruszewicz, M., Johansson, M-L., Zapolska-Downar, D., and Bukowska, H. (2002).
Effect of Lactobacillus plantarum 299v on cardiovascular disease risk factors in
smokers, Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 76: 1249-1255.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
160
Niedzielin, K., Kordecki, H. and Birkenfeld, B. (2001). A controlled, double-blind,
randomized study on the efficacy of Lactobacillus plantarum 299v in patients with
irritable bowel syndrome. European Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 13:
1143-1147.
Nishikawa, J., Kudo, T., Sakata, S., Benno, Y. and Sugiyama, T. (2009). Diversity of
mucosa-associated microbiota in active and inactive ulcerative colitis. Scand. J.
Gastroenterol. 44: 180-186.
Nobaek, S., Johansson, M-L., Molin, G., Ahrné, S., and Jeppsson, B. (2000). Alteration
of intestinal microflora is associated with reduction in abdominal bloating and pain in
patients with irritable bowel syndrome. American Journal of Gastroenterology 95:
1231-1238.
Olah, A., Belagyi, T., Issekutz, A., Gamal, M.E. and Bengmark, S. (2002). Randomized
clinical trial of specific Lactobacillus and fibre supplement to early enteral nutrition in
patients with acute pancreatitis. British Journal of Surgery 89: 1103-1107.
O’Mahony, L., McCarthy, J., Kelly, P., Hurley, G., Luo, F., Chen, K., O’Sullivan, G.C.,
Kiely, B., Collins, K., Shanahan, F. and Quigley, E.M.M. (2005). Lactobacillus and
Bifidobacterium in irritable bowel syndrome: Symptom responses and relationship to
cytokine profiles. Gastroenterology 128: 541–551.
Osman, N., Adawi, D., Ahrné, S. Jeppsson, B. and Molin, G. (2005). Probiotic strains of
Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium affect differently the translocation and intestinal load
of Enterobacteriaceae after D-galactosamine-induced liver injury in rats. Microbial
Ecology in Health and Disease 17: 40-46.
Parker, R.B. (1974). Probiotics, the other half of the antibiotic story. Animal Nutr.
Health 29: 4-8.
Pendyala, S., Walker, J.M. and Holt, P.R. (2012). A high fat diet is associated with
endotoxemia that originates from the gut. Gastroenterology 142: 1100-1101.
Pépin, J., Valiquette, L., Alary, M-E., Villemure, P., Pelletier, A., Forget, K., Pépin, K.
and Chouinard, D. (2003). Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea in a region of
Quebec from 1991 to 2003: a changing pattern of disease severity. CMAJ 171: 466-
472.
Pessayre, D., Mansouri, A. and Fromenty, B. (2002). Nonalcoholic steatosis and
steatohepatitis. V. Mitochondrial dysfunction in steatohepatitis. Am. J. Physiol.
Gastrointest. Liver Physiol. 282 : G193-G199.
Pitcher, M.C., Beatty, E.R. and Cummings, J.H. (2000). The contribution of sulphate
reducing bacteria and 5 aminosalicylic acid to faecal sulphide in patients with ulcerative
colitis. Gut 46: 64-72.
Prantera, C., Scribano, M.L., Falasco, G., Andreoli, A. and Luzi, C. (2002).
Ineffectiveness of probiotics in preventing recurrence after curative resection for
Crohn's disease: a randomised controlled trial with Lactobacillus GG. Gut 51: 405-409.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
161
Qin, H-L., Zheng, J-J., Tong, D-N., Chen, W-X., Fan, X-B., Hang, X-M. and Jiang, Y-
Q. (2008). Effect of Lactobacillus plantarum enteral feeding on the gut permeability
and septic complications in the patients with acute pancreatitis. European Journal of
Clinical Nutrition 62: 923–930.
Read, A.E., McCarthy, C.F., Heaton, K.W. and Laidlaw, J. (1966). Lactobacillus
acidophilus (Enpac) in treatment of hepatic encephalopathy. British Medical Journal 1:
1267–1269.
Ricciardi, R., Rothenberger, D.A., Madoff, R.D. and Baxter, N.N. (2007). Increasing
prevalence and severity of Clostridium difficile colitis in hospitalized patients in the
United States. Arch. Surg. 142: 624-631.
Rowan, F.E., Docherty, N.G., Coffey, J.C. and O'Connell, P.R. (2009). Sulphate-
reducing bacteria and hydrogen sulphide in the aetiology of ulcerative colitis. Br. J.
Surg. 96: 151-158.
Sang, L.X., Chang, B., Zhang, W.L., Wu, X.M., Li, X.H. and Jiang, M. (2010).
Remission induction and maintenance effect of probiotics on ulcerative colitis: a meta-
analysis. World J. Gastroenterol. 16: 1908-1915.
Schultz, M., Timmer, A., Herfarth, H.H., Sartor, R.B., Vanderhoof, J.A. and Rath, H.C.
(2004). Lactobacillus GG in inducing and maintaining remission of Crohn's disease.
BMC Gastroenterology 4: 1-5.
Sen, S., Mullan, M.M., Parker, T.J., Woolner, J.T., Tarry, S.A. and Hunter, J.O. (2002).
Effect of Lactobacillus plantarum 299v on colonic fermentation and symptoms of
irritable bowel syndrome. Digestive Diseases and Sciences 47: 2615-2620.
Sood, A., Midha, V., Makharia, G.K., Ahuja, V., Singal, D., Goswam,i P. and Tandon,
R.K. (2009). The probiotic preparation, VSL#3 induces remission in patients with mild-
to-moderately active ulcerative colitis. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 7: 1202-1209.
Stadlbauer, V, Mookerjee, R.P., Hodges, S., Wright , G.A.K., Davies, N.A. and Jalan,
R. (2008). Effect of probiotic treatment on deranged neutrophil function and cytokine
responses in patients with compensated alcoholic cirrhosis. J. Hepatol. 48: 945–951.
Such, J., Guardiola, J.V., de Juan, J., Casellas, J.A., Pascual, S., Aparicio, J.R., Solá-
Vera, J. and Pérez-Mateo M. (2002). Ultrastructural characteristics of distal duodenum
mucosa in patients with cirrhosis. Eur. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 14: 371–376.
Thompson, W.G., Creed, F., Drossman, D.A., Heaton, K.W., and Mazzacca, G. (1992).
Functional bowel disease and functional abdominal pain. Gastroenterol. Internat. 5:
75-91.
Turnbaugh, P.J., Ley, R.E., Mahowald, M.A., Magrini,V., Mardis, E.R. and Gordon
(2006). An obesity-associated gut microbiome with increased capacity for energy
harvest. Nature 444: 1027-1031.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
162
van Baarlena, P., Troosta, F.J., van Hemerta, S., van der Meera, C., de Vose, W.M., de
Groota, P.J., Hooivelda, G.J.E.J., Brummera, R-J. M. and Kleerebezema, M. (2009).
Differential NF- B pathways induction by Lactobacillus plantarum in the duodenum of
healthy humans correlating with immune tolerance. PNAS 106: 2371–2376.
van Gossum, A., Dewit, O., Louis, E., de Hertogh, G., Baert, F., Fontaine, F., DeVos,
M., Enslen, M., Paintin, M. and Franchimont, D. (2007). Multicenter randomized-
controlled clinical trial of probiotics (Lactobacillus johnsonii, LA1) on early endoscopic
recurrence of Crohn's disease after lleo-caecal resection. Inflamm. Bowel Dis. 13: 135-
142.
Wang, M., Adawi, D., Molin, G., Pettersson, B., Jeppsson, B. and Ahrné, S. (2001).
Identification of the translocating bacteria in rats with acute liver injury and their
relation to the bacterial flora of the intestinal mucosa. APMIS, 109: 551-558.
Wang, M., Molin, G., Ahrné, S., Adawi, D. and Jeppsson, B. (2007). High proportions
of proinflammatory bacteria on the colonic mucosa in a young patient with ulcerative
colitis as revealed by cloning and sequencing of 16S rRNA genes. Digestive Diseases
and Science 52: 620-627.
West, C. (2008). In: Effects on adaptive immunity and gut microbial function,
Ph.D. thesis, Umeå University.
Wiström, J., Norrby, S.R., Myhre, E.B., Eriksson, S., Granström, G., Lagergren, L.,
Rnglund, G., Nord, C.E. and Svennungson, B. (2001). Frequency of antibiotic-
associated diarrhoea in 2462 antibiotic-treated hospitalized patients: a prospective study.
J. Antimicr. Chemoth. 47: 43-50.
Younossi, Z.M., Diehl, A.M. and Ong, J.P. (2002). Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: An
agenda for clinical research. Hepatology 35: 746–752.
Xu, W.H., Wu, X.J. and Li, J.S. Influence of portal pressure change on intestinal
permeability in patients with portal hypertension. (2002). Hepatobiliary Pancreat. Dis.
Int. 1: 510–514.
Zhanga, H., DiBaiseb, J.K., Zuccoloc, A., Kudrnac, D., Braidottic, M., Yuc, Y.,
Parameswarana, P., Crowellb, M.D., Wingc, R., Rittmanna, B.E. and Krajmalnik-
Brown, R. (2009). Human gut microbiota in obesity and after gastric bypass. PNAS
106:2365-2370.
Zocco, M.A., dal Verme, L.Z., Cremonini, F., Piscaglia. A.C., Nista, E.C., Candell,i M.,
Nov,i M., Rigante, D., Cazzato, I.A., Ojetti, V., Armuzzi, A., Gasbarrini, G. and
Gasbarrini, A. (2006). Efficacy of Lactobacillus GG in maintaining remission of
ulcerative colitis. Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. 23: 1567-1574.
Zoetendal, E.G., von Wright, A., Vilpponen-Salmela, T., Ben-Amor, K., Akkermans,
A.D. and de Vos, W.M. (2002). Mucosa-associated bacteria in the human
gastrointestinal tract are uniformly distributed along the colon and differ from the
community recovered from feces. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 68: 3401-3407.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
163
Zuckerman, M.J., Menzies, I.S., Ho, H., Gregory, G.G., Casner, N.A., Crane, R.S. and
Hernandez, J.A. (2004). Assessment of intestinal permeability and absorption in
cirrhotic patients with ascites using combined sugar probes. Dig. Dis. Sci. 49: 621–626.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
164
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
165
Appendix A:
Inflammation
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
166
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
167
Defence
Inflammation is a defence-reaction of the body against an injury. The word
inflammation originates from the Latin “inflammatio” which means fire. Inflammation
is traditionally characterised by redness, swelling, pain, heat and impaired body
functions. Redness and heat are caused by increased blood flow, swelling by
accumulation of fluid, and pain by the swelling, but also by release of compounds
giving rise to nerve signals. Impaired functions can be caused by different reasons but,
in a certain analogy to fire, inflammation is devastating in order to clear away harmful
agents and so to say prepare the ground for healing.
Inflammation can be triggered off by both internal and external factors. Powerful
triggers for inflammation are the presence of microorganisms in sites where they do not
belong. Microorganisms contain structures alien to the body. For example, bacteria have
cell walls in contrast to human cells and the bacterial cell wall includes lots of
compounds that are alien to the human body. Cells and molecules involved in the
inflammatory defence system react immediately against alien elements that become
danger signals to the body. Inflammation can also be triggered by injuries to body tissue
and breakage of body-cells. When the cells are damaged, compounds that are normally
hidden within the cells are released and become danger signals.
All forms of immune reactions will lead to activation of the inflammatory defence
system. Consequently, inflammation can be started by infections, decomposition of
body tissue by trauma and autoimmunity or allergy. In autoimmunity the specific
immune system attacks body cells and tissue and trigger the inflammation, and in
allergy the inflammation is provoked by the specific immune system being activated
against different types of harmless compounds in the environment.
Inflammation is initiated by cells already present in the tissue, for example, resident
macrophages, dendritic cells and mast cells. Danger signals trigger these cells into
activation, and inflammatory mediators are released, which starts the process
responsible for the clinical signs of inflammation.
The process of inflammation proceeds along the following stages:
1) Blood vessels are expanded which lead to increased blood flow.
2) The permeability of the wall of the blood vessels is increased, which results in an
outflow of fluid and plasma proteins into the tissue.
3) White blood cells are recruited from the blood circulation to the tissue.
When the process of inflammation has been initiated, it will proceed until the source of
the inflammation has been erased and the process of healing can start. However, if the
cause of the inflammation cannot be eliminated, the inflammation will continue, and
then it will often vary in intensity over time.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
168
Acute, chronic and subclinical
In acute inflammation, there will be an accumulation of neutrophils (neutophil
granulocytes) in the inflamed tissue, while in chronic inflammation there will be an
accumulation of lymphocytes, macrophages and plasma cells in the tissue and these will
also infiltrate the connecting tissue. In an allergic reaction, however, there will be a
rapid accumulation of eosinophils (eosinophil granulocytes) and T-lymphocytes, and
sometimes also neutrophils (Mölne and Wold 2007). Acute inflammation is typically
caused by an infection, but death of human cells or decomposition of cancer tumours
will lead to acute inflammation. Chronic inflammation can, for example, be caused by
autoimmune diseases and reactions against foreign elements.
In an acute inflammatory response, the concentration of acute phase proteins such as C
reactive protein (CRC) and serum amyloid A protein (SAA) can increase steeply and
rise to 10 000-fold above the normal value (Pepys and Baltz 1983). However, different
markers for acute inflammation can also be monitored more closely for minor
deviations from normality. This type of slight elevation from the norm can be called
“low-grade inflammation”, or “subclinical inflammation”. Consequently, in this type of
condition the sharp short-term fluctuations of inflammatory markers are ignored;
instead, long-term systemic concentrations of the markers are taken into account,
especially if they correlate with more obvious risk factors such as, for example, blood
cholesterol and blood pressure. Low-grade systemic inflammation is associated with an
increased risk of cardiovascular disease (Ridker 2003). Obese individuals have higher
CRP levels than subjects of normal weight (Visser et al. 199; Piéroni et al. 2003).
Immunoactive cells and components
Gut-associated lymphoid tissue
The gut is associated with several types of lymphoid organs that collectively are
referred to as gut-associated lymphoid tissue (GALT). GALT is the largest collection of
lymphoid tissues in the body and consists of organised lymphoid tissues comprising
mesenteric lymph nodes, Payer´s patches, isolated lymphoid follicles, and
cryptopatches, as well as diffusely scattered lymphocytes and dendritic cells in the
lamina propria and intestinal epithelium. Some of them, such as Payer’s patches and the
isolated lymphoid follicles, are within the intestinal mucosa itself. In addition, intestinal
lymph drains into the mesenteric lymph nodes, which constitute a key checkpoint to
determine the anatomical location of tolerogenic or inflammatory responses.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
169
Macrophages
Macrophages have different major functions in inflammation, i.e. (i) antigen
presentation, (ii) phagocytosis and (iii) immune-modulation through production of
various cytokines and growth factors. Monocytes/macrophages produce a wide range of
biologically active molecules participating in both beneficial and detrimental outcomes
of inflammatory reactions. They are also able to phagocytose and destroy infectious
agents. Therefore, monocytes/macrophages play a critical role in initiation,
maintenance, and resolution of inflammation. Macrophages form varying phenotypes
depending on what signals they encounter. Different subsets of macrophages express
different patterns of chemokines, surface markers and metabolic enzymes.
Toll-like receptors
Intestinal epithelial cells are capable of detecting bacterial antigens and initiating and
regulating both innate and adaptive immune responses. Signals from bacteria can be
transmitted to adjacent immune cells such as macrophages, dendritic cells and
lymphocytes through molecules expressed on the epithelial cell surface, for example, by
Toll-like receptors (TLRs) (Cario et al. 2002). TLRs alert the immune system to the
presence of highly conserved microbial antigens often termed “pathogen-associated
molecular patterns” (PAMPs) present on most microorganisms. Examples of PAMPs
include LPS, peptidoglycan, flagellin, and microbial nucleic acids. At least ten types of
human TLRs are known.
NOD-like receptors
Besides the TLRs there is another family of membrane-bound receptors for detection of
proteins called NOD-like receptors or “nucleotide-binding domain, leucine-rich repeat
containing” proteins (NLRs). The best characterised members are NOD1 and NOD2,
but more than twenty different NLRs have been identified. NRLs are located in the
cytoplasm and are involved in the detection of bacterial PAMPs that enter the body-cell.
NRLs are especially important in tissues where TLRs only are expressed at low levels
(Philpott et al. 2001). This is the case in the epithelial cells of the GI-tract where the
cells are in constant contact with the microbiota, and the expression of TLRs must be
down-regulated in order to avoid over-stimulation. On the other hand, if these epithelial
gut-cells become infected with invasive bacteria or bacteria interacting directly with the
plasma membrane, they will come into contact with NLRs and defence mechanisms can
be activated (Girardin et al. 2001). NLRs are also involved in sensing other endogenous
warning signals which will result in the activation of inflammatory signalling pathways,
such as nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-κB) and mitogen-activated protein kinases
(MAPKs). Both NOD1 and NOD2 recognise peptidoglycan moieties found in bacteria.
NOD1 can sense peptidoglycan moieties containing meso-diaminopimelic acid, which
primarily are associated to gram-negative bacteria. NOD2 senses the muramyl dipeptide
motif that can be found in a wider range of bacteria (Girardin et al. 2003; Hasegawa et
al. 2006). The ability of NRLs to regulate, for example, nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-κB)
signalling and interleukin-1-beta (IL-1β) production, indicates that they are important
for the pathogenesis of inflammatory human diseases, such as Crohn’s disease.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
170
Microfold cells
The follicle-associated epithelium, which covers Peyer’s patches (organized lymphoid
tissue, measuring a few centimetres in length) is located along the small intestine (about
30) and is particularly abundant in the ileum. The epithelium harbours shorter villi that
contain a type of specialised cells called microfold cells (M cells). M cells have
numerous microfolds on the epithelial side and are specialised in capturing antigens,
apoptotic epithelial cells or bacteria from the lumen, and transport them to Peyer’s
patches for sampling by dendritic cells or for destruction by macrophages (Newberry
and Lorenz, 2005).
Dendritic cells and intra-epithelial lymphocytes
Dendritic cells may present antigen locally to T cells, migrate to T cell zones or to
mesenteric lymph nodes, or interact with memory B cells (Pickard et al. 2004). Both
pathogenic and non-pathogenic bacteria can also enter the mucosal tissue through
lamina propria associated dendritic cells, which extend their dendrites through epithelial
cell tight junctions (Rescigno et al. 2001).
Also, intra-epithelial lymphocytes located in the epithelium might recognise microbial
antigens (Cheroutre 2004). In addition to intestinal epithelial cells, the epithelium
includes specialised cells such as goblet cells, which secrete the protective mucus layer
limiting the contact between bacteria and epithelial cells, and Paneth cells, which reside
in the crypts of the small intestine and secrete bactericidal peptides (Cash et al. 2006).
IgA antibodies
Secretory IgA is the predominant class of immunoglobulin found in intestinal
secretions. It is produced by plasma cells residing in the lamina propria and is
transported to the lumen by the polyimmunoglobulin receptor. IgA molecules contribute
to specific immunity by capturing antigens, thereby inhibiting mucosal penetration
(Cerutti and Rescigno 2008).
References
Anderson, C.F. and Mosser, D.M. (2002). A novel phenotype for an activated
macrophage: The type 2 activated macrophage. J. Leukoc. Biol. 72: 101–106.
Cash, H.L., Whitham, C.V., Behrendt, C.L. and Hooper, L.V. (2006). Symbiotic
bacteria direct expression of an intestinal bactericidal lectin. Science 313: 1126–1130.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
171
Cario, E., Brown, D., McKee, M., Lynch-Devaney, K., Gerken, G. and Podolsky, D.K.
(2002). Commensal associated molecular patterns induce selective toll-like receptor-
trafficking from apical membrane to cytoplasmic compartments in polarized intestinal
epithelium. Am. J. Pathol. 160: 165–173.
Cerutti, A. and Rescigno, M. (2008). The biology of intestinal immunoglobulin A
responses. Immunity 28: 740–750.
Cheroutre, H. (2004). Starting at the beginning: new perspectives on the biology of
mucosal T cells. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 22: 217–246.
Fichorova, R.N., Cronin, A.O., Lien, E., Anderson, D.J. and Ingalls, R.R. (2002).
Response to Neisseria gonorrhoeae by cervicovaginal epithelial cells occurs in the
absence of toll-like receptor 4-mediated signalling. J. Immunol. 168: 2424–2432.
Girardin, S.E., Tournebize, R., Mavris, M., Page, A.L., Li, X., Stark, G.R., Bertin, J.,
DiStefano, P.S., Yaniv, M., Sansonetti, P.J. et al. (2001). CARD4/Nod1 mediates NF-
kappaB and JNK activation by invasive Shigella flexneri. EMBO Rep. 2: 736–742.
Girardin, S.E., Boneca, I.G., Carneiro, L.A., Antignac, A., Jéhanno, M., Viala, J., Tedin,
K., Taha, M.K., Labigne, A., Zähringer, U. et al. (2003). Nod1 detects a unique
muropeptide from gram-negative bacterial peptidoglycan. Science 300: 1584–1587.
Gordon, S. (2003). Alternative activation of macrophages. Nat. Rev. 3: 23–35.
Hasegawa, M., Yang, K., Hashimoto, M., Park, J.H., Kim, Y.G., Fujimoto, Y., Nuñez,
G., Fukase, K. and Inohara, N. (2006). Differential release and distribution of Nod1 and
Nod2 immunostimulatory molecules among bacterial species and environments. J. Biol.
Chem. 281: 29054–29063.
Mölne, J. and Wold, A. (2007). Inflammation, 1st ed.; Liber AB: Stockholm, Sweden.
Mosser, D.M. (2003). The many faces of macrophage activation. J. Leukoc. Biol. 73:
209–212.
Newberry, R.D. and Lorenz, R.G. (2005). Organizing a mucosal defence. Immunol. Rev.
206: 6–21.
Pepys, M.B. and Baltz, M.L. (1983). Acute phase proteins with special reference to C-
reactive and related proteins (pentaxins) and serum amyloid A protein. Adv. Immunol.
34: 141–212.
Philpott, D.J., Girardin, S.E. and Sansonetti, P.J. (2001). Innate immune responses of
epithelial cells following infection with bacterial pathogens. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 13:
410–416.
Piéroni, L., Bastard, J.P., Piton, A., Khalil, L., Hainque, B. and Jardel, C. (2003).
Interpretation of circulating C-reactive protein levels in adults: Body mass index and
gender are a must. Diabetes Metab. 29: 133–138.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
172
Pickard, K.M., Bremner, A.R., Gordon, J.N. and MacDonald, T.T. (2004). Microbial
gut interactions in health and disease. Immune responses. Best Pract. Res. Clin.
Gastroenterol. 18: 271−285.
Poltorak, A., He, X.; Smirnova, I., Liu, M.Y., Van Huffel, C., Du, X., Birdwell, D.,
Alejos, E., Silva, M., Galanos, C. et al. (1998). Defective LPS signalling in C3H/HeJ
and C57BL/10ScCr mice: Mutations in Tlr4 gene. Science 282: 2085–2088.
Qureshi, S.T., Lariviere, L., Leveque, G., Clermont, S., Moore, K.J., Gros, P. and Malo,
D. (1999). Endotoxin-tolerant mice have mutations in Toll-like receptor 4 (Tlr4). J. Exp.
Med. 189: 615–625.
Rescigno, M., Urbano, M., Valzasina, B., Francolini, M., Rotta, G., Bonasio, R.,
Granucci, F., Kraehenbuhl, J.P. and Ricciardi-Castagnoli, P. (2001). Dendritic cells
express tight junction proteins and penetrate gut epithelial monolayers to sample
bacteria. Nat. Immunol. 2: 361–367.
Ridker, P.M. (2003). Clinical application of C-reactive protein for cardiovascular
disease detection and prevention. Circulation 107: 363–369.
Schwandner, R., Dziarski, R., Wesche, H., Rothe, M. and Kirschning, C.J. (1999).
Peptidoglycan- and lipoteichoic acid-induced cell activation is mediated by Toll-like
receptor 2. J. Biol. Chem. 274: 17406–17409.
Takeuchi, O., Kaufmann, A., Grote, K., Kawai, T., Hoshino, K., Morr, M., Mühlradt,
P.F. and Akira, S. (2000). Cutting edge: Preferentially the R-stereoisomer of the
mycoplasmal lipopeptide macrophage-activating lipopeptide-2 activates immune cells
through a toll-like receptor 2- and MyD88-dependent signalling pathway. J. Immunol.
164: 554–557.
Testro, A.G. and Visvanathan, K. (2009). Toll-like receptors and their role in
gastrointestinal disease. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 24: 943–954.
Visser, M., Bouter, L.M., McQuillan, G.M., Wener, M.H. and Harris, T.B. (1999).
Elevated C-reactive protein levels in overweight and obese adults. JAMA 282: 2131–
2135.
Zarember, K.A. and Godowski, P.J. (2002). Tissue expression of human Toll-like
receptors and differential regulation of Toll-like receptor mRNAs in leukocytes in
response to microbes, their products, and cytokines. J. Immunol. 168: 554–561.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
173
Appendix B
Oxidative stress
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
174
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
175
Reactive oxygen species and antioxidants
Oxidative stress is caused by an excess of oxygen free radicals. Oxidative stress can
damage tissue, DNA, proteins and lipids and when injuring the body cells, the body
responds with inflammation. The most cell-damaging effect of reactive oxygen species
(ROS) is presumably lipid peroxidation of polyunsaturated fatty acids and
phospholipids in the cell membranes. The peroxidation changes structure and
permeability of the cell membrane. Oxidative stress can initiate, but also enhance
inflammation.
Oxidation is a free radical chain reaction, and so called “reactive oxygen species”
(ROS) include not only oxygen free radicals but also some nonradical derivates as
hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) and hyperchlorous acid (HOCL). In the cell, ROS are
involved in the energy generation, and in synthesis, cell growth and cell maintenance.
ROS are also used by immune cells in connection to phagocytosis to kill the alien
microorganism. Immune cells as neutrophils and macrophages can produce large
amounts of oxygen free radicals in order to kill the phagocyted microorganisms.
Inflammation leads to overproduction of ROS (Halliwell 1997).
The human body possesses antioxidant system in protection from the adverse effects of
ROS. There are antioxidative enzymes as, for example, superoxide dismutase, catalase,
glutathione peroxidise and glutathione reductase. There are also a nonenzymatic
defence of antioxidants, e.g. glutathione, alfa-topopherol, ascorbic acid and iron-binding
proteins. An antioxidant can be defined as a substance that, when present at low
concentration compared to that of an oxidizable substrate, delay or prevent its oxidation
(Shahidi and Zhong 2010).
Important dietary antioxidants are polyphenols of plant origin, carotenoids and vitamins
C, E and A. Antioxidants can exert different mode of inhibitory effects against
oxidation. They can scavenge free radicals, chelate metal ions, inactivate ROS and
inhibit pro-oxidative enzymes. Most polyphenols breaks the chain reaction of oxidation
and neutralize free radical by donating a hydrogen atom. The formed antioxidant radical
is stabilized by delocalization of the unpaired electron around the phenol ring to form
stable resonance hybrids (Shahidi et al. 1992).
Oxygen free radicals
Oxygen metabolism leads to production of oxygen free radicals, i.e.
O2- . HO2
.
. OH H2O2
Oxygen free radicals are reactive and cause cell damage if they are not disarmed.
The superoxide radical is formed when a single electron is transferred from a substrate
to the oxygen molecule:
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
176
In water, O2-
. is converted to HO2
. (proteonated) and
. OH (the hydroxyl radical). HO2
.
and . OH are the most reactive and harmful forms of oxygen free radicals. However, the
conversion from the superoxide form must be catalysed by a metal, preferably iron or
copper (Halliwell 1997):
Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) is formed spontaneously:
Antioxidative reaction
Organisms living in environments exposed to oxygen and metabolising oxygen have
active defence system for taking care of the oxygen free radicals. For example, they can
possess superoxide dismutase, catalase or peroxidise:
Strictly anaerobic bacteria as Bifidobacterium lack these enzymes and are also unable to
use oxygen in their metabolism. They are also sensitive for exposure to oxygen.
More microaerophilic than anaerobic bacteria as Lactobacillus are sometimes, at least to
a minor extent able to utilize oxygen in the metabolism. However, this ability differs
between species. Species as L. reuteri and L. acidophilus are usually relatively sensitive
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
177
to oxygen while species as L. plantarum, L. rhamnosus and L. paracasei are more
oxygen resistant.
Lactobacillus never possesses superoxide dismutase. Superoxide dismutase is typically
found in truly aerobic organisms. For example, Lactococcus have superoxide dismutase.
L. plantarum use instead manganese for the protection against oxygen free radicals. In
fact L. plantarum is quite unique in the biological world due to the fact that L.
plantarum can grow and multiply in the complete absence of iron. L. plantarum does
not have any iron containing enzymes which is most unusual in biology. This may be an
advantage in the protection from oxygen free radicals, i.e. the conversion of the
superoxide radical to a hydroxyl radical is efficiently catalysed by iron, and
in the absence of iron less hydroxyl radicals are formed.
There is also Lactobacillus species that possess NADH-oxidase and NADH peroxidise
for taking care of the oxygen free radicals.
References
Halliwell, B. (1997). Antioxidants and human disease: a general introduction. Nutr. Rev.
55: S44-S52.
Shahidi, F., Janitha, P.K. and Wanasundara, P.D. (1992). Phenolic antioxidants. Crit.
Rev. Food. Sci Nutr. 32: 67-103.
Shahidi, F. and Zhong, Y. (2010). Lipid oxidation and improving the oxidative stability.
Chem. Soc. Rev. 39: 4067-4079.
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
178
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
179
Index
abscess
acetaldehyde
acetic acid
acetoin
acetone
Acidobacteria
Acinetobacter
A. baumannii
A. johnsonii
Actimel
Actinobacteria
Activia
acute
acute phase protein
Adanson
aerobe
Aeromonas
age
Agidi
aggravator
Akkermansia
A. muciniphila
Alanine aminotransferase (ALT)
Alcaligenaceae
Ale
Alistipes
A. putredinis (former Bacteroides putredinis)
allergy
ALT
ammonium
amyloid A protein (SAA)
anaerobe
Anaerotruncus
animal model
antibody
antioxidant
application
Aquifcae
Archaea
Aristotle
aspartate aminotransferase (AST)
AST
ATCC (American type culture collection)
Atobium
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
180
Atopic
Auk
Aurbacteruim
butyric acid
essence
autoimmunity
autotrophe
Bacilli
Bacillus
B. cereus
B. anthracis
Bacteria
bacterial flora
bacteriocin
Bacteroidia
Bacteroides
B. caccae
B. capillosus
B. dorei
B. eggerthii
B. finegoldii
B. fragilis
B. intestinalis
B. pectinophilus
B. putredinis
B. merdae
B. ovatus
B. stercoris
B. thetaiotaomicron
B. vulgatus
B. xylanisolvens
Bacteroidetes
Bactufugation
balance
barrier
baseline
base pair composition
basophile granulocyte (basophile)
B-cell
Behçet’s syndrome
benzoic acid
beta-glucan
Betaproteobacteria
Bifidobacteriaceae
Bifidobacteriales
Bifidobacterium
B. animalis
B. animalis BB12
B. animalis DN-173010
B. bifidum
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
181
B. bifidum MF 20/3
B. breve
B. infantis
B. infantis 35624
B. longum
B. longum SP 07/3
B. longum subspecies infantis DSM 15158
B. longum subspecies infantis CURE19
B. lactis
Bifico
Bifidus Regularis
bile
bilirubin
Bilophila
B. wadsworthia
blackberry
blackcurrant
Blautia
blood pressure
blueberry
B-lymphocyte
Brachyspira
B. aalborgi
Brachyspiraceae
brest
B-vitamin
butanediol
Butyrivibrio
cabbage
calcium
Caliciviridae
calicivirus
cancer
caper berries
Capparis
carbon dioxide
carboxylic acid
carcinoma
Cardiobacteriaceae
Cardiobacterium
Carnobacterium
C. divergens
C. hominis
C. piscicola
cassava
CCM (Czech collection of microorganisms)
CCUG (culture collection University of Göteborg)
CD (cluster of different ion)
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
182
CD56
CD284
Cellulomonas
Cesalpino
cheese
Cheddar
Chemoautotroph
chemokine
chemotherapy
child
Chlamydiae
Chlorobi
Chloroflexi
cholera
cholesterol
Chorizos
chronic
Chrysiogenetes
cirrhosis
citrate
cladogram
claudin
class
classification
coagulation
coeliac disease
cold
colitis
collagenous colitis
colon
Coprococcus
core
corona virus
Cracraft
clone
cloning
Clostridia
Clostridiaceae
Clostridium
C. aminobutyricum
C. aminophilum
C. boltei
C. botulinum
C. difficile
C. lactatifermentans
C. leptum
C. orbiscindens
C. oroticum
C. perfringens
C. putrefaciens
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
183
C. symbiosum
C. tyrobutyricum
Collinsella
complement system
C-reactive protein (CRP)
Critical-care
Crohn’s disease
cucumber
Cucumis sativis
Cytokine
Cytotoxic
CXC
Deferribacteres
Deinococcus-Thermus
Deltaproteobacteria
dendric cell
dermatitis
Desulfovibrionaceae
D-galactosamine
diabetes
diacetyl
Dialiser
D. invisus
diarrhoea
Dictyoglomi
DNA
DNA:DNA-homology
DNA:DNA-hybridization
domain
Dorea
D. formicigenerans
Dose
DSS (dextran sulphate sodium)
dysbacteriosis
dysbiosis
eczema
EEC (enterovirulent E. coli)
Eggerthella
E. lenta
EIEC (enteroinvasive E. coli)
EHEC (enterohemorrhagic E. coli)
Eleusine coacana
ellagic acid
empire
endotoxaemia
endotoxin
end-point
Ensete ventricosum
Enterobacter
Enterobacteriaceae
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
184
Enterobacteriales
Enterococcus
E. faecium
E. faecalis
enteropathogen
enterotoxin
eosinophil granulocyte (eosinophil)
EPEC (enteropathogenic E. coli)
epigenetic
epithelial
Erysipelotrichia
Erysipelotrichaceae
Escherichia
E. coli
ETEC (enterotoxigenetic E. coli)
ethanol
Eubacteriaceae
Eubacterium
Eubacterium
E. eligens
E. formicigenerans
E. halii
Eucarya
Euzéby
facultatively heterofermentative
Faecalibacterium
F. prausnitzii
Family
FBD (functional bowel disorder)
FDA (Food and drug administration)
fermentation
fever
fibrinogen
Fibrobacteres
fibrosis
filmjölk
Firmicutes
flavanol
flavonoid
flavonol
folic acid
forage
FoxP3 (fork head box P3)
F2-isoprostane
Friscus
fructo-oligosaccharides
Fusobacteria
F. varium
Fusobacteriaceae
Fusobacterium
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
185
gallic acid
gall-stone
GALT
Gammaproteobacteria
GAS
gastro-intestinal (GI)
G+C-ratio
Gemmatimonadetes
genus
goblet cell
Gram
Gram-reaction
Gut-associated lymphoid tissue (GALT)
Haemophilus
H. parainfluenzae
H-antigen
Haptoglbin
HDL-cholesterol
Helicobacter pylori
Hennig
hepatic stellate cell
hepatitis
hepatocyte
heterofermentative
heterotrophe
Hieracium
histone
Holdemania
Homofermentative
HT-29 cell
HUS (haemolytic uremic syndrome)
hydrogen
hydrogen peroxide
hydrogen sulphide
hydroxybezoic acid
hydroxyl radical
hyperlipidaemia
hypochlorite
IBD (inflammatory bowel disease)
IBS (irritable bowel syndrome)
icterus
IgA
IFN-gamma
IL-1
IL1-beta
IL-2
IL-4
IL-6
IL-8
IL-10
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
186
IL-12
IL-13
Ileum
immune-modulation
immune system
infant
influenza virus
intensive-care
interferon
interleukin (IL)
inulin
iron
ischemia
ischemic colitis
isolate
jaundice
jejunum
K-antigen
Kimchi
Kiviak
Klebsiella
K. pneumoniae
Koch
Kocho
kupffer cell
lactic acid
LAB (lactic acid bacteria)
Lachnospiraceae
Lactobacillaceae
Lactobacillales
Lactobacillus
L. acidophilus
L. amylovorus
L. brevis
L. bulgaricus
L. casei
L. casei Shirota
L. casei defencis
L. casei DN-11401
L. crispatus
L. delbrueckii
L. delbrueckii subspecies bulgaricus
L. fermentum
L. fermentum ME-3
L. fermentum RC-14
L. helveticus
L. gallinarum
L. gasseri
L. gasseri PA 16/8
L. jensenii
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
187
L. johnsonii
L. johnsonii La1 (Lj1)
L. kefir
L. kefiranofaciens
L. paracasei
L. paracasei F19
L. paracasei 8700:2
L. pararplantarum
L. pentosus
L. plantarum
L. plantarum 299v
L. plantarum WCFS1
L. plantarum HEAL9
L. rhamnosus
L. rhamnosus GG
L. rhamnosus GR-1
L. reuteri
L. reuteri RC-14
L. sake
L. salivarius
L. salivarius UCC118
L. salivarius UCC4331
Lactococcus
L. lactis subspecies lactis
L. lactis subspecies cremoris
L. diacetolactis
lactoferrin
lactoperoxidase
lactulose
Lamarck
lamina propria
leakage
leptin
Leptotrichia
Lenthisphaerae
Leuconostoc
L. mesenteroides subspecies mesenteroides
L. mesenteroides subspecies cremoris
L. lactis
Lignin
lignin
Linnaeus
Linné
lipoteichoic acid
Listeria
L. monocytogenes
liver
low-grade
LPS (lipopolysaccharide)
LPSN (List of prokaryotic names with standing in nomenclature)
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
188
lumen
lymphocyte
lymphocytic colitis
lymphoid
macrophage
Magnol
maize
malic acid
malt
mammalian
manganese
Manihot esculenta
mast cell
Mayr
M-cell
Medvurst
Megasphaera
meta-analysis
metabolic syndrome
mesophilic LD culture
metagenomics
Metchnikoff
methotrexate
microaerophile
microbiota
Micrococcaceae
millet
minimal hepatic encephalopathy (MHE)
Mogibacterium
monocyte
Moraxellaceae
morbidity
morphology
mortality
mother
mould
MPO (myeloperoxidase)
MUC
mucin
mucous membrane
multiple organic failure
myeloid cell
myeloperoxidase
NaCl
NADH-oxidase
NADH-peroxidase
NAFLD (non-alcoholic fatty liver disease)
NCAM (neural cell adhesion molecule)
Negativicutes
Neisseria
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
189
N. subflava
Neisseriaceae
neutrophil granulocyte (neutrophil)
NFkappa-B
nitrogen oxide (NO)
Nitrospira
NK cell
NOD-like
non-alcoholic-fatty-liver-disease (NAFLD)
non-starter lactic acid bacteria
Nordenskiöld
Norovirus
nucleotide-binding
O-antigen
oats
oatmeal
occludin
Oenococcus
O. oeni
O.kitaharae
Ogi
oligosaccharide
olive
open-label
opportunistic
order
Oryza sativa
Oscillospira quilliermondii
OTU (operational taxonomic unit)
Overgrowth
overweight
oxidase
oxidative burst
oxygen free radical
PAMP
pancreatitis
paneth cell
Parabacteroides
P. distasonis (former Bacteroides distasonis)
paracellular
Pasteur
Pasteurellaceae
Pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMP)
pathogenic
PCR (polymerase chain reaction)
Pediococcus
P. pentosaceus
Pentose
peptidoglycan
Peptostreptococcaceae
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
190
Peptostreptococcus
P. anaerobius
peritonitis
permeability
Peyer’s patch
PFGE (pulse field gel electrophoresis)
pH
phagocytic
phagocytosis
phenetic
phenolic acid
phenyl acetic acid
phenyl propionic acid
phenyl valeric acid
photoautotroph
phylum (pl. phyla)
phylogenetic
physiological
physiopathological
phytate
pit cell
placebo
Planctomycetes
plasma cell
polyphenols
polysaccharide
Porphyromonadaceae
Porphyromonas
prebiotics
Prevotella
P. melaninogenica
Prevotellaceae
Propionispira arbores
Porphyromonadaceae
Porphyromonas
portal blood
probiotics
Proteobacteria
pseudocatalase
Proviva
Probi frisk
Pseudomonas
P. aeruginosa
Pseudomonadaseae
Psychrobacter
pure culture
radical
radiotherapy
RAPD (randomly amplified polymorphic DNA)
Ray
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
191
REA (restriction endonuclease analysis)
rectum
relative humidity
rennet
resident
respiration
reticuloendothelia
reticuloendothelial system (RES)
RFLP (restriction fragment length polymorphisms)
rhinovirus
Rhodiola
ribotype
ribotyping
rice
Rikenellaceae
rRNA (ribosomal RNA)
RNA
Rome
Roseburia
R. intestinalis
rotavirus
Rothia
Rubus
Ruminococcaceae
Ruminicoccus
R. gnavus
R. lactaris
R. obeum
R. torques
SAA
Saccharomyces cerevisiae
salami
Salix
Salmonella
Sanger sequencing
sauerkraut
sausage
Saccharomyces
safety
salmon
scaffold protein
scarlet fever
Schinkenplockwurst
secretary IgA
semidry
sensu strict
septic throat
sequencing
serotype
Serratia
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
192
Shigella
Shirota
Siberia
silage
Sirochaetes
smoking
Sneathia
sorghum
Sorghum
species
spp. (sp. = one species; spp. = several species)
Spirochaetae
Spirochaetes
Staphylococcus
S. aureus
Steatohepatitis
steatosis
stilbene
stomach
stomach flue
strain
Streptoccaceae
Streptococcus
S. anginosus
S. mitis
S. oralis
S. parasanguinis
S. pneumonia
S. pyogenes
S. salivarius
S. thermophilus
subclinic
Subdoligranulum
superoxide
suppressor
surgery
Sutterella
S. wadsworthensis
synbiotics
Synergisetes
systematic
systolic
tannin
Taraxacum
Taxonomy
T-cell
Th
T-helper cell (Th-cell)
Thermodesulfobacteria
Thermomicrobia
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
193
Thermotogae
Tight junction
thiocyanate
T-lymphocyte
TLR2
TLR4
TLR9
Toll-like receptor (TLR)
TGF-beta
TNF-alpha
Togwa
transcellular
translocation
transmembrane protein
transplantation
trauma
T-RFLP
Tschuktsch
TTGE (temporal temperature gradient gel electrophoresis)
Tschuktscer
TTP (thrombotic thrombocytopenic purple)
Tumour necrosis factor (TNF)
typing
type
type strain
ulcerative colitis
vagina
vaginosis
Veillonella
V. parvula
Veillonellaceae
Verrucomicrobia
Verrucomicrobiae
Verrucomicrobiaceae
Verrucomicrobium
virus
vomit
VSL#3
Warg
water activity
weaning
Weissella
W. minor
W. confusa
white blood cell
wine
winter vomiting disease
Yakult
yeast
yoghurt
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
194
Zea mays
zinc
ZO-1
zonulin
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
195
Lectures in Probiotics ©Göran Molin 2013
196