| Title |
Investigation of Lactic Acid Bacteria Isolated from Giant Panda Feces for Potential Probiotics In Vitro
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12602-017-9381-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Qian Liu, Xueqin Ni, Qiang Wang, Zhirong Peng, Lili Niu, Meiling Xie, Yicen Lin, Yi Zhou, Hao Sun, Kangcheng Pan, Bo Jing, Dong Zeng |
| Abstract |
The present study aimed to isolate an optimal lactic acid bacterial strain from the feces of healthy giant pandas. The strain exhibited good stability at low pH and high bile salt concentrations, activity against pathogens relevant to pandas, and antibiotic susceptibility. In the current study, 25 isolates were obtained from de Man, Rogosa, and Sharpe agar. Two (E21 and G83) and eight (E1, E2, E16, E18, E21, E69, E70, and G83) isolates demonstrated good performance at pH 2.0 and bile 2% (w/v), respectively. Three isolates (G83, G88, and G90) possessed better antimicrobial effect on enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli CVCC196 (ETEC) than the rest. One isolate (G83) strongly affected Salmonella, whereas three (G83, G87, and G88) exhibited inhibitory activity against Staphylococcus aureus. All isolates were multi-drug resistant. These isolates were identified as Lactobacillus (5 isolates) and Enterococcus (20 isolates) by 16S rRNA sequencing. Virulence genes were detected in Enterococcus isolates. Isolate G83 was identified as Lactobacillus plantarum and was considered as the best probiotic candidate among all of the experimental isolates. This study provided necessary and important theoretical guidance for further experiments on G83 in vivo. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 9 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 13% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 2 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 8% |
| Engineering | 2 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 12 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 January 2018.
All research outputs
#20,459,801
of 23,016,919 outputs
Outputs from Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins
#400
of 546 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#378,289
of 441,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins
#25
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,016,919 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 546 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 441,218 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.