↓ Skip to main content

Genotyping by PCR and High-Throughput Sequencing of Commercial Probiotic Products Reveals Composition Biases

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
15 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
78 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Genotyping by PCR and High-Throughput Sequencing of Commercial Probiotic Products Reveals Composition Biases
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2016.01747
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wesley Morovic, Ashley A. Hibberd, Bryan Zabel, Rodolphe Barrangou, Buffy Stahl

Abstract

Recent advances in microbiome research have brought renewed focus on beneficial bacteria, many of which are available in food and dietary supplements. Although probiotics have historically been defined as microorganisms that convey health benefits when ingested in sufficient viable amounts, this description now includes the stipulation "well defined strains," encompassing definitive taxonomy for consumer consideration and regulatory oversight. Here, we evaluated 52 commercial dietary supplements covering a range of labeled species using plate counting and targeted genotyping. Strain identities were assessed using methods recently published by the United States Pharmacopeial Convention. We also determined the relative abundance of individual bacteria by high-throughput sequencing (HTS) of the 16S rRNA sequence using paired-end 2 × 250 bp Illumina MiSeq technology. Using these methods, we tested the hypothesis that products do contain the quantitative and qualitative list of labeled microbial species. We found that 17 samples (33%) were below label claim for CFU prior to their expiration dates. A multiplexed-PCR scheme showed that only 30/52 (58%) of the products contained a correctly labeled classification, with issues encompassing incorrect taxonomy, missing species, and un-labeled species. The HTS revealed that many blended products consisted predominantly of Lactobacillus acidophilus and Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis. These results highlight the need for reliable methods to determine the correct taxonomy and quantify the relative amounts of mixed microbial populations in commercial probiotic products.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 93 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 20%
Researcher 18 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 5%
Other 5 5%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 27 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 32 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 57. 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 17 July 2018.
All research outputs
#726,796
of 24,885,505 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#392
of 28,434 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,070
of 317,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#9
of 415 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,885,505 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 28,434 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
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 317,924 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 415 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.