Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology

The Korean Society for Microbiology and Biotechnology (한국미생물·생명공학회)
권호 표지

Intestinal Colonization Characteristics of Lactobacillus spp. Isolated from Chicken Cecum and Competitive Inhibition Against Salmonella typhimurium

  • Shin, Jang-Woo (Institute of Traditional Medicine and Bioscience, Daejeon University) ;
  • Kang, Jong-Koo (Department of Veterinary Medicine, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Jang, Keum-Il (Department of Food Science and Technology and Research Center for Bioresource and Health, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Kim, Kwang-Yup (Department of Food Science and Technology and Research Center for Bioresource and Health, Chungbuk National University)
  • Published : 2002.08.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Probiotics are live microbial feed supplements which beneficially affect the host animal by improving its intestinal microflora. To select the best Lactobacillus spp. as a chicken probiotic, probiotic characteristics of 10 selected Lactobacillus strains isolated from chicken cecum or obtained from KCTC were investigated. The strains were examined for resistance to pH 2.0 and 0.3% oxgall, and adhesion to cecal mucus and cecal epithelial cells. All strains grew in MRS containing 0.3% oxgall. However, Lb. plantarum AYM-10, Lb. fermentum YL-3, AYM-3, and Lb. paracasei YL-6 showed relatively high resistance to 0.3% oxgall. Lb. fermentum YL-3, YM-5, AYM-3, and Lb. paracasei YL-6 survived 4 hours of incubation at pH 2.0. Lb. fermentum YL-3, KCTC 3112, and Lb. plantarum AYL-5 were strongly adhesive to cecal mucus, while the rest showed moderate or low adhesion. Lb. plantarum AYM-10, AYL-1, and AYL-5 had good adhering properties to cecal epithelial cells (30.7$\pm$10.82, 40.2$\pm$20.90, and 14.5$\pm$4.22, respectively). Lb. fermentum YL-3, AYM-3, and KCTC 3547 showed Intermediate adhesion ability, and Lb. plantarum showed better adhesion ability to cecal epithelial cells than Lb. fermentum. Attached Lb. fermentum YL-3 to cecum after 60 min incubation was confirmed using CLSM. Lb. fermentum YL-3 attached to a matrix which was composed of a mucus layer adjacent to intracrypts and pericryptal region. Some Lb. fermentum YL-3 bound to mucosal epithelial cells. From these results, Lb. fermentum YL-3 was selected as a chicken probiotic. In vivo trials of chicks inoculated with Lb. fermentum YL-3 had decreased Salmonella population in cecal contents and livers (p<0.5).

Keywords

References

  1. J. Hyg. v.82 Factors affecting the incidence and anti-salmonella activity of the anaerobic caecal flora of the young chick Barnes, E. M.;C. S. Impey;B. J. Stevens https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022172400025687
  2. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. v.33 Manipulation of the crop and intestinal flora of the newly hatched chick Barnes, E. M.;C. S. Impey;D. M. Cooper
  3. J. Appl. Bacteriol. v.46 The intestinal microflora of poultry and game birds during life and after storage Barnes, E. M. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.1979.tb00838.x
  4. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. v.34 Farm animals as a putative reservoir for vancomycin-resistant enterococcal infection in man Bates, J. J.;Z. Jordens;D. T. Griffiths https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/34.4.507
  5. J. Ultrastruct. Res. v.52 Adhesion of Lactobacilli to the chicken crop epithelium Broker, B. E.;R. Fuller https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5320(75)80019-0
  6. Kor. J. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. v.28 Isolation and characterization of Lactobacillus fermentum YL-3 as a poultry probiotic Cho, M. K.;K. Kim;C. H. Kim;T. K. Lee;K. Y. Kim
  7. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. v.58 Protein-mediated adhesion of Lactobacillus acidophilus BG2FO4 on human enterocyte and mucus-secreting cell lines in culture Coconnier, M. H.;T. R. Klaenhammer;S. Kerneis;M. F. Bernet;A. L. Servin
  8. J. Gen. Microbiol. v.135 Protein-mediated adhesion of Lactobacillus fermentum strain 737 to mouse stomach squamous epithelium Conway, P. L.;S. Kjelleberg
  9. Avian Dis. v.34 Effect of dietary lactose on cecal pH, bacteriostatic volatile fatty acids, and Salmonella typhimurium colonization of broiler chicks Corrier, D. E.;A. Jr. Hinton;R. L. Ziprin;R. C. Beier;J. R. DeLoach https://doi.org/10.2307/1591254
  10. Poult. Sci. v.74 Control of Salmonella typhimurium colonization in broiler chicks with a continuous-flow characterized mixed culture of cecal bacteria Corrier, D. E.;D. J. Nisbet;C. M. Scanlan;A. G. Hollister;J. R. Deloach https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.0740916
  11. Avian Dis. v.36 Binding of Salmonella strains to immobilized intestinal mucosal preparations from broiler chickens Craven, S. E.;N. A. Cox;J. S. Bailey;L. C. Blankenship https://doi.org/10.2307/1591504
  12. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. v.21 Adhesion of different bifidobacteria strains to human enterocyte-like Caco-2 cells and comparison with in vivo study Crociani, J.;J. P. Grill;M. Huppert;J. Ballongue https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-765X.1995.tb01027.x
  13. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. v.37 Does the use in animals of antimicrobial agents, including glycopeptide antibiotics, influence the efficacy of antimicrobial therapy in humans? Donnelly, J. P.;A. Voss;W. Witte;B. E. Murray https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/37.2.389
  14. Asia Pacific J. Clin. Nutr. v.5 Safety of probiotic bacteria Donohue, D. C.;S. Salminen
  15. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. v.27 Quinolone resistance in campylobacter isolated from man and poultry following the introduction of fluoroquinolones in veterinary medicine Endtz, H. P.;G. J. Ruijs;B. van Klingeren;W. H. Jansen;T. van der Reyden;R. P. Mouton https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/27.2.199
  16. J. Exp. Med. v.104 Experimental enteric Shigella and Vibrio infections in mice and guinea pigs Freter, R. https://doi.org/10.1084/jem.104.3.411
  17. J. Infect. Dis. v.110 In vivo and in vitro antagonism of intestinal bacteria against Shigella flexneri. Ⅱ. The inhibitory mechanism Freter, R. https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/110.1.38
  18. Avian Dis. v.33 Protection of chicks against Salmonella infection with a mixture of pure cultures of intestinal bacteria Gleeson, T. M.;S. Stavric;B. Blanchfield https://doi.org/10.2307/1591137
  19. Food Science and Technology/Lebensmittel-Wissen und-Technologie v.32 Acid tolerance of Lactobacillus plantarum from Kimchi Hong, S. I.;Y. J. Kim;Y. R. Pyun https://doi.org/10.1006/fstl.1998.0517
  20. J. Med. Microbiol. v.40 Gentamicin resistance in clinical isolates of Escherichia coli encoded by genes of veterinary origin Johnson, A. P.;L. Burns;N. Woodford;E. J. Threlfall;J. Naidoo;E. M. Cooke;R. C. George https://doi.org/10.1099/00222615-40-3-221
  21. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother v.32 High frequency of antimicrobial resistance in human fecal flora Levy, S. B.;B. Marshall;S. Schluederberg;D. Rowse;J. Davis https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.32.12.1801
  22. Aust. Vet. J. v.53 Prevention of Salmonella typhimurium infection in poultry by pretreatment of chickens and poults with intestinal extracts Lloyd, A. B.;R. B. Cumming;R. D. Kent https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-0813.1977.tb14891.x
  23. Science v.277 The chameleon within: Improving antigen delivery Madara, J. L. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.277.5328.910
  24. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. v.56 Acid tolerance of Leuconostoc mesenteroides and Lactobacillus plantarum McDonald, L. C.;H. P. Fleming;H. M. Hassan
  25. Nutrient Requirements of Poulty(8th ed.) National Research Council
  26. Poult. Sci. v.73 Effect of dietary lactose and cell concentration on the ability of a continuous-flow-derived bacterial culture to control Salmonella cecal colonization in broiler chickens Nisbet, D. J.;D. E. Corrier;C. M. Scanlan;A. G. Hollister;R. C. Beier;J. R. Deloach https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.0730056
  27. Nature v.241 New aspects of Salmonella infection in broiler production Nurmi, E.;M. Rantala https://doi.org/10.1038/241210a0
  28. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. v.65 Relationship between acid tolerance, cytoplasmic pH, and ATP and H+-ATPase levels in chemostat cultures of Lactococcus lactis O'Sullivan, E.;S. Condon
  29. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. v.38 Does the use of antimicrobial agents in veterinary medicine and animal husbandry select antibiotic-resistant bacteria that infect man and compromise antimicrobial chemotherapy? Piddock, L. J. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/38.1.1
  30. Infect. Immun. v.53 Factors responsible for increased susceptibility of mice to intestinal colonization after treatment with streptomycin Que, J. U.;S. W. Casey;D. J. Hentges
  31. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. v.52 Lipoteichoic acids in Lactobacillus strains that colonize the mouse gastric epithelium Sherman, L. A.;D. C. Savage
  32. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. v.58 Evidence for natural transfer of a tetracycline resistance gene between bacteria from the human colon and bacteria from the bovine rumen Shoemaker, N. B.;G. R. Wang;A. A. Salyers
  33. Avian Dis. v.22 Protecting chicks and poults from Salmonellae by oral administration of "normal" gut microflora Snoeyenbos, G. H.;O. M. Weinack;C. F. Smyser https://doi.org/10.2307/1589539
  34. Avian Dis. v.26 Adherence of salmonellae and native gut microflora to the gastrointestinal mucosa of chicks Soerjadi, A. S.;R. Rufner;G. H. Snoeyenbos;O. M. Weinack https://doi.org/10.2307/1589904
  35. Epidemiol. Infect. v.111 A comparison of multiple drug resistance in salmonellas from humans and food animals in England and Wales, 1981 and 1990 Threlfall, E. J.;B. Rowe;L. R. Ward https://doi.org/10.1017/S0950268800056892
  36. Microb. Drug Resist. v.3 Increase in multiple antibiotic resistance in nontyphoidal salmonellas from humans in England and Wales: A comparison of data for 1994 and 1996 Threlfall, E. J.;L. R. Ward;J. A. Skinner;B. Rowe https://doi.org/10.1089/mdr.1997.3.263
  37. J. Appl. Bacteriol. v.62 Surface properties of lactobacilli isolated from the small intestine of pigs Wadstrom, T.;K. Andersson;M. Sydow;L. Axelsson;S. Lindgren;B. Gullmar https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.1987.tb02683.x