4.6 Article

Susceptibility and adaptive response to bile salts in Propionibacterium freudenreichii:: Physiological and proteomic analysis

期刊

APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 69, 期 7, 页码 3809-3818

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AEM.69.7.3809-3818.2003

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tolerance to digestive stresses is one of the main factors limiting the use of microorganisms as live probiotic agents. Susceptibility to bile salts and tolerance acquisition in the probiotic strain Propionibacterium freudenreichii SI41 were characterized. We showed that pretreatment with a moderate concentration of bile salts (0.2 g/liter) greatly increased its survival during a subsequent lethal challenge (1.0 g/liter, 60 s). Bile salts challenge led to drastic morphological changes, consistent with intracellular material leakage, for nonadapted cells but not for preexposed ones. Moreover, the physiological state of the cells during lethal treatment played an important role in the response to bile salts, as stationary-phase bacteria appeared much less sensitive than exponentially growing cells. Either thermal or detergent pretreatment conferred significantly increased protection toward bile salts challenge. In contrast, some other heterologous pretreatments (hypothermic and hyperosmotic) had no effect on tolerance to bile salts, while acid pretreatment even might have sensitized the cells. Two-dimensional electrophoresis experiments revealed that at least 24 proteins were induced during bile salts adaptation. Identification of these polypeptides suggested that the bile salts stress response involves signal sensing and transduction, a general stress response (also triggered by thermal denaturation, oxidative toxicity, and DNA damage), and an alternative sigma factor. Taken together, our results provide new insights into the tolerance of P. freudenreichii to bile salts, which must be taken into consideration for the use of probiotic strains and the improvement of technological processes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据