DOCSLIB.ORG

Analysis of Potential Host-Colonization Factors in Bifidobacterium Bifidum S17

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Analysis of Potential Host-Colonization Factors in Bifidobacterium Bifidum S17 Analysis of potential host-colonization factors in Bifidobacterium bifidum S17 Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades Dr. rer. nat. der Fakultät für Naturwissenschaften der Universität Ulm vorgelegt von Christina Westermann aus Ulm 2015 Amtierender Dekan: Prof. Dr. Joachim Ankerhold Erstgutachter: PD Dr. Christian Riedel Zweitgutachter: Prof. Dr. Bernhard Eikmanns Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 15.10.2015 Die vorliegende Arbeit wurde im Institut für Mikrobiologie und Biotechnologie an der Universität Ulm angefertigt. Die Arbeit wurde durch ein Stipendium nach dem Landesgraduiertenförderungsgesetz Baden-Württemberg finanziert. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 8 1.1. General features of the genus Bifidobacterium ................................................................. 8 1.2. Bifidobacteria as a part of the human microbiota ............................................................. 9 1.3. Bifidobacteria as probiotics .............................................................................................. 10 1.3.1. Definition of probiotics ........................................................................................ 10 1.3.2. Probiotic bifidobacteria and their health-promoting effect on human host ....... 11 1.4. Potential adhesive structures of the human gut.............................................................. 12 1.4.1. Mucus ................................................................................................................... 12 1.4.2. Intestinal epithelial cells and the glycocalyx ........................................................ 13 1.4.3. Extracellular matrix proteins ................................................................................ 14 1.5. Bacterial cell surface architecture – potential adhesion mediating structures ............... 15 1.5.1. Exopolysaccharides .............................................................................................. 17 1.5.2. Cell envelope proteases ....................................................................................... 18 1.5.3. Pili ......................................................................................................................... 19 1.5.4. Identified single adhesins ..................................................................................... 20 1.5.4.1. Translocation and cell wall anchoring of cell surface proteins ........................ 21 1.6. The aim of this study ........................................................................................................ 23 2. Materials and Methods .................................................................................................... 24 2.1. Bacterial strains ................................................................................................................ 24 2.1.1. Bifidobacteria ....................................................................................................... 24 2.1.2. Escherichia coli ..................................................................................................... 25 2.2. Plasmids ............................................................................................................................ 26 2.3. Eukaryotic Caco-2 cell line ................................................................................................ 27 2.3.1. Subcultivation of Caco-2 cells............................................................................... 27 2.3.2. Cryoconservation of Caco-2 cells ......................................................................... 28 2.3.3. Thawing of cryo-stocks ......................................................................................... 28 2.3.4. Determination of the cell number ....................................................................... 28 2.4. Adhesion assays ............................................................................................................... 29 2.4.1. Adhesion assay with Caco-2 cells ......................................................................... 29 2.4.2. Competitive adhesion assay ................................................................................. 29 2.4.3. Adhesion to extracellular matrix proteins............................................................ 30 2.5. Working with nucleic acids ............................................................................................... 31 2.5.1. Chromosomal DNA extraction ............................................................................. 31 2.5.1.1. Preparation and cell lysis .................................................................................. 31 2.5.1.2. Phenol/chloroform/isoamylalcohol extraction ................................................ 32 2.5.1.3. Ethanol precipitation ........................................................................................ 32 2.5.2. Isolation of plasmid DNA ...................................................................................... 32 2.5.3. DNA purification from agarose gels or PCR mixtures .......................................... 33 2.5.4. Agarose gel electrophoresis ................................................................................. 33 2.5.5. Quantification of dsDNA ...................................................................................... 33 2.5.6. Oligonucleotides ................................................................................................... 34 2.5.7. Amplification of DNA by polymerase chain reaction ........................................... 34 2.5.7.1. Temperature gradient PCR ............................................................................... 35 2.5.8. Screening colonies by PCR .................................................................................... 36 2.5.9. DNA digestion with restriction enzymes .............................................................. 37 2.5.10. Klenow fill-in of DNA ends with 5`-overhang ....................................................... 37 2.5.11. Ligation ................................................................................................................. 37 2.5.12. Sequencing of plasmid constructs ........................................................................ 38 2.5.13. RNA extraction ..................................................................................................... 38 2.5.14. Reverse Transcription PCR ................................................................................... 39 2.6. Transformation on E. coli ................................................................................................. 40 2.6.1. Preparation of electrocompetent E. coli cells ...................................................... 40 2.6.2. Transformation of electrocompetent E. coli ........................................................ 41 2.6.3. Plasmid artificial modification .............................................................................. 41 2.7. Transformation of Bifidobacterium sp. strains................................................................. 42 2.7.1. Preparation of electrocompetent bifidobacteria ................................................. 42 2.7.2. Transformation of electrocompetent bifidobacteria ........................................... 42 2.8. Working with proteins...................................................................................................... 43 2.8.1. Preparation of bacterial cell fractions .................................................................. 43 2.8.2. Quantification of proteins .................................................................................... 44 2.8.3. Sodium dodecyl sulfate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis ............................... 44 2.8.4. Staining of SDS gels .............................................................................................. 45 2.8.5. Western Blot ........................................................................................................ 46 2.9. Microscopy ....................................................................................................................... 47 2.9.1. Ruthenium red staining ........................................................................................ 47 2.9.2. Sample embedding and ultrathin sectioning ....................................................... 47 2.9.3. Transmission electron microscopy ....................................................................... 48 2.9.4. Scanning electron microscopy ............................................................................. 48 2.9.5. Fixing and staining of cells for fluorescence microscopy ..................................... 48 2.9.6. Fluorescence microscopy ..................................................................................... 48 2.10. Bioinformatic analysis .............................................................................................. 49 2.11. Statistical analysis ..................................................................................................... 49 3. Results .............................................................................................................................. 50 3.1. Bioinformatic analysis .....................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bifidobacterium Response to Lactulose Ingestion in the Gut Relies on A
    ARTICLE https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-021-02072-7 OPEN Bifidobacterium response to lactulose ingestion in the gut relies on a solute-binding protein- dependent ABC transporter ✉ Keisuke Yoshida 1 , Rika Hirano2,3, Yohei Sakai4, Moonhak Choi5, Mikiyasu Sakanaka 5,6, Shin Kurihara3,6, Hisakazu Iino7, Jin-zhong Xiao 1, Takane Katayama5,6 & Toshitaka Odamaki1 This study aims to understand the mechanistic basis underlying the response of Bifido- bacterium to lactulose ingestion in guts of healthy Japanese subjects, with specific focus on a lactulose transporter. An in vitro assay using mutant strains of Bifidobacterium longum subsp. 1234567890():,; longum 105-A shows that a solute-binding protein with locus tag number BL105A_0502 (termed LT-SBP) is primarily involved in lactulose uptake. By quantifying faecal abundance of LT-SBP orthologues, which is defined by phylogenetic analysis, we find that subjects with 107 to 109 copies of the genes per gram of faeces before lactulose ingestion show a marked increase in Bifidobacterium after ingestion, suggesting the presence of thresholds between responders and non-responders to lactulose. These results help predict the prebiotics- responder and non-responder status and provide an insight into clinical interventions that test the efficacy of prebiotics. 1 Next Generation Science Institute, RD Division, Morinaga Milk Industry Co., Ltd., Zama, Japan. 2 Research Institute for Bioresources and Biotechnology, Ishikawa Prefectural University, Nonoichi, Japan. 3 Biology-Oriented Science and Technology, Kindai University, Kinokawa, Japan. 4 Food Ingredients and Technology Institute, RD Division, Morinaga Milk Industry Co., Ltd, Zama, Japan. 5 Graduate School of Biostudies, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan. 6 Faculty of Bioresources and Environmental Sciences, Ishikawa Prefectural University, Nonoichi, Japan.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Probiotics, Prebiotics and Synbiotics in Animal Nutrition Paulina Markowiak* and Katarzyna Śliżewska*
    Markowiak and Śliżewska Gut Pathog (2018) 10:21 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13099-018-0250-0 Gut Pathogens REVIEW Open Access The role of probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics in animal nutrition Paulina Markowiak* and Katarzyna Śliżewska* Abstract Along with the intensive development of methods of livestock breeding, breeders’ expectations are growing concern- ing feed additives that would guarantee such results as accelerating growth rate, protection of health from patho- genic infections and improvement of other production parameters such as: absorption of feed and quality of meat, milk, eggs. The main reason for their application would be a strive to achieve some benefcial efects comparable to those of antibiotic-based growth stimulators, banned on 01 January 2006. High hopes are being associated with the use of probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics. Used mainly for maintenance of the equilibrium of the intestinal micro- biota of livestock, they turn out to be an efective method in fght against pathogens posing a threat for both animals and consumers. This paper discusses defnitions of probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics. Criteria that have to be met by those kinds of formulas are also presented. The paper ofers a list of the most commonly used probiotics and prebi- otics and some examples of their combinations in synbiotic formulas used in animal feeding. Examples of available study results on the efect of probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics on animal health are also summarised. Keywords: Animal health, Prebiotics, Probiotic bacteria, Synbiotics Background quality and safety of meat, while taking animal welfare It is estimated that by 2050 the number of people in the and respect for the natural environment into account.
    [Show full text]
  • Bifidobacterium Bifidum Strains for Application In
    (19) TZZ _ _T (11) EP 2 481 299 B1 (12) EUROPEAN PATENT SPECIFICATION (45) Date of publication and mention (51) Int Cl.: of the grant of the patent: A23L 33/135 (2016.01) A61K 35/745 (2015.01) 07.12.2016 Bulletin 2016/49 (21) Application number: 11000744.0 (22) Date of filing: 31.01.2011 (54) BIFIDOBACTERIUM BIFIDUM STRAINS FOR APPLICATION IN GASTROINTESTINAL DISEASES BIFIDOBACTERIUM-BIFIDUM-STÄMME ZUR ANWENDUNG BEI MAGEN-DARM-ERKRANKUNGEN SOUCHES DE BIFIDOBACTERIUM BIFIDUM POUR APPLICATION DANS LES MALADIES GASTRO-INTESTINALES (84) Designated Contracting States: • GUGLIELMETTI ET AL.: "Study of the adhesion AL AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GB of Bifidobacterium bifidum MIMBb75 to human GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MC MK MT NL NO intestinal cell lines", CURR MICROBIOLOGY, vol. PL PT RO RS SE SI SK SM TR 59, 2009, pages 167-172, XP002634994, • PREISING ET AL: "Selection of Bifidobacteria (43) Date of publication of application: based on adhesion and anti-inflammatory 01.08.2012 Bulletin 2012/31 capacity in vitro for amelioration of Murine colitis", APPLIED AND (73) Proprietor: Dr. Fischer Gesundheitsprodukte ENVIRONMENTALMICROBIOLOGY, vol. 76, no. GmbH 9, May 2010 (2010-05), pages 3048-3051, 82166 Gräfelfing (DE) XP002634995, • LI-QUN ET AL.: "Influence of cell surface (72) Inventors: properties on adhesion ability of bifidobacteria", • Guglielmetti, Simone, Dr. WORLD J. MICROBIOL. BIOTECHNOL., vol. 26, 20122 Milano (IT) 2010, pages 1999-2007, XP002634996, • Mora, Diego, Dr. • DUFFY L C ET AL: "Effectiveness of 20122 Milano (IT) Bifidobacterium bifidum in mediating the clinical course of murine rotavirus diarrhea", PEDIATRIC (74) Representative: Wichmann, Hendrik RESEARCH, WILLIAMS AND WILKINS, Wuesthoff & Wuesthoff BALTIMORE, MD, US, [Online] vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Bifidobacterium Longum Subsp. Infantis CECT7210
    nutrients Article Bifidobacterium longum subsp. infantis CECT7210 (B. infantis IM-1®) Displays In Vitro Activity against Some Intestinal Pathogens 1,2, 1,2, 1,2 3 Lorena Ruiz y, Ana Belén Flórez y , Borja Sánchez , José Antonio Moreno-Muñoz , Maria Rodriguez-Palmero 3, Jesús Jiménez 3 , Clara G. de los Reyes Gavilán 1,2 , Miguel Gueimonde 1,2 , Patricia Ruas-Madiedo 1,2 and Abelardo Margolles 1,2,* 1 Instituto de Productos Lácteos de Asturias (CSIC), P. Río Linares s/n, 33300 Villaviciosa, Spain; [email protected] (L.R.); abfl[email protected] (A.B.F.); [email protected] (B.S.); [email protected] (C.G.d.l.R.G.); [email protected] (M.G.); [email protected] (P.R.-M.) 2 Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Principado de Asturias (ISPA), 33011 Oviedo, Spain 3 Laboratorios Ordesa S.L., Parc Científic de Barcelona, C/Baldiri Reixac 15-21, 08028 Barcelona, Spain; [email protected] (J.A.M.-M.); [email protected] (M.R.-P.); [email protected] (J.J.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +34-985-89-21-31 These authors contributed equally to this work. y Received: 31 July 2020; Accepted: 21 October 2020; Published: 24 October 2020 Abstract: Certain non-digestible oligosaccharides (NDO) are specifically fermented by bifidobacteria along the human gastrointestinal tract, selectively favoring their growth and the production of health-promoting metabolites. In the present study, the ability of the probiotic strain Bifidobacterium longum subsp. infantis CECT7210 (herein referred to as B. infantis IM-1®) to utilize a large range of oligosaccharides, or a mixture of oligosaccharides, was investigated.
    [Show full text]
  • Growth of Bifidobacteria in Mammalian Milk
    Czech J. Anim. Sci., 58, 2013 (3): 99–105 Original Paper Growth of bifidobacteria in mammalian milk Š. Ročková1, V. Rada1, J. Havlík1, R. Švejstil1, E. Vlková1, V. Bunešová1, K. Janda2, I. Profousová3,4 1Department of Microbiology, Nutrition and Dietetics, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic 2Department of General Husbandry and Ethology of Animals, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic 3Department of Parasitology, University of Veterinary and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Brno, Czech Republic 4Institute of Vertebrate Biology, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Brno, Czech Republic ABSTRACT: Microbial colonization of the mammalian intestine begins at birth, when from a sterile state a newborn infant is exposed to an external environment rich in various bacterial species. An important group of intestinal bacteria comprises bifidobacteria. Bifidobacteria represent major intestinal microbiota during the breast-feeding period. Animal milk contains all crucial nutrients for babies’ intestinal microflora. The aim of our work was to test the influence of different mammalian milk on the growth of bifidobacteria. The growth of seven strains of bifidobacteria in human milk, the colostrum of swine, cow’s milk, sheep’s milk, and rabbit’s milk was tested. Good growth accompanied by the production of lactic acid was observed not only in human milk, but also in the other kinds of milk in all three strains of Bifidobacterium bifidum of different origin. Human milk selectively supported the production of lactic acid of human bifidobacterial isolates, especially the Bifidobacterium bifidum species.
    [Show full text]
  • Bifidobacterium Bifidum: a Key Member of the Early Human Gut
    microorganisms Review Bifidobacterium bifidum: A Key Member of the Early Human Gut Microbiota Francesca Turroni 1,2,*, Sabrina Duranti 1, Christian Milani 1, Gabriele Andrea Lugli 1, Douwe van Sinderen 3,4 and Marco Ventura 1,2 1 Laboratory of Probiogenomics, Department of Chemistry, Life Sciences and Environmental Sustainability, University of Parma, 43124 Parma, Italy; [email protected] (S.D.); [email protected] (C.M.); [email protected] (G.A.L.); [email protected] (M.V.) 2 Microbiome Research Hub, University of Parma, 43124 Parma, Italy 3 School of Microbiology, University College Cork, T12 YT20 Cork, Ireland; [email protected] 4 APC Microbiome Institute, University College Cork, T12 YT20 Cork, Ireland * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 2 October 2019; Accepted: 7 November 2019; Published: 9 November 2019 Abstract: Bifidobacteria typically represent the most abundant bacteria of the human gut microbiota in healthy breast-fed infants. Members of the Bifidobacterium bifidum species constitute one of the dominant taxa amongst these bifidobacterial communities and have been shown to display notable physiological and genetic features encompassing adhesion to epithelia as well as metabolism of host-derived glycans. In the current review, we discuss current knowledge concerning particular biological characteristics of the B. bifidum species that support its specific adaptation to the human gut and their implications in terms of supporting host health. Keywords: Bifidobacterium bifidum; bifidobacteria; probiotics; genomics; microbiota 1. General Features of the Genus Bifidobacterium The genus Bifidobacterium belongs to the Actinobacteria phylum and this genus together with nine other genera constitute the Bifidobacteriaceae family [1].
    [Show full text]
  • The Genome Sequence of Bifidobacterium Longum Reflects Its Adaptation to the Human Gastrointestinal Tract
    The genome sequence of Bifidobacterium longum reflects its adaptation to the human gastrointestinal tract Mark A. Schell*†, Maria Karmirantzou*‡, Berend Snel§¶, David Vilanova*, Bernard Berger*, Gabriella Pessi*ʈ, Marie-Camille Zwahlen*, Frank Desiere*, Peer Bork§, Michele Delley*, R. David Pridmore*, and Fabrizio Arigoni*,** *Nestle´Research Center, Vers-Chez-les-Blanc, Lausanne 1000, Switzerland; †Department of Microbiology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602; and §European Molecular Biology Laboratory, Meyerhoffstrasse 1, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany Communicated by Dieter So¨ll, Yale University, New Haven, CT, August 30, 2002 (received for review July 3, 2002) Bifidobacteria are Gram-positive prokaryotes that naturally colo- colonizers of the sterile GITs of newborns and predominate in nize the human gastrointestinal tract (GIT) and vagina. Although breast-fed infants until weaning, when they are surpassed by not numerically dominant in the complex intestinal microflora, Bacteroides and other groups (6, 7). This progressive coloniza- they are considered as key commensals that promote a healthy GIT. tion is thought to be important for development of immune We determined the 2.26-Mb genome sequence of an infant-derived system tolerance, not only to GIT commensals, but also to strain of Bifidobacterium longum, and identified 1,730 possible dietary antigens (8); lack of such tolerance possibly leads to food coding sequences organized in a 60%–GC circular chromosome. allergies and chronic inflammation. Bioinformatic analysis revealed several physiological traits that Although bifidobacteria represent only 3–6% of the adult could partially explain the successful adaptation of this bacteria fecal flora, their presence has been associated with beneficial to the colon. An unexpectedly large number of the predicted health effects, such as prevention of diarrhea, amelioration of proteins appeared to be specialized for catabolism of a variety lactose intolerance, or immunomodulation (5).
    [Show full text]
  • Schneider-Dissertation-2019
    Biosynthetic Investigation, Synthesis, and Bioactivity Evaluation of Putative Peptide Aldehyde Natural Products From the Human Gut Microbiota The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Schneider, Benjamin Aaron. 2019. Biosynthetic Investigation, Synthesis, and Bioactivity Evaluation of Putative Peptide Aldehyde Natural Products From the Human Gut Microbiota. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Graduate School of Arts & Sciences. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:42029686 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use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
    [Show full text]
  • Probiotic G.I. 60'S
    Product Information Sheet – August 2015 Probiotic G.I. Introduced 2010 What Is It? derived from corn dextrose fermentation and palm oil. Pure Encapsulations® probiotic products contain a unique form of Probiotic G.I. is a shelf-stable probiotic blend designed to support gut rice starch produced through a natural enzymatic process. This associated lymphoid tissue composition and function, gastrointestinal proprietary starch has been extensively tested and is added to cell health and immune response in the G.I. tract. Each capsule provides protect the viability of the probiotic organisms. 10 billion CFU of the beneficial bacteria Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus salivarius, Lactobacillus casei, Bifidobacterium bifidum, Recommendations Bifidobacterium lactis and Streptococcus thermophilus.* Pure Encapsulations recommends 1–2 capsules daily, in divided Uses For Probiotic G.I. doses, with or between meals. Healthy Immune Response in the G.I. Tract: Probiotics are key players Are There Any Potential Side Effects Or in gastrointestinal health, promoting intestinal integrity and comfort. Precautions? Supplement use promotes colonization of the G.I. tract by competing for nutrients and attachment sites, and producing compounds which Probiotics may result in mild flatulence, which should subside limit the ability of certain microbes to adhere. Research indicates that with continued use. They may be contraindicated for use with the strains included in Probiotic G.I. provide particular support for a immunocompromised individuals. If pregnant or lactating, consult healthy immune response within the G.I. tract. Beneficial microflora your physician before taking this product. are crucial for proper gut associated lymphoid tissue (GALT) function Are There Any Potential Drug Interactions? and development.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bifidogenic Effect Revisited—Ecology and Health Perspectives
    microorganisms Review The Bifidogenic Effect Revisited—Ecology and Health Perspectives of Bifidobacterial Colonization in Early Life Himanshu Kumar 1, Maria Carmen Collado 2,3 , Harm Wopereis 1 , Seppo Salminen 3 , Jan Knol 1,4 and Guus Roeselers 1,* 1 Danone Nutricia Research, 3584 CT Utrecht, The Netherlands; [email protected] (H.K.); [email protected] (H.W.); [email protected] (J.K.) 2 Department of Biotechnology, Institute of Agrochemistry and Food Technology-Spanish National Research Council (IATA-CSIC), Paterna, 46980 Valencia, Spain; [email protected] 3 Functional Foods Forum, Faculty of Medicine, University of Turku, 20500 Turku, Finland; seppo.salminen@utu.fi 4 Laboratory for Microbiology, Wageningen University, 6708 PB Wageningen, The Netherlands * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 22 October 2020; Accepted: 23 November 2020; Published: 25 November 2020 Abstract: Extensive microbial colonization of the infant gastrointestinal tract starts after parturition. There are several parallel mechanisms by which early life microbiome acquisition may proceed, including early exposure to maternal vaginal and fecal microbiota, transmission of skin associated microbes, and ingestion of microorganisms present in breast milk. The crucial role of vertical transmission from the maternal microbial reservoir during vaginal delivery is supported by the shared microbial strains observed among mothers and their babies and the distinctly different gut microbiome composition of caesarean-section born infants. The healthy infant colon is often dominated by members of the keystone genus Bifidobacterium that have evolved complex genetic pathways to metabolize different glycans present in human milk. In exchange for these host-derived nutrients, bifidobacteria’s saccharolytic activity results in an anaerobic and acidic gut environment that is protective against enteropathogenic infection.
    [Show full text]
  • The Infant Gut Microbiome As a Microbial Organ Influencing Host
    Turroni et al. Italian Journal of Pediatrics (2020) 46:16 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13052-020-0781-0 REVIEW Open Access The infant gut microbiome as a microbial organ influencing host well-being Francesca Turroni1,2, Christian Milani1, Sabrina Duranti1, Gabriele Andrea Lugli1, Sergio Bernasconi2, Abelardo Margolles3,4, Francesco Di Pierro5, Douwe van Sinderen6 and Marco Ventura1,2* Abstract Initial establishment of the human gut microbiota is generally believed to occur immediately following birth, involving key gut commensals such as bifidobacteria that are acquired from the mother. The subsequent development of this early gut microbiota is driven and modulated by specific dietary compounds present in human milk that support selective colonization. This represents a very intriguing example of host-microbe co- evolution, where both partners are believed to benefit. In recent years, various publications have focused on dissecting microbial infant gut communities and their interaction with their human host, being a determining factor in host physiology and metabolic activities. Such studies have highlighted a reduction of microbial diversity and/or an aberrant microbiota composition, sometimes referred to as dysbiosis, which may manifest itself during the early stage of life, i.e., in infants, or later stages of life. There are growing experimental data that may explain how the early human gut microbiota affects risk factors related to adult health conditions. This concept has fueled the development of various nutritional strategies, many of which are based on probiotics and/or prebiotics, to shape the infant microbiota. In this review, we will present the current state of the art regarding the infant gut microbiota and the role of key commensal microorganisms like bifidobacteria in the establishment of the first microbial communities in the human gut.
    [Show full text]
  • Technological Aspects Related to the Use of Bifidobacteria in Dairy Products Denis Roy
    Technological aspects related to the use of bifidobacteria in dairy products Denis Roy To cite this version: Denis Roy. Technological aspects related to the use of bifidobacteria in dairy products. Le Lait, INRA Editions, 2005, 85 (1-2), pp.39-56. hal-00895593 HAL Id: hal-00895593 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00895593 Submitted on 1 Jan 2005 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Lait 85 (2005) 39–56 © INRA, EDP Sciences, 2005 39 DOI: 10.1051/lait:2004026 Review Technological aspects related to the use of bifidobacteria in dairy products Denis ROY* Institute of Nutraceuticals and Functional Foods and Centre STELA, Laval University, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada Abstract – Dairy-related bifidobacteria are already used in a wide variety of probiotic dairy products including milk, cheese, frozen yoghurt-like product and ice cream. The survival of bifidobacteria in fermented dairy products depends on varied factors such as the strain of bacteria used, fermentation conditions, storage temperature, and preservation methods. Growth of bifidobacteria in milk is often slow or limited compared with lactic acid bacteria used in fermented dairy products, and this appears partially due to low proteolytic activities.
    [Show full text]