Comparative Evaluation of the Antimicrobial and Mucus Induction Properties of Selected Bacillus Strains against Enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli

Bravo-Santano, Natalia; Boll, Erik J.; Capern, Lena Catrine; Cieplak, Tomasz; Keleszade, Enver; Letek, Michal; Costabile, Adele

doi:10.3390/antibiotics9120849

Cited by 14 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…are one type of DFM, being classified as gram-positive, catalase-positive, spore-forming, aerobic, and facultative anaerobic bacteria ( Luise et al, 2022 ). Besides its proven modes of action and benefits on health variables, such as pathogen inhibition ( Copani et al, 2020 ), biofilm formation ( Segura et al, 2020 ), and mucin formation ( Santano et al, 2020 ), Bacillus spp. have also been known for its ability to produce a diverse range and quantities of enzymes of interest in ruminant nutrition, such as fibrolytic, amylolytic, proteolytic, and lipolytic ( Schallmey et al, 2004 ; Elshaghabee et al, 2017 ; Luise et al, 2022 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of a Bacillus-based direct-fed microbial probiotic on in vitro rumen gas production and nutrient digestibility of different feedstuffs and total mixed rations

Cappellozza

Joergensen

Copani

et al. 2023

Translational Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We evaluated the effects of a Bacillus-based direct-fed microbial (DFM) on total in vitro gas production, dry matter (DM), neutral detergent fiber (NDF), and starch disappearance of different feedstuffs and total mixed rations (TMR) in three different experiments. In Exp. 1, six single fiber-based feedstuffs were evaluated: alfalfa hay, buffalo grass, beet pulp, eragrostis hay, oat hay, and smutsvinger grass. Experimental treatments were control (with no probiotic inoculation; CON) or incubation of a probiotic mixture containing Bacillus licheniformis and B. subtilis (3.2 × 10 9 CFU/g; DFM). The calculation of DFM dose under in vitro conditions was based on the assumption of a rumen capacity of 70 L and the dose of 3 g of the DFM mixture/head per day (9.6 × 10 9 CFU). Total in vitro gas production, DM, and NDF disappearance were evaluated at 24- and 48-h post-treatment incubation. Mean treatment effects were observed at 24- and 48-h gas production (P < 0.0001), as DFM incubation increased in vitro gas production by 5.0 and 6.5%, respectively. For nutrient digestibility, mean DM digestibility was increased at 48-h (P = 0.05), whereas mean NDF digestibility increased at both timepoints by incubating DFM in vitro (P ≤ 0.02). In Exp. 2, nine commercial dairy TMR were collected and evaluated for the same variables and treatments described in Exp. 1, with the additional analysis of starch digestibility at 7 h post in vitro incubation. The only difference was the concentration of the DFM included, being representative for a dosage of 8.8 × 10 9 CFU/head per day. In vitro gas production was increased only at 48-h due to DFM incubation (P = 0.05), whereas DM and NDF digestibility were improved at 24 and 48 h (P ≤ 0.02). No treatment effects were observed on in vitro starch digestibility (P = 0.31). In Exp. 3, a combined analysis of DM and NDF digestibility was performed by using quality values (NDF and CP) of sixteen substrates. Regardless of CP and NDF levels of the substrates, DFM improved in vitro 24- and 48-h DM and NDF digestibility (P ≤ 0.03). In summary, incubating a Bacillus-based DFM (B. licheniformis and B. subtilis; BOVACILLUS TM) improved mean in vitro gas production, DM, and NDF digestibility of single feedstuffs and commercial dairy total mixed rations, highlighting the potential of this combination of Bacillus spp. to improve nutrient utilization, mainly fiber.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of a Bacillus-based direct-fed microbial probiotic on in vitro rumen gas production and nutrient digestibility of different feedstuffs and total mixed rations

Cappellozza

Joergensen

Copani

et al. 2023

Translational Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, strains of Bacillus subtilis were also demonstrated to enhanced growth rate and improve gut barrier function of weaned pigs experimentally infected with pathogenic E. coli ( He et al, 2020 ), also influencing their mucosal transcriptomic profile ( Luise et al, 2019 ). This inhibitory effect, against pathogens like E. coli , could be explained by the production of antimicrobial peptides and an increased mucin production of goblet cells ( Bravo-Santano et al, 2020 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Potential effect of twoBacillusprobiotic strains on performance and fecal microbiota of breeding sows and their piglets

Saladrigas-García

Solà-Oriol

López-Vergé

et al. 2022

Journal of Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of long-term administration of two Bacillus strains was tested on 98 breeding sows and their litters allotted into three treatments: a control group (CON); supplemented with 5x10 8 cfu/kg B. subtilis – 541 (BSU); or with 5x10 8 cfu/kg B. amyloliquefaciens – 516 (BAM). Reproductive and performance variables were recorded over three cycles with 56 dams remaining through the third lactation. Blood and fecal samples were taken longitudinally from 12 sows per treatment on days 8 and 21 of the third lactation and milk samples were taken on day 21. Feces from one piglet per litter was sampled on days 21 and 33 and jejunal gene expression was assessed in two piglets on day 21. Changes in fecal microbiota were assessed by 16S rRNA gene sequencing (Illumina MiSeq) and gene expression by Open-Array technology. Metabolomic responses were analyzed in milk by NMR and Ig-G and Ig-A specific antibodies were determined by ELISA. No significant differences were observed on feed intake, body weight, or fat mobilization of the sows. However, a significant increase in the total number of piglets born was observed in supplemented sows. Whereas the increase was seen from the first cycle with BAM, improvements were not seen with BSU until the third cycle. BAM also increased the number of born-alive and weaned piglets. NMR analysis showed an impact of BAM on milk composition. No differences were found in milk or blood immunoglobulins. A different structure of the fecal microbiota was found in supplemented sows, with changes across phylum, family, and genus. These changes were greater at day 8, suggesting a relevant role of probiotics establishing a new intestinal balance after labor. Shifts in the microbiota were also seen in the piglets, with a clearer impact post-weaning than in suckling. In this regard, correlations between microbial groups of sows and piglets showed a higher link with weaned (d33) than with suckling pigs (d21) reinforcing the idea of an early maternal carry-over. No changes due to treatment in jejunal gene expression were detected, however, piglet size had a clear impact on different genes. In summary, the addition of both probiotics, and particularly Bacillus amyloliquefaciens, demonstrated potential benefits on the prolificacy of sows. Daily feeding of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens resulted in an increase in the number of weaned piglets. The high correlations between the compositions of the microbiota of sows and their piglets is evidence of maternal imprinting, with effects lasting beyond weaning.

show abstract

“…For example, they have been used in the poultry industry to promote the growth of chickens and to eliminate pathogenic infectious agents such as Salmonella [9,32]. In another more recent study, it was described that Bacillus could inhibit the growth and adhesion of enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC) [33]. Considering the possible antagonistic effect of probiotics of the Bacillus genus against bacterial pathogens and that this could be due to the antimicrobial effects described for METs [25], we carried out an in vitro challenge of METs induced by Bacillus against S. aureus, resulting in a decrease in CFU/mL, which was significant in the case of METs formed from infection with B. licheniformis (Figure 4).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…B. licheniformis and B. subtilis are probiotics that have been used to prevent the growth of microorganisms considered pathogens such as E. coli or Salmonella [32,33]. The results obtained so far indicate that both probiotics induce the production of METs.…”

Section: Mets Induced By B Licheniformis Inhibit the Growth Of Staphylococcus Aureusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bacillus licheniformis and Bacillus subtilis, Probiotics That Induce the Formation of Macrophage Extracellular Traps

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Probiotics are considered living microorganisms that help preserve the health of the host who uses them. Bacillus are a genus of Gram-positive bacteria used as probiotics for animal and human consumption. They are currently distributed in various commercial forms. Two of the species used as probiotics are B. licheniformis and B. subtilis. Macrophages are central cells in the immune response, being fundamental in the elimination of microbial pathogens, for which they use various mechanisms, including the formation of extracellular traps (METs). There have been very few studies carried out on the participation of macrophages in response to the interaction of probiotics of the genus Bacillus with the host. In this work, we used macrophages from the J774A mouse cell line.1, and we found that they are susceptible to infection by the two Bacillus species. However, both species were eliminated as the infection progressed. Using confocal microscopy, we identified the formation of METs from the first hours of infection, which were characterized by the presence of myeloperoxidase (MPO) and citrullinated histone (Hit3Cit). Quantitative data on extracellular DNA release were also obtained; release was observed starting in the first hour of infection. The induction of METs by B. licheniformis caused a significant decrease in the colony-forming units (CFU) of Staphylococcus aureus. The induction of METS by bacteria of the Bacillus genus is a mechanism that participates in controlling the probiotic and potentially pathogenic bacteria such as S. aureus. The induction of METs to control pathogens may be a novel mechanism that could explain the beneficial effects of probiotics of the genus Bacillus.

show abstract

Comparative Evaluation of the Antimicrobial and Mucus Induction Properties of Selected Bacillus Strains against Enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli

Cited by 14 publications

References 37 publications

Evaluation of a Bacillus-based direct-fed microbial probiotic on in vitro rumen gas production and nutrient digestibility of different feedstuffs and total mixed rations

Evaluation of a Bacillus-based direct-fed microbial probiotic on in vitro rumen gas production and nutrient digestibility of different feedstuffs and total mixed rations

Potential effect of twoBacillusprobiotic strains on performance and fecal microbiota of breeding sows and their piglets

Bacillus licheniformis and Bacillus subtilis, Probiotics That Induce the Formation of Macrophage Extracellular Traps

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About