2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2009.04.014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Identification and evaluation of the probiotic potential of lactobacilli isolated from canine milk

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
30
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
2
30
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The KAA counts (<1.16 × 10 3  CFU/mL) were similar to those reported for hygienically-obtained human milk on MRS plates, a medium also suitable for isolation of enterococci [6,7]. As previously reported for lactobacilli in porcine and canine milk [8,9], the enterococcal pattern observed in the milk samples seems to be restricted to a low number of species and strains, and also to have a high degree of individual variability. To our knowledge, this is the first description of enterococci isolated from fresh milk of healthy canine, feline and porcine hosts.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…The KAA counts (<1.16 × 10 3  CFU/mL) were similar to those reported for hygienically-obtained human milk on MRS plates, a medium also suitable for isolation of enterococci [6,7]. As previously reported for lactobacilli in porcine and canine milk [8,9], the enterococcal pattern observed in the milk samples seems to be restricted to a low number of species and strains, and also to have a high degree of individual variability. To our knowledge, this is the first description of enterococci isolated from fresh milk of healthy canine, feline and porcine hosts.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…above 15 mm (+++) were observed in a total of 6 isolates (L8, L12, L15, L16, L18 and L38) against 9 out of 11 test pathogens examined, 4 isolates (L13, L26, L33 and L42) against 5 out of 11 test pathogens examined, one isolate (L6) against 6 out of 11 test pathogens examined, one isolate (L2) against 5 out of 11 test pathogens examined, 5 isolates (L11, L14, L17, L35 and L41) against 1 out of 11 test pathogens examined, whereas in 3 isolates (L20, L31 and L36) inhibition zones above 15 mm (+++) were not observed (Table 1). The differences among antimicrobial activities displayed by different strains tested were supposed to be due to differences in production of organic acids like lactic acid or proteinaceous inhibitory substances (Martin et al, 2010). Antibacterial activity was found to be prominent (with inhibition zones above 15 mm) against O49, O128 and rough (R) serotypes of E. coli compared to O20 and O141 E. coli serotypes (Table 1).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…L. reuteri has been experimentally shown to be maternally transmitted in humans and pigs (63,64). Interestingly, L. reuteri is present in low numbers in milk from humans, pigs, and dogs, and thus transmission to the next generation might be facilitated by inoculation during lactation (65)(66)(67).…”
Section: Lactobacillus Reuteri As a Model Gut Symbiontmentioning
confidence: 99%