Journals / Çukurova Tarım ve Gıda Bilimleri Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 34 - Sayı: 1

Antibacterial Effects of Microencapsulated Probiotic and Synbiotics

Mikroenkapsüle Probiyotik ve Sinbiyotiklerin Antibakteriyel Etkisi

Pages
27–36
Publication Date
2019-06-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Furthermore, it was found that the survival rate of the probiotic culture cells varied according to the prebiotic.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The present study aims to evaluate the inhibition effect of microencapsulated probiotic culture with prebiotics against two different pathogen enterococci strain.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Furthermore, it was found that the survival rate of the probiotic culture cells varied according to the prebiotic.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It was determined that inulin was more efficient on L. rhamnosus cell viability than FOS.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Enterococcus · Lactobacillus rhamnosus · probiyotik

Abstract

The present study aims to evaluate the inhibition effect of microencapsulated probiotic culture with prebiotics against two different pathogen enterococci strain. Lactobacillus rhamnosus was used as probiotic, inulin and fructooligosaccharide (FOS) were used as prebiotics. Microencapsulation maintained with three different combinations as only probiotic culture, probiotic culture with inulin and probiotic culture with FOS. In addition, the effect of inulin and FOS on survival of L. rhamnosus was evaluated. L. rhamnosus was microencapsulated by the extrusion technique and its antibacterial effect on clinical vancomycin-susceptible Enterococcus faecalis (VSEF) and clinical vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VREF) growth was determined. According to the obtained results, microencapsulated probiotic culture with prebiotic addition showed inhibition effect on VREF growth. Furthermore, it was found that the survival rate of the probiotic culture cells varied according to the prebiotic. It was determined that inulin was more efficient on L. rhamnosus cell viability than FOS.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, prebiyotiklerle birlikte mikroenkapsüle edilen probiyotik kültürün iki farklı patojen enterokok gelişimi üzerine inhibe edici etkisi araştırılmıştır. Probiyotik olarak Lactobacillus rhamnosus (L. rhamnosus), prebiyotik olarak inulin ve fruktooligosakkarit (FOS) kullanılmıştır. Mikroenkapsülasyon, sadece probiyotik kültür, probiyotik kültür ile inülin, probiyotik kültür ile FOS olmak üzere 3 farklı kombinasyonda gerçekleştirilmiştir. Ayrıca, FOS ve inülinin L. rhamnosus canlılığı üzerine etkisi belirlenmiştir. L. rhamnosus ekstrüzyon tekniği ile mikroenkapsüle edilmiş ve vankomisin-duyarlı Enterococcus faecalis (VSEF) ile vankomisin-dirençli Enterococcus faecium (VREF) üzerine antibakteriyel etkisi araştırılmıştır. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre, prebiyotik ilavesi ile mikroenkapsüle edilen probiyotik kültür VREF üzerine inhibe edici etki göstermiştir. Probiyotik hücrelerin canlılığının prebiyotik çeşidinden etkilendiği gözlenmiştir. L. rhamnosus canlılığı üzerinde inülinin FOS’a göre daha etkili olduğu tespit edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ERGİNKAYA, Z., KONURAY, G., HARMANCI, M., KESEN, G., METE, N. (2019). Antibacterial Effects of Microencapsulated Probiotic and Synbiotics. Çukurova Tarım ve Gıda Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 34 - Sayı: 1, 27–36. https://ajindex.com/articles/119581

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Adebola, O. O., Corcoran, O., Morgan, W. A. (2014) Synbiotics: the impact of potential prebiotics inulin, lactulose and lactobionic acid on the survival and growth of lactobacilli probiotics. J Funct Foods 10: 75–84.
  2. Ambalam, P., Kondepudi, K. K., Balusupati, P., Nilsson, I., Wadstrom, T., Ljungh, A. (2015) Prebiotic preferences of human lactobacilli strains in co-culture with bifidobacteria and antimicrobial activity against Clostridium difficile. J Appl Microbiol 119: 1672-1682.
  3. Anal, A. K., Singh, H. (2007) Recent advances in microencapsulation of probiotics for industrial applications and targeted delivery. Trends Food Sci Technol 18: 240-251.
  4. Anyogu, A., Awamaria, B., Sutherland, J. P., Ouoba, L. I. I. (2014) Molecular characterisation and antimicrobial activity of bacteria associated with submerged lactic acid cassava fermentation. Food Control 39: 119-127.
  5. Argin, S. (2007) Microencapsulation of probiotic bacteria in xanthan-chitosan polyelectrolyte complex gels. PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park, America, 70. Arnold, J. W., Monteagudo-Mera, A., Altermann, E., Cadenas, M. B., Thompson, A. L., Azcarate-Peril, M. A. (2017) Genome sequences of potential probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus isolates from human infants. Genome Announcements 5, 14: e00107-17.Arslan-Tontul, S., Erbas, M. (2017) Single and double layered microencapsulation of probiotics by spray drying and spray chilling. LWT - Food Sci Technol 81: 160-169.
  6. Aryantini, N. P. D., Yamasaki, E., Kurazono, H., Sujaya, N., Urashima, T., Fukuda, K. (2017) In vitro safety assessments and antimicrobial activities of Lactobacillus rhamnosus strains isolated from a fermented mare's milk. Anim Sci J 88, 3: 517–525.
  7. Bağdatlı, A., Kundakcı, A. (2016) Optimization of compositional and structural properties in probiotic sausage production. J Food Sci Technol 53, 3: 1679-1689.
  8. Beristain-Bauza, S. C., Mani-López, E., Palou, E., López-Malo, A. (2016) Antimicrobial activity and physical properties of protein films added with cell-free supernatant of Lactobacillus rhamnosus. Food Control 62: 44–51.
  9. Bosnea, L. A., Moschakis, T., Biliaderis, C. G. (2014) Complex coacervation as a novel microencapsulation technique to improve viability of probiotics under different stresses. Food and Bioprocess Technol 7, 10: 2767–2781.
  10. Champagne, C., Fustier, P. (2007) Microencapsulation for the improved delivery of bioactive compounds into foods. Curr Opin Biotechnol 18: 184–190.
  11. Chandramouli, V., Kailasapathya, K., P