Dergiler / Veteriner Hekimler Derneği Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 91 - Sayı: 1

Comparative effects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria

Nisin ve monensin’in rumen bakterilerinin saf kültürleri üzerine karşılaştırmalı etkileri

Sayfa
1–8
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

It was concluded that the different effects of nisin and monensin particularly on some Gram-positive rumen bacteria may be responsible for their inconsistent effects on ruminal fermentation.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Nisin is a low molecular weight bacteriocin which is produced by Lactococcus lactis.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Growth of these bacteria was inhibited completely by monensin, at 6 and 12 µg/mL concentrations respectively.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:It was concluded that the different effects of nisin and monensin particularly on some Gram-positive rumen bacteria may be responsible for their inconsistent effects on ruminal fermentation.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

Nisin is a low molecular weight bacteriocin which is produced by Lactococcus lactis. Literature about the effects of nisin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria is scarce. The objective of the present study was to investigate the comparative effects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of some Gram-positive and Gram-negative rumen bacteria. The antibacterial activity assays of nisin and monensin were carried out using broth microdilution method in anaerobic conditions. Antibacterial effect of monensin on Gram-positive rumen bacteria was higher than nisin. Ruminococcus albus and Eubacterium ruminantium were the most sensitive bacteria to monensin. Growth of these bacteria was inhibited completely by monensin, at 6 and 12 µg/mL concentrations respectively. Nisin exhibited stimulatory effects on R. albus, E. ruminantium and, Streptecoccus bovis (p<0.05), unlike monensin. Both nisin and monensin showed potential antibacterial activity on Ruminococcus flavefaciens and Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens (p<0.05), although they did not inhibit these bacteria completely. Nisin and monensin also did not show inhibitory effect on Methanobacterium formicicum, however the potential antimicrobial activity of monensin on this methanogen was more evident. Gramnegative rumen bacteria, Megasphaera elsdenii and Fibrobacter succinogenes, were resistant to both of nisin and monesin. It was concluded that the different effects of nisin and monensin particularly on some Gram-positive rumen bacteria may be responsible for their inconsistent effects on ruminal fermentation.

Abstract

Nisin, Lactococcus lactis tarafından üretilen düşük moleküler ağırlıklı bir bakteriyosindir. Nisin’in rumen bakterilerinin saf kültürleri üzerine etkileri hakkında oldukça sınırlı düzeyde literatür bilgisi bulunmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, nisin ve monensin’in bazı Gram-pozitif ve Gram-negatif rumen bakterilerinin saf kültürleri üzerine karşılaştırmalı etkilerini araştırmaktır. Nisin ve monensin’in antibakteriyal aktivite analizleri, anaerobik koşullarda mikrodilüsyon yöntemi kullanılarak yapılmıştır. Monensin’in Gram-pozitif rumen bakterileri üzerine antibakteriyal etkisi nisin’den daha yüksek bulunmuştur. Ruminococcus albus ve Eubacterium ruminantium monensin’e karşı en duyarlı bakteriler olarak belirlenmiştir. Bu bakterilerin büyümesi, monensin tarafından sırasıyla 6 ve 12 µg/mL konsantrasyonlarında tamamen baskılanmıştır. Nisin, monensin’den farklı olarak R. albus, E. ruminantium ve Streptecoccus bovis üzerine uyarıcı etkiler göstermiştir (p<0,05). Hem nisin hem de monensin, Ruminococcus flavefaciens ve Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens üzerine potansiyel antibakteriyal aktivite sergilemişler (p<0,05), ancak bu bakterileri tamamen baskılamamışlardır. Nisin ve monensin ayrıca Methanobacterium formicicum üzerine baskılayıcı etki göstermemekle birlikte, monensin’in bu metanojen üzerine potansiyel antimikrobiyal etkinliğinin daha belirgin olduğu gözlenmiştir. Gram-negatif rumen bakterileri olan Megasphaera elsdenii ve Fibrobacter succinogenes’in, hem nisin hem de monensin’e karşı dirençli oldukları belirlenmiştir. Nisin ve monensin’in özellikle bazı Gram-pozitif rumen bakterileri üzerine olan farklı etkilerinin ruminal fermentasyon üzerine uyumlu olmayan etkilerinden sorumlu olabileceği sonucuna varılmıştır.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

DEMİRTAŞ, A. (2020). Comparative effects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria. Veteriner Hekimler Derneği Dergisi, Cilt: 91 - Sayı: 1, 1–8. https://ajindex.com/articles/332954

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (9)

  1. Aura AM (2008): Microbial metabolism of dietary phenolic compounds in the colon. Phytochem Rev, 7, 407– 429
  2. Breukink E, de Kruijff B (1999): The lantibiotic nisin, a special case or not? BBA-Biomembranes 1462, 223– 234
  3. Brulc JM, Antonopoulos DA, Miller ME, Wilson MK, Yannarell AC, Dinsdale EA, Edwards RE, Frank, ED, Emerson JB, Wacklin P, Coutinho PM, Henrissat B, Nelson KE, White BA (2009): Gene-centric metagenomics of the fiber-adherent bovine rumen microbiome reveals forage specific glycoside hydrolases. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 106, 1948–1953
  4. Callaway TR, De Melo AMC, Russell JB (1997): The effect of nisin and monensin on ruminal fermentations in vitro. Curr Microbiol, 35, 90–96
  5. Castillejos L, Calsamiglia S, Ferret A, Losa R (2007): Effects of dose and adaptation time of a specific blend of essential oil compounds on rumen fermentation. Anim Feed Sci Tech, 132, 186–201
  6. Chalupa W (1977): Manipulating rumen fermentation. J Anim Sci, 46, 585–599
  7. Chung KT, Dickson JS, Crouse JD (1989): Effects of nisin on growth of bacteria attached to meat. Appl Environ Microbiol, 55, 1329–1333
  8. CLSI (Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute) (2016): Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing: 26th Informational Supplement. In: M100-S26, CLSI, Wayne, PA
  9. Dawson KA, Boling JA (1984): Factors affecting resistance of monensin-resistant and sensitive strains of Bacteroides ruminicola. Can J Anim Sci, 64, 132–133. 10.DeVuyst L (1994): Nisin production variability between natural Lactococcus lactis subsp. lactis strains. Biotechnol Lett, 16, 287–292. 11.Henderson C, Stewart CS, Nekrep FV (1981): The effect of monensin on pure and mixed cultures of rumen bacteria. J Appl Bacteriol, 51, 159–169. 12.Jack RW, Tagg JR, Ray B (1995): Bacteriocins of Gram-positive bacteria. Microbiol Rev, 59, 171–200. 13.Jalc D, Lauková A (2002): Effect of nisin and monensin on rumen fermentation in the artificial rumen. Berl Munch Tierarztl, 115, 6–10. 14.Jami E, Mizrahi I (2012): Composition and similarity of bovine rumen microbiota across individual animals. Plos One, 7, e33306. 15.Kang MS, Oh JS, Kang IC, Hong SJ, Choi CH (2008): Inhibitory effect of methyl gallate and gallic acid on oral bacteria. J Microbiol, 46, 744–750. 16.Kišidayová S, Laukova A, Jalč D (2009): Comparison of nisin and monensin effects on ciliate and selected bacterial populations in artificial rumen. Folia Microbiol, 54, 527–532. 17.Ko HH, Lareu RR, Dix BR, Hughes JD (201