FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / J Appl Microbiol / Selection of a candidate probiotic strain of Pediococcus pen...
Journal of applied microbiology2016; 122(1); 225-238; doi: 10.1111/jam.13339

Selection of a candidate probiotic strain of Pediococcus pentosaceus from the faecal microbiota of horses by in vitro testing and health claims in a mouse model of Salmonella infection.

Abstract: The aim of this study was to verify the suitable use of candidate 'probiotics' selected by in vitro tests and the importance of in vivo assays to nominate micro-organisms as probiotics and alternative prophylactic treatments for Salmonella Typhimurium infection. Results: Thirty-three lactic acid bacteria (LAB) isolated from foal's faeces were assessed based on the main desirable functional in vitro criteria. Based on these results, Pediococcus pentosaceus strain 40 was chosen to evaluate its putative probiotic features in a mouse model of Salmonella infection. Daily intragastric doses of Ped. pentosaceus 40 for 10 days before and 10 days after Salmonella challenge (106 CFU of Salm. Typhimurium per mouse) led to a significant aggravation in mouse health by increasing weight loss, worsening clinical symptoms and anticipating the time and the number of deaths by Salmonella. Pediococcus pentosaceus modulated cell-mediated immune responses by up-regulation of the gene expression of the proinflammatory cytokines IFN-γ and TNF-α in the small intestine. Conclusions: The usual criteria were used for in vitro screening of a large number of LAB for desirable probiotic functional properties. However, the best candidate probiotic strain identified, Ped. pentosaceus #40, aggravated the experimental disease in mice. Conclusions: These findings emphasize the need for prophylactic or therapeutic effectiveness to be demonstrated in in vivo models to make precise health claims.
© 2016 The Society for Applied Microbiology.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2016-12-14 PubMed ID: 27813217PubMed Central: PMC7166613DOI: 10.1111/jam.13339Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The study aimed to identify a potential probiotic strain capable of replacing traditional treatments for Salmonella Typhimurium infection. Through a series of tests, Pediococcus pentosaceus strain 40 was selected, though it ended up exacerbating the condition in mouse models. This highlighted the importance of in vivo assays in confirming the effectiveness of probiotics for specific health applications.

Selection of Probiotic Strains

  • Researchers began by isolating 33 strains of lactic acid bacteria from foal’s feces.
  • The strains were then subjected to in vitro tests based on crucial functional criteria for probiotics.
  • One strain—Pediococcus pentosaceus 40—was picked based on the in vitro tests to further investigate its probiotic characteristics.

Probiotic Assessment in Mouse Model

  • A mouse model of Salmonella infection was used to evaluate the effectiveness of the chosen strain.
  • Mice were given daily intragastric doses of Pediococcus pentosaceus 40 for 10 days before and after exposure to Salmonella Typhimurium.
  • Contrary to the positive results from the in vitro tests, mice treated with the probiotic experienced significant health decline, including rapid weight loss, increased severity of clinical symptoms, and premature death.

Effects on Cellular Immune Response

  • Pediococcus pentosaceus also impacted the cellular immune response, enhancing the gene expression of proinflammatory cytokines, specifically IFN-γ and TNF-α, in the small intestine.
  • This modulation of immune response might have contributed to the worsening of the infection and the overall deterioration of the mice’s health.

Implications and Conclusions

  • The outcome of the study underscores the necessity for extending the evaluation of potential probiotics beyond in vitro tests to in vivo assays.
  • The researchers concluded that even though in vitro tests can filter potential candidates based on desirable traits, they aren’t sufficient for predicting the actual practical efficacy of a probiotic treatment.
  • The findings lead to a strong recommendation that any health claims associated with probiotics should be verified with in vivo tests to ascertain their preventative or therapeutic effectiveness.

Cite This Article

APA
Silva BC, Sandes SH, Alvim LB, Bomfim MR, Nicoli JR, Neumann E, Nunes AC. (2016). Selection of a candidate probiotic strain of Pediococcus pentosaceus from the faecal microbiota of horses by in vitro testing and health claims in a mouse model of Salmonella infection. J Appl Microbiol, 122(1), 225-238. https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.13339

Publication

Journal of applied microbiology
ISSN: 1365-2672
NlmUniqueID: 9706280
Country: England
Language: English
Volume: 122
Issue: 1
Pages: 225-238

Researcher Affiliations

Silva, B C
  • Departamento de Biologia Geral, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Campus Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
Sandes, S H C
  • Departamento de Biologia Geral, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Campus Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
Alvim, L B
  • Departamento de Biologia Geral, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Campus Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
Bomfim, M R Q
  • Laboratório de Biologia Molecular de Microrganismos do Núcleo de Biologia Parasitária, Centro Universitário do Maranhão (UniCEUMA), São Luís, MA, Brazil.
Nicoli, J R
  • Departamento de Microbiologia, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Campus Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
Neumann, E
  • Departamento de Microbiologia, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Campus Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
Nunes, A C
  • Departamento de Biologia Geral, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Campus Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Cytokines / genetics
  • Cytokines / immunology
  • Disease Models, Animal
  • Feces / microbiology
  • Female
  • Horses
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Mice
  • Mice, Inbred BALB C
  • Pediococcus pentosaceus / genetics
  • Pediococcus pentosaceus / isolation & purification
  • Pediococcus pentosaceus / physiology
  • Probiotics / administration & dosage
  • Salmonella / physiology
  • Salmonella Infections / drug therapy
  • Salmonella Infections / genetics
  • Salmonella Infections / metabolism
  • Salmonella Infections / microbiology
  • Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha / genetics
  • Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha / metabolism
  • Up-Regulation

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

This article includes 70 references
  1. Alvim LB, Sandes SHC, Silva BC, Steinberg RS, Campos MHA, Acurcio LB, Arantes RME, Nicoli JR. Weissella paramesenteroides WpK4 reduces gene expression of intestinal cytokines, and hepatic and splenic injuries in a murine model of typhoid fever.. Benef Microbes 7, 61–73.
    pubmed: 26565085
  2. Ammor MS, Florez AB, Mayo B. Antibiotic resistance in nonenterococcal lactic acid generate food grade vectors.. Food Microbiol 24, 559–570.
    pubmed: 17418306
  3. Botha M. Selection of probiotic lactic acid bacteria for horses based on in vitro and in vivo studies.. Master Thesis, University of Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch, South Africa.
  4. Bywater RJ. Identification and surveillance of antimicrobial resistance dissemination in animal production.. Poult Sci 84, 644–648.
    pubmed: 15844823
  5. Castillo NA, LeBlanc AM, Galdeano CM, Perdigón G. Probiotics: an alternative strategy for combating salmonellosis: immune mechanisms involved.. Food Res Int 45, 831–841.
  6. Charteris WP, Kelly PM, Morelli L, Collins JK. Development and application of an in vitro methodology to determine the transit tolerance of potentially probiotic Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium species in the upper human gastrointestinal tract.. J Appl Microbiol 84, 759–768.
    pubmed: 9674129
  7. Chaves S, Perdigón G, Moreno De, de Leblanc A. Yoghurt consumption regulates the immune cells implicated in acute intestinal inflammation and prevents the recurrence of the inflammatory process in a mouse model.. J Food Prot 74, 801–811.
    pubmed: 21549052
  8. Cremonini F, Di Caro S, Covino M, Armuzzi A, Gabrielli M, Santarelli L, Nista EC, Cammarota G. Effect of different probiotic preparations on antihelicobacter pylori therapy‐related side effects: a parallel group, triple blind, placebo‐controlled study.. Am J Gastroenterol 97, 2744–2749.
    pubmed: 12425542
  9. Danielsen M, Wind A. Susceptibility of Lactobacillus ssp. to antimicrobial agents.. Int J Food Microbiol 82, 1–11.
    pubmed: 12505455
  10. Davidson LE, Fiorino AM, Snydman DR, Hibberd PL. Lactobacillus GG as an immune adjuvant for live‐attenuated influenza vaccine in healthy adults: a randomized double‐blind placebo‐controlled trial.. Eur J Clin Nutr 65, 501–507.
    pmc: PMC3071884pubmed: 21285968
  11. Dogi CA, Perdigón G. Importance of the host specificity in the selection of probiotic bacteria.. J Dairy Res 73, 357–366.
    pubmed: 16836803
  12. Endo A, Okada S, Morita H. Molecular profiling of Lactobacillus, Streptococcus, and Bifidobacterium species in feces of active racehorses.. J Gen Appl Microbiol 53, 191–200.
    pubmed: 17726300
  13. Endo A, Futagawa‐Endo Y, Dicks LM. Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium diversity in horse feces, revealed by PCR‐DGGE.. Curr Microbiol 59, 651–655.
    pubmed: 19730939
  14. European Union. Regulation (EC) No. 1831/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on Additives for Use in Animal Nutrition.. Available at: http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/food_safety/animal_nutrition/l12037d_en.htm (accessed on 20 June 2016).
  15. Fagundes CT, Souza DG, Nicoli JR, Teixeira MM. Control of host inflammatory responsiveness by indigenous microbiota reveals an adaptive component of the innate immune system.. Microbes Infect 13, 1121–1132.
    pubmed: 21867769
  16. Food and Agricultural Organization/World Health Organization. Report of a Joint FAO/WHO. Expert Consultation on Guidelines for the Evaluation of Probiotics in Food.. London, ON, Canada: FAO/WHO of the United Nations.
  17. Franz CMPA, Cho GS, Holzapfel WH, Galvez A. Safety of lactic acid bacteria In Biotechnology of Lactic Acid Bacteria: Novel Applications eds. Mozzi F., Raya R.R. and Vignolo G.M. pp. 341–360.. Ames, IA, USA: Wiley‐Blackwell.
  18. Galdeano CM, Perdigón G. Role of viability of probiotic strains in their persistence in the gut and in mucosal immune stimulation.. J Appl Microbiol 97, 673–681.
    pubmed: 15357716
  19. Gevers D, Huys G, Swings J. Applicability of rep‐PCR fingerprinting for identification of Lactobacillus species.. FEMS Microbiol Lett 205, 31–36.
    pubmed: 11728712
  20. Giulietti A, Overbergh L, Valckx D, Decallonne B, Bouillon R, Mathieu C. An overview of real‐time quantitative PCR: applications to quantify cytokine gene expression.. Methods 25, 386–401.
    pubmed: 11846608
  21. Grassl GA, Valdez Y, Bergstrom KS, Vallance BA, Finlay BB. Chronic enteric Salmonella infection in mice leads to severe and persistent intestinal fibrosis.. Gastroenterology 134, 768–780.
    pubmed: 18325390
  22. Guo XH, Kim JM, Nam HM, Park SY, Kim JM. Screening lactic acid bacteria from swine origins for multistrain probiotics based on in vitro functional properties.. Anaerobe 16, 321–326.
    pubmed: 20304081
  23. Hellemans J, Mortier G, Paepe AD, Speleman F, Vandesompele J. qBase relative quantification framework and software for management and automated analysis of real‐time quantitative PCR data.. Genome Biol 8, R19.
    pmc: PMC1852402pubmed: 17291332
  24. Heselmans M, Reid G, Akkermans LM, Savelkoul H, Timmerman H, Rombouts FM. Gut flora in health and disease: potential role of probiotics.. Curr Issues Intest Microbiol 6, 1–7.
    pubmed: 15751747
  25. Hill C, Guarner F, Reid G, Gibson GR, Merenstein DJ, Pot B, Morelli L, Canani RB. New commensals and consortia comprising defined strains from human samples, with adequate evidence of safety and efficacy, are ‘probiotics’ (Expert consensus document: The International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics consensus statement on the scope and appropriate use of the term probiotic).. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 11, 506–514.
    pubmed: 24912386
  26. Hori T, Kiyoshima J, Shida K, Yasui H. Effect of intranasal administration of Lactobacillus casei Shirota on influenza virus infection of upper respiratory tract in mice.. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 8, 593–597.
    pmc: PMC96107pubmed: 11329464
  27. Jouany JP, Morgavi DP. Use of natural products as alternatives to antibiotic feed additives in ruminant production.. Animal 1, 1443–1466.
    pubmed: 22444918
  28. Klare I, Konstabel C, Werner G, Huys G, Vankerckhoven V, Kahlmeter G, Hildebrandt B, Müller‐Bertling S. Antimicrobial susceptibilities of Lactobacillus, Pediococcus and Lactococcus human isolates and cultures intended for probiotic or nutritional use.. J Antimicrob Chemother 59, 900–912.
    pubmed: 17369278
  29. Lahteenmaki L, Ledeboer AM. Probiotics – the consumer perspective.. Food Sci Technol Bull: Functional Foods 3, 47–50.
  30. Lebeer S, Vanderleyden J, De Keersmaecker SC. Genes and molecules of lactobacilli supporting probiotic action.. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 72, 728–764.
    pmc: PMC2593565pubmed: 19052326
  31. Lee CM, Sieo CC, Cheah YK, Abdullah N, Ho YW. Discrimination of probiotic Lactobacillus strains for poultry by repetitive sequenced‐based PCR fingerprinting.. J Sci Food Agric 92, 660–666.
    pubmed: 21919004
  32. Mainville I, Arcand Y, Farnworth ER. A dynamic model that simulates the human upper gastrointestinal tract for the study of probiotics.. Int J Food Microbiol 99, 287–296.
    pubmed: 15808363
  33. Maragkoudakis PA, Chingwaru W, Gradisnik L, Tsakalidou E, Cencic A. Lactic acid bacteria efficiently protect human and animal intestinal epithelial and immune cells from enteric virus infection.. Int J Food Microbiol 141(Suppl. 1), S91–S97.
    pmc: PMC7114074pubmed: 20106541
  34. Markiewicz L, Biedrzycka E, Wasilewska E, Bielecka M. Rapid molecular identification and characteristics of Lactobacillus strains.. Folia Microbiol 55, 481–488.
    pubmed: 20941584
  35. Martins AKS, Martins FS, Gomes DA, Elian SDA, Vieira AT, Teixeira MM, Cara DC, Nardi RMD. Evaluation of in vitro antagonism and of in vivo immune modulation and protection against pathogenic experimental challenge of two probiotic strains of Bifidobacterium animalis var. lactis.. Arch Microbiol 192, 995–1003.
    pubmed: 20848082
  36. Mastroeni P, Grant AJ. Spread of Salmonella enterica in the body during systemic infection: unravelling host and pathogen determinants.. Expert Rev Mol Med 13, 1–15.
    pubmed: 21477411
  37. Mathur S, Singh R. Antibiotic resistance in food lactic acid bacteria – a review.. Int J Food Microbiol 105, 281–295.
    pubmed: 16289406
  38. Mathur R, Oh H, Zhang D, Park S, Seo J, Koblansky A, Hayden MS, Ghosh S. A mouse model of Salmonella Typhi infection.. Cell 151, 590–602.
    pmc: PMC3500584pubmed: 23101627
  39. Mirlohi M, Soleimanian-Zad S, Dokhani S, Sheikh-Zeinodin M, Abghary A. Investigation of acid and bile tolerance of native lactobacilli isolated from fecal samples and commercial probiotics by growth and survival studies.. Iran J Biotechnol 7, 233–240.
  40. Montes AJ, Pugh DG. The use of probiotics in food‐animal practice.. Vet Med 88, 282–288.
  41. Morelli L. In vitro selection of probiotic lactobacilli: a critical appraisal.. Curr Issues Intest Microbiol 1, 59–67.
    pubmed: 11709870
  42. Morotomi M, Yuki N, Kado Y, Kushiro A, Shimazaki T, Watanabe K, Yuyama T. Lactobacillus equi sp. nov., a predominant intestinal Lactobacillus species of the horse isolated from faeces of healthy horses.. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 52, 211–214.
    pubmed: 11837305
  43. Nardi RM, Santoro MM, Oliveira JS, Pimenta AM, Ferraz VP, Benchetrit LC, Nicoli JR. Purification and molecular characterization of antibacterial compounds produced by Lactobacillus murinus strain L1.. J Appl Microbiol 99, 649–656.
    pubmed: 16108807
  44. National Research Council. Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals.. 8th Edn. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  45. Niederhausern S, Sabia C, Messi P, Guerrieri E, Manicardi G, Bondi M. Van A‐type vancomycin resistant enterococi in equine and swine rectal swabs and in human clinical samples.. Curr Microbiol 55, 240–246.
    pubmed: 17657536
  46. Ohland CL, MacNaughton WK. Probiotic bacteria and intestinal epithelial barrier function.. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 298, G807–G819.
    pubmed: 20299599
  47. Paineau D, Carcano D, Leyer G, Darquy S, Alyanakian MA, Simoneau G, Bergmann JF, Brassart D. Effects of seven potential probiotic strains on specific immune responses in healthy adults: a double‐blind, randomized, controlled trial.. Fems Immunol Med Mic 53, 107–113.
    pubmed: 18422632
  48. Reid G, Jass J, Sebulsky MT, McCormick JK. Uses of probiotics in clinical practice.. Clin Microbiol Rev 16, 658–672.
    pmc: PMC207122pubmed: 14557292
  49. Ringel Y, Quigley EMM, Lin HC. Using probiotics in gastrointestinal disorders.. Am J Gastroenterol Suppl 1, 34–40.
  50. Ripamonti B, Agazzi A, Bersani C, De Dea P, Pecorini C, Pirani S, Rebucci R, Savoini G. Screening of species‐specific lactic acid bacteria for veal calves multi‐strain probiotic adjuncts.. Anaerobe 17, 97–105.
    pubmed: 21619939
  51. Sandes SHC, Alvim LB, Silva BC, Zanirati DF, Jung LRC, Nicoli JR, Neumann E, Nunes AC. Lactobacillus species identification by amplified ribosomal 16S‐23S rRNA restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis.. Benef Microbes 5, 471–481.
    pubmed: 24902955
  52. Schoster A, Staempfli HR, Abrahams M, Jalali M, Weese JS, Guardabassi L. Effect of a probiotic on prevention of diarrhea and Clostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens shedding in foals.. J Vet Intern Med 29, 925–931.
    pmc: PMC4895414pubmed: 25903509
  53. Schoster A, Guardabassi L, Staempfli HR, Abrahams M, Jalali M, Weese JS. The longitudinal effect of a multi‐strain probiotic on the intestinal bacterial microbiota of neonatal foals.. Equine Vet J 48, 689–696.
    pubmed: 26509834
  54. Servin AL. Antagonistic activities of lactobacilli and bifidobacteria against microbial pathogens.. FEMS Microbiol Rev 28, 405–440.
    pubmed: 15374659
  55. Silva AM, Barbosa FH, Duarte R, Vieira LQ, Arantes RM, Nicoli JR. Effect of Bifidobacterium longum ingestion on experimental salmonellosis in mice.. J Appl Microbiol 97, 29–37.
    pubmed: 15186439
  56. Silva BC, Jung LRC, Sandes SHC, Alvim LB, Bomfim MRQ, Nicoli JR, Neumann E, Nunes AC. In vitro assessment of functional properties of lactic acid bacteria isolated from faecal microbiota of healthy dogs for potential use as probiotics.. Benef Microbes 4, 267–275.
    pubmed: 23538205
  57. Song HJ, Kim JY, Jung SA, Kim SE, Park HS, Jeong Y, Hong SP, Cheon JH. Effect of probiotic prevention of antibiotic‐associated diarrhea: a prospective, randomized, double‐blind, multicenter study.. J Korean Med Sci 25, 1784–1791.
    pmc: PMC2995234pubmed: 21165295
  58. Steinberg RS, Silva L, Souza TC, Lima MT, de Oliveira NL, Vieira LQ, Arantes RM, Miyoshi A. Safety and protective effectiveness of two strains of Lactobacillus with probiotic features in an experimental model of salmonellosis.. Int J Environ Res Public Health 11, 8755–8776.
    pmc: PMC4198989pubmed: 25162711
  59. Stephenson D, Moore R, Allison G. Comparison and utilization of repetitive‐element PCR techniques for typing Lactobacillus isolates from the chicken gastrointestinal tract.. Appl Environ Microbiol 75, 6764–6776.
    pmc: PMC2772419pubmed: 19749057
  60. Stoyancheva GD, Danova ST, Boudakov IY. Molecular identification of vaginal lactobacilli isolated from Bulgarian women.. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 90, 201–210.
    pubmed: 16871423
  61. Tanabe S, Suzuki T, Wasano Y, Nakajima F, Kawasaki H, Tsuda T, Nagamine N, Tsurumachi T. Anti‐inflammatory and intestinal barrier‐protective activities of commensal Lactobacilli and Bifidobacteria in Thoroughbreds: role of probiotics in diarrhea prevention in neonatal Thoroughbreds.. J Equine Sci 25, 37–43.
    pmc: PMC4090357pubmed: 25013357
  62. Tsai CC, Liang HW, Yu B, Hsieh CC, Hwang CF, Chen MH, Tsen HY. The relative efficacy of different strain combinations of lactic acid bacteria in the reduction of populations of Salmonella enterica Typhimurium in the livers and spleens of mice.. FEMS Immunol Med Mic 63, 44–53.
    pubmed: 21635568
  63. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The judicious use of medically important antimicrobial drugs in food‐producing animals; New animal drugs and new animal drug combination products administered in or on medicated feed or drinking water of food producing animals: Recommendations for drug sponsors for voluntarily aligning product use conditions with GFI #209.. Rockville, MD, USA: U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
  64. Versalovic J, Schneider M, de Bruijn FJ, Lupski JR. Genomic fingerprinting of bacteria using repetitive sequence‐based polymerase chain reaction.. Method Mol Cell Biol 5, 25–40.
  65. Vinderola CG, Reinheimer JA. Lactic acid starter and probiotic bacteria: a comparative ‘in vitro’ study of probiotic characteristics and biological barrier resistance.. Food Res Int 36, 895–904.
  66. Voros A. Diet related changes in the gastrointestinal microbiota of horses.. Master thesis, Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweeden.
  67. Weese JS, Anderson ME, Lowe A, Penno R, da Costa TM, Button L, Goth KC. Screening of the equine intestinal microflora for potential probiotic organisms.. Equine Vet J 36, 351–355.
    pubmed: 15163044
  68. Wright GD. Mechanism of resistance to antibiotics.. Curr Opin Chem Biol 7, 563–569.
    pubmed: 14580559
  69. Yan F, Cao H, Cover TL, Whitehead R, Washington MK, Polk DB. Soluble proteins produced by probiotic bacteria regulate intestinal epithelial cell survival and growth.. Gastroenterology 132, 562–575.
    pmc: PMC3036990pubmed: 17258729
  70. Zhang W, Azevedo MS, Wen K, Gonzalez A, Saif LJ, Li G, Yousef AE, Yuan L. Probiotic Lactobacillus acidophilus enhances the immunogenicity of an oral rotavirus vaccine in gnotobiotic pigs.. Vaccine 26, 29–30.
    pmc: PMC2491559pubmed: 18524434
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,344 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.