研究报告

高黏附力乳杆菌筛选及黏附力与非特异相互作用力关系研究

  • 杜磊 ,
  • 李海天 ,
  • 吴晓龙 ,
  • 张媛 ,
  • 韩建春
展开
  • 1(东北农业大学 食品学院,黑龙江 哈尔滨,150030)
    2(哈尔滨新区新质生产力促进中心,黑龙江 哈尔滨,150023)
第一作者:硕士研究生(韩建春教授为通信作者,E-mail:hanjianchun@hotmail.com)

收稿日期: 2025-01-02

  修回日期: 2025-05-02

  网络出版日期: 2026-01-12

基金资助

黑龙江省“双一流”学科协同创新成果项目(LJGXCG2023-026)

Screening of highly-adhesive Lactobacillus and the relationship between adhesion force and non-specific interaction force

  • DU Lei ,
  • LI Haitian ,
  • WU Xiaolong ,
  • ZHANG Yuan ,
  • HAN Jianchun
Expand
  • 1(Collage of Food Science, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China)
    2(Harbin New Area New Quality Productivity Promotion Center, Harbin 150023, China)

Received date: 2025-01-02

  Revised date: 2025-05-02

  Online published: 2026-01-12

摘要

黏附能力是乳杆菌定植肠道发挥功能特性的重要前提之一,而非特异性相互作用力是乳杆菌黏附初步阶段的主要作用力。该研究旨在探究黏附能力与非特异相互作用力(自聚集能力、疏水相互作用力及静电相互作用力)间的联系并筛选出高黏附力乳杆菌。首先,通过体外模拟连续消化(唾液-胃液-肠液)应激实验评价了从东北酸菜中分离的47株乳杆菌的耐消化应激能力;然后,评价其对肠道黏蛋白和Caco-2细胞的黏附能力;最后,对乳杆菌黏附能力与非特异性相互作用力之间进行了相关性分析。结果表明,从酸菜中分离出47株乳杆菌,且发现其中12株耐消化菌株及鼠李糖乳酪杆菌GG(Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus GG,LGG)的表面特性(自聚集、表面疏水性和携带正电荷能力)与其黏附能力之间为正相关。植物乳植杆菌(Lactiplantibacillus plantarum)中的HS-P5以及副干酪乳酪杆菌(Lacticaseibacillus paracasei)中的LP-112、LP-116和LP-121具有良好的耐消化性和黏附能力。该研究显示可通过综合评价乳杆菌表面特性优化黏附筛选程序,丰富了高黏附力菌株资源,并为益生菌制品提供了更多的菌株选择。

本文引用格式

杜磊 , 李海天 , 吴晓龙 , 张媛 , 韩建春 . 高黏附力乳杆菌筛选及黏附力与非特异相互作用力关系研究[J]. 食品与发酵工业, 2025 , 51(24) : 261 -268 . DOI: 10.13995/j.cnki.11-1802/ts.042023

Abstract

Adhesion capacity is one of the essential prerequisites for Lactobacillus strains to colonize the intestine and exert their functional properties, and non-specific interactive forces serve as the primary driving forces during the initial phase of bacterial adhesion.This study aims to investigate the correlation between adhesion capacity and non-specific interactions (including auto-aggregation ability, hydrophobic interactions, and electrostatic interactions) in Lactobacillus strains and screen high-adhesion lactobacilli for potential probiotic applications.First, the digestive stress tolerance of 47 Lactobacillus strains isolated from Northeastern sauerkraut to digestive stress was evaluated through in vitro simulated continuous digestion (saliva-gastric-intestinal fluid) stress experiments.Their adhesion capacity to intestinal mucin and Caco-2 cells was also evaluated.Finally, the correlation between the adhesion ability of Lactobacillus and non-specific interaction force was analyzed.The results showed that 47 Lactobacillus strains were isolated from sauerkraut, of which 12 digestion-resistant strains and Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus GG demonstrated significant positive correlations between their surface properties (auto-aggregation capacity, surface hydrophobicity, and positive charge potential) and adhesion capabilities.Lactiplantibacillus plantarum HS-P5, Lacticaseibacillus paracasei LP-112, LP-116, and LP-121 showed excellent digestion tolerance and adhesion capacity.This study presents a comprehensive evaluation strategy to optimize adhesion screening processes through the analysis of Lactobacillus surface properties, thereby enriching the repertoire of highly adhesive strains and providing broader alternatives for probiotic product development.

参考文献

[1] AMENU DELESA D, JIMMA, BOX E P O. Overview of anticancer activity of lactic acid bacteria[J]. International Journal of Advanced Research in Biological Sciences (IJARBS), 2017, 4(12):166-177.
[2] QAYYUM N, HAN H Y, ISMAEL M, et al. In vitro assessment of antioxidant, antidiabetic, and cholesterol-modulating abilities of lactic acid bacteria: Implications for metabolic health and functional foods[J]. Food Bioscience, 2024, 59:103952.
[3] ERCAN D, DEMIRCI A. Recent advances for the production and recovery methods of lysozyme[J]. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology, 2016, 36(6):1078-1088.
[4] MA J G, WANG W, SUN C B, et al. Effects of environmental stresses on the physiological characteristics, adhesion ability and pathogen adhesion inhibition of Lactobacillus plantarum KLDS 1.0328[J]. Process Biochemistry, 2020, 92:426-436.
[5] WU Z, WANG G, WANG W W, et al. Proteomics analysis of the adhesion activity of Lactobacillus acidophilus ATCC 4356 upon growth in an intestine-like pH environment[J]. PROTEOMICS, 2018, 18(5-6):1700308.
[6] ANTIKAINEN J, ANTON L, SILLANPÄÄ J, et al. Domains in the S-layer protein CbsA of Lactobacillus crispatus involved in adherence to collagens, laminin and lipoteichoic acids and in self-assembly[J]. Molecular Microbiology, 2002, 46(2):381-394.
[7] ROOS S, JONSSON H. A high-molecular-mass cell-surface protein from Lactobacillus reuteri 1063 adheres to mucus components[J]. Microbiology, 2002, 148(Pt 2):433-442.
[8] ANGELESCU I R, ZAMFIR M, IONETIC E C, et al. The biological role of the S-layer produced by Lactobacillus helveticus 34.9 in cell protection and its probiotic properties[J]. Fermentation, 2024, 10(3):150.
[9] KOS B, ŠUŠKOVIĆ J, VUKOVIĆ S, et al. Adhesion and aggregation ability of probiotic strain Lactobacillus acidophilus M92[J]. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 2003, 94(6):981-987.
[10] GLEINSER M, GRIMM V, ZHURINA D, et al. Improved adhesive properties of recombinant bifidobacteria expressing the Bifidobacterium bifidum-specific lipoprotein BopA[J]. Microbial Cell Factories, 2012, 11(1):80.
[11] ARGYRI A A, ZOUMPOPOULOU G, KARATZAS K G, et al. Selection of potential probiotic lactic acid bacteria from fermented olives by in vitro tests[J]. Food Microbiology, 2013, 33(2):282-291.
[12] SOPHATHA B, PIWAT S, TEANPAISAN R. Adhesion, anti-adhesion and aggregation properties relating to surface charges of selected Lactobacillus strains: Study in Caco-2 and H357 cells[J]. Archives of Microbiology, 2020, 202(6):1349-1357.
[13] WILLER T, HAN Z F, PIELSTICKER C, et al. In vitro investigations on interference of selected probiotic candidates with Campylobacter jejuni adhesion and invasion of primary chicken derived cecal and Caco-2 cells[J]. Gut Pathogens, 2024, 16(1):30.
[14] YUE X Q, LI X, WU J R, et al. Isolation and identification of Lactobacillus from naturally fermented sauerkraut juices in Xifeng[J]. Advanced Materials Research, 2013, 726-731:147-150.
[15] LI H Y, PENG F, LIN J X, et al. Preparation of probiotic microcapsules using gelatin-xylooligosaccharides conjugates by spray drying: Physicochemical properties, survival, digestion resistance and colonization[J]. Food Bioscience, 2023, 52:102462.
[16] ALIZADEH BEHBAHANI B, NOSHAD M, FALAH F. Inhibition of Escherichia coli adhesion to human intestinal Caco-2 cells by probiotic candidate Lactobacillus plantarum strain L15[J]. Microbial Pathogenesis, 2019, 136:103677.
[17] JAYASHREE S, KARTHIKEYAN R, NITHYALAKSHMI S, et al. Anti-adhesion property of the potential probiotic strain Lactobacillus fermentum 8711 against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2018, 9:411.
[18] DEL RE B, SGORBATI B, MIGLIOLI M, et al. Adhesion, autoaggregation and hydrophobicity of 13 strains of Bifidobacterium longum[J]. Letters in Applied Microbiology, 2000, 31(6):438-442.
[19] OU D X, LING N, WANG X H, et al. Safety assessment of one lactiplantibacillus plantarum isolated from the traditional Chinese fermented vegetables: Jiangshui[J]. Foods, 2022, 11(15):2177.
[20] FENG J, CEN Q Y, CUI Y R, et al. Lactobacillus rhamnosus: An emerging probiotic with therapeutic potential for depression[J]. Pharmacological Research, 2025, 211:107541.
[21] CABELLO-OLMO M, ARAÑA M, URTASUN R, et al. Role of postbiotics in diabetes mellitus: Current knowledge and future perspectives[J]. Foods, 2021, 10(7):1590.
[22] BOVE P, RUSSO P, CAPOZZI V, et al. Lactobacillus plantarum passage through an oro-gastro-intestinal tract simulator: Carrier matrix effect and transcriptional analysis of genes associated to stress and probiosis[J]. Microbiological Research, 2013, 168(6):351-359.
[23] MANGIA N P, SALIBA L, DEIANA P. Functional and safety characterization of autochthonous Lactobacillus paracasei FS103 isolated from sheep cheese and its survival in sheep and cow fermented milks during cold storage[J]. Annals of Microbiology, 2019, 69(2):161-170.
[24] HERNÁNDEZ-GÓMEZ J G, LÓPEZ-BONILLA A, TREJO-TAPIA G, et al. In vitro bile salt hydrolase (BSH) activity screening of different probiotic microorganisms[J]. Foods, 2021, 10(3):674.
[25] YANG M X, LIANG X H, SONG X Y, et al. Proteomic analysis of milk fat globule membrane protein modulation of differently expressed proteins in Lactobacillus plantarum under bile salt stress[J]. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 2024, 72(23):13125-13137.
[26] KINOSHITA H, UCHIDA H, KAWAI Y, et al. Cell surface Lactobacillus plantarum LA 318 glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) adheres to human colonic mucin[J]. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 2008, 104(6):1667-1674.
[27] LIANG A J, WANG J L, DING L L, et al. Probiotic properties, whole-genome sequence analysis, and safety assessment of BreviBacillus borstelensis S8[J]. LWT, 2024, 210:116800.
[28] ASHIDA N, YANAGIHARA S, SHINODA T, et al. Characterization of adhesive molecule with affinity to Caco-2 cells in Lactobacillus acidophilus by proteome analysis[J]. Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering, 2011, 112(4):333-337.
[29] ELLEN R P, LÉPINE G, NGHIEM P M. In vitro models that support adhesion specificity in biofilms of oral bacteria[J]. Advances in Dental Research, 1997, 11(1):33-42.
[30] MILJKOVIC M, BERTANI I, FIRA D, et al. Shortening of the Lactobacillus paracasei subsp. paracasei BGNJ1-64 AggLb protein switches its activity from auto-aggregation to biofilm formation[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2016, 7:1422.
[31] GERBINO E, CARASI P, MOBILI P, et al. Role of S-layer proteins in bacteria[J]. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2015, 31(12):1877-1887.
[32] PIWAT S, SOPHATHA B, TEANPAISAN R. An assessment of adhesion, aggregation and surface charges of Lactobacillus strains derived from the human oral cavity[J]. Letters in Applied Microbiology, 2015, 61(1):98-105.
文章导航

/