Food and Fermentation Industries >

2025 , Vol. 51 >Issue 24: 261 - 268

DOI: https://doi.org/10.13995/j.cnki.11-1802/ts.042023

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

Fold

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.

Key words： Lactobacillus; digestion-resistant; adhesion; surface properties; nonspecific interaction forces

Cite this article

DU Lei , LI Haitian , WU Xiaolong , ZHANG Yuan , HAN Jianchun . Screening of highly-adhesive Lactobacillus and the relationship between adhesion force and non-specific interaction force[J]. Food and Fermentation Industries, 2025 , 51(24) : 261 -268 . DOI: 10.13995/j.cnki.11-1802/ts.042023

References

[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.
Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉

Powered by Beijing Magtech Co. Ltd,.