ReviewMicrobiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR2010
Genomic insights into bifidobacteria.
Review in Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 125 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
125 citing papers in PubMed, 278 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- From Identification to Enzymatic Activity Profiling: Comprehensive Characterization of BloCAβ, a Probiotic β-Carbonic Anhydrase From Bifidobacterium longum.Archiv der Pharmazie · 2026Article
- Traditional Fermented Dairy Products as Reservoirs of Bifidobacterium With Probiotic Potential: From Microbial Diversity to Functional Characterization.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2026Review
- Effects ofFood chemistry: X · 2026Article
- Unveiling the probiotic potential of the genus Geobacillus through comparative genomics and in silico analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparative Genomics and Adaptive Evolution ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Profiling the response of individual gut microbes to free fatty acids (FFAs) found in human milk.Journal of functional foods · 2025Article
- Probiotic applications of bifidobacteria in poultry: administration methods and microencapsulation techniques.Microbiome research reports · 2025Review
- Benefits and Challenges of Encapsulating Bifidobacterium Probiotic Strains with Bifidogenic Prebiotics.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2024Review
- Bacterial interactions on nutrient-rich surfaces in the gut lumen.Infection and immunity · 2024Review
- Dietary fiber monosaccharide content alters gut microbiome composition and fermentation.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2024Article
- Review
- Diversity Analysis of Intestinal Bifidobacteria in the Hohhot Population.Microorganisms · 2024Article
- Faecal hsa-miR-7704 inhibits the growth and adhesion of Bifidobacterium longum by suppressing ProB and aggravates hepatic encephalopathy.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2024Article
- Characteristics ofMicrobiology spectrum · 2024Article
- Characterization of the preweaned Holstein calf fecal microbiota prior to, during, and following resolution of uncomplicated gastrointestinal disease.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- Analyzing the Responses of Enteric Bacteria to Neonatal Intensive Care Supplements.International journal of microbiology · 2024Article
- Article
- Review
- The Effect of Delivery Matrix onNutrients · 2023Article
65 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since the discovery in 1899 of bifidobacteria as numerically dominant microbes in the feces of breast-fed infants, there have been numerous studies addressing their role in modulating gut microflora as well as their other potential health benefits. Because of this, they are frequently incorporated into foods as probiotic cultures. An understanding of their full interactions with intestinal microbes and the host is needed to scientifically validate any health benefits they may afford. Recently, the genome sequences of nine strains representing four species of Bifidobacterium became available. A comparative genome analysis of these genomes reveals a likely efficient capacity to adapt to their habitats, with B. longum subsp. infantis exhibiting more genomic potential to utilize human milk oligosaccharides, consistent with its habitat in the infant gut. Conversely, B. longum subsp. longum exhibits a higher genomic potential for utilization of plant-derived complex carbohydrates and polyols, consistent with its habitat in an adult gut. An intriguing observation is the loss of much of this genome potential when strains are adapted to pure culture environments, as highlighted by the genomes of B. animalis subsp. lactis strains, which exhibit the least potential for a gut habitat and are believed to have evolved from the B. animalis species during adaptation to dairy fermentation environments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.