Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32687505›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Integrated genome-based probiotic relevance and safety evaluation of Lactobacillus reuteri PNW1.

Kazeem Adekunle Alayande, Olayinka Ayobami Aiyegoro, Thizwilondi Michael Nengwekhulu, Lebogang Katata-Seru, Collins Njie Ateba

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Genomic Sequence ofVeterinary sciences · 2024
    Article
  5. Genomic Assessment of Potential ProbioticTropical life sciences research · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kazeem Adekunle AlayandeAntibiotic Resistance and Phage Biocontrol Research Group, Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, North-West University, Mmabatho, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0001-8446-1733
Olayinka Ayobami AiyegoroGastrointestinal Microbiology and Biotechnology Division, Agricultural Research Council, Animal Production Institute, Irene, South Africa.
Thizwilondi Michael NengwekhuluDepartment of Chemistry, Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, North West University, Mmabatho, South Africa.
Lebogang Katata-SeruDepartment of Chemistry, Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, North West University, Mmabatho, South Africa.
Collins Njie AtebaAntibiotic Resistance and Phage Biocontrol Research Group, Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, North-West University, Mmabatho, South Africa.
North-West University · ZAAnimal Production Institute · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study evaluates whole-genome sequence of Lactobacillus reuteri PNW1 and identifies its safety genes that may qualify it as a putative probiotic. It further extracted the bacteriocin produced by the strain and tested its effectiveness against pathogenic STEC E. coli O177. The genomic DNA was sequenced on illuminal Miseq instrument and the sequenced data was assessed for quality reads before assembled with SPAdes. The draft assembly was annotated with Prokaryotic Genome Annotation Pipeline (PGAP) and Rapid Annotations using Subsystems Technology (RAST). Further downstream analyses were carried out using appropriate bioinformatic tools. Production of biogenic amines was biochemically confirmed through HPLC analysis. The assembled genome was 2,430,215 bp long in 420 contigs with 39% G+C content. Among all known genes, putatively responsible for the production of toxic biochemicals, only arginine deiminase (EC3.5.3.6) was spotted. Coding sequences (CDS) putative for D-lactate dehydrogenase (EC1.1.1.28), L-lactate dehydrogenase (EC1.1.1.27) and bacteriocin helveticin J were found within the genome together with plethora of other probiotic important genes. The strain harbours only resistant genes putative for Lincosamide (lnuC) and Tetracycline resistant genes (tetW). There was no hit found for virulence factors and probability of the strain being a human pathogen was zero. Two intact prophage regions were detected within the genome of L. reuteri PNW1 and nine CDS were identified for insertion sequence by OASIS which are belong to seven different families. Five putative CDS were identified for the CRISPR, each associated with Cas genes. Maximum zone of inhibition exhibited by the bacteriocin produced L. reuteri PNW1 is 20.0±1.00 mm (crude) and 23.3±1.15 mm (at 0.25 mg/ml) after being partially purified. With the strain predicted as non-human pathogen, coupled with many other identified desired features, L. reuteri PNW1 stands a chance of making good and safe candidates for probiotic, though further in-vivo investigations are still necessary.

Indexed as

Genome, BacterialBacterial ProteinsBacteriocinsEscherichia coliHydrolasesLimosilactobacillus reuteriL-Lactate DehydrogenaseMolecular Sequence AnnotationProbioticsVirulence Factorsarginine deiminaseBacterial ProteinsBacteriocinsHydrolasesL-Lactate DehydrogenaseVirulence Factors

Identifiers

PMID32687505
PMCPMC7371166
OpenAlexW3044428714

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.