Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35744713›Full record

ArticleMicroorganisms2022

Probiotic Potential

Chandana Kumari V B, Sujay S Huligere, Abdullah M Shbeer, Mohammed Ageel, Jayanthi M K, Jagadeep Chandra S, Ramith Ramu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microorganisms, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Investigation of Probiotic Properties ofFood science & nutrition · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Characterization ofInternational journal of microbiology · 2024
    Article
  9. Cell-free supernatant ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Chandana Kumari V BDepartment of Biotechnology and Bioinformatics, School of Life Sciences, JSS Academy of Higher Education and Research, Mysuru 570015, Karnataka, India.ORCID 0000-0003-1806-8452
Sujay S HuligereDepartment of Biotechnology and Bioinformatics, School of Life Sciences, JSS Academy of Higher Education and Research, Mysuru 570015, Karnataka, India.
Abdullah M ShbeerDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Jazan University, Jazan 45142, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-1944-8388
Mohammed AgeelDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Jazan University, Jazan 45142, Saudi Arabia.
Jayanthi M KDepartment of Pharmacology, JSS Medical College, JSS Academy of Higher Education and Research, Mysuru 570015, Karnataka, India.
Jagadeep Chandra SDepartment of Microbiology, School of Life Sciences, JSS Academy of Higher Education and Research, Mysuru 570015, Karnataka, India.
Ramith RamuDepartment of Biotechnology and Bioinformatics, School of Life Sciences, JSS Academy of Higher Education and Research, Mysuru 570015, Karnataka, India.ORCID 0000-0003-2776-5815
JSS Academy of Higher Education and Research · INJazan University · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fermented food plays a major role in gastrointestinal health, as well as possesses other health benefits, such as beneficiary effects in the management of diabetes. Probiotics are thought to be viable sources for enhancing the microbiome of the human gut. In the present study, using biochemical, physiological, and molecular approaches, the isolated Lactobacillus spp. from dosa batter were identified. The cell-free supernatant (CS), cell-free extract (CE), and intact cells (IC) were evaluated for their inhibitory potential against the carbohydrate hydrolyzing enzymes α-glucosidase and α-amylase. Then, 16S rDNA amplification and sequencing were used to identify the species. A homology search in NCBI database was performed that suggests the isolates are >95% similar to Limosilactobacillus fermentum and Lacticaseibacillus casei. Different standard parameters were used to evaluate the probiotic potential of strains RAMULAB07, RAMULAB08, RAMULAB09, RAMULAB10, RAMULAB11, and RAMULAB12. The strains expressed a significant tolerance to the gastric and intestinal juices with a higher survival rate (>98%). A high adhesion capability was observed by the isolates exhibited through hydrophobicity (>65%), aggregation assays (>75%), and adherence assay on HT-29 cells (>82%) and buccal epithelial cells. In addition, the isolates expressed antibacterial and antibiotic properties. Safety assessments (DNase and hemolytic assay) revealed that the isolates could be classified as safe. α-glucosidase and α-amylase inhibition of the isolates for CS, CE, and IC ranged from 7.50% to 65.01% and 20.21% to 56.91%, respectively. The results suggest that these species have exceptional antidiabetic potential, which may be explained by their use as foods that can have health-enhancing effects beyond basic nutrition.

Indexed as

dosa batterlactic acid bacteriaprobioticsα-amylaseα-glucosidase

Identifiers

PMID35744713
PMCPMC9228708
OpenAlexW4282593972

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.