Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38192285›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in microbiology2023

Probiotic and postbiotic analytical methods: a perspective of available enumeration techniques.

Marie-Eve Boyte, Andrzej Benkowski, Marco Pane, Hanan R Shehata

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in microbiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Next-Generation Probiotics in Allergy Therapy: Scientific Evidence and Clinical Applications.Anti-inflammatory & anti-allergy agents in medicinal chemistry · 2026
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Marie-Eve Boyte *NutraPharma Consulting Services Inc., Sainte-Anne-des-Plaines, QC, Canada.
Andrzej Benkowski *Eurofins, Madison, WI, United States.
Marco Pane *Probiotical Research s.r.l., Novara, Italy.
Hanan R Shehata *Purity-IQ Inc., Guelph, ON, Canada.
Eurofins (United States) · USProbiotical (Italy) · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Probiotics are the largest non-herbal/traditional dietary supplements category worldwide. To be effective, a probiotic strain must be delivered viable at an adequate dose proven to deliver a health benefit. The objective of this article is to provide an overview of the various technologies available for probiotic enumeration, including a general description of each technology, their advantages and limitations, and their potential for the future of the probiotics industry. The current "gold standard" for analytical quantification of probiotics in the probiotic industry is the Plate Count method (PC). PC measures the bacterial cell's ability to proliferate into detectable colonies, thus PC relies on cultivability as a measure of viability. Although viability has widely been measured by cultivability, there has been agreement that the definition of viability is not limited to cultivability. For example, bacterial cells may exist in a state known as viable but not culturable (VBNC) where the cells lose cultivability but can maintain some of the characteristics of viable cells as well as probiotic properties. This led to questioning the association between viability and cultivability and the accuracy of PC in enumerating all the viable cells in probiotic products. PC has always been an estimate of the number of viable cells and not a true cell count. Additionally, newer probiotic categories such as Next Generation Probiotics (NGPs) are difficult to culture in routine laboratories as NGPs are often strict anaerobes with extreme sensitivity to atmospheric oxygen. Thus, accurate quantification using culture-based techniques will be complicated. Another emerging category of biotics is postbiotics, which are inanimate microorganisms, also often referred to as tyndallized or heat-killed bacteria. Obviously, culture dependent methods are not suitable for these products, and alternative methods are needed for their quantification. Different methodologies provide a more complete picture of a heterogeneous bacterial population versus PC focusing exclusively on the eventual multiplication of the cells. Alternative culture-independent techniques including real-time PCR, digital PCR and flow cytometry are discussed. These methods can measure viability beyond cultivability (i.e., by measuring cellular enzymatic activity, membrane integrity or membrane potential), and depending on how they are designed they can achieve strain-specific enumeration.

Indexed as

culture-independentdigital PCRenumerationflow cytometryplate countquantificationreal-time PCRviable count

Identifiers

PMID38192285
PMCPMC10773886
OpenAlexW4389453503

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.