Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38564170›Full record

ArticleProbiotics and antimicrobial proteins2025

Safety and Beneficial Properties of Bacteriocinogenic Lactococcus lactis and Pediococcus pentosaceus Strains, and Their Effect Versus Oral Cavity Related and Antibiotic-Resistant Pathogens.

Gee Hyeun Choi, Joanna Ivy Irorita Fugaban, Clarizza May Dioso, Jorge Enrique Vazquez Bucheli, Wilhelm Heinrich Holzapfel, Svetoslav Dimitrov Todorov

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The therapeutic potential ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Lactic Acid Bacteria Bacteriocins: Safe and Effective Antimicrobial Agents.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 4 countries.

Gee Hyeun ChoiProBacLab, Department of Advanced Convergence, Handong Global University, 37554, Pohang, Gyeongbuk, Republic of Korea.
Joanna Ivy Irorita FugabanProBacLab, Department of Advanced Convergence, Handong Global University, 37554, Pohang, Gyeongbuk, Republic of Korea.
Clarizza May DiosoHEM Laboratory, Department of Advanced Convergence, Handong Global University, 37554, Pohang, Gyeongbuk, Republic of Korea.
Jorge Enrique Vazquez BucheliProBacLab, Department of Advanced Convergence, Handong Global University, 37554, Pohang, Gyeongbuk, Republic of Korea.
Wilhelm Heinrich HolzapfelHEM Laboratory, Department of Advanced Convergence, Handong Global University, 37554, Pohang, Gyeongbuk, Republic of Korea.
Svetoslav Dimitrov TodorovProBacLab, Department of Advanced Convergence, Handong Global University, 37554, Pohang, Gyeongbuk, Republic of Korea. slavi310570@abv.bg.
Handong Global University · KRUniversidade de São Paulo · BR

Funding

FCT Portugal UIDB/05937/2020 and UIDP/05937/2020
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pediococcus pentosaceus 732, Lactococcus lactis subsp. lactis 431, and Lactococcus lactis 808, bacteriocinogenic strains previously isolated from kimchi and banana, were investigated for their safety, beneficial properties and in vitro inhibition of pathogens such as Listeria monocytogenes ATCC 15313 and Staphylococcus simulans KACC 13241 and Staphylococcus auricularis KACC 13252. The results of performed physiological, biochemical, and biomolecular tests suggest that these strains can be deemed safe, as no virulence genes were detected in their DNA. Notably, only the gad gene associated with GABA production was identified in the DNA isolated of Lc. lactis 808 and Lc. lactis subsp. lactis 431 strains. All tested LAB strains exhibited γ-hemolysins and were non-producers of gelatinase and biogenic amines, which suggested their safety potential. Additionally, they were relatively susceptible to antibiotics except for streptomycin, tobramycin, and vancomycin for Pd. pentosaceus 732. The growth of Pd. pentosaceus 732, Lc. lactis subsp. lactis 431, and Lc. lactis 808 and their survival were minimally affected by up to 3% ox bile and low pH (except pH 2.0 and 4.0). Moreover, these LAB strains were not inhibited by various commercial extracts as well as most of the tested medications tested in the study. They did not produce proteolytic enzymes but exhibited production of D/L-lactic acid and β-galactosidase. They were also hydrophilic. Furthermore, their survival in artificial saliva, gastric simulation, and enteric passage was measured followed by a challenge test to assess their ability to inhibit the selected oral pathogens in an oral saliva model conditions.

Indexed as

BacteriocinsLactococcus lactisMouthPediococcus pentosaceusProbioticsAnti-Bacterial AgentsHumansListeria monocytogenesStaphylococcusAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacteriocinsBacteriocinsGastrointestinal modelLactic acid bacteriaOral modelProbiotics

Identifiers

PMID38564170
OpenAlexW4393484939

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.