ArticleProbiotics and antimicrobial proteins2025
Comparative Genome Analysis and Characterization of the Probiotic Properties of Lactic Acid Bacteria Isolated from the Gastrointestinal Tract of Wild Boars in the Czech Republic.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Isolation, Functional Screening, and Genomic Characterization of a Potential Probiotic Lactiplantibacillus Plantarum MP49 from Traditionally Fermented Bamboo Shoots of Tripura, India.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Article
- The Therapeutic Administration ofMicroorganisms · 2026Article
- WGS analysis and functional studies illustrate promising gene-signatures for probiotic attributes and molecular-targeted therapeutic prospects of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum LP-ARP2.Archives of microbiology · 2026Article
- Article
- In vitro characterization of lactic acid bacteria and bifidobacteria from wild and domestic pigs: probiotic potential for post-weaning piglets.BMC microbiology · 2025Article
- Complete genome sequence, metabolic profiling and functional studies revealFrontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Probiotics are crucial components for maintaining a healthy gut microbiota in pigs, especially during the weaning period. Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) derived from the gastrointestinal tract of wild boars can serve as an abundant source of beneficial probiotic strains with suitable properties for use in pig husbandry. In this study, we analyzed and characterized 15 strains of Limosilactobacillus mucosae obtained from the gut contents of wild boars to assess their safety and suitability as probiotic candidates. The strains were compared using pan-genomic analysis with 49 L. mucosae strains obtained from the NCBI database. All isolated strains demonstrated their safety by showing an absence of transferrable antimicrobial resistance genes and hemolysin activity. Based on the presence of beneficial genes, five candidates with probiotic properties were selected and subjected to phenotypic profiling. These five selected isolates exhibited the ability to survive conditions mimicking passage through the host's digestive tract, such as low pH and the presence of bile salts. Furthermore, five selected strains demonstrated the presence of corresponding carbohydrate-active enzymes and the ability to utilize various carbohydrate substrates. These strains can enhance the digestibility of oligosaccharide or polysaccharide substrates found in food or feed, specifically resistant starch, α-galactosides, cellobiose, gentiobiose, and arabinoxylans. Based on the results obtained, the L. mucosae isolates tested in this study appear to be promising candidates for use as probiotics in pigs.
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.