ArticleCurrent microbiology2025
Safety and Probiotics Evaluation of Bifidobacterial Genomes Isolated from Probiotic Products.
Article in Current microbiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Safety Assessment of Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus OF44, a Previously Isolated Human-origin Probiotic Candidate.Current microbiology · 2026Article
- Traditional Fermented Dairy Products as Reservoirs of Bifidobacterium With Probiotic Potential: From Microbial Diversity to Functional Characterization.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2026Review
- Genome-Based Evaluation of Safety and Probiotic Traits in Infant Feces-SourcedFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Bifidobacterium is a common bacterium colonizing human intestines which is frequently used to produce probiotic-related products. Since the rapid development of probiotic products field over recent years, improving probiotic-related testing methods, as well as conducting systematic safety evaluations is urgently needed. Advances in sequencing technology enable clinicians to access the complete genome of bacteria more effectively via whole genome sequencing, thereby providing a solution for the safety evaluation of probiotics. In our current study, seven samples of the Bifidobacterium spp. were isolated from probiotic products, and genomic analysis were used to improve the identification of Bifidobacterium spp. at the species and subspecies levels. Notably, the obtained high-quality complete genomes were employed to predict the genetically encoded drug resistance and virulence attributes of seven Bifidobacterium strains, which further improve the evaluation of probiotics safety. Genes imparting beneficial functional properties, as well as those associated with colonization and survival within the gastrointestinal tract were presented in all strains. In addition, whole genome sequencing-based analysis combined with phylogenetic trees could help identify the subspecies and facilitate the analysis of the existing homology of samples and the previously reported differences between strains. Our study evaluated the accuracy of mainstream approaches in identifying the bacteria probiotic-related products, and uncovered the deceptive facts in bacteria labeling. Our findings could provide the experimental basis for subspecies level bacterial identification in probiotic-related industry, and to help establish a standard systematic safety evaluation method.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40244303What 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.