Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40604408›Full record

ArticleBMC microbiology2025

Whole genome analysis and in vivo safety assessment of probiotic candidate Lactobacillus acidophilus L177.

Yunjiang Liu, Haohong Zheng, Jiali Wang, Jialiang Xin, Ruihu Wu, Jingyi Zhang, Zhijun Zhong, Haifeng Liu, Yixin Huang, Hualin Fu and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC microbiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Microorganisms · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Vitamin BCommunications biology · 2025
    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

12 authors.

Yunjiang Liu *Key Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Haohong Zheng *Key Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Jiali Wang *Key Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Jialiang XinKey Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Ruihu WuKey Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Jingyi ZhangKey Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Zhijun ZhongKey Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Haifeng LiuKey Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Yixin HuangKey Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Hualin FuKey Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Ziyao ZhouKey Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China.
Guangneng PengKey Laboratory of Animal Disease and Human Health of Sichuan Province, College of Veterinary Medicine, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, China. pgn.sicau@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Probiotics, particularly strains of lactic acid bacteria (LAB), are recognized for their beneficial effects on gut health. Lactobacillus acidophilus L177, a promising probiotic strain isolated from canine feces, was evaluated for safety and probiotic properties through whole genome sequencing and a 28-day subacute oral toxicity study in C57BL/6 mice. The toxicity study involved daily administration of L177 at doses of 108, 109, and 1010 CFU/mL, with continuous monitoring of general health, behavioral changes, and physiological parameters. Body weight, food and water intake, hematological and biochemical indices, organ weights, and histopathology were assessed. No significant adverse effects were observed, and proinflammatory cytokines (TNF-α, IL-6, IL-1β) remained undetectable in serum, indicating an absence of inflammatory response. Statistical analysis confirmed no significant differences in key health markers between treated and control groups (p > 0.05). Whole genome sequencing revealed a single chromosome of approximately 1,972,211 base pairs (GC content: 35.02%) with 1 CRISPR sequence and 1,955 genes. Functional annotation highlighted genes associated with metabolism, information processing, and cellular functions. Antibiotic Resistance Gene analysis identified one AMR gene (lnu(C)), but phenotypic tests confirmed L177 is sensitive to clindamycin and lincomycin. Sixty-seven virulence-associated genes were detected, mainly related to structure, metabolism, and regulation. These findings support the safety and probiotic potential of L. acidophilus L177 for potential applications in both animal and human health.

Indexed as

Genome, BacterialLactobacillus acidophilusProbioticsWhole Genome SequencingAnimalsCytokinesFecesFemaleMaleMiceMice, Inbred C57BLCytokinesLactic acid bacteriaLactobacillus acidophilusProbioticsSubacute oral toxicity studyWhole genome sequencing

Identifiers

PMID40604408
PMCPMC12217917

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.