ArticleScientific reports2026
Evaluation of the antimicrobial properties of potential probiotic lactic acid bacteria from raw and fermented cow milk.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Functional Characterization and Probiotic Properties of Lactic Acid Bacteria Isolated from Donkey Milk.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) comprise a diverse group of Gram-positive, non-spore-forming, non-motile, catalase-negative microorganisms that produce lactic acid as a major fermentation end product and are commonly associated with fermented foods. The aim of this study was to isolate, characterize, and evaluate lactic acid bacteria from fermented and raw cow milk as potential probiotic candidates. Twenty-five raw and fermented cow milk samples collected from South and North Gondar, Ethiopia, were analyzed, yielding twenty presumptive LAB isolates. Isolation was performed using de Man, Rogosa, and Sharpe (MRS) agar. Isolates were characterized using morphological and biochemical tests and evaluated for tolerance to conditions simulating the gastrointestinal environment, including variations in pH, sodium chloride concentration, and temperature. Antimicrobial activity of cell-free supernatants was assessed using the agar well diffusion method against selected Gram-positive and Gram-negative pathogenic bacteria. All isolates exhibited γ-hemolysis (non-hemolytic activity). The isolates showed resistance to vancomycin and gentamicin, while susceptibility was observed to bacitracin, ampicillin, tetracycline, and penicillin. Lactic acid production ranged from 5.0% to 8.2%, and several isolates induced milk coagulation within 12 h. Antimicrobial assays demonstrated inhibitory activity against Staphylococcus aureus (15–27 mm), Escherichia coli (8–13 mm), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (10–17 mm), and Salmonella Typhi (8–14 mm). The LAB isolates exhibited several in vitro functional properties consistent with potential probiotic candidates from raw and fermented cow milk. However, species-level identification and safety assessment remain presumptive, and further molecular characterization as well as comprehensive in vitro and in vivo studies are required to confirm their probiotic potential and suitability for industrial application.
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.