ArticleScientific reports2026
Postbiotics combined with Caesalpinia sappan L. extract inhibit bovine mastitis bacterial pathogens, promote anti-inflammation and in vitro wound healing property.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Biological activities on inhibition of bovine mastitis-associated bacterial pathogens and bacterial biofilm, anti-inflammation, and wound healing effects of lactic acid bacteria (LAB); Lactiplantibacillus plantarum TISTR 2070 (LP) and Lacticaseibacillus casei TISTR 1340 (LC) supernatants were investigated in this study. Moreover, Caesalpinia sappan extract, and their combinations with L. plantarum (LPC) and L. casei (LCC) were determined for their biological properties. Antibacterial assays revealed that LPC and LCC exhibited the lowest MIC (0.024–3.125 mg/mL) and MBC (0.098–3.125 mg/mL) values, that showed significant antibacterial activity stronger than LP and LC. In biofilm assays, the LPC and LCC combinations (0.8–1.6 mg/mL) inhibited preformed biofilm of Streptococcus agalactiae O4 (61.97–73.49%), Staphylococcus haemolyticus (38.74–52.65%), and Streptococcus uberis (24.78–58.05%) whereas C. sappan extract alone strongly inhibited both preformed and mature biofilms of all pathogens. Cytotoxicity evaluation showed that LPC and LCC were non-toxic to bovine endothelial (CPAE) and macrophage (RAW 264.7) cells at concentration ≤ 12.5 µg/mL. Furthermore, novel co-culture of CPAE and RAW 264.7 cells was applied in this study, LPS (5 ng/mL) significantly induced nitric oxide (NO) production compared with monoculture. In this model, LPC and LCC markedly suppressed LPS-induced NO production by 60.13–77.38% and 74.64–95.30%, respectively, while C. sappan extract achieved NO inhibition by 80.33–92.79%. Furthermore, LPC and LCC significantly downregulated IL-6 and TNF-α inflammatory genes expression, with LCC showing the strongest effect. Wound healing assay demonstrated that LP, LC, C. sappan extract and the combinations promoted complete closure of wound within 12 h. Therefore, these findings indicate that the combinations of LAB postbiotics with C. sappan extract exhibit strong antibacterial, anti-biofilm, anti-inflammatory, and wound healing activities, supporting their potential as alternative therapeutics against bovine mastitis.
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.