ArticleScientific reports2026
Whole-genome sequencing reveals hidden antimicrobial resistance genes in phenotypically susceptible probiotic candidate lactic acid bacteria.
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Phenotypic assays commonly used to evaluate probiotic safety may fail to detect clinically relevant antimicrobial resistance (AMR), potentially allowing genetically concerning strains to appear acceptable based on MIC testing alone. To explore this issue, we applied whole-genome sequencing (WGS) to three lactic acid bacteria (LAB) isolates previously identified as probiotic candidates based on acid and bile tolerance, antagonism against enteric pathogens, and biofilm formation in vitro: Lactiplantibacillus plantarum L25F and L22F (from pigs) and Ligilactobacillus salivarius AF2319 (from a chicken). Genome annotation identified extensive repertoires of probiotic-associated genes (46-47 per strain) linked to stress tolerance, adhesion, immunomodulation, and quorum sensing, supporting functional potential. The two L. plantarum strains exhibited broader predicted metabolic capacities than L. salivarius AF2319. However, genomic analysis revealed acquired AMR genes with complex genotype-phenotype relationships not fully apparent from phenotypic testing. The L. plantarum strains harbored lnu(A) (99.79% identity) on extrachromosomal DNA, conferring the L-phenotype (lincomycin resistance, clindamycin susceptibility); clindamycin MICs (1 mg/L) were concordant with this genotype, though lincomycin MICs were not determined. L. salivarius AF2319 carried tet(M), tet(L), and erm(C) (99.48%, 99.49%, and 99.45% identity by ResFinder, respectively) on extrachromosomal DNA; notably, the erythromycin MIC (1 mg/L) was precisely at the EFSA breakpoint (≤ 1 mg/L), representing borderline genotype-phenotype discordance potentially due to silent gene expression. Under current EFSA QPS criteria, these acquired ARGs would preclude all three strains from approval as probiotic feed additives despite favorable functional profiles, underscoring the indispensable role of WGS-based AMR gene detection in modern probiotic safety evaluation.
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.