ArticleWorld journal of microbiology & biotechnology2026
Comparative genomic and phenotypic profiling of commercial probiotic Enterococcus faecium strains: insights into safety and functional attributes.
Article in World journal of microbiology & biotechnology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Enterococcus faecium is widely used in probiotics but can also act as an opportunistic pathogen, necessitating strain-specific safety and efficacy assessments. While previous studies have characterized individual E. faecium probiotic strains, few have provided an integrated genomic and phenotypic comparison of multiple commercial strains from the Asian market. This study conducted a comparative genomic and phenotypic analysis of five E. faecium strains isolated from commercial probiotic products alongside five reference strains. Whole-genome sequencing revealed that the probiotic-derived strains, which were identified as Enterococcus lactis, clustered into two distinct phylogenetic clades (Clade I: ST-812; Clade II: ST-76), corroborated by Average Nucleotide Identity and Multilocus Sequence Typing analyses. These clades exhibited coherent functional genomic profiles, with Clade I enriched in genes for carbohydrate metabolism and dietary fiber degradation, while Clade II showed a different emphasis, including carotenoid biosynthesis. Crucially, all probiotic strains lacked high-risk antibiotic resistance genes (vanA) and major virulence determinants (esp, hyl, gelE) found in the clinical control strain ATCC 51559, and were phenotypically susceptible to the tested β-lactams (penicillin, ampicillin), vancomycin, and tetracycline, and lacked acquired resistance genes for WHO-defined critically important antibiotics. In vitro probiotic property assays further showed significant inter-strain variability in gastric acid tolerance, bile salt resistance, and bile salt hydrolase (BSH) activity, underscoring the strain-specific nature of functional performance. Our integrated analysis indicates a strong link between genomic identity, functional potential, and safety profile in commercial E. faecium probiotics. This study provides a detailed genomic framework for strain-level safety assessment and supports the informed selection of E. faecium strains for probiotic applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42801401What 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.