Accuracy of species identity of commercial bacterial cultures intended for probiotic or nutritional use

被引:117
作者
Huys, Geert
Vancanneyt, Marc
D'Haene, Klaas
Vankerckhoven, Vanessa
Goossens, Herman
Swings, Jean
机构
[1] Univ Ghent, Microbiol Lab, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
[2] Univ Ghent, BCCM TM, LMG Bacteria Collect, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
[3] Univ Antwerp, Lab Med Microbiol, B-2610 Antwerp, Belgium
[4] Leiden Univ, Med Ctr, NL-2300 Leiden, Netherlands
关键词
product labeling; FAFLP; Rep-PCR; Lactobacillus; Bifidobacterium;
D O I
10.1016/j.resmic.2006.06.006
中图分类号
Q93 [微生物学];
学科分类号
071005 ; 100705 ;
摘要
Independent studies have indicated that the microbiological composition of several commercial probiotic products does not correspond to the product label information. The present study set out to investigate to what extent these problems may be due to the use of misidentified cultures at the onset of production. For this purpose, 213 cultures of lactic acid bacteria (LAB) and propionibacteria intended for probiotic or nutritional use were collected from 26 manufacturers of probiotic products, three international culture collections and one research institute. The accuracy of the taxonomic identity provided by the strain depositor was assessed through a polyphasic approach based on validated and standardized identification methods including fluorescent amplified fragment length polymorphism (FAFLP) and repetitive DNA element (rep)-PCR fingerprinting, protein profiling and partial 16S rDNA sequencing. The majority of the cultures were received as members of the genera Lactobacillus (57%) and Bifidobacterium (22%); however, propionibacteria, enterococci, Lactococcus lactis (subsp. lactis), Streptococcus thermophilus and pediococci were also obtained. Upon reidentification, 46 cases of misidentification at the genus level (n = 19) or species level (n = 27) were recorded, including 34 commercial probiotic cultures deposited by 10 different companies. The finding that more than 28% of the commercial cultures intended for human and/or animal probiotic use were misidentified at the genus or species level suggests that many cases of probiotic product mislabeling originate from the incorporation of incorrectly identified strains. A large number of these discrepancies could be related to the use of methods with limited taxonomic resolution (e.g., API strips) or that are unsuitable for reliable identification up to species level (e.g., pulsed-field gel electrophoresis and randomly amplified polymorphic DNA analysis). The current study has again highlighted that reliable identification of LAB and propionibacteria requires molecular methods with a high taxonomic resolution that are linked to up-to-date identification libraries. (c) 2006 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:803 / 810
页数:8
相关论文
共 46 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], CHEM METHODS PROKARY
[2]   Identification of Lactobacillus species using tDNA-PCR [J].
Baele, M ;
Vaneechoutte, M ;
Verhelst, R ;
Vancanneyt, M ;
Devriese, LA ;
Haesebrouck, F .
JOURNAL OF MICROBIOLOGICAL METHODS, 2002, 50 (03) :263-271
[3]   Comparison of API 50 CH strips to whole-chromosomal DNA probes for identification of Lactobacillus species [J].
Boyd, MA ;
Antonio, MAD ;
Hillier, SL .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 2005, 43 (10) :5309-5311
[4]   Bifidobacterium lactis Meile et al. 1997 is a subjective synonym of Bifidobacterium animalis (Mitsuoka 1969) Scardovi and Trovatelli 1974 [J].
Cai, YM ;
Matsumoto, M ;
Benno, Y .
MICROBIOLOGY AND IMMUNOLOGY, 2000, 44 (10) :815-820
[5]   Microbiological evaluation and molecular characterization of bifidobacteria strains in commercial fermented milks [J].
Collado, MC ;
Moreno, Y ;
Cobo, JM ;
Hernández, M .
EUROPEAN FOOD RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY, 2006, 222 (1-2) :112-117
[6]   DEOXYRIBONUCLEIC-ACID HOMOLOGY STUDIES OF LACTOBACILLUS-CASEI, LACTOBACILLUS-PARACASEI SP-NOV, SUBSP PARACASEI AND SUBSP TOLERANS, AND LACTOBACILLUS-RHAMNOSUS SP-NOV, COMB-NOV [J].
COLLINS, MD ;
PHILLIPS, BA ;
ZANONI, P .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SYSTEMATIC BACTERIOLOGY, 1989, 39 (02) :105-108
[7]   The status of the species Lactobacillus casei (Orla-Jensen 1916) Hansen and Lessel 1971 and Lactobacillus paracasei Collins et al. 1989.: Request for an Opinion [J].
Dellaglio, F ;
Felis, GE ;
Torriani, S .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SYSTEMATIC AND EVOLUTIONARY MICROBIOLOGY, 2002, 52 :285-287
[8]   Reclassification of Lactobacillus casei subsp casei ATCC 393 and Lactobacillus rhamnosus ATCC 15820 as Lactobacillus zeae nom rev, designation of ATCC 334 as the neotype of L-casei subsp casei, and rejection of the Lactobacillus paracasei [J].
Dicks, LMT ;
DuPlessis, EM ;
Dellaglio, F ;
Lauer, E .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SYSTEMATIC BACTERIOLOGY, 1996, 46 (01) :337-340
[9]   Evaluation of five probiotic products for label claims by DNA extraction and polymerase chain reaction analysis [J].
Drisko, J ;
Bischoff, B ;
Giles, C ;
Adelson, M ;
Rao, RVS ;
McCallum, R .
DIGESTIVE DISEASES AND SCIENCES, 2005, 50 (06) :1113-1117
[10]   Bacterial composition of commercial probiotic products as evaluated by PCR-DGGE analysis [J].
Fasoli, S ;
Marzotto, M ;
Rizzotti, L ;
Rossi, F ;
Dellaglio, F ;
Torriani, S .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FOOD MICROBIOLOGY, 2003, 82 (01) :59-70