View More View Less
  • 1 Department of Biotechnology, Faculty of Science and Letters, Aksaray University, 68100, Aksaray, Turkey
  • | 2 Institute of Biotechnology, Ankara University, 06110, Ankara, Turkey
Open access

Abstract

The probiotic and technological potentials of lactic acid bacteria originating from human milk are becoming a remarkable research area. In the present study, Limosilactobacillus vaginalis MA-10 isolated from human milk was investigated in vitro for its probiotic and technological aspects. According to the results obtained in the study, MA-10 strain exhibited non-haemolytic activity and various degrees of sensitivity to most of the tested antibiotics. The strain showed good resistance to the gastrointestinal system and maintained its viability under these conditions. Its antimicrobial activity against human or clinical bacterial and fungal microorganisms and fish bacteria was determined in the range of 2.38–11.22 mm. The MA-10 strain was able to assimilate cholesterol ranging from 31.42 to 82.30%. The strain showed 9.34% ferrous-ion chelating and 32% DPPH free radical scavenging activities. These initial results from the present study confirm that L. vaginalis MA-10 may be a new source with appropriated probiotic and technological traits for various industries, and further in vivo assays.Due to the limited number of studies on L. vaginalis strains originated from human breast milk in the literature, the data obtained in this study are thought to be important for revealing the basic probiotic properties of the strain.

Abstract

The probiotic and technological potentials of lactic acid bacteria originating from human milk are becoming a remarkable research area. In the present study, Limosilactobacillus vaginalis MA-10 isolated from human milk was investigated in vitro for its probiotic and technological aspects. According to the results obtained in the study, MA-10 strain exhibited non-haemolytic activity and various degrees of sensitivity to most of the tested antibiotics. The strain showed good resistance to the gastrointestinal system and maintained its viability under these conditions. Its antimicrobial activity against human or clinical bacterial and fungal microorganisms and fish bacteria was determined in the range of 2.38–11.22 mm. The MA-10 strain was able to assimilate cholesterol ranging from 31.42 to 82.30%. The strain showed 9.34% ferrous-ion chelating and 32% DPPH free radical scavenging activities. These initial results from the present study confirm that L. vaginalis MA-10 may be a new source with appropriated probiotic and technological traits for various industries, and further in vivo assays.Due to the limited number of studies on L. vaginalis strains originated from human breast milk in the literature, the data obtained in this study are thought to be important for revealing the basic probiotic properties of the strain.

1 Introduction

A healthy gastrointestinal tract microbiota is highly balanced in terms of the distribution of beneficial/harmful microorganisms, but the deterioration of this balance may lead to the onset of a pathological process called microbial dysbiosis and the development of symptoms related to it. The deterioration of commensal microbiota homeostasis causes a wide range of diseases. Most of the bacterial groups, such as Lactobacillus, Lactococcus, Bacillus, Bifidobacterium, which are naturally found in the gastrointestinal tract, are frequently used as food and health-promoting supplements to re-establish homeostasis (Kothari et al., 2019). Also, in recent years, human milk has gained considerable importance as safe and attractive source of probiotic lactic acid bacteria (LAB). The most commonly found and isolated bacteria species from human breast milk include Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Streptococcus, and Enterococcus. Human milk bacteria are gaining much attention because of their ability to protect the host from pathogenic microorganisms, survive in the gastrointestinal tract, adhere to epithelial cells of the mucosa, assimilate cholesterol, support immune defence, produce antimicrobial substances and mediators (Amenu, 2014).

The use of LAB in food and feed industrial applications enjoys a “generally recognised as safe” (GRAS) status. Literature have focused on the Lactobacillus genus among LAB, and their probiotic effects were reported to be genus-specific, species-specific, or even strain-specific. In the literature, the research is generally focused on the probiotic potential of Lactobacillus gasseri, Lactobacillus fermentum, and Lactobacillus plantarum strains originated from human milk (Gunyakti and Asan-Ozusaglam, 2018, 2019). However, few studies have reported the probiotic potential and technological properties of Limosilactobacillus vaginalis isolated from human stomach, feces, vagina, and chicken. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to investigate L. vaginalis originated from human milk as a possibly potential probiotic candidate.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Identification of Lactobacillus strains

The Gram-positive and catalase-negative isolate with bacillus morphology was first identified using API 50 CHL (BiomerieuxSA, France) according to the manufacturer's instructions. The defined strain was then sent to IONTEK (Turkey) for molecular identification by 16S rRNA PCR analysis.

2.2 Determination of safety

Haemolytic activity was verified by inoculating Colombia agar media containing 5% sheep blood (OR-BAK, Turkey) with the isolate and incubating under anaerobic condition at 37 °C for 24 h. Haemolytic activity was determined by zone formation around the colonies. The greenish zone was considered α-haemolysis, clear zone was classified as β-haemolysis, and no zone indicated γ-haemolysis.

The susceptibility profiles of L. vaginalis MA-10 were assessed by the disc diffusion method against eleven commercial antibiotics (Oxoid, Germany). The suspension adjusted to Mc Farland 0.5 densities was spread on MRS agar medium. Each antibiotic disc was located on the inoculated MRS agar medium in triplicate, and the Petri dishes were incubated at 37 °C for 24 h. The inhibition zone diameters were measured and assessed as stated by CLSI (Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute) guideline (Sharma et al., 2016).

2.3 Determination of probiotic potential and technological properties

2.3.1 Cell viability under simulated gastrointestinal conditions

The resistance of L. vaginalis MA-10 to simulated gastric conditions including low pH, bile, gastric, and small intestine juice tolerances were determined as described in our previous study (Gunyakti and Asan-Ozusaglam, 2019).

2.3.2 Determination of antimicrobial activity

Fifteen clinical and food-borne bacteria, two fungal strains and seven fish originated pathogenic bacteria were used to determine the antimicrobial activity of L. vaginalis MA-10 using well diffusion method. The indicator microorganisms adjusted to McFarland 0.5 standard were spread onto the specific agar media. MA-10 strain supernatant (100 μL) was placed into each well (7 mm diameter). The plates were incubated for 24 h and then the inhibition zones around the wells were measured using Vernier caliper. The inhibition zone diameter was obtained by subtracting the diameter of the well from the entire inhibition diameter. The experiment was conducted three times.

2.3.3 Cholesterol assimilation activity

L. vaginalis MA-10 culture was inoculated into the MRS broth containing 100 μg mL−1 of cholesterol (Sigma-Aldrich, USA) and different concentrations of bile (0.3 and 1%) (Oxoid, UK) then incubated at 37 °C for 24 h. The cholesterol assimilation of supernatant and pellet was separately evaluated using the o-phthalaldehyde method (Hosono et al., 1999). Cholesterol removal ability of MA-10 was calculated as described in our previous study (Gunyakti and Asan-Ozusaglam, 2019).

2.3.4 Antioxidant activity

The free radical scavenging activity and ferrous-ion chelating property of MA-10 strain were measured using 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) as described in our previous study (Gunyakti and Asan-Ozusaglam, 2019).

2.4 Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was performed with the Mann-Whitney U-test to identify significant differences in antibiotic susceptibility and antimicrobial activity assay results. The differences were considered significant at a P-value of <0.05. The statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS version 22 (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA).

3 Results and discussion

3.1 Identification of Lactobacillus strain

The isolated strain was identified by API 50 CHL System as Lactobacillus acidophilus (98.7%). Genotypic identification according to the 16S rRNA sequences showed that MA-10 strain was L. vaginalis. However, molecular identification with 16S rRNA of strains may be more consistent than microbial and biochemical techniques. Therefore, the strain was identified as L. vaginalis MA-10 according to the 16S rRNA PCR analysis results.

3.2 Determination of safety

The strain had no-zones around the colonies on the blood agar. L. vaginalis MA-10 exhibited γ-haemolytic or non-haemolytic activity. Haemolytic activity is related to virulence factors that can be found in pathogenic microorganisms, so the microorganisms under investigation for probiotic properties are expected to be non-haemolytic strains (FAO/WHO, 2002). In this study, the absence of a lysis region for MA-10 strain indicates the safety of this strain as a probable probiotic candidate in food and other application areas.

L. vaginalis MA-10 showed susceptibility to chloramphenicol, amoxicillin, erythromycin, and ampicillin and resistance to amikacin, gentamicin, kanamycin, nalidixic acid, and ofloxacin (Table 1). The intermediate resistance was determined against cloxacillin and penicillin G. There are mean differences in the antibiotic susceptibility of MA-10 strain against the tested antibiotics. The statistical analysis, however, indicated that the inhibition zone averages of MA-10 strain were not statistically significant atthe significance level of 0.05 (P > 0.05). The safety concerns related to the use of antibiotic-resistant strains as probiotics are due to the possibility of transferring antibiotic-resistance genes to pathogens in the intestine (Curragh and Collins, 1992). However, in the literature, the antibiotic resistance of some LAB is thought to be natural or intrinsic, so chromosomally encoded and thereby non-transmissible. For example, Bifidobacterium strains resistant to various antibiotics in quinolone and aminoglycoside groups are used as starter cultures in food applications. Resistance to aminoglycoside antibiotics, such as amikacin, kanamycin, streptomycin, andgentamicin, is considered to be intrinsic in the Lactobacillus genus. The reason for the resistance is the lack of electron transport mediated by the cytochrome, as it mediates the drug uptake (Danielsen and Wind, 2003). Literature information supports our study data, suggesting that L. vaginalis strain resistance genes are structural and the risk of transfer to other microorganisms is low. However, in later studies, these results can be confirmed by molecular-based methods.

Table 1.

Antibiotic susceptibility profile of L. vaginalis MA-10

Antibiotics
AKAMCAMCOBECNKNAOFXP
Inhibition zone diameter (mm)7.38b ± 0.2626.11 ± 0.9126.58 ± 1.0425.31 ± 0.9319.86 ± 0.8626.08 ± 1.367.66 ± 0.6119.68 ± 1.56
CLSIaRSSSIRSRRRRIR

– Indicates no inhibition zone.

aThe inhibition zones was evaluated as Susceptible (S) > 20, Intermediate (IR) ≅ 15–19, Resistant (R) ≤ 14.

bDiameter of the inhibition zone including disc diameter. AK: Amikacin (10 µg); AMC: Amoxicillin (30 µg); AM: Ampicillin (10 µg); C: Chloramphenicol (10 µg); OB: Cloxacillin (5 µg); E: Erythromycin (15 µg); CN: Gentamicin (10 µg); K: Kanamycin (30 µg); NA: Nalidixic Acid (5 µg); OFX: Ofloxacin; P: Penicillin G (10 µg).

3.3 Determination of probiotic potential and technological properties

3.3.1 Cell viability under simulated gastrointestinal conditions

The high tolerance to acidity at pH 2 and 3 was found for MA-10 with a high survival rate after 3 h (Table 2). The survival rate was found to be over 100% for both bile concentrations during the incubation period (4 h) (Table 2). During fasting and after the meal, the pH ranges from 1.5 to 4.5, and the food digestion is completed in about 3 h (Lebeer et al., 2008). MA-10 strain showed high survival rates at pH 3. Delgado et al. (2015) reported almost similar growth rate for two L. vaginalis strains (LV121 and LV51) from the human stomach. Herein, MA-10 strain exhibited cell viability as 7.26 and 7.65 CFU mL−1 at pH 2 and 3, respectively, after 3 h. MA-10 strain showed higher viability at pH 2. The strains that pass the acidic barrier of the stomach are then exposed to bile fluid. Therefore, tolerance to bile is another criterion to be a good probiotic. The strain has maintained its viability under different pH and bile conditions.

Table 2.

Acid and bile tolerance of L. vaginalis MA-10

Acid tolerance (log10 CFU mL−1)Bile tolerance (log10 CFU mL−1)
pH 2pH 30.3% bile1% bile
0 h1 h3 hSurvival rate (%)0 h1 h3 hSurvival rate (%)0 h4 hSurvival rate (%)0 h4 hSurvival rate (%)
7.747.497.2693.798.608.237.6588.957.378.38113.707.978.38105.14

L. vaginalis MA-10 also showed good survival ability under simulated gastric and pancreatic conditions (Table 3). In general, most LAB seem to have natural survival ability in pancreatin, but contrary to pancreatin tolerance, bile tolerance is specific to the strain (Masco et al., 2007). L. vaginalis MA-10 showed 100.69% survival rate after 3 h under simulated gastric juice conditions at pH 2 and 3. The results indicate that MA-10 can survive under gastrointestinal conditions and can thus be a probable candidate as probiotic strain.

Table 3.

Simulated gastric and pancreatic juice tolerance of L. vaginalis MA-10

Gastric juicePancreatic juice (log10 CFU mL−1)Survival rate (%)
pH 2.0 (log10 CFU mL−1)Survival rate (%)pH 3.0 (log10 CFU mL−1)Survival rate (%)
0 h3 h0 h3 h0 h3 h
10.3510.54101.839.959.5796.1810.0210.09100.69

3.3.2 Antimicrobial activity

Antimicrobial activities of MA-10 tested against 25 indicator strains are presented in Table 4. The inhibition zones of the food-borne and clinical bacterial strains varied from 2.38 to 11.22 mm. The highest two inhibitory activities were found against Staphylococcus epidermidis ATCC 11228 and Listeria monocytogenes ATCC 7644. The strain inhibited the growth of two Candida strains and inhibition zone diameters were determined as 2.70 and 2.87 mm. The growth of all fish originated pathogenic bacteria was also inhibited by MA-10 strain with inhibition zones ranging from 3.53 to 7.35 mm. The highest antibacterial activity was determined against Aeromonas hydrophila. The statistical analysis indicated that the differences between zone averages of MA-10 were not statistically significant at the significance level of 0.05 (P > 0.05).

Table 4.

Antimicrobial activity of L. vaginalis MA-10

Test microorganismsL. vaginalis MA-10

Inhibition zone diameter (mm)
Human food borne and clinical

Bacterial strains
E. coli ATCC 112293.76 ± 0.08a
E. coli O157:H7
B. megaterium (Pasteur Ins. 5117)3.52 ± 0.03
S. enteritidis RSKK 1713.21 ± 0.16
B. cereus RSKK 8633.25 ± 0.66
B. subtilis RSKK 244
E. coli ATCC 35218
M. luteus NRRL B-4375
S. enteritidis ATCC 13076
S. sonnei MU:572.38 ± 0.27
S. aureus ATCC 25923
Y. enterocolitica NCTC 11175
E. faecalis ATCC 29212
L. monocytogenes ATCC 76449.79 ± 1.13
S. epidermidis ATCC 1122811.22 ± 0.76
Fungal strains
C. albicans ATCC 102312.70 ± 0
C. glabrata RSKK 040192.87 ± 0.24
Fish originated bacterial strains
V. alginolyticus4.64 ± 0.57
V. anguillarium M13.73 ± 0.35
V. anguillarium A43.53 ± 0.31
A. hydrophila ATCC 195707.35 ± 0.78
L. garviae4.44 ± 0.45
Y. ruckeri4.88 ± 0.73
S. agalactiae Pas. Inst. 551184.71 ± 0.76

– Indicates no antimicrobial activity.

aDiameter of the inhibition zone including disc diameter.

Anukam and Reid (2007) reported the antibacterial activity of vaginal L. vaginalis against Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Staphylococcus aureus as over 15 mm of inhibition zone diameter. In another study conducted by Siroli et al. (2017), vaginal L. vaginalis BC15, BC16, and BC17 showed antibacterial activities against L. monocytogenes ATCC 13932 with a 1 to 3 mm inhibition zone diameter. Herein, MA-10 strain showed higher antibacterial activity than these vaginal L. vaginalis strains against L. monocytogenes ATCC 7644 with 9.79 mm inhibition zone diameter. Intestinal colonisation or infection of the intestine with pathogenic microorganisms may cause a risk of necrotising enterocolitis that can be decreased with the colonisation with lactobacilli and bifidobacteria of the intestine (Reid et al., 2003). The antimicrobial activities of probiotic strains are necessary to prevent infection or invasion of pathogenic microorganisms. Various LAB are known to synthesize various inhibitory agents such as bacteriocins, organic acids, but in this study, it was observed that the inhibitory activity was lost at neutral pH. Therefore, the inhibitory activity in the current situation can be ascribed to organic acid-like metabolic products from L. vaginalis MA-10. These results indicated that MA-10 strain can be used as a feed supplement in aquaculture in the form of single or co-culture with various probiotic microorganisms. Besides, the strain may be a new alternative bio-source that exhibits inhibitory activity against human pathogens.

3.3.3 Cholesterol assimilation activity

The cholesterol-reducing activity of MA-10 was determined in vitro in the presence of 0.3 and 1% bile, the results obtained were 44.69 and 31.42% for pellets and 82.30 and 81.19% for supernatants, respectively. The higher anti-cholesterol activity at both bile concentrations was obtained for supernatants compared to pellets. The increased bile concentrations caused a small decrease in cholesterol assimilation activities of the pellet and supernatant. The possible cause of cholesterol assimilation activities of Lactobacillus strains is to decrease the solubility of cholesterol and therefore reduce cholesterol intake (Oh et al., 2018). The high serum cholesterol level can be a risk factor for cardiovascular disease; therefore, cholesterol-reducing ability has become an important functional feature for the selection of probiotic strains. There is no literature data on the cholesterol-lowering activity of L. vaginalis according to our knowledge. Nowadays, the development of cholesterol-lowering bio-therapeutics has become an important area. L. vaginalis MA-10 can assimilate with good cholesterol-lowering percentages and, therefore, can be a new bio-agent to reduce cholesterol level.

3.3.4 Antioxidant activity

The antioxidant activity was evaluated by DPPH free radical scavenging and ferrous-ion chelating activities. The strain showed 32% DPPH free radical scavenging and 9.34% ferrous-ion chelating activities. Many LAB have special systems to prevent the organisms from the reactive oxygen species. The activities of various LAB to reduce reactive oxygen species have been induced by many in vitro experiments. However, there are a limited number of studies on L. vaginalis strains. Delgado et al. (2015) tested the total antioxidant activity of L. vaginalis LV51 and LV121 strains and found 21% and no activity. Several synthetic antioxidants widely used in food, cosmetic, and medicinal industries are carcinogenic and may cause liver damage (Saduakhasova et al., 2013). Antioxidant activity of the probiotic bacteria plays an important role in the protection of host health from free radicals. Therefore, L. vaginalis MA-10 can be an alternative to the synthetic antioxidants as a natural antioxidant source.

4 Conclusions

In the current study, probiotic potential and some technological properties of L. vaginalis MA-10 isolated from human milk were examined in vitro. MA-10 strain exhibited appropriate probiotic effects including non-haemolytic activity and high tolerance to gastrointestinal conditions. The results of the antimicrobial, antioxidant, and anti-cholesterol activity assays also indicated that MA-10 strain can beneficially affect host health with these properties. Considering the results of the current study, L. vaginalis MA-10 strain may be a new bio-source for food, feed, and pharmaceutical industries after confirming its benefits and safe use in animal models.

References

  • Amenu, D. (2014). Probiotic properties of lactic acid bacteria from human milk. Journal of Medical Microbiology and Diagnosis, S3: 005.

  • Anukam, K.C. and Reid, G. (2007). Lactobacillus plantarum and Lactobacillus fermentum with probiotic potentials isolated from the vagina of healthy Nigerian women. Research Journal of Microbiology, 2: 8187.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Curragh, H.J. and Collins, M. (1992). High levels of spontaneous drug resistance in Lactobacillus. Journal of Applied Bacteriology, 73: 3136.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Danielsen, M. and Wind, A. (2003). Susceptibility of Lactobacillus spp. to antimicrobial agents. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 82: 111.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Delgado, S., Leite, A.M., Ruas-Madiedo, P., and Mayo, B. (2015). Probiotic and technological properties of Lactobacillus spp. strains from the human stomach in the search for potential candidates against gastric microbial dysbiosis. Frontiers in Microbiology, 5: 766.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • FAO/WHO (2002). WHO Working Group on Drafting Guidelines for the Evaluation of Probiotics in Food. Guidelines for the evaluation of probiotics in food: Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Working Group on Drafting Guidelines for the Evaluation of Probiotics in Food, London, Ontario, Canada, April 30 and May 1. https://www.who.int/foodsafety/fs_management/en/probiotic_guidelines.pdf(Accessed: 26 August 2020).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gunyakti, A. and Asan-Ozusaglam, M. (2018). Investigation of the potential use of Lactobacillus gasseri originated from human milk as food additive. LWT – Food Science and Technology, 93: 613619.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gunyakti, A. and Asan-Ozusaglam, M. (2019). Lactobacillus gasseri from human milk with probiotic potential and some technological properties. LWT – Food Science and Technology, 109: 261269.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hosono, A. (1999). Bile tolerance, taurocholate deconjugation, and binding of cholesterol by Lactobacillus gasseri strains. Journal of Dairy Science, 82: 243248.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kothari, D., Patel, S., and Kim, S.K. (2019). Probiotic supplements might not be universally-effective and safe: a review. Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy, 111: 537547.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lebeer, S., Vanderleyden, J., and De Keersmaecker, S.C. (2008). Genes and molecules of lactobacilli supporting probiotic action. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews, 72: 728764.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Masco, L., Crockaert, C., Van Hoorde, K., Swings, J., and Huys, G. (2007). In vitro assessment of the gastrointestinal transit tolerance of taxonomic reference strains from human origin and probiotic product isolates of Bifidobacterium. Journal of Dairy Science, 90: 35723578.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Oh, N.S., Joung, J.Y., Lee, J.Y., and Kim, Y. (2018). Probiotic and anti-inflammatory potential of Lactobacillus rhamnosus 4B15 and Lactobacillus gasseri 4M13 isolated from infant feces. Plos One, 13: e0192021.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Reid, G., Jass, J., Sebulsky, M.T., and Mccormick, J.K. (2003). Potential uses of probiotics in clinical practice. Clinical Microbiology Reviews, 16: 658672.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Saduakhasova, S., Kushugulova, A., Kozhakhmetov, S., Shakhabayeva, G., Tynybayeva, I., Nurgozhin, T., Marotta, F., and Zhumadilov, Z. (2013). Antioxidant activity of the probiotic consortium in vitro. Central Asian Journal of Global Health, 24: 115.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sharma, P., Tomar, S.K., Sangwan, V., Goswami, P., and Singh, R. (2016). Antibiotic resistance of Lactobacillus sp. isolated from commercial probiotic preparations. Journal of Food Safety, 36: 3851.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Siroli, L., Patrignani, F., Serrazanetti, D.I., Parolin, C., Palomino, Ñ., Vitali, B.., and Lanciotti, R. (2017). Determination of antibacterial and technological properties of vaginal lactobacilli for their potential application in dairy products. Frontiers in Microbiology, 8: 166.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Amenu, D. (2014). Probiotic properties of lactic acid bacteria from human milk. Journal of Medical Microbiology and Diagnosis, S3: 005.

  • Anukam, K.C. and Reid, G. (2007). Lactobacillus plantarum and Lactobacillus fermentum with probiotic potentials isolated from the vagina of healthy Nigerian women. Research Journal of Microbiology, 2: 8187.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Curragh, H.J. and Collins, M. (1992). High levels of spontaneous drug resistance in Lactobacillus. Journal of Applied Bacteriology, 73: 3136.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Danielsen, M. and Wind, A. (2003). Susceptibility of Lactobacillus spp. to antimicrobial agents. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 82: 111.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Delgado, S., Leite, A.M., Ruas-Madiedo, P., and Mayo, B. (2015). Probiotic and technological properties of Lactobacillus spp. strains from the human stomach in the search for potential candidates against gastric microbial dysbiosis. Frontiers in Microbiology, 5: 766.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • FAO/WHO (2002). WHO Working Group on Drafting Guidelines for the Evaluation of Probiotics in Food. Guidelines for the evaluation of probiotics in food: Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Working Group on Drafting Guidelines for the Evaluation of Probiotics in Food, London, Ontario, Canada, April 30 and May 1. https://www.who.int/foodsafety/fs_management/en/probiotic_guidelines.pdf(Accessed: 26 August 2020).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gunyakti, A. and Asan-Ozusaglam, M. (2018). Investigation of the potential use of Lactobacillus gasseri originated from human milk as food additive. LWT – Food Science and Technology, 93: 613619.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gunyakti, A. and Asan-Ozusaglam, M. (2019). Lactobacillus gasseri from human milk with probiotic potential and some technological properties. LWT – Food Science and Technology, 109: 261269.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hosono, A. (1999). Bile tolerance, taurocholate deconjugation, and binding of cholesterol by Lactobacillus gasseri strains. Journal of Dairy Science, 82: 243248.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kothari, D., Patel, S., and Kim, S.K. (2019). Probiotic supplements might not be universally-effective and safe: a review. Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy, 111: 537547.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lebeer, S., Vanderleyden, J., and De Keersmaecker, S.C. (2008). Genes and molecules of lactobacilli supporting probiotic action. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews, 72: 728764.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Masco, L., Crockaert, C., Van Hoorde, K., Swings, J., and Huys, G. (2007). In vitro assessment of the gastrointestinal transit tolerance of taxonomic reference strains from human origin and probiotic product isolates of Bifidobacterium. Journal of Dairy Science, 90: 35723578.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Oh, N.S., Joung, J.Y., Lee, J.Y., and Kim, Y. (2018). Probiotic and anti-inflammatory potential of Lactobacillus rhamnosus 4B15 and Lactobacillus gasseri 4M13 isolated from infant feces. Plos One, 13: e0192021.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Reid, G., Jass, J., Sebulsky, M.T., and Mccormick, J.K. (2003). Potential uses of probiotics in clinical practice. Clinical Microbiology Reviews, 16: 658672.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Saduakhasova, S., Kushugulova, A., Kozhakhmetov, S., Shakhabayeva, G., Tynybayeva, I., Nurgozhin, T., Marotta, F., and Zhumadilov, Z. (2013). Antioxidant activity of the probiotic consortium in vitro. Central Asian Journal of Global Health, 24: 115.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sharma, P., Tomar, S.K., Sangwan, V., Goswami, P., and Singh, R. (2016). Antibiotic resistance of Lactobacillus sp. isolated from commercial probiotic preparations. Journal of Food Safety, 36: 3851.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Siroli, L., Patrignani, F., Serrazanetti, D.I., Parolin, C., Palomino, Ñ., Vitali, B.., and Lanciotti, R. (2017). Determination of antibacterial and technological properties of vaginal lactobacilli for their potential application in dairy products. Frontiers in Microbiology, 8: 166.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

 

The author instruction is available in PDF.
Please, download the file from HERE.

Senior editors

Editor(s)-in-Chief: András Salgó

Co-ordinating Editor(s) Marianna Tóth-Markus

Co-editor(s): A. Halász

       Editorial Board

  • L. Abrankó (Szent István University, Gödöllő, Hungary)
  • D. Bánáti (University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary)
  • J. Baranyi (Institute of Food Research, Norwich, UK)
  • I. Bata-Vidács (Agro-Environmental Research Institute, National Agricultural Research and Innovation Centre, Budapest, Hungary)
  • J. Beczner (Food Science Research Institute, National Agricultural Research and Innovation Centre, Budapest, Hungary)
  • F. Békés (FBFD PTY LTD, Sydney, NSW Australia)
  • Gy. Biró (National Institute for Food and Nutrition Science, Budapest, Hungary)
  • A. Blázovics (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
  • F. Capozzi (University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy)
  • M. Carcea (Research Centre for Food and Nutrition, Council for Agricultural Research and Economics Rome, Italy)
  • Zs. Cserhalmi (Food Science Research Institute, National Agricultural Research and Innovation Centre, Budapest, Hungary)
  • M. Dalla Rosa (University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy)
  • I. Dalmadi (Szent István University, Budapest, Hungary)
  • K. Demnerova (University of Chemistry and Technology, Prague, Czech Republic)
  • M. Dobozi King (Texas A&M University, Texas, USA)
  • Muying Du (Southwest University in Chongqing, Chongqing, China)
  • S. N. El (Ege University, Izmir, Turkey)
  • S. B. Engelsen (University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark)
  • E. Gelencsér (Food Science Research Institute, National Agricultural Research and Innovation Centre, Budapest, Hungary)
  • V. M. Gómez-López (Universidad Católica San Antonio de Murcia, Murcia, Spain)
  • J. Hardi (University of Osijek, Osijek, Croatia)
  • K. Héberger (Research Centre for Natural Sciences, ELKH, Budapest, Hungary)
  • N. Ilić (University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad, Serbia)
  • D. Knorr (Technische Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany)
  • H. Köksel (Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey)
  • K. Liburdi (Tuscia University, Viterbo, Italy)
  • M. Lindhauer (Max Rubner Institute, Detmold, Germany)
  • M.-T. Liong (Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia)
  • M. Manley (Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa)
  • M. Mézes (Szent István University, Gödöllő, Hungary)
  • Á. Németh (Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary)
  • P. Ng (Michigan State University,  Michigan, USA)
  • Q. D. Nguyen (Szent István University, Budapest, Hungary)
  • L. Nyström (ETH Zürich, Switzerland)
  • L. Perez (University of Cordoba, Cordoba, Spain)
  • V. Piironen (University of Helsinki, Finland)
  • A. Pino (University of Catania, Catania, Italy)
  • M. Rychtera (University of Chemistry and Technology, Prague, Czech Republic)
  • K. Scherf (Technical University, Munich, Germany)
  • R. Schönlechner (University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria)
  • A. Sharma (Department of Atomic Energy, Delhi, India)
  • A. Szarka (Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary)
  • M. Szeitzné Szabó (National Food Chain Safety Office, Budapest, Hungary)
  • S. Tömösközi (Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary)
  • L. Varga (University of West Hungary, Mosonmagyaróvár, Hungary)
  • R. Venskutonis (Kaunas University of Technology, Kaunas, Lithuania)
  • B. Wróblewska (Institute of Animal Reproduction and Food Research, Polish Academy of Sciences Olsztyn, Poland)

 

Acta Alimentaria
E-mail: Acta.Alimentaria@uni-mate.hu

Indexing and Abstracting Services:

  • Biological Abstracts
  • BIOSIS Previews
  • CAB Abstracts
  • Chemical Abstracts
  • Current Contents: Agriculture, Biology and Environmental Sciences
  • Elsevier Science Navigator
  • Essential Science Indicators
  • Global Health
  • Index Veterinarius
  • Science Citation Index
  • Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch)
  • SCOPUS
  • The ISI Alerting Services

 

2020
 
Total Cites
768
WoS
Journal
Impact Factor
0,650
Rank by
Nutrition & Dietetics 79/89 (Q4)
Impact Factor
Food Science & Technology 130/144 (Q4)
Impact Factor
0,575
without
Journal Self Cites
5 Year
0,899
Impact Factor
Journal
0,17
Citation Indicator
 
Rank by Journal
Nutrition & Dietetics 88/103 (Q4)
Citation Indicator
Food Science & Technology 142/160 (Q4)
Citable
59
Items
Total
58
Articles
Total
1
Reviews
Scimago
28
H-index
Scimago
0,237
Journal Rank
Scimago
Food Science Q3
Quartile Score
 
Scopus
248/238=1,0
Scite Score
 
Scopus
Food Science 216/310 (Q3)
Scite Score Rank
 
Scopus
0,349
SNIP
 
Days from
100
submission
 
to acceptance
 
Days from
143
acceptance
 
to publication
 
Acceptance
16%
Rate
2019  
Total Cites
WoS
522
Impact Factor 0,458
Impact Factor
without
Journal Self Cites
0,433
5 Year
Impact Factor
0,503
Immediacy
Index
0,100
Citable
Items
60
Total
Articles
59
Total
Reviews
1
Cited
Half-Life
7,8
Citing
Half-Life
9,8
Eigenfactor
Score
0,00034
Article Influence
Score
0,077
% Articles
in
Citable Items
98,33
Normalized
Eigenfactor
0,04267
Average
IF
Percentile
7,429
Scimago
H-index
27
Scimago
Journal Rank
0,212
Scopus
Scite Score
220/247=0,9
Scopus
Scite Score Rank
Food Science 215/299 (Q3)
Scopus
SNIP
0,275
Acceptance
Rate
15%

 

Acta Alimentaria
Publication Model Hybrid
Submission Fee none
Article Processing Charge 1100 EUR/article
Printed Color Illustrations 40 EUR (or 10 000 HUF) + VAT / piece
Regional discounts on country of the funding agency World Bank Lower-middle-income economies: 50%
World Bank Low-income economies: 100%
Further Discounts Editorial Board / Advisory Board members: 50%
Corresponding authors, affiliated to an EISZ member institution subscribing to the journal package of Akadémiai Kiadó: 100%
Subscription fee 2021 Online subsscription: 736 EUR / 920 USD
Print + online subscription: 852 EUR / 1064 USD
Subscription fee 2022 Online subsscription: 754 EUR / 944 USD
Print + online subscription: 872 EUR / 1090 USD
Subscription Information Online subscribers are entitled access to all back issues published by Akadémiai Kiadó for each title for the duration of the subscription, as well as Online First content for the subscribed content.
Purchase per Title Individual articles are sold on the displayed price.

Acta Alimentaria
Language English
Size B5
Year of
Foundation
1972
Publication
Programme
2021 Volume 50
Volumes
per Year
1
Issues
per Year
4
Founder Magyar Tudományos Akadémia    
Founder's
Address
H-1051 Budapest, Hungary, Széchenyi István tér 9.
Publisher Akadémiai Kiadó
Publisher's
Address
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Responsible
Publisher
Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó
ISSN 0139-3006 (Print)
ISSN 1588-2535 (Online)

 

Monthly Content Usage

Abstract Views Full Text Views PDF Downloads
Jun 2021 0 24 37
Jul 2021 0 49 37
Aug 2021 0 23 19
Sep 2021 0 34 32
Oct 2021 0 30 47
Nov 2021 0 44 50
Dec 2021 0 0 0