Veterinary Research Forum
Vet Res Forum

Probiotic potential of autochthonous Lactobacillus species from buffalo calves in controlling multidrug resistant Escherichia coli

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Srivani Moturi 1
Lakshmi Kavitha Kommalapati 2
Muralidhar Metta 3
Venkata Seshaiah Chappidi 4
Srilakshmi Jatavathu 5

1 Department of Veterinary Microbiology, N.T.R College of Veterinary Science, Sri Venkateswara Veterinary University, Vijayawada, India

2 Department of Veterinary Microbiology, College of Veterinary Science, Sri Venkateswara Veterinary University, Tirupati, India

3 Department of Animal Genetics and Breeding, College of Veterinary Science, Sri Venkateswara Veterinary University, Vizianagaram, India

4 Livestock Farm Complex, N.T.R College of Veterinary Science, Sri Venkateswara Veterinary University, Vijayawada, India

5 Junior Research Fellow, Department of Veterinary Microbiology, N.T.R College of Veterinary Science, Sri Venkateswara Veterinary University, Vijayawada, India

https://doi.org/10.30466/vrf.2024.2012559.4024
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the probiotic potential of autochthonous Lactobacillus species isolated from buffalo calves against multidrug-resistant Escherichia coli. A total of 252 rectal swabs were collected from healthy neonatal buffalo calves under 30 days old from six districts of Andhra Pradesh, India in a completely randomized design from August 2019 to August 2021, of which 190 Lactobacillus strains were isolated based on cultural, morphological, biochemical and molecular tests. Out of 190 isolates, 57 showed high levels of auto-aggregation (> 80.00%) and hydrophobicity (> 60.00%) and 51 of the 57 isolates had a zone of inhibition greater than 15.00 mm in diameter against multidrug-resistant E. coli in an Agar well diffusion assay. Among the 51 isolates, 36 were found to be acid and bile tolerant and showed varying levels of sensitivity to antibiotics such as erythromycin, clindamycin, tetracycline, chloramphenicol, and ampicillin. Among the 36 isolates, Limosilactobacillus reuteri 178, L. reuteri 209, L. fermentum 182, L. fermentum 211, and Lactiplanti-bacillus plantarum 34 were non-hemolytic, and none of the isolates were able to hydrolyse gelatine. Therefore, these five autochthonous Lactobacillus species may be used in probiotic or synbiotic formulations against multidrug resistant E. coli in buffalo calves.

Keywords

Autochthonous probiotic
Buffalo calves
Multidrug resistant E. coli

Subjects

  1. Axelsson, L. Lactic acid bacteria: classification and physiology. In: Salminen S, Wright AV, Ouwehand A (Eds). Lactic acid bacteria: microbiological and functional aspects. 3rd New York, USA: Marcel Dekker 2004; 1-67.
  2. Srivani M, Reddy YN, Subramanyam KV, et al. Prevalence and antimicrobial resistance pattern of Shiga toxigenic Escherichia coli in diarrheic buffalo calves, Vet World 2017; 10(7): 774-778.
  3. Trobos M, Lester CH, Olsen JE, et al. Natural transfer of sulphonamide and ampicillin resistance between Escherichia coli residing in the human J Antimicrob. Chemother 2009; 63(1): 80-86.
  4. Ahmed AM, Younis EE, Osman SA, et al. Genetic analysis of antimicrobial resistance in Escherichia coli isolated from diarrheic neonatal calves. Vet Microbiol 2009; 136(3-4): 397-402.
  5. Marshall BM, Levy SB. Food animals and antimicrobials: impacts on human health. Clin Microbiol Rev 2011; 24(4): 718-733.
  6. World Health Organization. Report of a joint FAO/ WHO working group on drafting guidelines for the evaluation of probiotics in food. Available at: https: //www.mhlw.go.jp/file/05-Shingikai-11121000-Iyaku shokuhinkyoku-Soumuka/0000197343.pdf. Accessed May 05, 2024.
  7. Al-Saiady MY. Effect of probiotic bacteria on immunoglobulin G concentration and other blood components of newborn calves. J Anim Vet Adv 2010; 9(3): 604-609.
  8. Mahasneh AM, Abbas MM. Probiotics: the possible alternative to disease chemotherapy. In: Darvishi Harzevili F (Ed). Microbial biotechnology: progress and trends. 1st Florida, USA: CRC Press 2014; 213-238.
  9. Soto LP, Frizzo LS, Bertozzi E, et al. Molecular microbial analysis of Lactobacillus strains isolated from the gut of calves for potential probiotic use. Vet Med Int 2010; 2010: 274987. doi: 10.4061/2010/274987.
  10. Adeniyi BA, Adetoye A, Ayeni FA. Antibacterial activities of lactic acid bacteria isolated from cow faeces against potential enteric pathogens. Afr Health Sci 2015; 15(3): 888-895.
  11. Balasingham K, Valli C, Radhakrishnan L, et al. Probiotic characterization of lactic acid bacteria isolated from swine intestine. Vet World 2017; 10(7): 825-829.
  12. Boone DR, CastenholzRW. Bergey’s manual of systematic bacteriology. 2nd New York, USA; Springer 2001; 33-38.
  13. Arora S, Agarwal RK, Bist B. Comparison of ELISA and PCR vis-à-vis cultural methods for detecting Aeromonas spp. in foods of animal origin. Int J Food Microbiol 2006; 106(2): 177-183.
  14. Garcia-Mazcorro JF, Lanerie DJ, Dowd SE, et al. Effect of a multi-species synbiotic formulation on fecal bacterial microbiota of healthy cats and dogs as evaluated by pyrosequencing. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2011; 78(3): 542-554.
  15. Janković T, Frece J, Abram M, et al. Aggregation ability of potential probiotic Lactobacillus plantarum Sanitarno Inženirstvo (IJSER) 2012; 6(1): 19-24.
  16. Vineetha PG, Tomar S, Saxena VK, et al. Screening of Lactobacillus isolates from gastrointestinal tract of guinea fowl for probiotic qualities using in-vitro tests to select species-specific probiotic candidates. Br Poult Sci 2016; 57(4): 474-482.
  17. Nair PS. Studies on lactic acid bacteria from tropical fish and shell fish. PhD Thesis. Cochin University of Science and Technology, Cochin, India: 2000.
  18. Guo Z, Wang J, Yan L, et al. In vitro comparison of probiotic properties of Lactobacillus casei Zhang, a potential new probiotic, with selected probiotic strains. LWT 2009; 42(10): 1640-1646.
  19. Khalil R, Mahrous H, El-Halafawy K, et al. Evaluation of the probiotic potential of lactic acid bacteria isolated from faeces of breastfed infants in Egypt. Afr J Biotechnol 2007; 6(7): 939-949.
  20. Bauer AW, Kirby MM, Sherris JC, et al. Antibiotic susceptibility testing by a standardized single disk method. Am J Clin Pathol 1966; 45(4): 493-496.
  21. Charteris WP, Kelly PM, Morelli L, et al. Development and application of an in vitro methodology to determine the transit tolerance of potentially probiotic Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium species in the upper human gastrointestinal tract. J Appl Microbiol 1998; 84(5): 759-768.
  22. Tamura K, Stecher G, Kumar S, et al. MEGA11: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 11. Mol Biol Evol 2021; 38(7): 3022-3027.
  23. Posada D, Crandall KA. MODELTEST: testing the model of DNA substitution. Bioinformatics 1998; 14(9): 817-818.
  24. Mangia NP, Saliba L, Deiana P. Functional and safetycharacterization of autochthonous Lactobacillus paracasei FS103 isolated from sheep cheese and its survival in sheep and cow fermented milks during cold storage. Ann Microbiol 2019; 69: 161-170.
  25. dela Cruz TEE, Torres JMO. Gelatin hydrolysis test protocol. American Society for Microbiology. Washington DC, USA: ASM Press 2012; 1-10.
  26. Singh A, Kumar S, Vinay VV, et al. Autochthonous Lactobacillus isolated from Murrah buffalo calves show potential application as probiotic. Curr Res Biotechnol 2021; 3: 109-119.
  27. Kumar S, Pattanaik AK, Sharma S, et al. Probiotic potential of a Lactobacillus Bacterium of canine faecal-origin and its impact on select gut health indices and immune response of dogs. Probiotics Antimicro Proteins 2017; 9(3): 262-277.
  28. Tyagi A, Kumar S, Choudhury PK, et al. Conjugated linoleic acid producing potential of lactobacilli isolated from goat (AXB) rumen fluid samples. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2020; 33(8):1233-1241.
  29. Dias J, Marcondes MI, Noronha MF, et al. Effect of pre-weaning diet on the ruminal archaeal, bacterial, and fungal communities of dairy calves. Front Microbiol 2017; 8: 1553. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2017.01553.
  30. Guzman CE, Bereza-Malcolm LT, De Groef B, et al. Uptake of milk with and without solid feed during the monogastric phase: effect on fibrolytic methanogenic microorganisms in the gastrointestinal tract of calves. Anim Sci J 2016; 87(3): 378-388.
  31. Sidira M, Kourkoutas Y, Kanellaki M, et al. In vitro study on the cell adhesion ability of immobilized lactobacilli on natural supports. Food Res Int 2015; 76(pt 3): 532-539.
  32. Farid W, Masud T, Sohail A, et al. Gastrointestinal transit tolerance, cell surface hydrophobicity, and functional attributes of Lactobacillus Acidophilus strains isolated from Indigenous Dahi. Food Sci Nutr 2021; 9(9): 5092-5102.
  33. Pan M, Kumaree KK Shah NP. Physiological changes of surface membrane in Lactobacillus with prebiotics. J Food Sci 2017; 82(3): 744-750.
  34. Chen CC, Lai CC, Huang HL, et al. Antimicrobial activity of Lactobacillus species against carbapenem-resistant Front Microbiol 2019; 10: 789. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00789.
  35. Zhang B, Wang Y, Tan Z, et al. Screening of probiotic activities of Lactobacilli strains isolated from traditional Tibetan Qula, a raw yak milk cheese. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2016; 29(10): 1490-1499.
  36. Alakomi HL, Skyttä E, Saarela M, et al. Lactic acid permeabilizes gram-negative bacteria by disrupting the outer membrane. Appl Environ Microbiol 2000; 66(5): 2001-2005.
  37. Kumar M, Dhaka P, Vijay D, et al. Antimicrobial effects of Lactobacillus plantarum and Lactobacillus acidophilus against multidrug- resistant enteroaggregative Escherichia coli. Int J Antimicrob. Agents 2016; 48(3): 265-270.
  38. Kang MS, Lim HS, Oh JS, et al. Antimicrobial activity of Lactobacillus salivarius and Lactobacillus fermentum against Staphylococcus aureus. Pathog Dis 2017; 75(2). doi: 10.1093/femspd/ftx009.
  39. Chandran A, Duary RK, Grover S, et al. Relative expression of bacterial and host specific genes associated with probiotic survival and viability in the mice gut fed with Lactobacillus plantarum Microbiol Res 2013; 168(9): 555-562.
  40. Klare I, Konstabel C, Werner G, et al. Antimicrobial susceptibilities of Lactobacillus, Pediococcus and Lactococcus human isolates and cultures intended for probiotic or nutritional use. J Antimicrob Chemother 2007; 59(5): 900-912.
  41. Marchwińska K, Gwiazdowska D. Isolation and probiotic potential of lactic acid bacteria from swine feces for feed additive composition. Arch Microbiol 2021; 204(1): 61. doi: 10.1007/s00203-021-02700-0.
  42. Tulini FL, Winkelströter LK, De Martinis EC. Identification and evaluation of the probiotic potential of Lactobacillus paraplantarum FT259, a bacterio-cinogenic strain isolated from Brazilian semi-hard artisanal cheese. Anaerobe 2013; 22: 57-63.
  43. Casarotti SN, Carneiro BM, Todorov SD, et al. In vitro assessment of safety and probiotic potential characteristics of Lactobacillus strains isolated from water buffalo mozzarella cheese. Ann Microbiol 2017; 67: 289-301.
  44. Park MR, Ryu S, Maburutse BE, et al. Probiotic. Lactobacillus fermentum strain JDFM216 stimulates the longevity and immune response of Caenorhabditis elegans through a nuclear hormone receptor. Sci Rep 2018; 8(1): 7441. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-25333-8.
  45. Sharma R, Kumari M, Kumari A, et al. Diet supplemented with phytochemical epigallocatechin gallate and probiotic Lactobacillus fermentum confers second generation synbiotic effects by modulating cellular immune responses and antioxidant capacity in aging mice. Eur J Nutr 2019; 58(7): 2943-2957.
  46. Mu Q, Tavella VJ, Luo XM. Role of Lactobacillus reuteri in human health and diseases. Front Microbiol 2018; 9: 757. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.00757.
  47. Fidanza M, Panigrahi P, Kollmann TR. Lactiplantibacillus plantarum-nomad and ideal probiotic. Front Microbiol 2021; 12: 712236. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.712236.
  48. Gottschalk MG, Lacouture S, Dubreuil JD. Characterization of Streptococcus suis capsular type 2 haemolysin. Microbiology (Reading) 1995; 141(Pt 1): 189-195.
Veterinary Research Forum
Volume 15, Issue 6
June 2024
Pages 275-282

  • Receive Date 29 September 2023
  • Revise Date 26 December 2023
  • Accept Date 08 January 2024

Home

Guide for Authors

Submit Manuscript

Reviewers

Contact Us