Differences in the occurence and efficiency of antimicrobial compounds produced by lactic acid bacteria
- 161 Downloads
To provide consumers with new, attractive, and healthy food products, chemical additives could be replaced by lactic acid bacteria (LAB). Twelve highly antagonistic LAB strains were screened to find the best manufacturers of antimicrobial agents and key components that ensure greater effectiveness of their antagonistic activity. The tested LAB strains appeared to produce and excrete natural antimicrobial compounds such as ethanol (0.27–0.87%), lactic (5.6–19.9 g/L), citric (0.3–3.3 g/L), benzoic (0.2–1.8 mg/L), and sorbic (0.1–1.2 mg/L) acids. The individual LAB strain showed strain-specific abilities to produce individual compounds: citric acid was observed for Streptococcus thermophilus 43, sorbic acid for Lactococcus lactis 140/2, and diacetyl for other L. lactis strains. Lactobacillus helveticus R reached the highest antimicrobial activity by the production of the largest amount of lactic acid, while L. lactis 140/2 achieved that by the complex of produced organic acids. Enterococcus faecium 41-2B was mostly effective protein producing strain (1.2 g/100 g); moreover, enterocins A and P coding genes with antimicrobial activity against Listeriamonocytogenes were found in these Enterococcus strains. Five LAB strains were characterized by containing 1–2 plasmids. The study demonstrated a delicate balance of natural antimicrobial synthesis; meanwhile, the insertion of some preservatives in the medium could not significantly decrease their antagonistic activity.
KeywordsLactic acid bacteria Antimicrobial compounds Antilisterial activity Plasmid DNA
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
J. Salomskiene, D. Jonkuviene, I. Macioniene, A. Abraitiene, J. Zeime, J. Repeckiene and L. Vaiciulyte-Funk state that there are no conflicts of interest.
Compliance with ethics requirements
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and /or national research committee.
- 4.Rattanachaikunsopon P, Phumkhachorn P (2010) Lactic acid bacteria: their antimicrobial compounds and their uses in food production. Ann Biol Res 1:218–228Google Scholar
- 5.Ikeda DM, Weinert E, Chang KCS, McGinn JM, Miller SA, Keliihoomalu Ch, DuPonte MW (2013) Natural farming: lactic acid bacteria. J Sustain Agric SA 8:1–4Google Scholar
- 6.Blagojev N, Škrinjar M, Veskovic-Moračanin S, Šošo V (2012) Control of mould growth and mycotoxin production by lactic acid bacteria metabolites. Rom Biotech Lett 17:7219–7226Google Scholar
- 7.Šušković J, Kos B, Beganović J, Leboš Pavunc A, Habjanič K, Matošić S (2010) Antimicrobial activity—the most important property of probiotic and starter lactic acid bacteria. Food Technol Biotech 48:296–307Google Scholar
- 13.Hawkins S (2014) Antimicrobial activity of cinnamic acid, citric acid, cinnamaldehyde, and levulinic acid against foodborne pathogens. Savannah Hawkins Senior Honors Thesis. http://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2750&context=utk_chanhonoproj. Accessed 26 Jan 15
- 16.Šalomskienė J, Abraitienė A, Jonkuvienė D, Mačionienė I, Repečkienė J, Stankienė J, Vaičiulytė-Funk L (2015) Changes in antagonistic activity of lactic acid bacteria induced by their response to technological factors. J Sci Food Agric 24:289–299Google Scholar
- 17.AOAC (1990) Official method of analysis, 15th edn. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
- 19.O’Sullivan DJ, Klaenhammer TR (1993) Rapid Mini-Prep isolation of high-quality plasmid DNA from Lactococcus and Lactobacillus spp. Appl Environ Microbiol 59:2730–2733Google Scholar
- 22.Janssen M, Geeraerd AH, Cappuyns A, Garcia-Gonzalez L, Schockaert G, Van Houteghem N, Vereecken KM, Debevere J, Devlieghere F, Van Impe JF (2007) Individual and combined effects of pH and lactic acid concentration on Listeria innocua inactivation: development of a predictive model and assessment of experimental variability. Appl Environ Microbiol 73:1601–1611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Kockova M, Gerekova P, Petrulakova Z, Hybenova E, Šturdik E, Valik L (2011) Evaluation of fermentation properties of lactic acid bacteria isolated from sourdough. Acta Chim Slov 4:78–87Google Scholar
- 25.Joshi V, Sharma S, Ran SN (2006) Production, purification, stability and efficacy of bacteriocin from isolates of natural lactic acid fermentation of vegetables. Food Technol Biotechnol 44:435–439Google Scholar
- 31.Jonkuvienė D, Vaičiulytė-Funk L, Šalomskienė J, Alenčikienė G, Mieželienė A (2016) Potential of Lactobacillus reuteri from spontaneous sourdough as a starter additive for improving quality parameters of bread. Food Technol Biotechnol 54:342–350Google Scholar
- 33.Mobolaji OA, Wuraola FO (2011) Assessment of the antimicrobial activity of lactic acid bacteria isolated from two fermented maize products—ogi and kunnu-zaki. Malays J Microbiol 7:124–128Google Scholar
- 40.Rosvoll TC, Pedersen T, Sletvold H, Johnsen PJ, Sollid JE, Simonsen GS, Jensen LB, Nielsen KM, Sundsfjord A (2010) PCR-based plasmid typing in Enterococcus faecium strains reveals widely distributed pRE25-, pRUM-, pIP501- and pHTbeta-related replicons associated with glycopeptide resistance and stabilizing toxin-antitoxin systems. FEMS. Immunol Med Microbiol 58:254–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 43.Samaržija D, Antunac N, Havranek JL (2001) Taxonomy, physiology and growth of Lactococcus lactis: a review. Mljekarstvo 51:35–48Google Scholar