Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins

, Volume 11, Issue 3, pp 910–920 | Cite as

Assessing the Safety and Efficacy of Lactobacillus plantarum MTCC 5690 and Lactobacillus fermentum MTCC 5689 in Colitis Mouse Model

  • Diwas Pradhan
  • Rajbir Singh
  • Ashish Tyagi
  • Rashmi H.M.
  • Virender K. Batish
  • Sunita GroverEmail author


Probiotic lactobacilli have an unprecedented history of safe use, although some cases of infections have raised concerns about their safety, and hence, a rigorous screening of any new strain even of Lactobacillus is a must in order to study possible adverse interactions with the host, particularly under unhealthy conditions. The present study was, therefore, undertaken to investigate the safety as well as therapeutic efficacy of probiotic Lactobacillus plantarum MTCC 5690 and L. fermentum MTCC 5689 strains in dextran sodium sulfate (DSS)-induced colitis mouse model. Both MTCC 5690 and MTCC 5689 did not induce any detrimental effect on the colitic mice, as was reflected by normal colon and caecum length, blood biochemistry, hematology, and absence of inflammation. Although translocation of both the strains was observed in extraintestinal organs, probiotic-fed mice had significantly improved intestinal permeability and decreased myeloperoxidase (MPO) activity. Probiotic interventions also led to an improved health index and better growth of colitis mice compared to colitis animals with no probiotic intervention. These results point towards the safe use of L. plantarum MTCC 5690 and L. fermentum MTCC 5689 as biotherapeutics for amelioration of inflammatory conditions after establishing their efficacy in human clinical trials.


Probiotics Lactobacilli Colitis Safety Anti-inflammatory 



The authors acknowledge the Director, ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute (NDRI), Karnal, India, for providing facilities to carry out this study. The financial support from ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, in terms of providing fellowship to the first author is also duly acknowledged.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

The animal studies were conducted as per current legislation on animal experiments with approval from the Institutional Animal Ethical Committee (IAEC approval no. 76/14) of Indian Council of Agricultural Research-National Dairy Research Institute, Deemed University, Karnal-132001, Haryana, India (Reg. No. 1705/GO/ac/13/CPCSA/2013).

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Vandenplas Y, Huys G, Daube G (2015) Probiotics: an update. J Pediatr (Rio J) 91(1):6–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vankerckhoven V, Huys G, Vancanneyt M, Vael C, Klare I, Romond MB, Entenza JM, Moreillon P, Wind RD, Knol J, Wiertz E (2008) Biosafety assessment of probiotics used for human consumption: recommendations from the EU-PROSAFE project. Trends Food Sci Technol 19(2):102–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Avlami A, Kordossis T, Vrizidis N, Sipsas NV (2001) Lactobacillus rhamnosus endocarditis complicating colonoscopy. J Inf Secur 42(4):283–285Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chanet V, Brazille P, Honore S, Michel M, Schaeffer A, Zarrouk V (2007) Lactobacillus septic arthritis. South Med J 100(5):531–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    FAO/WHO (2002) 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. World Health Organization, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ganguly NK, Bhattacharya SK, Sesikeran B, Nair GB, Ramakrishna BS, Sachdev HPS, Batish VK, Kanagasabapathy AS, Muthuswamy V, Kathuria SC, Katoch VM (2011) ICMR-DBT guidelines for evaluation of probiotics in food. Indian J Med Res 134(1):22–25Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sanders ME, Akkermans LMA, Haller D, Hammerman C, Heimbach JT, Hörmannsperger G, Huys G (2010) Safety assessment of probiotics for human use. Gut Microbes 1(3):164–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Frias R, Ouwehand A, Spillmann T, Vankerckhoven V, Hewicker-Trautwein M, Salminen S, Gueimonde M (2009) Effect of clinical and probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus strains on intestinal permeability and bacterial translocation in healthy and colitic rats. Food Res Int 42(5–6):636–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pavan S, Desreumaux P, Mercenier A (2003) Use of mouse models to evaluate the persistence, safety, and immune modulation capacities of lactic acid bacteria. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 10(4):696–701Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Daniel C, Poiret S, Goudercourt D, Dennin V, Leyer G, Pot B (2006) Selecting lactic acid bacteria for their safety and functionality by use of a mouse colitis model. Appl Environ Microbiol 72(9):5799–5805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Herias MV, Koninkx JFJG, Vos JG, In't Veld JH, Van Dijk JE (2005) Probiotic effects of Lactobacillus casei on DSS-induced ulcerative colitis in mice. Int J Food Microbiol 103(2):143–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chandran A, Duary RK, Grover S, Batish VK (2013) Relative expression of bacterial and host specific genes associated with probiotic survival and viability in the mice gut fed with Lactobacillus plantarum Lp91. Microbiol Res 168(9):555–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Duary RK, Rajput YS, Batish VK, Grover S (2011) Assessing the adhesion of putative indigenous probiotic lactobacilli to human colonic epithelial cells. Indian J Med Res 134(5):664–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Achuthan AA, Duary RK, Madathil A, Panwar H, Kumar H, Batish VK, Grover S (2012) Antioxidative potential of lactobacilli isolated from the gut of Indian people. Mol Biol Rep 39(8):7887–7897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chauhan R, Sudhakaran VA, Panwar H, Mallapa RH, Duary RK, Batish VK, Grover S (2014) Amelioration of colitis in mouse model by exploring antioxidative potentials of an indigenous probiotic strain of Lactobacillus fermentum Lf1. Biomed Res Int 2014:206732Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Duary R, Bhausaheb M, Batish V, Grover S (2012) Anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory efficacy of indigenous probiotic Lactobacillus plantarum Lp91 in colitis mouse model. Mol Biol Rep 39(4):4765–4775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kumar R, Grover S, Batish VK (2011) Hypocholesterolaemic effect of dietary inclusion of two putative probiotic bile salt hydrolase-producing Lactobacillus plantarum strains in Sprague–Dawley rats. Br J Nutr 105:561–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rokana N, Singh R, Mallappa RH, Batish VK, Grover S (2016) Modulation of intestinal barrier function to ameliorate Salmonella infection in mice by oral administration of fermented milks produced with Lactobacillus plantarum MTCC 5690–a probiotic strain of Indian gut origin. J Med Microbiol 65(12):1482–1493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pradhan D, Singh R, Tyagi A, Rashmi HM, Batish VK, Grover S (2019) Assessing safety of Lactobacillus plantarum MTCC 5690 and Lactobacillus fermentum MTCC 5689 using in vitro approaches and an in vivo murine model. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 101:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kaushik JK, Kumar A, Duary RK, Mohanty AK, Grover S, Batish VK (2009) Functional and probiotic attributes of an indigenous isolate of Lactobacillus plantarum. PLoS One 4(12):e8099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dickson EM, Riggio MP, Macpherson L (2005) A novel species-specific PCR assay for identifying Lactobacillus fermentum. J Med Microbiol 54(3):299–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cooper HS, Murthy SN, Shah RS, Sedergran DJ (1993) Clinicopathologic study of dextran sulfate sodium experimental murine colitis. Lab Investig 69(2):238–249Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cani PD, Lecourt E, Dewulf EM, Sohet FM, Pachikian BD, Naslain D, De Backer F, Neyrinck AM, Delzenne NM (2009) Gut microbiota fermentation of prebiotics increases satietogenic and incretin gut peptide production with consequences for appetite sensation and glucose response after a meal. Am J Clin Nutr 90(5):1236–1243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bischoff SC, Barbara G, Buurman W, Ockhuizen T, Schulzke JD, Serino M, Tilg H, Watson A, Wells JM (2014) Intestinal permeability–a new target for disease prevention and therapy. BMC Gastroenterol 14(1):189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Michielan A, D’Incà R (2015) Intestinal permeability in inflammatory bowel disease: pathogenesis, clinical evaluation, and therapy of leaky gut. Mediat Inflamm 2015:628157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kim SH, Jeung W, Choi ID, Jeong JW, LDE HCS, Kim GB, Hong SS, Shim JJ, Lee JL (2016) Lactic acid bacteria improves Peyer’s patch cell-mediated immunoglobulin A and tight-junction expression in a destructed gut microbial environment. J Microbiol Biotechnol 26(6):1035–1045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rokana N, Mallappa RH, Batish VK, Grover S (2017) Interaction between putative probiotic Lactobacillus strains of Indian gut origin and Salmonella: impact on intestinal barrier function. LWT-Food Sci Technol 84:851–860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Srutkova D, Schwarzer M, Hudcovic T, Zakostelska Z, Drab V, Spanova A, Rittich B, Kozakova H, Schabussova I (2015) Bifidobacterium longum CCM 7952 promotes epithelial barrier function and prevents acute DSS-induced colitis in strictly strain-specific manner. PLoS One 10(7):e0134050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bosch M, Fuentes MC, Audivert S, Bonachera MA, Peiró S, Cuñé J (2014) Lactobacillus plantarum CECT 7527, 7528 and 7529: probiotic candidates to reduce cholesterol levels. J Sci Food Agric 94(4):803–809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sanchez E, Nieto JC, Boullosa A, Vidal S, Sancho FJ, Rossi G, Sancho-Bru P, Oms R, Mirelis B, Juárez C, Guarner C (2015) VSL# 3 probiotic treatment decreases bacterial translocation in rats with carbon tetrachloride-induced cirrhosis. Liver Int 35(3):735–745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zhou JS, Shu Q, Rutherfurd KJ, Prasad J, Gopal PK, Gill HS (2000) Acute oral toxicity and bacterial translocation studies on potentially probiotic strains of lactic acid bacteria. Food Chem Toxicol 38(2–3):153–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Diwas Pradhan
    • 1
  • Rajbir Singh
    • 2
  • Ashish Tyagi
    • 1
    • 2
  • Rashmi H.M.
    • 1
  • Virender K. Batish
    • 1
  • Sunita Grover
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Molecular Biology Unit, Dairy Microbiology DivisionICAR-National Dairy Research InstituteKarnalIndia
  2. 2.University of LouisvilleLouisvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations