Co-effect of microencapsulation and prebiotics on the survivability of some lactic acid bacteria in simulating gastrointestinal tract and storage conditions

Salwa Gharieb, Gaber Bresha, Omar Omar
{"title":"Co-effect of microencapsulation and prebiotics on the survivability of some lactic acid bacteria in simulating gastrointestinal tract and storage conditions","authors":"Salwa Gharieb, Gaber Bresha, Omar Omar","doi":"10.21608/jmr.2023.229427.1117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Probiotics lose their viability during formulation, processing, and storage. The current work investigates the co-effect of three different combinations of encapsulation and prebiotics on the Survival of L. rhamnosus, L. acidophilus, and B. adolescentis under different conditions. In simulating gastric juice solution, the free cells survivability ranged between 36.5% to 40.5% for B. adolescentis and L. rhamnosus , after 2 hr, respectively. However, the encapsulated bacteria survival, ranged between 54.5% to 78.5% for B. adolescentis and L. rhamnosus , respectively. The encapsulated bacteria exhibited the highest survival rates, between 78.5%, and 76.5% for L. rhamnosus, and L. acidophilus , respectively, and 68.7% for B. adolescentis against the enzymatic gastric juice. In the simulating intestinal juice solution, cells encapsulated with resistant starch (ARs) and oligosaccharides (ARsG or ARsF) significantly enhanced survival over bacteria encapsulated with alginate alone and free cells, where the survivability was 104.4% for L. rhamnosus , 103.4% for L. acidophilus and 103.6% for B. adolescentis . A highly significant difference in survival rates was found between encapsulated and non-encapsulated bacteria when stored at 4 o C and 25 o C for 30 days. Survivability between 31.5% to 77.1% was apparent for L. acidophilus and L. rhamnosus , respectively, after 30 days at 4 o C. In contrast, free bacterial cells recorded a 29.1% to 31.5% survivability. After 30 days, the survivability of microencapsulated bacteria at 25 o C ranged between 15.6% and 63.6%, while the survival rate of free bacteria declined between 10.9% and 13.5%. Overall, microencapsulation of the tested strains enhanced bacteria tolerance, survival, and storage periods, especially at 4 o C.","PeriodicalId":516676,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Modern Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Modern Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21608/jmr.2023.229427.1117","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Probiotics lose their viability during formulation, processing, and storage. The current work investigates the co-effect of three different combinations of encapsulation and prebiotics on the Survival of L. rhamnosus, L. acidophilus, and B. adolescentis under different conditions. In simulating gastric juice solution, the free cells survivability ranged between 36.5% to 40.5% for B. adolescentis and L. rhamnosus , after 2 hr, respectively. However, the encapsulated bacteria survival, ranged between 54.5% to 78.5% for B. adolescentis and L. rhamnosus , respectively. The encapsulated bacteria exhibited the highest survival rates, between 78.5%, and 76.5% for L. rhamnosus, and L. acidophilus , respectively, and 68.7% for B. adolescentis against the enzymatic gastric juice. In the simulating intestinal juice solution, cells encapsulated with resistant starch (ARs) and oligosaccharides (ARsG or ARsF) significantly enhanced survival over bacteria encapsulated with alginate alone and free cells, where the survivability was 104.4% for L. rhamnosus , 103.4% for L. acidophilus and 103.6% for B. adolescentis . A highly significant difference in survival rates was found between encapsulated and non-encapsulated bacteria when stored at 4 o C and 25 o C for 30 days. Survivability between 31.5% to 77.1% was apparent for L. acidophilus and L. rhamnosus , respectively, after 30 days at 4 o C. In contrast, free bacterial cells recorded a 29.1% to 31.5% survivability. After 30 days, the survivability of microencapsulated bacteria at 25 o C ranged between 15.6% and 63.6%, while the survival rate of free bacteria declined between 10.9% and 13.5%. Overall, microencapsulation of the tested strains enhanced bacteria tolerance, survival, and storage periods, especially at 4 o C.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
微胶囊和益生元对模拟胃肠道和储存条件下某些乳酸菌存活率的共同影响
益生菌在配制、加工和储存过程中会失去活力。目前的工作研究了三种不同的封装和益生元组合在不同条件下对鼠李糖、嗜酸乳杆菌和青春期乳杆菌存活率的共同影响。在模拟胃液中,青少年乳杆菌和鼠李糖在 2 小时后的游离细胞存活率分别为 36.5% 至 40.5%。然而,包囊菌的存活率在 54.5%至 78.5%之间。封装细菌的存活率最高,鼠李糖和嗜酸乳杆菌的存活率分别为 78.5% 和 76.5%,而青春双歧杆菌在酶胃液中的存活率为 68.7%。在模拟肠液中,抗性淀粉(ARs)和低聚糖(ARsG 或 ARsF)包裹的细胞比单独海藻酸盐包裹的细菌和游离细胞的存活率显著提高,鼠李糖桿菌的存活率为 104.4%,嗜酸乳杆菌为 103.4%,青春期桿菌为 103.6%。在 4 o C 和 25 o C 下分别储存 30 天后,发现包裹菌和非包裹菌的存活率有很大差异。相比之下,游离细菌细胞的存活率为 29.1%至 31.5%。30 天后,微胶囊细菌在 25 o C 下的存活率为 15.6% 至 63.6%,而游离细菌的存活率则下降了 10.9% 至 13.5%。总体而言,测试菌株的微胶囊化提高了细菌的耐受性、存活率和储存期,尤其是在 4 o C 时。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
In vitro culture and cytological features of two Moringa species cultivated in Egypt Response of immature and mature embryos of modern Egyptian commercial durum (Triticum durum Desf.) and bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) for in Vitro culture Monitoring of pesticide residues in some vegetable crops in Minia Governorate Markets with regard to their risk in human health. Improving the Productivity of Nigella sativa Plants Via Chitosan and Some Amino Acids Design and deployment of an advanced computerized crime tracking information system in Nigeria
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1