Comparative assessment of probiotic properties of seven commercially available probiotic strains: an in vitro study

Amrutha S. Raj; Anjana Baby; Hareeshma K. S.; Nila Udayan; Harish Kumar K. S.

doi:10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20254448

Authors

Amrutha S. Raj Department of Medical Microbiology, School of Medical Education, Centre for Professional and Advanced Studies, Kottayam, Kerala, India
Anjana Baby Department of Medical Microbiology, School of Medical Education, Centre for Professional and Advanced Studies, Kottayam, Kerala, India
Hareeshma K. S. Department of Medical Microbiology, School of Medical Education, Centre for Professional and Advanced Studies, Kottayam, Kerala, India
Nila Udayan Department of Medical Microbiology, School of Medical Education, Centre for Professional and Advanced Studies, Kottayam, Kerala, India
Harish Kumar K. S. Department of Medical Microbiology, School of Medical Education, Centre for Professional and Advanced Studies, Kottayam, Kerala, India https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0504-7794

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20254448

Keywords:

Shouchella clausii, Limosilactobacillus reuteri, Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Weizmannia coagulans, Bacillus subtilis, Saccharomyces boulardii

Abstract

Background: Probiotics are live microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts, confer health benefits to the host. Their ability to survive harsh gastrointestinal conditions such as low pH, bile salts, and toxic compounds like phenol is crucial for colonization and activity. The present study was undertaken to evaluate the probiotic properties of commercially available probiotic strains including Lactobacillus acidophilus, Limosilactobacillus reuteri, Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus, Shouchella clausii, Weizmannia coagulans, Bacillus subtilis and Saccharomyces boulardii.

Methods: All strains were germinated in brain heart infusion (BHI) broth and subjected to standard probiotic property evaluation. Acid, bile, and phenol tolerance were assessed using modified BHI broth adjusted to pH 2.0, 0.3% bile, and 0.4% phenol, respectively, with viable counts determined at specific time intervals. Antagonistic activity was tested against E. coli isolates by agar overlay method.

Results: Among tested strains, Shouchella clausii and Weizmannia coagulans exhibited highest tolerance to acidic, bile and phenolic stress. Limosilactobacillus reuteri showed moderate tolerance, while Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus and Lactobacillus acidophilus demonstrated fair survival rates. Saccharomyces boulardii and Bacillus subtilis recorded comparatively lower tolerance. Most isolates showed significant inhibitory activity against coliforms.

Conclusions: The study highlights the potential of commercially available probiotic formulations as effective candidates for gastrointestinal health. The survival ability of Bacillus species under harsh gut conditions suggests their suitability as stable probiotics. Further studies focusing on molecular mechanisms and clinical efficacy are warranted.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

FAO/WHO. 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. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and World Health Organization. 2002. Available at: https://isappscience.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/probiotic_guidelines.pdf. Accessed on 20 October 2025.

Sanders ME, Merenstein DJ, Reid G, Gibson GR, Rastall RA. Probiotics and prebiotics in intestinal health and disease: from biology to the clinic. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;16(10):605-16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41575-019-0173-3

Cutting SM. Bacillus probiotics. Food Microbiol. 2011;28(2):214-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fm.2010.03.007

Dunne C, O’Mahony L, Murphy L, Thornton G, Morrissey D, O’Halloran S, et al. In vitro selection criteria for probiotic bacteria of human origin: correlation with in vivo findings. Am J Clin Nutr. 2001;73(2):386S-92S. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/73.2.386s

Begley M, Hill C, Gahan CGM. Bile salt hydrolase activity in probiotics. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2006;72(3):1729-38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.72.3.1729-1738.2006

Corr SC, Li Y, Riedel CU, O’Toole PW, Hill C, Gahan CGM. Bacteriocin production as a mechanism for the anti-infective activity of Lactobacillus salivarius UCC118. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007;104(18):7617-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0700440104

Ouwehand AC, Salminen S, Isolauri E. Probiotics: an overview of beneficial effects. Int J Food Microbiol. 2002;78(1-2):99-105.

Hill C, Guarner F, Reid G, Gibson GR, Merenstein DJ, Pot B, et al. The International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics consensus statement on the scope and appropriate use of the term probiotic. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014;11(8):506-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrgastro.2014.66

Marco ML, Sanders ME, Gänzle M. The International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics (ISAPP) consensus statement on fermented foods and health. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021;18(3):196-208. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41575-020-00390-5

Charteris WP, Kelly PM, Morelli L, Collins JK. 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):759-68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2672.1998.00407.x

Zheng J, Wittouck S, Salvetti E, Franz CMAP, Harris HMB, Mattarelli P, et al. A taxonomic note on the genus Lactobacillus: description of 23 novel genera, emended description of the genus Lactobacillus Beijerinck 1901, and union of Lactobacillaceae and Leuconostocaceae. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2020;70(4):2782-858. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1099/ijsem.0.004107

Yadav R, Puniya AK, Shukla P. Probiotic properties of Lactobacillus plantarum RYPR1 from an indigenous fermented beverage Raabadi. Front Microbiol. 2016;7:1683. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2016.01683

Raj A, Kumar HKS, Anil A, Azhar MM, Kuriakose N. Anti-Staphylococcus aureus activity of Lactobacillus rhamnosus and Lactobacillus acidophilus on clinical isolates: an in vitro study. J Med Res. 2024;10(1):5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31254/jmr.2024.10105

Ramos CI, Farias-Rodrigues JL, Araujo GR, et al. in vitro assessment of acid and bile tolerance of lactic acid bacteria isolated from traditional fermented foods. Fermentation. 2022;8(10):529. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation8100529

Edwards-Ingram L, Gitsham P, Burton N, Warhurst G, Clarke I, Hoyle D, et al. Genotypic and physiological characterization of Saccharomyces boulardii, the probiotic strain of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007;73(8):2458-67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.02201-06

Gilliland SE, Staley TE, Bush LJ. Importance of bile tolerance of Lactobacillus acidophilus used as a dietary adjunct. J Dairy Sci. 1984;67(12):3045-51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(84)81670-7

Guo X, Chen DD, Peng KS, Cao Y, Tan ZY. Comparative evaluation of acid and bile tolerance in Saccharomyces boulardii and Lactobacillus species. Food Sci Nutr. 2019;7(8):2619-27.

De Angelis M, Calasso M, Siragusa S. Comparative transcriptomics and functional characterization of Lactobacillus plantarum and Lactobacillus rhamnosus under stress conditions. Front Microbiol. 2019;10:1203.

Panda AK, Rao SS, Gurumurthy P, Reddy V. Probiotic yeast Saccharomyces boulardii-mechanisms of action and clinical implications. Int J Probiotics Prebiotics. 2008;3(1):1-10.

Ouwehand AC, Kirjavainen PV, Grönlund MM, Isolauri E, Salminen SJ. Adhesion of probiotic micro-organisms to intestinal mucus. Int Dairy J. 2002;9(9):623-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0958-6946(99)00132-6