Comparative Antimicrobial Activity of Lactobacillus acidophilus and Lactobacillus rhamnosus on Clinically Isolated Escherichia coli: An In vitro Study

Nithyamol Kuriakose

Department of Medical Microbiology, School of Medical Education, Center for Professional and Advanced studies, Kottayam, Kerala, India.

Ananthu Raj

Department of Medical Microbiology, School of Medical Education, Center for Professional and Advanced studies, Kottayam, Kerala, India.

Anju Anil

Department of Medical Microbiology, School of Medical Education, Center for Professional and Advanced studies, Kottayam, Kerala, India.

Azhar M M

Department of Medical Microbiology, School of Medical Education, Center for Professional and Advanced studies, Kottayam, Kerala, India.

Sajmi Sathar

Department of Medical Microbiology, School of Medical Education, Center for Professional and Advanced studies, Kottayam, Kerala, India.

Anagha S

Department of Medical Microbiology, School of Medical Education, Center for Professional and Advanced studies, Kottayam, Kerala, India.

Harish Kumar K S *

Department of Medical Microbiology, School of Medical Education, Center for Professional and Advanced studies, Kottayam, Kerala, India.

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.


Abstract

Aim: The aim of present study is to evaluate the comparative antimicrobial activity of Lactobacillus acidophilus and Lactobacillus rhamnosus on clinical isolates of Escherichia coli.

Study Design:  Cross-sectional observational study.

Place and Duration of Study: This study was conducted in Department of Medical Microbiology, School of Medical Education between January 2023 to September 2023.

Methodology: A total of 100 E. coli isolates collected from various diagnostic laboratories were included in the sample population and the prevalence of XDR, MDR, and non MDR isolates among them were determined by Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion method. The inhibitory activity of untreated and treated (pH adjusted) suspension of standard strains of L. acidophilus and L. rhamnosus on E. coli were determined by agar overlay method and the data was statistically analysed using ANOVA single-factor.

Results: The antimicrobial activity was confirmed for untreated and treated suspension of Lactobacillus spp. by measuring the zone of inhibition surrounding E. coli strains spotted on MRS medium but treated suspension exerted greater inhibitory activity than untreated suspensions of both Lactobacillus spp. and among the treated suspension L. rhamnosus exhibit greater inhibitory activity. Statistical analysis of this data using ANOVA single-factor was found to be not significant (P >0.05), that is treated suspension of both L. acidophilus and L. rhamnosus has the independent activity against E. coli. While untreated suspensions of both L. acidophilus and L. rhamnosus was significant (P =0.03), that is untreated suspension of L. rhamnosus (mean inhibition of 12.19 mm) has greater inhibitory activity than untreated cell cultures of L. acidophilus (mean inhibition of 11.39 mm).

Conclusion: This result, disclosed that even if both Lactobacillus spp. exhibit antimicrobial activity against E. coli, L. rhamnosus showed greater inhibition than L. acidophilus. The study suggested the use probiotic Lactobacillus as a biotherapeutic in antibiotic resistant E. coli infection and should be further studied for their human health benefits.

Keywords: Probiotics, antimicrobial resistance, Escherichia coli, XDR, MDR, Lactobacillus rhamnosus, Lactobacillus acidophilus


How to Cite

Kuriakose , N., Raj , A., Anil, A., Azhar M M, Sathar , S., Anagha S, & Harish Kumar K S. (2023). Comparative Antimicrobial Activity of Lactobacillus acidophilus and Lactobacillus rhamnosus on Clinically Isolated Escherichia coli: An In vitro Study. Microbiology Research Journal International, 33(12), 31–42. https://doi.org/10.9734/mrji/2023/v33i11-121418

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Tebyaniyan Hamid, Bakhtiari Afsaneh, Karami Ali, Kariminik Ashraf. Antimicrobial activity of some lactobacillus species against intestinal pathogenic bacteria. International Letters of Natural Sciences. 2017;65.10-15.10.18052/ Available:www.scipress.com/ILNS.65.10

Kim SK, Guevarra RB, Kim YT, Kwon J, Kim H, Cho JH, Kim HB, Lee JH. Role of probiotics in human gut microbiome-associated diseases. J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2019;29(9):1335-1340. DOI:10.4014/jmb.1906.06064. PMID: 31434172

Ganipisetti VM, Dudiki N, Athavale A. A diagnostic quandary of Escherichia Coli pneumonia: A case report and literature review. Cureus. 2023;15(5):e39668. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.39668 PMID: 37265881 PMCID: PMC10231897

Fijan S, Šulc D, Steyer A. Study of the In vitro antagonistic activity of various single-strain and multi-strain probiotics against Escherichia coli. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018;15(7):1539. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15071539 PMID: 30036977 PMCID: PMC6069398

Abdisa Kebede, et al. Probiotics in health and disease: A review of emerging evidence of potential benefits and harm. American Journal of Microbiological Research.2022;10(1):23-33.

Dunne C, O'Mahony L, Murphy L, Thornton G, Morrissey D, O'Halloran S, Feeney M, Flynn S, Fitzgerald G, Daly C, Kiely B, O'Sullivan GC, Shanahan F, Collins JK. In vitro selection criteria for probiotic bacteria of human origin: Correlation with in vivo findings. Am J Clin Nutr. 2001;73(2 Suppl):386S-392S. DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/73.2.386s PMID: 11157346

Reid G, Younes JA, Van der Mei HC, Gloor GB, Knight R, Busscher HJ. Microbiota restoration: Natural and supplemented recovery of human microbial communities. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2011; 9(1):27-38. DOI: 10.1038/nrmicro2473. Epub 2010 Nov 29 PMID: 21113182

Gut AM, Vasiljevic T, Yeager T, Donkor ON. Salmonella infection - prevention and treatment by antibiotics and probiotic yeasts: a review. Microbiology (Reading). 2018;164(11):1327-1344. DOI:10.1099/mic.0.000709. Epub 2018 Aug 23 PMID: 30136920

Fijan S. Microorganisms with claimed probiotic properties: an overview of recent literature. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014;11(5):4745-67. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph110504745 PMID: 24859749 PMCID: PMC4053917

Fijan S, Frauwallner A, Langerholc T, Krebs B, Ter Haar Née Younes JA, Heschl A, Mičetić Turk D, Rogelj I. Efficacy of using probiotics with antagonistic activity against pathogens of wound infections: An integrative review of literature. Biomed Res Int. 2019;2019:7585486. DOI: 10.1155/2019/7585486 PMID: 31915703 PMCID: PMC6930797

Haghshenas B, Kiani A, Mansoori S. et al. Probiotic properties and antimicrobial evaluation of silymarin-enriched Lactobacillus bacteria isolated from traditional curd. Sci Rep. 2023;13, 10916. Available:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-37350-3

CLSI. Performance standards for antimicrobial disk susceptibility tests. 13th ed. CLSI standard M02. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory standards institute; 2018.

CLSI. Performans Standards for antimicrobial susceptibility Testing. 33 rd ed.

Magiorakos AP, Srinivasan A, Carey RB, Carmeli Y, Falagas ME, Giske CG, Harbarth S, Hindler JF, Kahlmeter G, Olsson-Liljequist B, Paterson DL, Rice LB, Stelling J, Struelens MJ, Vatopoulos A, Weber JT, Monnet DL. Multidrug-resistant, extensively drug-resistant and pandrug-resistant bacteria: An international expert proposal for interim standard definitions for acquired resistance. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012;18(3):268-81. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03570.x. Epub 2011 Jul 27 PMID: 21793988.

Fleming HP, Etchells JL, Costilow RN. Microbial inhibition by an isolate of Pediococcus from cucumber brines. Appl microbial. 1975;30(6):1040-1042. DOI: 10.1128/am.30.6.1040-1042.1975

Shokryazdan P, Sieo CC, Kalavathy R, Liang JB, Alitheen NB, Faseleh Jahromi M, Ho YW. Probiotic potential of lactobacillus strains with antimicrobial activity against some human pathogenic strains. Biomed Res Int. 2014;927268. DOI: 10.1155/2014/927268. Epub 2014 Jul 3 PMID: 25105147 PMCID: PMC4106073

Scillato M, Spitale A, Mongelli G, Privitera GF, Mangano K, Cianci A, Stefani S, Santagati M. Antimicrobial properties of lactobacillus cell-free supernatants against multidrug-resistant urogenital pathogens. Microbiologyopen. 2021;10(2): e1173. DOI: 10.1002/mbo3.1173 PMID: 33970542 PMCID: PMC8483400

Feng Y, Qiao L, Liu R. et al. Potential probiotic properties of lactic acid bacteria isolated from the intestinal mucosa of healthy piglets. Ann Microbiol. 2017;67: 239–253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13213-017-1254-6

Pakbin B, Brück WM, Rossen JWA. Virulence factors of enteric pathogenic Escherichia coli: A Review. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22(18):9922. DOI: 10.3390/ijms22189922 PMID: 34576083 PMCID: PMC8468683

Ozma MA, Abbasi A, Asgharzadeh M, Pagliano P, Guarino A, Köse Ş, Samadi Kafil H. Antibiotic therapy for pan-drug-resistant infections. Infez Med. 2022;30(4): 525-531. DOI: 10.53854/liim-3004-6 PMID: 36482958 PMCID: PMC9715010

Pattnaik, Dipti, Snigdha, Subhra, Singh, Nipa, Sahoo, Smrutilata, Mohapatra, Ipsa, Jena, Jagadananda. Multidrug resistant, extensively drug resistant and pan drug resistant gram negative bacteria at a tertiary care centre in Bhubaneswar. International Journal of Community Medicine And Public Health. 2019;6:567. DOI: 10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20190170

Halah MH, Al-Hasani, Dalal S. Al-Rubaye, Alyaa Abdelhameed. “The emergence of multidrug-resistant (MDR), Extensively drug-resistant (XDR), and pandrug-resistant (PDR) In Iraqi Clinical Isolates of Escherichia coli. Journal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical Pharmacology; 2023.

Cadirci, Bilge, Sumru, Citak. A comparison of two methods used for measuring antagonistic activity of lactic acid bacteria. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition. 2005:4. DOI: 10.3923/pjn.2005.237.241

Jacobsen CN, Rosenfeldt Nielsen V, Hayford AE, Møller PL, Michaelsen KF, Paerregaard A, Sandström B, Tvede M, Jakobsen M. Screening of probiotic activities of forty-seven strains of Lactobacillus spp. by in vitro techniques and evaluation of the colonization ability of five selected strains in humans. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1999;65(11):4949-56. DOI: 10.1128/AEM.65.11.4949-4956.1999 PMID: 10543808 PMCID: PMC91666

Davoodabadi A, Soltan Dallal MM, Lashani E, Tajabadi Ebrahimi M. Antimicrobial activity of lactobacillus spp. Isolated from fecal flora of healthy breast-fed infants against diarrheagenic Escherichia coli. Jundishapur J Microbiol. 2015;8(12): e27852. DOI: 10.5812/jjm.27852 PMID: 26865944 PMCID: PMC4745268

Michèle Delley, Anne Bruttin, Michel Richard, Michael Affolter, Enea Rezzonico, Wolfram M. Brück, In vitro activity of commercial probiotic Lactobacillus strains against uropathogenic Escherichia coli, FEMS Microbiology Letters, 2015;362(13): fnv096. Available:https://doi.org/10.1093/femsle/fnv096

Hütt P, Shchepetova J, Lõivukene K, Kullisaar T, Mikelsaar M. Antagonistic activity of probiotic lactobacilli and bifidobacteria against entero- and uropathogens. J Appl Microbiol. 2006;100(6):1324-32. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2006.02857.x PMID: 16696680

Halder D, Mandal S. Antibacterial potentiality of commercially available probiotic lactobacilli and curd lactobacilli strains, Alone and in combination, against Human Pathogenic Bacteria. Transl Biomed. 2016;7:2.

Georgieva R, Yocheva L, Tserovska L, Zhelezova G, Stefanova N, Atanasova A, Danguleva A, Ivanova G, Karapetkov N, Rumyan N, Karaivanova E. Antimicrobial activity and antibiotic susceptibility of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium spp. intended for use as starter and probiotic cultures. Biotechnol Biotechnol Equip. 2015;29(1):84-91. DOI: 10.1080/13102818.2014.987450. Epub 2014 Dec 11 PMID: 26019620 PMCID: PMC4434095

Tejero-Sariñena S, Barlow J, Costabile A, Gibson GR, Rowland I. In vitro evaluation of the antimicrobial activity of a range of probiotics against pathogens: evidence for the effects of organic acids. Anaerobe. 2012;18(5):530-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.anaerobe.2012.08.004. Epub 2012 Aug 24 PMID: 22959627

Zubair, Faiza. Antibacterial activity of bacteriocin isolated from Lactobacillus acidophilus against throat infections causing bacteria. International Journal of Biosciences (IJB). 2017;10. DOI: 10.12692/ijb/10.4.372-379