Bioprotective potential of lactic acid bacteria for Salmonella biocontrol in vitro

• Published in: Veterinary research communications 2023-09, Vol.47 (3), p.1357-1368
• Main Authors: Evangelista, Alberto Gonçalves, Matté, Eduardo Henrique Custódio, Corrêa, Jessica Audrey Feijó, Gonçalves, Francieli Dalvana Ribeiro, dos Santos, João Vitor Garcia, Biauki, Gabrieli Camila, Milek, Mônica Moura, Costa, Leandro Batista, Luciano, Fernando Bittencourt
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Bacteria; Biological control; Biomedical and Life Sciences; Dietary supplements; Encapsulation; Lactic acid bacteria; Life Sciences; Meat products; Probiotics; Salmonella; Veterinary Medicine/Veterinary Science; Zoology
• ISSN: 0165-7380; 1573-7446
• DOI: 10.1007/s11259-023-10083-4

Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) are an important option for Salmonella control in animal production, resulting in lower antibiotic use. The objective of this research was to isolate LAB from meat products and from commercial probiotics sold as nutritional supplements for in vitro verification of their bioprotective potential. Eleven bacteria were identified as Pediococcus acidilactici , two as Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus , one as Lacticaseibacillus paracasei paracasei , one as Limosilactobacillus fermentum , and one as a consortium of Lactobacillus delbrueckii bulgaricus and L. fermentum . All bacteria showed inhibitory activity against Salmonella , with emphasis on the inhibition of P. acidilactici PUCPR 011 against Salmonella Enteritidis 33SUSUP, S. Enteritidis 9SUSP, S. Enteritidis 56301, S. Enteritidis CRIFS 1016, Salmonella Typhimurium ATCC ™ 14,028 ® , and Salmonella Gallinarum AL 1138, with inhibition halos of 7.3 ± 0.5 mm, 7.7 ± 1.0 mm, 9.0 ± 1.8 mm, 7.3 ± 0.5 mm, 7.7 ± 1.0 mm, and 7.3 ± 0.5, respectively. The isolates P. acidilactici PUCPR 011, P. acidilactici PUCPR 012, P. acidilactici PUCPR 014, L. fermentum PUCPR 005, L. paracasei paracasei PUCPR 013, and L. rhamnosus PUCPR 010 showed inhibition greater than 2 mm against at least 3 Salmonella and were used for encapsulation and in vitro digestion. The encapsulation efficiency ranged from 76.89 ± 1.54 to 116.48 ± 2.23%, and the population after 12 months of storage was from 5.31 ± 0.17 to 9.46 ± 0.09 log CFU/g. When simulating swine and chicken digestion, there was a large reduction in bacterial viability, stabilizing at concentrations close to 2.5 log CFU/mL after the analyses. The analyzed bacteria showed strong in vitro bioprotective potential; further analyses are required to determine in vivo effectiveness.