Evidence mapPaperPMID 24936361Full record

ArticleBioscience of microbiota, food and health2013

Influence of different probiotic lactic Acid bacteria on microbiota and metabolism of rats with dysbiosis.

Elena Ermolenko, Ludmila Gromova, Yuri Borschev, Anna Voeikova, Alena Karaseva, Konstantin Ermolenko, Andrei Gruzdkov, Alexander Suvorov

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioscience of microbiota, food and health, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Restoration ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. What Is Wrong with Enterococcal Probiotics?Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2020
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. A genomic view of food-related and probiotic Enterococcus strains.DNA research : an international journal for rapid publication of reports on genes and genomes · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Elena ErmolenkoDepartment of Molecular Microbiology, Institute of Experimental Medicine, acad. Pavlov str. 12, Saint Petersburg 197376, Russia.
Ludmila GromovaDepartment of Physiology of Nutrition, Pavlov Institute of Physiology, Makarova emb.6, Saint Petersburg 199034, Russia.
Yuri BorschevDepartment of Physiology of Nutrition, Pavlov Institute of Physiology, Makarova emb.6, Saint Petersburg 199034, Russia.
Anna VoeikovaDepartment of Molecular Microbiology, Institute of Experimental Medicine, acad. Pavlov str. 12, Saint Petersburg 197376, Russia.
Alena KarasevaDepartment of Molecular Microbiology, Institute of Experimental Medicine, acad. Pavlov str. 12, Saint Petersburg 197376, Russia.
Konstantin ErmolenkoLaboratory of Immunology, Pasteur Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology, Mira str. 16, Saint Petersburg 197376, Russia.
Andrei GruzdkovDepartment of Physiology of Nutrition, Pavlov Institute of Physiology, Makarova emb.6, Saint Petersburg 199034, Russia.
Alexander SuvorovDepartment of Molecular Microbiology, Institute of Experimental Medicine, acad. Pavlov str. 12, Saint Petersburg 197376, Russia.
Institute of Experimental Medicine · RUPavlov Institute of Physiology of the Russian Academy of Sciences · RUSaint Petersburg Pasteur Institute · RU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) are often used for prevention and treatment of dysbiosis. However, the action of various strains of LAB on metabolism and digestion under these conditions are poorly understood. The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of probiotic LAB on metabolism, digestion and microbiota in animals with dysbiosis. After administration of ampicillin and metronidazole male Wistar rats, were fed products containing Enterococcus faecium L3 (E.f.), Lactobacillus fermentum Z (L.f.) or milk (control 1). Animals in control group 2 were fed milk, after water instead of antibiotics. Dyspeptic symptoms disappeared after administration of probiotic compared with control 1. At the end of the experiment, an increase in the content of enterococci and lactobacilli in the proximal part of the small intestine was found in the animals treated with E.f. and L.f., respectively. After the introduction of probiotic enterococci, the quantity of lactobacilli and bifidobacteria in the intestines of rats increased, and the content of Klebsiella spp. and Escherichia coli decreased in comparison with the control group 1 and the group fed lactobacilli. The activity of alkaline phosphatase and aspartate transaminase was greater in blood serum of rats with dysbiosis receiving milk and lactobacilli. Intestinal alkaline phosphatase activity increased in the epithelium and chyme in the jejunum of the animals treated with L. f. and in the chyme only in the animals treated with E. f. Thus, the specific effects of different strains of probiotic LAB on the microbiota, and on metabolism and digestion of various nutrients were demonstrated.

Indexed as

dysbiosisenterococcilactobacillimetabolism

Identifiers

PMID24936361
PMCPMC4034318
OpenAlexW1975524013

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.