ArticleScientific reports2026
Prospecting and characterization of potential probiotic lactobacilli from animal gut and food sources.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Indigenous Lactobacillus species from African environments remain insufficiently characterised, despite their potential to serve as locally adapted, cost-effective probiotic candidates. This study explored plant- and poultry-derived lactobacilli to identify strains with functional traits relevant to gastrointestinal survival, host interaction, and food-related applications. Eighteen isolates recovered from chicken gut, tomatoes, cucumbers, and bananas were identified by 16S rRNA sequencing and assessed in vitro for acid and bile tolerance, bile-salt hydrolase (BSH) activity, exopolysaccharide (EPS) production, cholesterol assimilation, antioxidant capacity, antimicrobial effects, auto-aggregation, hydrophobicity, adhesion to Caco-2 cells, and safety indicators, including haemolysis, DNase activity, and antibiotic susceptibility. The isolates exhibited pronounced strain-specific variation, with several functional traits occurring in coordinated patterns. Strong acid and bile tolerance frequently aligned with BSH activity, while EPS production correlated with enhanced auto-aggregation. Two tomato-derived Lactiplantibacillus plantarum strains (To3a and To3d) consistently demonstrated the most favourable combination of survival, functional, and safety attributes, including high acid/bile tolerance, notable antioxidant and antimicrobial activity, and strong adhesion to Caco-2 cells. All isolates were non-haemolytic and DNase-negative, and most remained susceptible to clinically relevant antibiotics. Locally sourced L. plantarum strains showed multiple complementary probiotic traits, underscoring their potential as regionally adapted candidates for food or microbial intervention applications. However, genomic characterisation and in vivo validation are required to confirm safety, exclude transferable resistance determinants, and substantiate probiotic efficacy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.