Patent Application
20160168616
The present invention relates to a method for producing raw materials and of finished products intended for the food and pharmaceutical industries and devoid of toxicity, which is detectable by means of an innovative method—based on probiotic bacteria—for analyzing toxicity toward probiotic bacteria.
All the materials or substances that are at the basis of the manufacture and production of other products through the use of appropriate processing and industrial processes that enable the desired final product to be obtained are considered raw materials.
The raw materials used in the production of food products or supplements or medical devices or pharmaceutical products include, by way of example, flavourings, extracts, co-formulants of organic and/or inorganic origin, technological additives, vitamins, proteins, amino acids, peptones, natural and/or synthetic polymers and still more.
By way of an illustrative and therefore non-exhaustive example, flavourings and/or extracts can be prepared from plants and/or their fruit.
It is well known that fruit-bearing plants and the fruit itself are today treated, for example, with chemical substances in order to protect them against the attacks of microorganisms or fungi or insects so as to enable the fruit to grow until reaching ripeness and then be harvested and consumed.
It is likewise well known that following said treatments, a part of the chemical substances used remains adsorbed on the exterior surface of the fruit, commonly called peel or rind. The chemical substances that are adsorbed also persist following successive washings of the fruit with water.
The peel (exocarp) is the protective outer layer of a fruit (epidermis, in turn made up of cuticle and sclerenchymatous tissue) or a vegetable which can be detached. The protective outer layer is also improperly called rind.
Furthermore, it cannot be ruled out that a part of the chemical substances adsorbed on the exterior surface of the fruit might penetrate into the fruit itself (into the flesh) as a result of absorption of said chemical substances from the outside toward the inside of the fruit.
Part of the fruit harvested is today used to produce natural vegetable extracts and/or flavourings (raw materials) that have application in the food, pharmaceutical and nutraceutical industries.
Usually, the natural vegetable extracts and/or flavourings are obtained by mechanical and/or chemical extraction from the whole fruit (peel and flesh) or from the peel and/or flesh treated separately, by means of the equipment and/or the techniques known to the person skilled in the art,
For example, in the case of flavourings and/or extracts and/or organic compounds obtained by extraction with solvents, it may occur that even by carrying out several washing steps with water and/or chemical solvents one does not succeed in completely eliminating all the solvent used; hence even a minimal presence can provoke toxicity to probiotic bacteria,
Therefore, it would be desirable to be able to have a method having high sensitivity and capable of identifying up until when there is a residual toxicity in a given substance or raw material in order to program the purification or washing or precipitation processes to be used to render the raw material free of toxicity to probiotic bacteria.
The same applies with reference to a protein extract or with reference to the preparation of amino acids. In this case as well, use is made of chemical reagents and/or solvents that can be left as residue and provoke toxicity to probiotic bacteria.
The same problem can also present itself with reference to inorganic raw materials, such as, for example silicon dioxide, widely used to formulate finished products.
With reference both to natural vegetable extracts and/or flavourings obtained by mechanical and/or chemical extraction and with reference to the other above-mentioned raw materials, prepared by means of processes of synthesis and/or extraction, one cannot disregard the fact that there may remain, within the raw material, minimal quantities of substances or compounds endowed with a “toxic” nature that impart a certain intrinsic toxicity to the raw material itself.
Therefore, with reference to natural vegetable extracts and/or with reference to the other above-mentioned raw materials, one cannot rule out the presence of toxic substances inside them in a variable quantity that can depend on the type of cultivation adopted for the fruit and/or the operating conditions adopted to carry out the mechanical and/or chemical extraction.
In any case, any toxic substances present in the natural vegetable extracts and/or flavourings and/or raw materials in general can give rise to two types of problems: an indirect one and a direct one.
The former, or indirect problem, is related to the influence that the intake of said toxic substances can have in altering the intestinal probiotic microflora and, therefore, also on the physiology of the digestive system, to such a point as to influence the absorption of vitamins, bioactive peptides and metabolites, and likewise permit the production of harmful biogenic amines, which are known to alter intestinal permeability and create a whole series of health problems, even arriving at the production of nitrosamine, well-known carcinogenic substances, said biogenic amines being produce by strains that have benefited from this alteration.
In this regard, it should be highlighted that, if the probiotic bacterial flora is altered as a result of an increase in the colonization of coliform pathogenic bacteria, such as, for example E. coli, endowed with decarboxylating properties capable of transforming an amino acid into an amine by eliminating the carboxyl group, abnormal quantities of harmful biogenic amines come to be produced.
Furthermore, an imbalance in intestinal microflora seems to be capable of contributing to the occurrence of various pathologies: diabetes and autoimmune diseases or, as has been hypothesized, to have a role in unbalanced local and systemic immune responses to certain food allergens.
The second, or direct problem, involves the effects that said toxic substances, already capable of killing the cells of probiotic bacteria, could have in individuals of paediatric age or in the development stage because of an immediate and/or accumulated toxic action, not only against bacterial cells but also against eukaryote cells, particularly sensitive in the differentiation and growth stage.
Thus there remains a need to be able to produce raw materials and finished products in an assuredly nontoxic manner and to have a method for determining the toxicity of an extract and/or a flavouring and/or a raw material in general that is sure, simple and practical to use, economical and repeatable.
In particular, there remains a need to have a method for determining the toxicity toward probiotic bacteria of the individual ingredients making up a finished product such as a food, a supplement, or a medical device or a drug.
The Applicant has found an innovative way of producing nontoxic raw materials and finished products, by subjecting the extracts and/or flavourings and/or raw materials in general to a new toxicity test in order to determine their toxicity toward probiotic bacteria.
The subject matter of the present invention is a method for producing nontoxic raw materials and finished products thanks to the possibility, provided by the Applicant, of being able to determine toxicity toward the probiotic bacteria present in said raw materials and finished products by means of an innovative method that likewise forms the subject matter of the present invention.
The Applicant has found that the toxicity determined with the method of the present invention depends not only on the raw material used per se, but also, and above all, on the type of mechanical and/or chemical extraction used to produce said raw material. In fact, the chemical extraction of a raw material can involve the use of chemical solvents, and some washing or precipitation steps that can leave residual toxicity in the raw material itself.
The method comprises a step in which the probiotic bacterial strain (toxicity marker) is placed in contact with a raw material to be tested using a quantity of raw material equal to that normally used in the formulation.
In practical terms, a first sample is prepared which comprises the probiotic bacterial strain (toxicity marker), the optimal culture substrate for said probiotic bacterial strain and the raw material to be tested.
Then a second sample (internal reference) is prepared which comprises the same probiotic bacterial strain used in said first sample (toxicity marker) and only the optimal culture substrate (without the raw material to be tested).
The determination takes place by means of a bacterial plate count of said first sample and said second sample, as described below.
The ratio between the bacterial count (number of cells counted on the plate) of said first sample and the bacterial count (number of cells on the plate) of said second sample provides a number less than 1, which, if expressed as a percentage, provides a count of the bacteria which survived in contact with the raw material and, therefore, also expresses the % mortality induced by said raw material in the probiotic bacterial strains used as a marker.
A first embodiment relates to determining the toxicity of a raw material, such as, for example, a natural vegetable extract and/or flavouring and/or raw material in general.
In this case, the test of toxicity toward the probiotic bacteria entails setting up two tests in the laboratory, as described above.
In practical terms, a first sample is prepared which comprises the probiotic bacterial strain (toxicity marker), the optimal culture substrate for said probiotic bacterial strain and the raw material to be tested.
Then a second sample (internal reference) is prepared which comprises the same probiotic bacterial strain used in said first sample (toxicity marker) and only the optimal culture substrate (without the raw material to be tested).
The determination takes place by means of a bacterial plate count of said first sample and said second sample, as described below.
Preferably, said first and second test are performed in parallel under the same operating conditions.
The ratio between the bacterial count (number of cells counted on the plate) of said first sample and the bacterial count (number of cells on the plate) of said second sample provides a number less than 1, which, if expressed as a percentage, provides a count of the bacteria which survived in contact with the raw material and, therefore, also expresses the % mortality induced by said raw material in the probiotic bacterial strains used as a marker.
The difference between the bacterial count performed in said first test and the bacterial count performed in said second test provides a percentage of bacterial mortality which provides an indication of the toxicity toward probiotic bacteria associated with said raw material.
The Applicant, by way of non-exhaustive example, tested several flavourings and extracts present in the market, such as, for example, lemon and blueberry flavourings, which are also used in the preparation of finished products. The aim of these tests was to verify whether said foods or raw materials (lemon and blueberry flavourings) possessed an intrinsic toxicity toward probiotic bacteria.
For this reason, said raw materials (lemon and blueberry flavourings) were placed in contact with given strains of probiotic lactic bacteria or bifidobacteria under particular operating conditions.
The probiotic bacterial strains used as a toxicity marker in the method of the present invention belong to the species selected from the groups comprising lactobacilli and bifidobacteria, preferably probiotic. Preferred embodiments envisage the use of a bacterial strain among those listed in Table 1.
Lactobacillus casei
Lactobacillus gasseri
Lactobacillus crispatus
Lactobacillus fermentum
Lactobacillus fermentum
Lactobacillus casei ssp.
pseudoplantarum
Streptococcus thermophilus B39
Streptococcus thermophilus T003
Lactobacillus pentosus 9/1 ei
Lactobacillus plantarum 776/1 bi
Lactobacillus plantarum 476LL 20 bi
Lactobacillus plantarum PR ci
Lactobacillus plantarum 776/2 hi
Lactobacillus casei ssp. paracasei
Lactobacillus belonging to the
acidophilus group 192A/1 aiai
Bifidobacterium longum 175A/1 aiai
Bifidobacterium breve 195A/1 aici
Bifidobacterium lactis 32A/3 aiai
Lactobacillus plantarum 501/2 gi
Lactococcus lactis ssp. lactis 501/4 ci
Lactococcus lactis ssp. lactis 501/4 hi
Lactococcus lactis ssp. lactis 501/4 ci
Lactobacillus plantarum 501/4 li
Lactobacillus acidophilus
Lactobacillus paracasei ssp.
paracasei
Streptococcus thermophilus
Streptococcus thermophilus
Streptococcus thermophilus
Streptococcus thermophilus
Streptococcus thermophilus
Streptococcus thermophilus
Bifidobacterium adolescentis
Bifidobacterium adolescentis
Bifidobacterium breve
Bifidobacterium pseudocatenulatum
Bifidobacterium pseudocatenulatum
Bifidobacterium longum
Bifidobacterium breve
Lactobacillus casei ssp. rhamnosus
Lactobacillus delbrueckii ssp.
bulgaricus
Lactobacillus delbrueckii ssp.
bulgaricus
Staphylococcus xylosus
Bifidobacterium adolescentis
Lactobacillus plantarum
Streptococcus thermophilus
Streptococcus thermophilus
Streptococcus thermophilus
Lactobacillus fermentum
Lactobacillus fermentum
Lactobacillus fermentum
Lactobacillus fermentum
Lactobacillus gasseri
Lactobacillus gasseri
Lactobacillus gasseri
Lactobacillus gasseri
Bifidobacterium adolescentis EI-3
Bifidobacterium catenulatum
Bifidobacterium adolescentis EI-15
Bifidobacterium adolescentis EI-18
Bifidobacterium animalis subsp.
lactis EI-18, ID 09-256
Bifidobacterium catenulatum EI-20
Streptococcus thermophilus FRai
Streptococcus thermophilus LB2bi
Streptococcus thermophilus LRci
Streptococcus thermophilus FP4
Streptococcus thermophilus ZZ5F8
Streptococcus thermophilus TEO4
Streptococcus thermophilus S1ci
Streptococcus thermophilus 641bi
Streptococcus thermophilus 277A/1ai
Streptococcus thermophilus 277A/2ai
Streptococcus thermophilus IDC11
Streptococcus thermophilus ML3di
Streptococcus thermophilus TEO3
Streptococcus thermophilus G62
Streptococcus thermophilus G1192
Streptococcus thermophilus GB18
Streptococcus thermophilus CCR21
Streptococcus thermophilus G92
Streptococcus thermophilus G69
Streptococcus thermophilus
Streptococcus thermophilus
Streptococcus thermophilus
Streptococcus thermophilus
Weissella ssp. WSP 01
Weissella ssp. WSP 02
Lactobacillus ssp. WSP 03
Lactobacillus plantarum LP 09
Lactobacillus plantarum LP 10
Lactococcus lactis
Lactobacillus fermentum
Lactobacillus fermentum
Lactobacillus casei ssp.
rhamnosus
Bifidobacterium bifidum
Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp.
bulgaricus LD 01
Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp.
bulgaricus LD 02
Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp.
bulgaricus LD 03
Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp.
bulgaricus LD 04
Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp.
bulgaricus LD 05
Bifidobacterium pseudocatenulatum
Lactobacillus acidophilus
Lactobacillus paracasei
Lactobacillus pentosus
Lactobacillus rahmnosus
Lactobacillus delbrueckii ssp.
delbrueckii
Lactobacillus plantarum
Lactobacillus salivarius
Lactobacillus salivarius
Bifidobacterium bifidum
Bifidobacterium bifidum
Bifidobacterium bifidum
Bifidobacterium lactis
Lactobacillus acidophilus
Lactobacillus brevis
Bifidobacterium animalis ssp. lactis
Bifidobacterium longum
Bifidobacterium longum
Bifidobacterium bifidum
Bifidobacterium breve
Bifidobacterium lactis
Lactobacillus reuteri
Lactobacillus reuteri
Lactobacillus reuteri
Lactobacillus reuteri
Lactobacillus paracasei ssp.
paracasei
Lactobacillus acidophilus
Bifidobacterium bifidum
Lactobacillus crispatus
Lactobacillus crispatus
Lactobacillus paracasei
Lactobacillus salivarius
Lactobacillus gasseri
Lactobacillus acidophilus
Lactobacillus salivarius
Lactobacillus crispatus
Lactobacillus crispatus
Lacotbacillus acidophilus
Lactobacillus gasseri
Lactobacillus paracasei
Bifidobacterium infantis
Bifidobacterium bifidum
Bifidobacterium longum
Bifidobacterium lactis
Bifidobacterium longum
Bifidobacterium breve
Bifidobacterium breve
Bifidobacterium breve
Bifidobacterium longum
Lactobacillus salivarius
Lactobacillus reuteri
Lactobacillus reuteri
Lactobacillus reuteri
Streptococcus thermophilus
Streptococcus thermophilus
Streptococcus thermophilus
Lactobacillus salivarius
Bifidobacterium longum
Bifidobacterium longum
Bifidobacterium longum
Bifidobacterium longum
Bifidobacterium longum
Bifidobacterium longum
Bifidobacterium longum
Bifidobacterium longum
Bifidobacterium longum
Bifidobacterium longum
Bifidobacterium longum
Lactobacillus johnsonii
Lactobacillus rhamnosus
Lactobacillus rhamnosus
Lactobacillus reuteri
Lactobacillus reuteri
Lactobacillus reuteri
Bifidobacterium longum
Bifidobacterium infantis
Lactobacillus plantarum
Bifidobacterium longum
Bifidobacterium longum
Lactobacillus salivarius
Lactobacillus salivarius
Lactobacillus pentosus
Bifidobacterium pseudolongum
Lactobacillus fermentum
Lactobacillus fermentum
Lactobacillus casei
Lactobacillus crispatus
Lactobacillus jensenii
The tests performed on said foods or raw materials (lemon and blueberry flavourings) showed an acute toxicity toward the probiotic bacterial strains used as toxicity markers. In practical terms, two lemon extracts (raw material) and two blueberry extracts of (raw material) from different suppliers were tested. It was possible to verify that a first lemon extract and a second blueberry one provoked an acute toxicity, 57% and 58% mortality respectively, toward the probiotic bacterial strains used having an initial theoretical load of 6×109 CFU/g. The tests were performed using the probiotic bacterial strain Lactobacillus acidophilus LA02 LMG P-21381 deposited by the company Anidral Srl on Jan. 13, 2002, and the probiotic bacterial strain Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. Lactis BS01 LMG P-21384 deposited by the company Anidral Srl on Jan. 13, 2002.
At this point the Applicant replicated the aforesaid tests using, in place of the blueberry and lemon flavourings present in the market, flavourings obtained only from the flesh of the fruit (lemon and blueberry) by gentle squeezing. In practical terms, in the case of both lemon and blueberry, the peel was separated from the flesh beforehand and only the latter was subjected to mechanical extraction under gentle conditions, using equipment and methods known to the person skilled in the art. In this case, with the extracts/raw materials obtained from an extraction of the flesh under gentle conditions, toxicity toward the probiotic bacteria was found to be inexistent; in fact, using an initial load of the probiotic bacterial strain equal to 6.7×109 CFU/g, 6.5×109 CFU/g were obtained with blueberry juice and 6.4×109 CFU/g with lemon juice, hence much better values than in the previous case with very low toxicity and a mortality close to zero.
Other raw materials were tested in the same way as the lemon and blueberry extracts, as described below.
The Applicant tested several finished products present in the market with the aim of determining the degree of toxicity toward probiotic bacteria and identify, among the raw materials used in said finished products, which of the raw materials used contributed most to the toxicity.
In a preferred embodiment, the toxicity of a raw material toward probiotic bacteria is determined, the raw material being for example an extract and/or a flavouring that is within a formulation of a finished product having, for example, a total of 5 components.
In this case, the toxicity test involves setting up a number of tests in the laboratory equal to the number of components—in this exemplifying case there are 5 components, plus the analytical references.
In order to show the potentiality of the present invention, the Applicant tested a series of samples of cranberry extract to be used in the preparation of a finished product, for example P1.
The toxicity of the raw material, cranberry extract (lot L1, lot L2, from four different suppliers) which must be present together with other components/ingredients within a finished product (P1) was determined.
In this case, two tests were set up. In a first test, a mixture consisting of a probiotic bacterial strain, for example LS01 (used as the toxicity marker) was prepared. This first test represents the internal analytical reference—Ref. 1. The expected theoretical bacterial count was equal to 25 MLD/dose (internal reference).
In a second test, a mixture containing the probiotic bacterial strain LS01 (used as the toxicity marker) together with a first cranberry extract—L1 and L2, in said finished product, from different suppliers, was prepared.
Said first and second bacterial counts were performed in parallel under the same operating conditions and with the same amounts as those present in said finished product.
Subsequently, the real bacterial count of said first test—Ref. 1 and the bacterial count of said second test were determined. The bacterial count was carried out adopting the same operating conditions.
Supplier V: lot 1 (L1) and lot 2 (L2)—Var cranberry
Supplier V: lot 1 (L1) and lot 2 (L2)—Var cranberry
Supplier K: lot 1 (L1) and lot 2 (L2)—Kem cranberry
Supplier K: lot 1 (L1) and lot 2 (L2)—Kem cranberry
Supplier P: lot 1 (L1) and lot 2 (L2)—Pac cranberry
Supplier P: lot 1 (L1) and lot 2 (L2)—Pac cranberry
Supplier N: lot 1 (L1) and lot 2 (L2)—Nut cranberry
Supplier N: lot 1 (L1) and lot 2 (L2)—Nut cranberry
The various supplies (lots) of the raw material, cranberry, were introduced into the mixture for the toxicity test based on their proanthocyanidin content (at least 1.5% (HPLC)), so at to ensure the same concentration of that ingredient in the finished product P1.
The tests of Table 2 were also repeated with the probiotic bacterial strains indicated in Table 1 with the numbers 9, 33, 39, 46, 54, 59, 73, 84, 95, 101, 116, 130, 138, 143, 169 and 185 and the results obtained were very similar to those shown in Table 2.
The difference between the bacterial count performed in said first test—Ref.1 and the bacterial count performed in said second test provides a percentage of mortality of the probiotic bacterial strain LS01, which provides an indication of the toxicity of said cranberry extract towards said strain.
The viable cell load obtained from the bacterial count, as determined in said first test and in said second test, makes it possible to establish whether the tested raw material exerts a toxic effect on the cells of the probiotic bacterial strain LS01 present in said finished product P1.
The percentage decrease in the bacterial count compared to the reference—Ref.1 is expressed as % mortality induced by the raw material subjected to the toxicity test of the present invention.
The Applicant further applied the above-described method to lemon and blueberry extracts present in a finished product, obtaining results comparable to the ones obtained above with cranberry.
Table 2 shows that there are extracts, for example cranberry extract, which is commonly used to formulate finished products—but the same consideration also applies with reference to other raw materials—which impart toxicity to finished products and, consequently, also to the body of individuals who use said finished products.
Therefore, with the present invention it is possible to develop formulations of finished products such as dietary supplements or medical devices or pharmaceutical products devoid of toxicity or with greatly reduced toxicity, since it is possible to identify whether the raw materials used impart toxicity toward probiotic bacteria.
In the context of the present invention a percentage decrease in the bacterial load compared to the internal reference [(Bacterial count of the test sample)/(Bacterial count of the internal reference)]=% mortality induced by the raw material comprised from 1 to 5% signifies no mortality; a value comprised from greater than 5 to 15% signifies a low mortality, still acceptable; a value comprised from greater than 15 to 25% signifies medium-high mortality, whereas beyond 25% we are facing acute mortality.
The method of the present invention has valid application, for example, in testing for the presence of toxic excipients or raw materials used in the formulations of supplements and medical devices (finished products), such as, for example, orange flavouring, safflower, black carrot, blueberry extract etc.).
The method of the present invention is illustrated below by way of example and therefore does not limit of the scope of the present invention.
In a preferred embodiment, in the case of a finished product containing, for example, the following components A, B, C (complete formulation A+B+C), the method of the present invention can be used in order to determine whether the finished product as a whole (A+B+C) exerts toxicity towards the probiotic bacterial strains.
In this case, the test of the toxicity toward the probiotic bacteria involves setting up two tests in the laboratory.
In practical terms, a first sample is prepared which comprises the probiotic bacterial strain (toxicity marker), the optimal culture substrate for said probiotic bacterial strain and the raw material to be tested, in this case the formulation A+B+C.
Then a second sample (internal reference) is prepared which comprises the same probiotic bacterial strain used in said first sample (toxicity marker) and only the optimal culture substrate (without the raw material to be tested).
The determination takes place by means of a bacterial plate count of said first sample and said second sample.
Preferably, said first and second tests are performed in parallel under the same operating conditions.
If the ratio between the bacterial count (number of cells counted on the plate) of said first sample and the bacterial count (number of cells counted on the plate) of said second sample provides a number lower than 1, for example 0.55 (or 55%), it means that the count of the bacteria that have survived in contact with the raw material is 55% and, therefore, the % mortality induced by A+B+C in the probiotic bacterial strain used as the marker is 45%.
If, precisely, a toxicity toward the probiotic bacterial strain used as a marker emerges, the next step is to go and determine which of the components A, B and C making up the finished product (A+B+C), exerts the detected toxicity.
In this case, the method involves preparing three tests (test 1, test 2 and test 3) as specified below.
For example, test 1 is performed on raw material A and involves preparing the following samples:
(i) A first sample is prepared which comprises the probiotic bacterial strain (toxicity marker), the optimal culture substrate for said probiotic bacterial strain and the raw material to be tested, in this case A.
(ii) A second sample (internal reference) is prepared which comprises the same probiotic bacterial strain used in said first sample (toxicity marker) and only the optimal culture substrate (without the raw material to be tested).
(iii) A bacterial plate count is performed on said first sample and said second sample.
(iv) The percentage of mortality is determined.
Analogously, test 2 with raw material B and test 3 with raw material C are prepared with the same method. In this manner, it is possible to identify which, among the components A, B and C present in the formulation A+B+C, is the component that exerts toxicity towards probiotic bacterial strains. The toxicity tests are performed under the same operating conditions and at the concentrations indicated in the finished product—sequential approach.
For the plate count one follows the method, described below by way of non-limiting example of a test method, which comprises a traditional microbiological count with initial resuspension of the sample, serial dilutions in a suitable diluent, plating on an agarized medium and a colony count after incubation under optimal conditions. The excipients/raw materials that determine a plate mortality comparable with that of the reference sample are to be considered as conforming (reduced toxicity or no toxicity whatsoever).
As noted above, one performs a total, differential and/or selective (in an agarized medium) count of lactic bacteria and bifidobacteria for probiotic use, present alone or in admixture in the sample to be subjected to a determination of the concentration of live, viable cells.
The formulation of the culture medium is such as to ensure the growth of all the various species of probiotic bacteria belonging to the aforesaid microbial groups and if necessary to enable them to be discriminated by adding selective agents (generally antibiotics and/or sugars) or differential ones (generally pH and/or redox colour change indicators).
The method provides for the use of the agarized medium LAPTg, whose formulation consists solely in the presence of two different nitrogen sources, a sugar as a source of carbon, and yeast extract as a source of group B vitamins and growth factors. The absence of organic and inorganic salts and substances with selective action allows a flourishing growth of all the various species of probiotic bacteria belonging to the genera Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium.
By adding a selective and/or differential agent to the LAPTg agar it is possible to perform differentiated counts of the probiotics present in a complex mixture. The selective agents (generally antibiotics and/or sugars) or differential ones (generally pH and/or redox colour change indicators) are selected case by case on the basis of the specific genotypic and phenotypic characteristics of the strains making up the mixture.
If the sample to be analyzed consists of a mixture of two or more strains of lactobacilli and bifidobacteria, it is advisable to accompany the selective count in LAPTg with a qualitative assessment of the strains making up the mixture using HHD medium. For further details, reference is made to the following scientific articles:
Molecular Cloning a Laboratory Manual (Sambrook, Fritsch, Maniatis);
Susceptibility of Lactobacillus spp. to antimicrobial agents. M. Danielsen A. Wind. 2002;
Antibiotic Susceptibility of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium species from Human Gastrointestinal tract, S. Delgrado A. B. Florez B. Mayo, 2005;
ISO 6887-1:2000
Preparation of LAPTg medium: FONT DE VALDEZ, G, and coll.: Influence of the recovery medium on the viability of injured freeze-dried lactic acid bacteria Milchwissenschaft 40 (9) 518-520 (1985).
UNI EN ISO 6887-1:2000 “Buffered Peptone Water”
A differential medium for the enumeration of homofermentative and heterofermentative lactic acid bacteria. L C. McDonald R. F. McFeeters, M. A. Daeschel and H P Felminq. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. June 1987: 1382-1384.
Initials and Abbreviations:
concentration of live, viable cells=no. of cells/units (g or ml) able to grow in the culture medium and form distinct colonies (CFU/g or ml)
CFU/g or ml=Colony Forming Unit, i.e. unit of measure of the concentration of live, viable cells
MIC=Minimum Inhibitory Concentration
The method provides for the use of the agarized medium LAPTg, whose formulation consists solely in the presence of two different nitrogen sources, a sugar, as a source of carbon, and yeast extract as a source of group B vitamins and growth factors. The absence of organic and inorganic salts and substances with selective action allows a flourishing growth of all the various species of probiotic bacteria belonging to the genera Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium. By adding a selective and/or differential agent to LAPTg agar it is possible to perform differentiated counts of the probiotics present in a complex mixture. The selective agents (generally antibiotics and/or sugars) or differential ones (generally pH and/or redox colour change indicators) are selected case by case on the basis of the specific genotypic and phenotypic characteristics of the strains making up the mixture. (see 8.2). If the sample to be analyzed consists of a mixture of two or more strains of lactobacilli and bifidobacteria, it is advisable to accompany the selective count in LAPTg with a qualitative assessment of the strains making up the mixture using HHD medium.
Materials and Reagents:
LAPTg Medium, Basal Medium:
Bacto Peptone (enzymatic hydrolysate of animal protein) 15 g
Tryptone (pancreatic hydrolysate of casein) 10 g
Yeast extract 10 g
Tween 80 ml 1
Agar g 15
Distilled water q.s. to 900 ml
Note: the weights indicated above are understood as having an accuracy of ±5%
Dissolve the components in the distilled water, except for the agar. Check the pH and correct if necessary to 6.55±0.05, then add the agar and dissolve in a water bath. Dispense the medium while still warm into the Bibby beakers, and sterilize in an autoclave at 121° C. for 15 minutes; after sterilization the pH should be 6.5±0.5 at 25° C.±1.
Complete Medium:
At the time of use, after dissolution (8.1), add one volume of a 10% glucose solution, sterilized by filtration, to the basal medium, so as to have a final glucose concentration of 10 g/litre.
HHD Medium:
Ethanol, Minisart single-use sterile 0.45 μm syringe filters, diluents for reconstituting the samples:
Reconstitution of liquid bacterial cultures and preparation of serial decimal dilutions—peptone saline solution
Reconstitution of anhydrous (lyophilized) bacterial cultures and finished products with probiotics in free form (not microencapsulated).
Sachets, capsules, pills, tablets, suppositories and undercaps of bottles:
Dissolve the components in distilled water, heating if necessary. Check that the pH is 6.8±0.10. Dispense the diluents into Bibby beakers, sterilize in an autoclave at 121° C. for 15 minutes, and store in darkness at a temperature of 4-5° C. for no longer than one month.
Should the finished products contain oils and/or lipid substances it will be necessary to add 1% Tween 80 to the buffer pH 6.8 (5.5.2,1).
Anaerobic kit (AnaeroGen—Oxoid): chemically binds oxygen, producing CO2; small 10 ml non-sterile syringes also purchasable in pharmacies; 5%fin L-cysteine HCI solution: weigh out 5 g of L-cysteine hydrochloride 1-hydrate (BDH 370553) and bring to 100 ml with MQ water; then filter in a sterile falcon tube with a 0.45 μm filter and store at +4° C.±2 for up to 1 year (the solution will have to be added to the LAPTg medium so as to obtain a final concentration of 0.05%).
Procedure.
8.1 Dissolve the LAPTg medium (5.1) in a sufficient amount for the number of plates to be prepared (see note in paragraph 8.5.5), considering that for each plate about 12±1 ml of medium is necessary.
If it is planned to perform a count on the same dilutions of the sample not only in the LAPTg medium as such, but also in the same supplemented with one or more selective agents (N), consider the (no. of plates) multiplied by N. Leave the medium a thermostated water bath at a temperature of 45° C.±0.5 for at least 3 hours;
8.2 List of selective agents and respective preparation
L. casei, L. paracasei etc.).
L. acidophilus group
L. rhamosus, L. casei, L. paracasei, L, plantarum, L. reuteri, L. delbrueckii,
Streptococcus thermophilus (e.g. YO 8) and other strains with MIC ≦0.016.
8.2.2 Other selective conditions.
8.3 If the sample to be analyzed consists of a mixture of two or more strains of lactobacilli and/or bifidobacteria, it is advisable to accompany the selective count in LAPTg with a qualitative assessment of the strains making up the mixture using HHD medium. Dissolve the aforesaid medium and leave it in a thermostated bath as described for the LAPTg medium. Then distribute the medium in amounts of 12±1 ml in Petri plates and allow to solidify;
8.4 If it is planned to use one or more selective agents, add the antibiotic solution or other selective agent necessary for discriminating the strains making up the sample to an aliquot (e.g. 100 ml for about 8 plates) of the dissolved LAPTg medium, at the final concentration indicated, in a sterile bottle;
8.5 Prepare successive decimal dilutions of the sample (section Ia ISO 6887-1:2000 par. 9.2.)
8.5.1 Use a sterile pipette to transfer 1 ml of the primary dilution, or 1 ml directly from the sample culture if liquid, into a test tube containing 9 ml of sterile diluent;
8.5.2 do not introduce the pipette deeper than 1 cm into the initial suspension;
8.5.3 change the pipette after every dilution;
8.5.4 thoroughly homogenize the dilution with a mechanical shaker, vortexing the tube 3 times for a time of no less than 5 seconds, so as to obtain the dilution 10−2;
8.5.5 repeat these steps using the dilution 10−2 and dilute further until obtaining a concentration of microorganisms which, when cultured on a plate, give a significant number of colonies;
It should be noted that seeding 2 successive decimal dilutions (e.g.: 10−8, 10−9) should enable two contiguous dilutions containing a number of cells comprised from 10 to 300 to be found. If there is no clear idea as to the number of cells contained in the sample, it will be necessary to seed more than 2 successive decimal dilutions (e.g.: 10−5, 10−6, 10−7, 10−8, 10−9, 10−10) and then consider only the ones that give rise to a number of colonies comprised from 10 to 300.
8.6 distribute 1 ml, drawn from the dilutions of the sample judged to be appropriate (8.5.5), onto the Petri plates;
8.7 add the medium LAPTg on the first series of plates and LAPTg supplemented with the selective agent on the second series, in amounts of 12±1 ml;
It should be noted that the time elapsing between the reconstitution of the sample and the moment at which the serial dilution comes into contact with the culture medium on the Petri plate (8,6) must not exceed 30 minutes
8.8 evenly mix the medium and sample, first with rotational movements, and then horizontal and vertical translational ones;
8.9 allow to solidify for 15-20 minutes;
8.10 in the case of samples consisting of a mixture of two or more strains of lactobacilli and bifidobacteria and/or for which it is recommended to use the HHD medium, add 100 μl of the appropriate dilutions to the ready plates of HHD (8.3) and distribute the sample evenly with a spatula;
8.11 incubate the plates upside down at 37±1° C. for 72 h under anaerobic conditions (Gas-Pak+anaerobic kit). As to how to use the anaerobic system, follow the instructions included with the kit. Calculation of the results: verify the presence of colonies by observing them under the lens of the plate viewer and count exclusively the plates containing a number of colonies comprised from 10 to 300. The result will be expressed as CFU, i.e. Colony Forming Units. Express the result using the following formula:
where:
ΣC is the sum of the colonies counted on all the plates
n1 is the number of plates counted in the first dilution
n2 is the number of plates counted in the second dilution
d is the dilution the first counts were obtained from
Result:
Round off the result obtained to two significant digits. The results of the example shown will thus be 250 10−8 CFU/g or ml in the case of liquid samples (for the detail of the expression of results based on the specific type. In the case of samples spread in HHD, visually examine the different morphologies of the cultured colonies which identify the various strains of lactobacilli and bifidobacteria present in admixture.
After performing the count and examining the plate-cultured colonies (step 9) one has: in the case of single-strain samples, the count obtained from the plates with LAPTg as such represents the total load of the probiotic load making up the sample.
In the case of samples consisting of a mixture of two or more strains of lactobacilli and bifidobacteria:
a) the count obtained from the series of plates prepared with the LAPTg medium as such represents the total load of the probiotic bacteria in the sample subjected to analysis;
b) the count obtained from the series of plates prepared with the LAPTg medium supplemented with the selective agent represents the load of the strain(s) that were capable of replicating in the presence of that specific substance added to the medium as a selective agent.
c) from the count regarding the individual probiotic strains, obtained with the selective medium, it is possible to derive the count of the remaining strain(s) that did not develop in the presence of the selective agent by calculating the difference with the total count (letter a) in LAPTg as such.
d) seeding in HHD medium makes it possible to visually discriminate the different strains present in the sample in admixture and selectively enumerated in LAPTg medium.
The Applicant tested the following raw materials with the method of the present invention in a number of tests using the probiotic bacterial strains indicated in Table 1 with the numbers 17, 22, 41, 60, 74, 98, 121, 145, 174 and 182 as toxicity markers.
Experimental data show that in many cases toxicity was unexpectedly found always to be present at various levels, along with a substantial % mortality.
Aloe test: mortality found equal to 5%.
Citric Acid test: mortality found equal to 2%.
Arabinogalactan test: mortality found equal to 6%.
Raspberry flavouring test: mortality found equal to 2%.
Raspberry flavouring test: mortality found equal to 26%.
Blueberry test: mortality found equal to 5%.
Silicon dioxide test: mortality found equal to 50%.
Silicon dioxide test: mortality found equal to 28%.
Silicon dioxide test: mortality found equal to 23%.
Tara gum test: mortality found equal to 14%.
Vitamin B1, B2 and B6 test: mortality found equal to 33%.
Zeolite test: mortality found equal to 2%.
| Number | Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| MI2013A001280 | Jul 2013 | IT | national |
| Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| PCT/IB2014/001416 | 7/30/2014 | WO | 00 |
