Differences in Acid Stress Response of Lacticaseibacillus paracasei Zhang Cultured from Solid-State Fermentation and Liquid-State Fermentation
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Bacterial Strain, Media, and Growth Conditions
2.2. Preparation of L. paracasei Zhang Bacterial Suspensions after Solid-State and Liquid-State Fermentatio, Cell Crushing Supernatant, and Cell Debris
2.3. Bacterial Agent Preparation by Cold-Air Drying and Spray Drying
2.4. Tolerance to Acid Stress of L. paracasei Zhang Produced from Solid-State and Liquid-State Fermentations
2.5. Morphology Observation with Transmission Electron Microscope
2.6. GC-MS Analysis of CMFA Composition
2.7. Measurement of Intracellular pH(pHi), ATP Concentration, Activity of ATPase and Glutathione Reductase
2.8. RNA Extraction, RNA-Seq, and Transcriptomic Data Processing
2.9. Statistical Analysis
3. Results and Discussions
3.1. Differences of Fermentation Biomass, Survival Rate of Bacterial Agent, and Acid Stress Tolerance
3.2. Differences in Cell Morphology and Cell Membrane Fatty Acid Composition
3.3. Differences in Intracellular Microenvironment and Activity of Metabolic Enzymes after Acid Stress Treatment
3.4. Transcriptomic Differences between L. paracasei Zhang from SSF and LSF
3.5. Expression Change of Genes Related to Phosphotransferase System (PTS)
3.6. Expression Change of Genes Related to Glycolysis, Pentose Phosphate Pathway, and Pyruvate Metabolism
3.7. Expression Change of Genes Related to Inositol Phosphate Metabolism and Fatty Acid Synthesis
3.8. Expression Change of Genes Related to Glutamate Metabolism Pathways
3.9. Expression Change of Genes Related to Quorum-Sensing and Acid Stress Response
3.10. Mechanism of Liquid-State Fermented Cells in Response to Acid Stress
4. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- García-Burgos, M.; Moreno-Fernández, J.; Alférez, M.J.; Díaz-Castro, J.; López-Aliaga, I. New perspectives in fermented dairy products and their health relevance. J. Funct. Foods 2020, 72, 104059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bartkiene, E.; Lele, V.; Ruzauskas, M.; Domig, K.J.; Starkute, V.; Zavistanaviciute, P.; Bartkevics, V.; Pugajeva, I.; Klupsaite, D.; Juodeikiene, G.; et al. Lactic acid bacteria isolation from spontaneous sourdough and their characterization including antimi-crobial and antifungal properties evaluation. Microorganisms 2019, 8, 64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chen, X.X.; Zheng, R.; Liu, R.; Li, L.Q. Goat milk fermented by Lactic acid bacteria modulates small intestinal microbiota and immune responses. J. Funct. Foods 2020, 65, 103744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, Q.; Hou, Q.; Wang, Y.; Shen, L.; Sun, Z.; Zhang, H.; Liong, M.-T.; Kwok, L.-Y. Long-term administration of Lactobacillus casei Zhang stabilized gut microbiota of adults and reduced gut microbiota age index of older adults. J. Funct. Foods 2020, 64, 103682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, J.; Wang, L.; Guo, Z.; Sun, Z.; Gesudu, Q.; Kwok, L.; Zhang, H. 454 pyrosequencing reveals changes in the faecal microbiota of adults consuming Lactobacillus casei Zhang. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 2014, 88, 612–622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Chee, W.J.Y.; Chew, S.Y.; Than, L.T.L. Vaginal microbiota and the potential of Lactobacillus derivatives in maintaining vaginal health. Microb. Cell Fact. 2020, 19, 203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Schlagenhauf, U.; Rehder, J.; Gelbrich, G.; Jockel-Schneider, Y. Consumption of Lactobacillus reuteri-containing lozenges improves periodontal health in navy sailors at sea: A randomized controlled trial. J. Periodontol. 2020, 91, 1328–1338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Sakai, Y.; Arie, H.; Ni, Y.; Zhuge, F.; Xu, L.; Chen, G.; Nagata, N.; Suzuki, T.; Kaneko, S.; Ota, T.; et al. Lactobacillus pentosus strain S-PT84 improves steatohepatitis by maintaining gut permeability. J. Endocrinol. 2020, 247, 169–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sasazaki, N.; Obi, T.; Aridome, C.; Fujimoto, Y.; Furumoto, M.; Toda, K.; Hasunuma, H.; Matsumoto, D.; Sato, S.; Okawa, H.; et al. Effects of dietary feed supplementation of heat-treated Lactobacillus sakei HS-1 on the health status, blood parameters, and fecal microbes of Japanese Black calves. J. Vet. Med. Sci. 2020, 82, 1428–1435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alawneh, J.I.; James, A.S.; Phillips, N.; Fraser, B.; Jury, K.; Soust, M.; Olchowy, T.W.J. Efficacy of a Lactobacillus-Based Teat Spray on Udder Health in Lactating Dairy Cows. Front. Vet. Sci. 2020, 7, 584436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- de Souza, M.; Baptista, A.A.S.; Valdiviezo, M.J.; Justino, L.; Menck-Costa, M.F.; Ferraz, C.R.; da Gloria, E.M.; Verri, W.A.; Bracarense, A.P.F. Lactobacillus spp. reduces morphological changes and oxidative stress induced by deoxynivalenol on the intestine and liver of broilers. Toxicon 2020, 185, 203–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Babot, J.D.; Argañaraz-Martínez, E.; Quiroga, M.; Grande, S.M.; Apella, M.C.; Chaia, A.P. Protection of the intestinal epithelium of poultry against deleterious effects of dietary lectins by a multi-strain bacterial supplement. Res. Vet. Sci. 2021, 135, 27–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Valeriano, V.D.; Balolong, M.; Kang, D.-K. Probiotic roles of Lactobacillu ssp. in swine: Insights from gut microbiota. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2017, 122, 554–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Lacroix, C.; Yildirim, S. Fermentation technologies for the production of probiotics with high viability and functionality. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2007, 18, 176–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Otero, M.C.; Espeche, M.C.; Nader-Macías, M.E. Optimization of the freeze-drying media and sur-vival throughout storage of freeze-dried Lactobacillus gasseri and Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. delbrueckii for veterinarian probiotic applications. Process Biochem. 2007, 42, 1406–1411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thomas, L.; Larroche, C.; Pandey, A. Current developments in solid-state fermentation. Biochem. Eng. J. 2013, 81, 146–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pandey, A.; Soccol, C.R.; Mitchell, D. New developments in solid state fermentation: I-bioprocesses and products. Process Biochem. 2000, 35, 1153–1169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, R.S.; Chauhan, K.; Kaur, K.; Pandey, A. Statistical optimization of solid-state fermentation for the production of fungal inulinase from apple pomace. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 2020, 9, 83–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xiao, L.R.S. Sustainable Production of Fuels and Chemicals from Lignocellulosic Biomass. J. Powder Metall. Min. 2013, 2, 04. [Google Scholar]
- Krishania, M. Design of Bioreactors in Solid-State Fermentation. In Current Developments in Biotechnology and Bioengineering; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2018; pp. 83–96. [Google Scholar]
- Zhu, Z.; Yang, P.; Wu, Z.; Zhang, J.; Du, G. Systemic understanding of Lactococcus lactis response to acid stress using transcriptomics approaches. J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2019, 46, 1621–1629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ranadheera, S.; Evans, C.A.; Adams, M.C.; Baines, S.K. Effect of dairy probiotic combinations on in vitro gastrointestinal tolerance, intestinal epithelial cell adhesion and cytokine secretion. J. Funct. Foods 2014, 8, 18–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koponen, J.; Laakso, K.; Koskenniemi, K.; Kankainen, M.; Savijoki, K.; Nyman, T.; de Vos, W.M.; Tynkkynen, S.; Kalkkinen, N.; Varmanen, P. Effect of acid stress on protein expression and phosphorylation in Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG. J. Proteom. 2012, 75, 1357–1374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frees, D.; Vogensen, F.K.; Ingmer, H. Identification of proteins induced at low pH in Lactococcus lactis. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2003, 87, 293–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Montanari, C.; Kamdem, S.L.S.; Serrazanetti, D.I.; Etoa, F.-X.; Guerzoni, M.E. Synthesis of cyclopropane fatty acids in Lactobacillus helveticus and Lactobacillus sanfranciscensis and their cellular fatty acids changes following short term acid and cold stresses. Food Microbiol. 2010, 27, 493–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, R.; Pan, M.; Wan, C.; Shah, N.P.; Tao, X.; Wei, H. Physiological and transcriptional responses and cross protection of Lacto-bacillus plantarum zdy2013 under acid stress. J. Dairy Sci. 2016, 99, 1002–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Koebmann, B.J.; Nilsson, D.; Kuipers, O.P.; Jensen, P.R. The membrane-bound H+-ATPase complex is essential for growth of Lacto-coccus lactis. J. Bacteriol. 2000, 182, 4738–4743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hugenholtz, J.; Sybesma, W.; Groot, M.N.; Wisselink, W.; Ladero, V.; Burgess, K.; van Sinderen, D.; Piard, J.C.; Eggink, G.; Smid, E.J.; et al. Metabolic engineering of Lactic acid bacteria for the production of nutraceuticals. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 2002, 82, 217–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cotter, P.D.; Hill, C. Surviving the Acid Test: Responses of Gram-Positive Bacteria to Low pH. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 2003, 67, 429–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wu, R.N.; Zhang, W.Y.; Sun, T.S.; Wu, J.R.; Yue, X.Q.; Meng, H.; Zhang, H.P. Proteomic analysis of responses of a new probiotic bacterium Lactobacillus casei Zhang to low acid stress. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2011, 147, 181–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Van de Guchte, M.; Serror, P.; Chervaux, C.; Smokvina, T.; Ehrlich, S.D.; Maguin, E. Stress responses in Lactic acid bacteria. Anton Leeuw Int. J. 2002, 82, 187–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Connell-Motherway, M.; van Sinderen, D.; Morel-Deville, F.; Fitzgerald, G.F.; Ehrlich, S.D.; Morel, P. Six putative two-component regulatory systems isolated from Lactococcus lactis subsp cremoris MG1363. Microbiology 2000, 146, 935–947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Guan, N.; Liu, L.; Shin, H.-D.; Chen, R.R.; Zhang, J.; Li, J.; Du, G.; Shi, Z.; Chen, J. Systems-level understanding of how Propionibacterium acidipropionici respond to propionic acid stress at the microenvironment levels: Mechanism and application. J. Biotechnol. 2013, 167, 56–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cock, P.J.A.; Fields, C.J.; Goto, N.; Heuer, M.L.; Rice, P.M. The Sanger FASTQ file format for sequences with quality scores, and the Solexa/Illumina FASTQ variants. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010, 38, 1767–1771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Langmead, B.; Salzberg, S.L. Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2. Nat. Methods 2012, 9, 357–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Li, B.; Dewey, C.N. RSEM: Accurate transcript quantification from RNA-Seq data with or without a reference genome. BMC Bioinform. 2011, 12, 323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Wang, L.; Feng, Z.; Wang, X.; Wang, X.; Zhang, X. DEGseq: An R package for identifying differentially expressed genes from RNA-seq data. Bioinformatics 2009, 26, 136–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, C.; Shi, C.; Su, W.; Jin, M.; Xu, B.; Hao, L.; Zhang, Y.; Lu, Z.; Wang, F.; Wang, Y.; et al. Dynamics of the Physicochemical Characteristics, Microbiota, and Metabolic Functions of Soybean Meal and Corn Mixed Substrates during Two-Stage Solid-State Fermentation. mSystems 2020, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Shi, C.; Zhang, Y.; Lu, Z.; Wang, Y. Solid-state fermentation of corn-soybean meal mixed feed with Bacillus subtilis and Enterococcus faecium for degrading antinutritional factors and enhancing nutritional value. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol. 2017, 8, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, Y.S.; Pérez, V.G.; Pettigrew, J.E.; Martinez-Villaluenga, C.; Gonzalez de Mejia, E. Fermentation of soybean meal and its in-clusion in diets for newly weaned pigs reduced diarrhea and measures of immunoreactivity in the plasma. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2010, 15, 41–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shim, Y.H.; Shinde, P.L.; Choi, J.Y.; Kim, J.S.; Kwon, I.K. Evaluation of Multi-microbial Probiotics Produced by Submerged Liquid and Solid Substrate Fermentation Methods in Broilers. Asian Austral. J. Anim. 2010, 23, 521–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choi, J.Y.; Kim, J.S.; Ingale, S.L.; Kim, K.H.; Shinde, P.L.; Kwon, I.K.; Chae, B.J. Effect of potential multimicrobe probiotic product processed by high drying temperature and antibiotic on performance of weanling pigs1. J. Anim. Sci. 2011, 89, 1795–1804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wu, P.; An, J.; Chen, L.; Zhu, Q.; Li, Y.; Mei, Y.; Chen, Z.; Liang, Y. Differential Analysis of Stress Tolerance and Transcriptome of Probiotic Lacticaseibacillus casei Zhang Produced from Solid-State (SSF-SW) and Liquid-State (LSF-MRS) Fermentations. Microorganisms 2020, 8, 1656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sohlenkamp, C. Membrane Homeostasis in Bacteria upon pH Challenge. In Biogenesis of Fatty Acids, Lipids and Membranes; Geiger, O., Ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017; pp. 1–13. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, Y.; Kadim, M.I.; Khoo, W.J.; Zheng, Q.; Setyawati, M.I.; Shin, Y.-J.; Lee, S.-C.; Yuk, H.-G. Membrane lipid composition and stress/virulence related gene expression of Salmonella Enteritidis cells adapted to lactic acid and trisodium phosphate and their resistance to lethal heat and acid stress. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2014, 191, 24–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yan, D.; Lin, X.; Qi, Y.; Liu, H.; Chen, X.; Liu, L.; Chen, J. Crz1p Regulates pH Homeostasis in Candida glabrata by Altering Membrane Lipid Composition. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2016, 82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Suutari, M.; Liukkonen, K.; Laakso, S. Temperature adaptation in yeasts: The role of fatty acids. J. Gen. Microbiol. 1990, 136, 1469–1474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Russell, N.J.; Fukunaga, N. A comparison of thermal adaptation of membrane-lipids in Psychrophilic and Thermophilic bacteria. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 1990, 75, 171–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Russell, N.; Evans, R.; Steeg, P.; Hellemons, J.; Verheul, A.; Abee, T. Membranes as a target for stress adaptation. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 1995, 28, 255–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dionisi, F.; Golay, P.-A.; Elli, M.; Fay, L.B. Stability of cyclopropane and conjugated linoleic acids during fatty acid quantification in lactic acid bacteria. Lipids 1999, 34, 1107–1115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suutari, M.; Laakso, S. Temperature adaptation in Lactobacillus fermentum—Interconversions of oleic, vaccenic and dihydros-terulic acids. J. Gen. Microbiol. 1992, 138, 445–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mykytczuk, N.; Trevors, J.; Leduc, L.; Ferroni, G. Fluorescence polarization in studies of bacterial cytoplasmic membrane fluidity under environmental stress. Prog. Biophys. Mol. Biol. 2007, 95, 60–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodríguez-Vargas, S.; Sanchez-Garcia, A.; Martínez-Rivas, J.M.; Prieto, J.A.; Randez-Gil, F. Fluidization of Membrane Lipids Enhances the Tolerance of Saccharomyces cerevisiae to Freezing and Salt Stress. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2007, 73, 110–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Broadbent, J.R.; Larsen, R.L.; Deibel, V.; Steele, J.L. Physiological and Transcriptional Response of Lactobacillus casei ATCC 334 to Acid Stress. J. Bacteriol. 2010, 192, 2445–2458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Wu, C.; Zhang, J.; Wang, M.; Du, G.; Chen, J. Lactobacillus casei combats acid stress by maintaining cell membrane functionality. J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2012, 39, 1031–1039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lambert, R.J.; Stratford, M. Weak-acid preservatives: Modelling microbial inhibition and response. J. Appl. Microbiol. 1999, 86, 157–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Warnecke, T.; Gill, R.T. Organic acid toxicity, tolerance, and production in Escherichia coli biorefining applications. Microb. Cell Fact. 2005, 4, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hutkins, R.W.; Nannen, N.L. pH Homeostasis in Lactic Acid Bacteria. J. Dairy Sci. 1993, 76, 2354–2365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lebeer, S.; Vanderleyden, J.; De Keersmaecker, S.C.J. Genes and Molecules of Lactobacilli Supporting Probiotic Action. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 2008, 72, 728–764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chen, X.; Sun, Z.; Meng, H.; Zhang, H. The acid tolerance association with expression of H+-ATPase in Lactobacillus casei. Int. J. Dairy Technol. 2009, 62, 272–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, C.; Zhang, J.; Chen, W.; Wang, M.; Du, G.; Chen, J. A combined physiological and proteomic approach to reveal lactic-acid-induced alterations in Lactobacillus casei Zhang and its mutant with enhanced lactic acid tolerance. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2011, 93, 707–722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, Z.; Yang, J.; Yang, P.; Wu, Z.; Zhang, J.; Du, G. Enhanced acid-stress tolerance in Lactococcus lactis NZ9000 by overexpression of ABC transporters. Microb. Cell Factories 2019, 18, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guan, N.; Liu, L. Microbial response to acid stress: Mechanisms and applications. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2020, 104, 51–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Smirnova, G.V.; Krasnykh, T.A.; Oktyabrsky, O.N. Role of Glutathione in the Response of Escherichia coli to Osmotic Stress. Biochem. 2001, 66, 973–978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferguson, G.P. Protective mechanisms against toxic electrophiles in Escherichia coli. Trends Microbiol. 1999, 7, 242–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carmel-Harel, O.; Storz, G. Roles of the glutathione- and thioredoxin-dependent reduction systems in the Escherichia coli and Saccharomyces cerevisiae responses to oxidative stress. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 2000, 54, 439–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meyer, A.J.; Hell, R. Glutathione homeostasis and redox-regulation by sulfhydryl groups. Photosynth. Res. 2005, 86, 435–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Petrov, K.; Arsov, A.; Petrova, P. Butanol Tolerance of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum: A Transcriptome Study. Genes 2021, 12, 181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chattopadhyay, M.K.; Tabor, H. Polyamines Are Critical for the Induction of the Glutamate Decarboxylase-dependent Acid Resistance System in Escherichia coli. J. Biol. Chem. 2013, 288, 33559–33570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Ye, B.; He, S.; Zhou, X.; Cui, Y.; Zhou, M.; Shi, X. Response to Acid Adaptation in Salmonella enterica Serovar Enteritidis. J. Food Sci. 2019, 84, 599–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Poonam; Yennamalli, R.M.; Bisht, G.S.; Shrivastava, R. Ribosomal maturation factor (RimP) is essential for survival of nontuberculous mycobacteria Mycobacterium fortuitum under in vitro acidic stress conditions. 3 Biotech 2019, 9, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, M.; Yao, M.; Lai, T.; Zhao, H.; Wang, Y.; Yang, Z. Response of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum NMGL2 to Combinational Cold and Acid Stresses during Storage of Fermented Milk as Analyzed by Data-Independent Acquisition Proteomics. Foods 2021, 10, 1514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wei, Y.-X.; Ye, L.; Liu, D.-B.; Zhang, Z.-Y.; Liu, C.; Guo, X.-K. Activation of the chromosomally encoded mazEFBif locus of Bifidobacterium longum under acid stress. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2015, 207, 16–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
FA or Parameter | Fatty Acid Distribution (μg/g, M/M %) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
G | GP | Y | YP | |
C14:0 | 116.56 ± 12.69 | 309.84 ± 27.05 | 194.78 ± 10.13 | 595.60 ± 87.63 |
C15:0 | 36.93 ± 4.35 | 99.61 ± 8.87 | 29.30 ± 1.80 | 83.66 ± 7.74 |
C16:0 | 3589.90 ± 351.80 | 10,490.40 ± 773.05 | 5036.58 ± 220.69 | 22,115.55 ± 2961.51 |
C16:1 | 40.77 ± 5.92 | 66.61 ± 7.39 | 163.85 ± 9.60 | 230.47 ± 33.66 |
C17:0 | 24.45 ± 2.78 | 43.44 ± 3.61 | 29.22 ± 1.90 | 87.81 ± 8.62 |
C18:0 | 1341.62 ± 137.26 | 4190.22 ± 308.72 | 2025.53 ± 89.15 | 13065.27 ± 1781.62 |
C18:1ω8c | 26.95 ± 4.79 | 26.84 ± 1.30 | 17.50 ± 1.00 | 34.00 ± 13.05 |
C18:1ω9c | 682.13 ± 65.14 | 1746.20 ± 137.60 | 1320.58 ± 40.83 | 1351.64 ± 162.82 |
C18:2 | 1530.59 ± 163.38 | 2972.23 ± 221.16 | 5241.26 ± 214.60 | 4685.70 ± 543.25 |
C18:3 | 229.96 ± 23.94 | 366.59 ± 30.10 | 835.87 ± 36.46 | 686.66 ± 89.92 |
C20:0 | 140.07 ± 15.32 | 62.10 ± 4.66 | 35.95 ± 1.80 | 186.65 ± 16.90 |
C22:1 | 219.28 ± 25.63 | 588.33 ± 49.55 | 173.98 ± 6.75 | 2229.79 ± 311.61 |
Saturated/unsaturated ratio | 1.92 | 2.64 | 0.95 | 3.92 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wu, P.; Zhu, Q.; Yang, R.; Mei, Y.; Chen, Z.; Liang, Y. Differences in Acid Stress Response of Lacticaseibacillus paracasei Zhang Cultured from Solid-State Fermentation and Liquid-State Fermentation. Microorganisms 2021, 9, 1951. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9091951
Wu P, Zhu Q, Yang R, Mei Y, Chen Z, Liang Y. Differences in Acid Stress Response of Lacticaseibacillus paracasei Zhang Cultured from Solid-State Fermentation and Liquid-State Fermentation. Microorganisms. 2021; 9(9):1951. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9091951
Chicago/Turabian StyleWu, Pengyu, Qiuyan Zhu, Rui Yang, Yuxia Mei, Zhenmin Chen, and Yunxiang Liang. 2021. "Differences in Acid Stress Response of Lacticaseibacillus paracasei Zhang Cultured from Solid-State Fermentation and Liquid-State Fermentation" Microorganisms 9, no. 9: 1951. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9091951