Next Article in Journal
Trends in Antimicrobial Resistance of Uropathogens Isolated from Urinary Tract Infections in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Dhaka, Bangladesh
Previous Article in Journal
Primary Healthcare Physicians’ Insufficient Knowledge Is Associated with Antibiotic Overprescribing for Acute Upper Respiratory Tract Infections in China: A Cross-Sectional Study
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

A Novel Bifidobacterium longum Subsp. longum T1 Strain from Cow’s Milk: Homeostatic and Antibacterial Activity against ESBL-Producing Escherichia coli

by
Andrey V. Machulin
1,2,
Vyacheslav M. Abramov
1,3,*,
Igor V. Kosarev
1,3,
Evgenia I. Deryusheva
4,
Tatiana V. Priputnevich
3,
Alexander N. Panin
1,
Ashot M. Manoyan
1,
Irina O. Chikileva
5,
Tatiana N. Abashina
2,
Dmitriy A. Blumenkrants
1,
Olga E. Ivanova
1,
Tigran T. Papazyan
6,
Ilia N. Nikonov
7,
Nataliya E. Suzina
2,
Vyacheslav G. Melnikov
8,
Valentin S. Khlebnikov
9,
Vadim K. Sakulin
9,
Vladimir A. Samoilenko
2,
Alexey B. Gordeev
3,
Gennady T. Sukhikh
3,
Vladimir N. Uversky
10 and
Andrey V. Karlyshev
11
add Show full author list remove Hide full author list
1
Federal Service for Veterinary and Phytosanitary Surveillance (Rosselkhoznadzor) Federal State Budgetary Institution “The Russian State Center for Animal Feed and Drug Standardization and Quality” (FGBU VGNKI), 123022 Moscow, Russia
2
Skryabin Institute of Biochemistry and Physiology of Microorganisms, Federal Research Center “Pushchino Scientific Center for Biological Research of Russian Academy of Science”, Russian Academy of Science, 142290 Pushchino, Russia
3
Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Health, 117997 Moscow, Russia
4
Institute for Biological Instrumentation, Federal Research Center “Pushchino Scientific Center for Biological Research of Russian Academy of Science”, Russian Academy of Science, 142290 Pushchino, Russia
5
Blokhin National Research Center of Oncology, Ministry of Health, 115478 Moscow, Russia
6
Alltech Company, 105062 Moscow, Russia
7
Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education, St. Petersburg State University of Veterinary Medicine, 196084 Saint Petersburg, Russia
8
Gabrichevsky Research Institute for Epidemiology and Microbiology, 125212 Moscow, Russia
9
Institute of Immunological Engineering, 142380 Lyubuchany, Russia
10
Department of Molecular Medicine, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL 33612, USA
11
Department of Biomolecular Sciences, School of Life Sciences, Chemistry and Pharmacy, Faculty of Health, Science, Social Care and Education, Kingston University London, Kingston upon Thames KT1 2EE, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Antibiotics 2024, 13(10), 924; https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics13100924
Submission received: 28 August 2024 / Revised: 20 September 2024 / Accepted: 25 September 2024 / Published: 27 September 2024

Abstract

:
Background/Objectives: The global emergence of antibiotic-resistant zooanthroponotic Escherichia coli strains, producing extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBL-E) and persisting in the intestines of farm animals, has now led to the development of a pandemic of extra-intestinal infectious diseases in humans. The search for innovative probiotic microorganisms that eliminate ESBL-E from the intestines of humans and animals is relevant. Previously, we received three isolates of bifidobacteria: from milk of a calved cow (BLLT1), feces of a newborn calf (BLLT2) and feces of a three-year-old child who received fresh milk from this calved cow (BLLT3). Our goal was to evaluate the genetic identity of BLLT1, BLLT2, BLLT3 isolates using genomic DNA fingerprinting (GDF), to study the tolerance, adhesion, homeostatic and antibacterial activity of BLLT1 against ESBL-E. Methods: We used a complex of microbiological, molecular biological, and immunological methods, including next generation sequencing (NGS). Results: GDF showed that DNA fragments of BLLT2 and BLLT3 isolates were identical in number and size to DNA fragments of BLLT1. These data show for the first time the possibility of natural horizontal transmission of BLLT1 through with the milk of a calved cow into the intestines of a calf and the intestines of a child. BLLT1 was resistant to gastric and intestinal stresses and exhibited high adhesive activity to calf, pig, chicken, and human enterocytes. This indicates the unique ability of BLLT1 to inhabit the intestines of animals and humans. We are the first to show that BLLT1 has antibacterial activity against ESBL-E strains that persist in humans and animals. BLLT1 produced 145 ± 8 mM of acetic acid, which reduced the pH of the nutrient medium from 6.8 to 5.2. This had an antibacterial effect on ESBL-E. The genome of BLLT1 contains ABC-type carbohydrate transporter gene clusters responsible for the synthesis of acetic acid with its antibacterial activity against ESBL-E. BLLT1 inhibited TLR4 mRNA expression induced by ESBL-E in HT-29 enterocytes, and protected the enterocyte monolayers used in this study as a bio-model of the intestinal barrier. BLLT1 increased intestinal alkaline phosphatase (IAP) as one of the main molecular factors providing intestinal homeostasis. Conclusions: BLLT1 shows promise for the creation of innovative functional nutritional products for humans and feed additives for farm animals that will reduce the spread of ESBL-E strains in the food chain.

1. Introduction

The global emergence of antibiotic-resistant zooanthroponotic Escherichia coli strains, producing extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBL-E) and persisting in the intestines of farm animals, has now led to the development of a pandemic of extra-intestinal infectious diseases in humans. The pandemic was first announced in 2008, and it has flourished to the present day [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8].
Pathogenic polyresistant ESBL-E strains isolated from broilers, mainly CTX-M type and belonging to the ST 131 clone, had genetic similarities and shared virulence genes with ESBL-E found in human feces. These strains were etiological agents of various extracellular infectious pathologies in humans [9]. In various countries, poultry serves as a reservoir for ESBL-E pathogens [10]. These bacteria survive at all stages of broiler production [11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22]. Other farm animals (including pigs and dairy animals), due to their direct connection to the human food chain, represent a niche and function as a depot and means for transmission and dissemination of ESBL-E pathogens [20,23,24,25,26,27]. Bovine mastitis leads to significant financial losses due milk waste and the premature culling of affected animals [28,29,30,31,32,33,34]. In recent decades, ESBL-E pathogens have settled in the human gut. They have also begun to inhabit hospital environments [35,36,37].
ESBL-E cause avian colibacteriosis, which leads to high mortality (up to 53.5%) among young chickens and costs the poultry industry hundreds of millions of dollars in economic losses worldwide [38].
ESBL enzymes produced by polyresistant E. coli strains hydrolyze a wide range of beta-lactam antibiotics, including oxyimino-cephalosporins and third-generation monobactams [39]. The rapid spread of ESBL-producing representatives of the Enterobacteriaceae family is due to the association of β-lactamase genes with conjugative plasmids [40], which in the last few decades have ensured the occupation of almost all ecological niches in the countries of five continents [4,41,42,43]. ESBL-E live in humans, animals and the environment [44,45]. Once in the intestine, ESBL-E grow intensively and produce lipopolysaccharide (LPS), which causes an increase in intestinal permeability and the entry of pathogens into mesenteric lymph nodes and the blood. This is accompanied by infection of parenchymal organs and the development of numerous extra-intestinal infectious diseases from lactation mastitis, cystitis, pyelonephritis [30,46,47,48,49], to septicemia [50]. In women, cystitis and pyelonephritis most often develop as a result of direct penetration of the pathogen from the intestine into the urogenital system [51]. Women of reproductive age turned out to be the most sensitive to the action of ESBL-E. The main niche for the habitat of ESBL-E is the intestine [52]. Penetrating from the intestine into the urinary system, ESBL-E induce the development of cystitis, pyelonephritis and stimulate premature birth in pregnant women [53,54], which has been confirmed experimentally on mice [55].
Pregnant women belong to a high-risk group, especially susceptible to the rapid progression of sepsis with significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. In addition, maternal infections can have a serious detrimental effect on newborns: almost one million deaths of newborns annually are associated with maternal infection or sepsis [56].
Urinary tract infections (UTIs) caused by ESBL-E pathogens are among the most common diseases in the world [57,58,59,60,61,62]. Risk factors for the development of UTIs are the previous use of cephalosporins and fluoroquinolones of the third- and fourth-generations, women of reproductive age, type II diabetes, and others [57]. Carbapenems are the drug of choice for the treatment of infections caused by ESBL producers, but in many countries, there is an increase in resistance to these drugs [60], which has led to an increase in mortality up to 40% [61].
Currently, according to statistical data [63,64,65,66,67], the mortality rate of patients in intensive care units for infections caused by pathogens not producing ESBL did not exceed 3% and increased to 22% in the treatment of infections caused by pathogens producing ESBL.
In recent decades, ESBL-E has started to inhabit the hospital environment [8,68], and also settled in the human intestine [36,37,69,70]. Treatment of ESBL-E infectious diseases through the use of intensive antibiotic therapy damages the normal intestinal microbiota, violates the intestinal barrier and creates conditions for the selective growth of multi-drug resistant (MDR) pathogens [71].
Numerous approaches are being developed to reduce the prevalence of MDR ESBL-E, including usage of antibiotic-free feed additives and probiotic-based supplements for pathogen competitive exclusion [72,73,74]. The antibacterial activity of 50 Bacillus subtilis strains was screened against ESBL-E pathogens [75]. Due to the fact that B. subtilis strains have a weak adhesive interaction with enterocytes, they are of little use for the elimination of ESBL-E pathogens from the intestine. The addition of a competitive exclusion probiotic to the feed of newly hatched birds inhibited colonization and reduced the level of ESBL-E in the intestines of broilers [76]. The addition of a probiotic based on “natural living intestinal microbiota obtained from chickens that do not contain specific pathogens and produced by fermentation” (Aviguard®, MSD Animal Health, Boxmeer, The Netherlands) to drinking water from day 0–7, prevented colonization and reduced transmission of the E. coli E3827 strain, which carries the ESBL blaCTX-M-1 gene [77]. Probiotic feed additive for poultry (Gro2MAX, BioNatural America, Royal Oak, MI, USA) containing Lactobacillus acidophilus, Pediococcus acidilactici, P. pentosaceus, B. subtilis, and Saccharomyces cerevisiae was applied orally from birth in experimental chickens. Subsequent oral administration of the ESBL-E showed a decrease in the adhesion of this pathogen to enterocytes and a loss of the pathogen’s film-forming ability [78]. The use of probiotics with the ability of competitive exclusion is promising. However, the high variability of the obtained results indicates the need for further research. According to the “One Health” concept, implemented by WHO, FAO, UNEP, and WOAH [79], the search for probiotic strains with the ability to inhabit the intestines of animals and humans and show competitive exclusion to ESBL-producing pathogens is of considerable interest. Bifidobacteria play a significant role in the formation of a healthy intestinal microbiota in humans and animals. The protective functions of bifidobacteria are performed through mechanisms of direct and indirect antagonism against opportunistic and pathogenic bacteria, preventing colonization of the intestinal biotope and preventing their penetration into the internal environment of the body [80,81,82]. Previously, we received three isolates of bifidobacteria: from the milk of a calved cow (T1), the feces of a newborn calf (T2), and the feces of a three-year-old child who received fresh milk from this calved cow (T3). According to MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry the T1, T2, T3 isolates belonged to Bifidobacterium longum subsp. longum (BLLT1, BLLT2, and BLLT3). These results were confirmed by complete genome sequencing data for BLLT1 (GenBank, Accession number: CP090414.1). We assumed that isolate BLLT2 obtained from the feces of a newborn calf and isolate BLLT3 obtained from the feces of a child who received fresh milk represent one strain (isolate BLLT1) living in the milk of a calved cow. The purpose of this work was to evaluate the genetic identity of BLLT1, BLLT2, and BLLT3 isolates using genomic DNA fingerprinting to study the tolerance, adhesion, homeostatic, and antibacterial activity of BLLT1 against ESBL-producing Escherichia coli.

2. Results

2.1. Morphological Characteristics of Pure Cultures of BLLT1, BLLT2, and BLLT3 Isolates of Bifidobacteria

The light microscopy of bifidobacteria pure cultures of BLLT1, BLLT2, and BLLT3 isolates are shown in Figure 1A–C. The cultures of three isolates have homologous cell morphology. The cells are arranged singly, in pairs, can combine into small aggregates, and rarely form V-shaped structures.

2.2. Genomic Fingerprinting of BLLT1, BLLT2, and BLLT3 Isolates

To identify the differences between the BLLT1, BLLT2 and BLLT3 isolates, we used the method of DNA genomic fingerprinting. The results are shown in Figure 2.
Genomic fingerprint analysis showed that the DNA fragments of BLLT1, BLLT2, and BLLT3 isolates are identical in number and size. Further studies were carried out using the BLLT1 isolate (strain).

2.3. Tolerance of BLLT1 to Gastric and Intestinal Stresses

The results of the in vitro assessment of BLLT1 tolerance to gastric and intestinal stress are presented in Table 1. According to the data obtained, BLLT1 is highly resistant to gastric stress. After 60 min of exposure to gastric juice, the degree of resistance (RD) of BLLT1 to gastric stress was 1.1 ± 0.3. BLLT1 is highly resistant to intestinal stress. After five hours of exposure to intestinal juice, the RD of BLLT1 to intestinal stress was 3.9 ± 0.4.

2.4. Adhesion of BLLT1 to Enterocytes

The adhesion of BLLT1 to human HT-29, porcine IPEC-J2, chicken CPCE, and bovine BPCE enterocytes is shown in Table 2. BLLT1 demonstrated efficient adhesion to human immortalized HT-29 intestinal epithelial cells (Adhesion activity (AA): 100%; Adhesion index (AI): 34 ± 3), porcine immortalized IPEC-J2 intestinal epithelial cells (AA: 100%; AI: 25 ± 3), chicken primary CPCE intestinal epithelial cells (AA: 100%; AI: 29 ± 3), and bovine primary BPCE intestinal epithelial cells (AA: 100%; AI: 36 ± 3). These findings indicate that BLLT1 exhibits high adhesive ability to enterocytes regardless of the host species (human, pig, chicken, or bovine). The strong attachment of BLLT1 to human and animal enterocytes is necessary to ensure colonization resistance of the intestine and to perform various probiotic functions in the digestive system.

2.5. BLLT1 Antibacterial Activity

The antibacterial activity of BLLT1 against ESBL-E is shown in Table 3. Cultivation of ESBL-E together with BLLT1 for 24 h reduced the level of living test cultures by 6 Log. ESBL-E isolates from the urine of pregnant women (IIE PW 8015, IIE PW 8034, IIE PW 8042, IIE PW 8059, IIE PW 8123, IIE PW 8147), which were an etiological factor of cystitis and pyelonephritis with subsequent premature birth, produced various ESBL types and were highly sensitive to the antibacterial action of BLLT1 (Table 3). In a mother–child pair, it was found that ESBL-E isolate (IIE WLM8194) obtained from the milk of a mother with lactation mastitis and ESBL-E isolate (IIE NB8215) obtained from feces of a premature baby (<36 weeks) receiving infected milk produce the same type of ESBL (TEM). Both isolates were highly sensitive to the bactericidal action of BLLT1 (Table 3). ESBL-E isolate (IIE Co 8316) from the milk of a dairy cow with mastitis and ESBL-E isolate (IIE Ca 8320) and isolate from feces of a calf that received milk from this cow with mastitis produced the same type of ESBL (STX-M). ESBL-E isolate (IIE Co 8316) from milk of a lactating sow and ESBL-E isolate (IIE WP8436) from feces of a weaned piglet that received milk from this lactating sow produced the same type of ESBL (SHV). This suggests that ESBL-E enters the intestines of offspring through maternal milk in farm animals.
ESBL-E (IIE LH 8508) from the feces of a laying hen and ESBL-E (IIE Egg 8517) from eggs laid by this laying hen produced the same type of ESBL (OXA), which was highly sensitive to BLLT1 (Table 3). ESBL-E (IIE LH 8525) from the feces of a laying hen and ESBL-E (IIE Egg 8532) from eggs laid by this laying hen produced the same type of ESBL (STX-M) (Table 3). ESBL-E (IIE BC 8648, IIE BC 8650, IIE BC 8675, and IIE BC 8689) from fresh broiler carcass produced various ESBL types and were highly sensitive to the antibacterial action of BLLT1 (Table 3). Thus, BLLT1 has antibacterial effects on ESBL-E pathogens, regardless of their habitat and the production of ESBL types.

2.6. Acetic Acid Production by BLLT1 Strain and pH Reduction of the Nutrient Medium

BLLT1 effectively produces acetic acid. The dynamics of acetic acid production is shown in Figure 3. After 12 h of BLLT1 cultivation, the acetic acid concentration in the culture medium was 52 ± 6 mM. After 24 h of BLLT1 cultivation, the acetic acid concentration in the culture medium reached up to 145 ± 8 mM. An increase in the acetic acid concentration led to a decrease in the pH of the culture medium from 6.8 to 5.2.

2.7. BLLT1 Whole Genome Analysis

According to GenBank records (accession number CP090414.1), the genome of BLLT1 consists of a 2,408,132 bp chromosome with 60% GC content. It does not contain any extrachromosomal elements. There are 2063 genes, including 1993 protein encoding genes and 70 pseudogenes. It has four rRNA gene clusters. These numbers are in a good match in terms of correlation with those of the genome of a reference B. longum subsp. longum strain JCM 1217 (GenBank accession number AP010888.1) with a 2,385,164 bp genome size, 60.5% GC content, and a total of 2009 genes, of which 1924 encode proteins. The genetic map (Figure 4) constructed using a Proksee server [83] and available at https://proksee.ca/ (accessed on 27 August 2024) demonstrates unusual seemingly random distribution of GC skew+ and − regions, which in other bacteria are typically positive in the leading and negative in lagging strands of a replicon [84,85]. While the Bagel5 tool [86] failed to detect any bacteriocin-related genes, a gene encoding lactococcin 972 family bacteriocin-encoding gene was found by the NCBI GenBank annotation pipeline. No prophages were found using the PHASTEST server at https://phastest.ca (accessed on 27 August 2024) [87].
Using an in vivo model of infection, alleviated production of acetic acids was previously found to be responsible for the antimicrobial activity of particular isolates of bifidobacteria [88]. In contrast with isolates lacking this activity, such isolates carried gene clusters containing ABC-type carbohydrate transporter genes. We therefore investigated the complete genome of our BLLT1 strain and confirmed the presence of a large number of such genes in its genome. Since such genes are responsible for the assimilation of carbohydrates and the production of short chain fatty acids [89], these findings are consistent with the results of our study reporting on the association of the ability of this strain to produce acetic acid with its antibacterial activity against ESBL-E pathogens.

2.8. BLLT1 Inhibits TLR4 mRNA Expression Induced by ESBL-E Pathogens in Enterocytes

In vitro experiments on HT-29 enterocytes have studied the ability of BLLT1 to inhibit the expression of TLR4 mRNA induced by ESBL-E pathogens.
The results of the studies are shown in Table 4. When BLLT1 was added to enterocytes, the TLR4 mRNA expression level did not change compared with the control (p > 0.05). Unlike the BLLT1, all ESBL-E studied in our work significantly stimulated TLR4 mRNA expression in enterocytes (p < 0.01). However, the preliminary introduction of BLLT1 into the culture medium of enterocytes prevented an increase in TLR4 mRNA expression induced by ESBL-E. TLR4 mRNA expression remained at the level of intact control.

2.9. Protection of Intestinal Barrier in HT-29 Enterocyte Monolayers by BLLT1

The ability of BLLT1 to protect the intestinal barrier (TEER) was studied in experiments in vitro on monolayers of HT-29 enterocytes. The results of the studies are shown in Table 5. The introduction of BLLT1 into the culture medium containing a monolayer of HT-29 enterocytes did not significantly affect the TEER value compared with the intact control. In all experiments, there was a slight upward trend in the TEER value. Unlike BLLT1, all ESBL-E strains significantly reduced TEER value in the enterocyte monolayers (p < 0.01). The preliminary introduction of BLLT1 into a culture medium containing a monolayer of HT-29 enterocytes prevented a decrease in the TEER value.

2.10. Inhibition of Intestinal Paracellular Permeability in HT-29 Enterocyte Monolayers by BLLT1

The ability of BLLT1 to inhibit the intestinal paracellular permeability induced by ESBL-E was studied in the in vitro experiments on the monolayers of HT-29 enterocytes. The results of the studies are shown in Table 6. BLLT1 did not significantly affect the intestinal paracellular permeability of the HT-29 enterocyte monolayer compared to the intact control. All ESBL-E strains significantly increased the paracellular permeability of the HT-29 enterocyte monolayer compared to the control (p < 0.01). The preliminary introduction of BLLT1 into a culture medium containing a monolayer of HT-29 enterocytes prevented an E. coli-induced increase in intestinal paracellular permeability.

2.11. Inhibition of Zonulin Secretion in the Enterocyte Monolayers HT-29 by BLLT1

The ability of BLLT1 to inhibit zonulin secretion induced by ESBL-E strains was studied in the in vitro experiments on monolayers of HT-29 enterocytes. The results of the studies are shown in Table 7. BLLT1 had no effect on zonulin secretion by monolayers of HT-29 enterocytes compared with the intact control. ESBL-E pathogens significantly increased zonulin secretion in the monolayers of HT-29 enterocytes (p < 0.01). The preliminary addition of BLLT1 into a culture medium containing a monolayer of HT-29 enterocytes prevented an ESBL-E-induced increase of zonulin secretion. The inhibitory effect of BLLT1 on zonulin secretion did not depend on the source of isolation of ESBL-E strains and the production by these strains of various ESBL types.

2.12. BLLT1 Stimulates IAP mRNA Expression in Enterocytes

The effect of BLLT1 on the expression of IAP mRNA in HT-29 enterocytes has been studied. The results are presented in Table 8. BLLT1 increases IAP mRNA expression in HT-29 enterocytes by 24 ± 2–39 ± 5% relative to the intact control (p < 0.05). ESBL-E strains decrease the level of IAP mRNA expression in HT-29 enterocytes to 24 ± 2–39 ± 5% relative to the intact control (p < 0.01). The preliminary addition of BLLT1 into a culture medium containing a monolayer of HT-29 enterocytes prevented an E. coli-induced decrease in IAP mRNA expression. Moreover, the increased level of IAP mRNA expression was maintained in relation to the intact control (p < 0.05). Stimulating effect of BLLT1 on IAP mRNA expression did not depend on the source of isolation of ESBL-E strains and the production by these strains of various ESBL types.

3. Discussion

Cow’s milk containing probiotic microorganisms, in particular bifidobacteria, is an ideal food for feeding calves. Bifidobacteria stimulate earlier maturation of the digestive tract, improve immunity, reduce latency to the first feed post-weaning and increase early post-weaning feed intake and growth [90]. Bacteria associated with mother’s milk control the formation of the baby’s gut microbiota [91]. B. longum subsp. longum isolates—T1 (BLLT1) was originally obtained by us from milk of a calved cow, T2 (BLLT2) was from the feces of a newborn calf, and T3 (BLLT3) was from the feces of a three-year-old child who received fresh milk from this calved cow. The calved cow was kept on a peasant farm, which practiced the use of fresh milk as a functional nutritional product for children. The method of genomic DNA fingerprinting was used to establish genomic differences or genomic similarities between the BLLT1, BLLT2, and BLLT3 isolates. Genomic DNA fingerprinting can be considered as a promising genotypic tool for the identification of a wide range of bifidobacteria at the species, subspecies and potentially up to the strain level [92,93,94]. Genomic fingerprint analysis showed that DNA fragments of BLLT1, BLLT2, and BLLT3 isolates are identical in number and size. The data obtained allowed us to assume that strain B. longum subsp. longum T1 (isolate BLLT1), which we obtained initially from the milk of a calved cow, entered with milk into the intestines of a newborn calf (BLLT2) and into the intestines of a three-year-old child who received fresh milk from this calved cow (BLLT3). In this regard, we used BLLT1 in further studies.
B. longum subsp. longum represents one of the most prevalent bifidobacterial species in the infant, adult and elderly human and animal gut [95,96,97,98], unlike B. longum subsp. infantis, which has co-evolved with humans [99]. B. longum subsp. infantis has host-specific nature. Previously, before the widespread use of antibiotics across the world, this bacterium was one of the first and most common colonizers of the intestine in infants, but not in animals [100]. This would explain why B. longum subsp. infantis grows better in the presence of human-milk oligosaccharides than in lactose [101]. B. longum subsp. infantis demonstrated its anti-inflammatory impact on fetal human enterocytes using TLR4 receptors [102]. The widespread use of antibiotics used as growth stimulants and drugs for the prevention and treatment of infections in animal husbandry, which is the basis of the human food chain containing trace amounts of antibiotics, has led to the elimination of B. infantis from the human intestine in the world [103]. This indicates the need to replace antibiotics with safer biological alternatives [104]. Previously, the presence of bifidobacteria in women’s milk was established [105]. Bifidobacteria in human breast milk were assessed by PCR-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (PCR-DGGE), and their levels were estimated by quantitative real-time PCR (qRTi-PCR). Sequences with similarities above 98% were identified as B. breve, B. adolescentis, B. longum, B. bifidum, and B. dentium [106].
During the breastfeeding periods for children and young animals, membrane digestion is the main one [107]. Membrane digestion is provided by bifidobacteria. The fecal microbiota of a breastfed baby contains 75–90% bifidobacteria [108]. The resistance of probiotic microorganisms to gastric and intestinal stress is an essential condition for their normal functioning in the digestive system of the host organism. BLLT1 is highly resistant to gastric and intestinal stresses (Table 1).
Adhesion to the surface of intestinal enterocytes is a necessary condition for bifidobacteria to be actively involved in the work of the digestive system and to show a beneficial effect on the host [109]. It is known that B. longum subsp. infantis, in the presence of human-milk oligosaccharides in the nutrient medium, exhibits high adhesive activity to human enterocytes, but not to those of animals [100,110]. The BLLT1 strain exhibits high adhesive activity to human, pig, chicken, and calf enterocytes (Table 2) Unlike B. longum subsp. infantis, which colonizes only the intestines of children, but not adults, B. longum subsp. longum is able to colonize both infants and adults [111,112,113]. Oki et al. conducted a longitudinal study of the duration of intestinal persistence of B. longum subsp. longum strains from infancy after birth and established the persistence of the observed strains in the intestine of a 6-year-old child [114].
Asahara et al. investigated the antimicrobial properties of probiotic bifidobacteria using the Shiga toxin-producing E. coli O157:H7 mice in vivo model [115]. In the infected control groups, all animals died. In the experimental group, before infection with the pathogen, a strain of B. breve strain Yakult was added to drinking water to colonize the intestines of mice. The subsequent infection of animals of the experimental group with E. coli O157:H7 did not lead to their death. B. breve strain Yakult produced a higher concentration of acetic acid of approximately 56 mM and lowered the pH from 7.15 to 6.0 as compared to the infected control group (acetic acid concentration, 28 mM; pH, 7.15). For the first time, we have shown that BLLT1 has antibacterial activity against ESBL-E strains isolated from humans and farm animals. The antibacterial activity of BLLT1 did not depend on the ESBL type produced by the pathogen (Table 3). BLLT1 is an effective producer of acetic acid (Figure 3). After 24 h of BLLT1 cultivation, the concentration of acetic acid in the culture medium reached up to 145 ± 8 mM. An increase in acetic acid content during BLLT1 cultivation leads to a decrease in the pH of the nutrient medium from 6.8 to 5.2. This had an antibacterial effect on ESBL-E pathogens (Table 3).
Earlier, Fukuda et al. established that some strains of bifidobacteria prevent infection with E. coli O157, inducing death (preventive), while other strains do not prevent infection (non-preventive). In experiments in vivo, a high concentration of acetic acid was found in the feces of mice treated with preventive strains of bifidobacteria and a low concentration of this metabolite in the feces of mice injected with non-preventive strains [88]. In bifidobacteria, short-chain fatty acids, including acetic acid, are the main end products of carbohydrate metabolism. Preventive bifidobacteria contained cassette-type carbohydrate transporter genes, responsible for the production of acetic acid inhibiting translocation of E. coli O157:H7 from the intestine into the blood [89]. Analysis of the complete genome of the BLLT1 strain allowed us to identify the presence of ABC-type carbohydrate transporter genes responsible for the synthesis of acetic acid, which have antibacterial activity against ESBL-E pathogens (Figure 4). Henrick B.M. and co-authors [116] found a tendency to increase the pH of feces in breastfed infants over the last century (from 5.0 to 6.5), which is associated with the loss of specialized types of bifidobacteria and represents an increased risk of intestinal dysbiosis. Acetic acid is utilized by bacteria producing butyrate in the intestine, such as Faecalibacterium prausnitzii [117]. Enterocytes assimilate butyrate as an energy source. Butyrate participates in mechanisms that ensure the preservation of intestinal barrier function [118] and inhibits inflammation in the intestine [119].
The discovery of Toll-like receptors (TLRs) has greatly advanced our understanding of how the body senses pathogen invasion, triggers innate immune responses, and primes antigen-specific adaptive immunity [120]. The TLR family in mammals consists of 13 members. TLRs are representatives of pattern recognition receptors (PRR). TLRs recognize evolutionarily conservative components of bacteria, viruses, fungi, and parasites, which are collectively called pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMP). Recognition of PAMP by PRR triggers rapid inflammatory reactions necessary for innate immunity [121,122,123,124,125]. Although TLRs are crucial for the protection of the body, evidence has accumulated that they are closely related to the pathogenesis of inflammatory diseases [126,127,128]. TLR4 is a powerful factor of innate immunity that causes inflammation in response to LPS produced by bacteria, in particular E. coli [129,130]. LPS is an agonist of TLR4 [130]. Diphosphorylated LPS, like E. coli LPS (O111:B4), is one of the most potent agonists of TLR4, whereas dephosphorylated LPS species lose their proinflammatory activity [131]. The dephosphorylation of LPS is carried out by IAP [132]. BLLT1 controls the level of IAP production by enterocytes (Table 8).
TLR4 activates the MyD88-signaling pathway at the plasma membrane [133,134,135] and after a CD14-dependent endocytosis initiates the TRIF-dependent cascade [136]. Via activated NF-κB, TLR4 also contributes to the activation of the cytosolic NLRP3 inflammasome [137,138,139,140,141].
Uncontrolled activation of TLR4 leads to excessive production of proinflammatory cytokines and the development of a cytokine storm that leads to apoptosis and the reduced proliferation of enterocytes, destroying the intestinal barrier and affects intestinal homeostasis [142,143,144]. Inflammatory signaling triggered by TLR4 during infection can lead to sepsis, septic shock, and death [129]. Infections of Gram-negative bacteria, including E. coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, are the predominant cause of severe sepsis in humans [145]. Low doses of LPS obtained from the gut microbiota can, under certain conditions, enter the bloodstream and cause metabolic endotoxemia, leading to low-grade chronic TLR4-dependent inflammation, which contributes to the development of metabolic diseases such as type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and obesity [146,147,148,149]. These diseases have now acquired the character of a pandemic [150]. A high level of intestinal IAP is protective against (T2DM) and obesity [151]. BLLT1 increases IAP mRNA expression in enterocytes (Table 8). The enzyme IAP is one of the main molecular factors providing intestinal homeostasis [152,153,154]. IAP dephosphorylate LPS, which loses the properties of a TLR4 agonist [132], is necessary to increase the efficiency of elimination of enteropathogens from the intestine, including ESBL-E [155]. IAP controls the development of inflammation [156] and ensures the safety of the intestinal barrier functions [157,158].
Numerous studies are currently underway to develop TLR4 antagonists [159]. Strict requirements are imposed on the TLR4 antagonists being developed. The TLR4 antagonist must maintain the intestinal barrier and ensure intestinal homeostasis [159]. BLLT1 meets these requirements. It inhibits TLR4 mRNA expression induced by ESBL-E in the HT-29 enterocytes (Table 4), protects the intestinal barrier in HT-29 enterocyte monolayers (Table 5), inhibits the intestinal paracellular permeability and zonulin secretion induced by ESBL-E in the enterocyte monolayers (Table 6 and Table 7), and increases IAP mRNA expression in enterocytes. Thus, the BLLT1 strain, obtained initially from the milk of a calved cow, has homeostatic properties and antibacterial activity against ESBL-E.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Bacterial Strains and Growth Conditions

The full list of bacteria used in the work and the conditions of their reproduction are given in the Table 9.

4.2. Assessment of the Morphology of Bifidobacteria BLLT1, BLLT2, and BLLT3 Isolates

Cell cultures were stained with methylene blue and the morphology of Bifidobacterium isolates was studied using light microscopy.

4.3. Genomic Fingerprinting of B. longum Isolates

DNA from bifidobacteria isolates was obtained by the method described in the work [160]. The strain-specific identity and/or difference of the analyzed isolates was carried out by genomic fingerprinting using ERIC primers specific to repetitive intergenic consensus sequences of enterobacteria, BOXA1 and BOXS1 primers specific to repetitive BOX sequences, as well as using REP primers specific to highly conservative extragenic palindromic repeats with a length of 35-40 base pairs [161]. The use of primers complementary to certain repetitive motifs leads to selective amplification of individual sections of the genome localized between repetitive elements. Thus, the resulting genomic fingerprints make it possible to identify differences between bacteria at the strain level.
The following primer systems proposed in the work [161] were used:
BOX A1 5′-CTACggCAAggCgACgCTgACg-3′
BoxS1 5′-CggCAAggCgACgCTgACg
ERIC1R 5′-ATgTAAgCTCCTggggATTCAC-3′
ERIC 2 5′-AAgTAAgTgACTggggTgAgCg-3′
REP 1R 5′-IIIICgICgICATCIggC-3′
REP 2I 5′-ICgICTTATCIggCCTAC-3′

4.4. Determination of BLLT1 Strain Tolerance to Gastric and Intestinal Stresses

Assays for gastric stress imitation and intestinal stress imitation in vitro were performed as previously described in [162].
The degree of resistance to gastric or intestinal stress RD (Resistance Degree) was determined by the formula:
R D = n 1 n 2 ,
where n1—the number of colony-forming cells per ml (CFU/mL) in the control and n2—(CFU/mL) in the experiment.
The level of discrimination of gastric and intestinal stress was evaluated as “very good” when the RD (discrimination ratio) is less than 5, “good” when the RD is between 5 and 10, “acceptable” when the RD is between 10 and 15, and “unacceptable” when the RD exceeds 15.

4.5. Enterocytes and Growth Conditions

4.5.1. Human Enterocytes

A human immortalized large intestine epithelial HT-29 cell line, a relevant in vitro model system for intestinal pathogen–host cell interactions, was used. A culture medium consisting of DMEM, 10% fetal calf serum (FCS), and 0.02% penicillin and streptomycin each was used for the cultivation of the HT-29 cells. The HT-29 cells were seeded into 12-well cell culture plates at a density of 5 × 105 cells/mL and were incubated for 48 h at 37 °C under 5% CO2 to establish a cell monolayer. To study the monolayer of HT-29 cells as an intestinal barrier, HT-29 cells were cultured at 37 °C under 5% CO2 for 15 days with daily replacement of the culture medium.

4.5.2. Porcine Enterocytes

Porcine immortalized intestinal epithelial cells, IPEC-J2, were employed as a relevant in vitro model system for porcine intestinal pathogen–host cell interactions [163]. A culture medium consisting of DMEM, 10% FCS, and 0.02% penicillin and streptomycin each was used for the cultivation of the IPEC-J2 cells. The IPEC-J2 cells were seeded into 12-well cell culture plates at a density of 5 × 105 cells/mL and were incubated for 48 h at 37 °C under 5% CO2 to establish a cell monolayer.

4.5.3. Chicken Enterocytes

Chicken primary cecal enterocytes (CPCE) were isolated from the cecal of 2-week-old chicks (Cobb-500 cross) using a well-established protocol [164]. A culture medium consisting of DMEM, 2.5% FCS, 0.1% insulin, 0.5% transferrin, 0.007% hydrocortisone, 0.1% fibronectin, and 0.02% penicillin and streptomycin each was used for the cultivation of CPCE cells. The CPCE cells were seeded into 12-well cell culture plates at a density of 5 × 105 cells/mL and were incubated for 48 h at 37 °C under 5% CO2 to establish a cell monolayer.

4.5.4. Bovine Enterocytes

Bovine primary colon enterocytes (BPCE) were obtained from the colon of a calf using the method developed by [165]. A culture medium consisting of DMEM, 5% FCS, 1% L-glutamine, 0.1% epidermal growth factor (EGF), 0.1% each of insulin, human transferrin and 1% each penicillin and streptomycin. The BPCE cells were seeded into 12-well cell culture plates at a density of 5 × 105 cells/mL and were incubated for 48 h at 37 °C under 5% CO2 to establish a cell monolayer.

4.6. BLLT1 Adhesion

Immortalized human HT-29 and porcine IPEC-J2 enterocytes, primary chicken cecal CPCE enterocytes, and bovine colon BPCE enterocytes were used as in vitro intestinal bio-models. The enterocytes were seeded into cell culture plates (2 × 105 cells/mL) and incubated 48 h at 37 °C under 5% CO2.
The nutrient medium was removed and BLLT1 at a concentration of 109 CFU/mL was added to the wells. The plates were incubated at 37 °C, under 5% CO2 for 2 h. The nutrient medium in the wells was replaced with a sterile PBS to remove non-adherent bacteria. Adherent bacteria was stained with azure–eosin and were quantified using a Leica DM 4500 microscope (Leica, Calgary, AB, Canada) containing the Leica IM modulator applications system (Leica, Calgary, AB, Canada). The adhesion activity and the adhesion index were determined. The adhesion activity of BLLT1 is the percentage of enterocytes on the surface of which BLLT1 cells are found. The adhesion index is the number of BLLT1 cells adhered to the surface of one enterocyte.

4.7. Determination of BLLT1 Antagonistic Activity

The antagonistic activity of the BLLT1 strain to ESBL-E pathogens was determined by co-cultivation in Bifidobacterium broth medium (HiMedia, Mumbai, India) anaerobically at 37 ± 1 °C for 24 h as described in [166]. The counting of ESBL-E cells (CFU/mL) grown in monoculture (control) and grown on LB agar in the presence of BLLT1 was carried out after 24 h by serial dilution.

4.8. Acetic Acid Determination in Culture Liquid of BLLT1

The suspension of BLLT1 cells grown in the broth for bifidobacteria (HiMedia, Mumbai, India) was centrifuged, the culture supernatant was filtered using a 0.22 µm pore size filter (Millipore, Burlington, MA, USA). The concentration of acetic acid in the culture supernatant was determined according to the method in [167] using HPLC with an ultraviolet–visible detector (Shidmadzu, Kyoto, Japan) set at 220 nm and a Luna C18(2) column (150 mm × 4.6 mm, 5 µm; Phenomenex, Torrance, CA, USA). HPLC-grade acetic acid was used as the standard.

4.9. RNA Extraction, cDNA Synthesis, and Quantitative Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction

Trizol reagent (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA, USA) was used to extract total RNA from the HT29 cells. The RNA purity was assessed spectrophotometrically by measuring absorbance at 260 nm and its ratio relative to that at 280 nm. RNase-free DNase I (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) was used for total RNA treatments to eliminate DNA contaminants. The integrity of RNA was monitored through electrophoresis on an agarose gel stained with GelRedTM (Biotium, Hayward, CA, USA). Subsequently, cDNA was synthesized from total RNA using the QuantiTect® Reverse Transcription kit (Qiagen, Germantown, MD, USA), according to the manufacturer’s recommendations. qRT-PCR was conducted utilizing SYBR® Premix Ex TaqTM (Takara Biotechnology, Otsu, Japan) on a thermal cycler (StepOnePlusTM; Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA) through 40 cycles. The reaction mixture (20 µL) comprised 5 µL cDNA, 10 µL Power SYBR® Green PCR master mix (Applied Biosystems, San Francisco, CA, USA), 4 µL RNasefree water, and 0.5 µL each of forward and reverse primers. The PCR protocol involved an initial denaturation cycle at 95 °C for 10 min, followed by 40 cycles at 95 °C for 30 s and 60 °C for 30 s, with a final extension step for 30 s at 72 °C. The results were expressed as mean values averaged from three independent experiments, with the β-actin gene (ACTB) serving as an endogenous control. In all tests, a negative control was implemented to detect contamination. The relative quantity (RQ) of gene expression for the sample was calculated using the 2−ΔΔCt method.
Primers used for evaluating the effects of BLLT1 on the expression of TLR4 and IAP genes in HT-29 enterocytes are shown in Supplementary Table S1. The β-actin gene was used as a housekeeping reference gene.

4.10. Co-Culture of HT-29 Enterocytes with BLLT1 and ESBL-E Strains to Quantify the Levels of TLR4 and IAP mRNA Expression

Enterocytes HT-29 cells were plated onto 12-well plates at a density of 106 cells per well in DMEM, supplemented with 10% FCS and 0.02% penicillin and streptomycin each. Following a 24 h incubation period at 37 °C with 5% CO2, the culture medium was exchanged with Roswell Park Memorial Institute (RPMI) 1640 medium without penicillin/streptomycin. In experimental group 1, enterocytes were co-incubated with BLLT1 at a concentration of 1 × 108 CFU/mL for 30 min at 37 °C under anaerobic conditions. In experimental group 2, enterocytes were infected with ESBL-E at a concentration of 1 × 107 CFU/mL for 30 min at 37 °C under anaerobic conditions. In experimental group 3, enterocytes were co-incubated with BLLT1 at concentration of 1 × 108 CFU/mL for 30 min at 37 °C under anaerobic conditions, and then were infected with ESBL-E at a concentration of 1 × 107 CFU/mL for 30 min at 37 °C under anaerobic conditions. In plates with enterocytes of control group RPMI 1640 without penicillin/streptomycin was added. The cells were incubated under anaerobic conditions. After incubation, the enterocytes from the experimental groups were washed thrice with RPMI 1640 containing penicillin/streptomycin. The cell pellets of the experimental and control groups were washed twice with sterile PBS solution (pH 6.7) to quantify the levels of TLR4 and IAP mRNA expression.

4.11. TEER Measurements

The HT-29 cells were seeded onto apical inserts (AP) (Millicell-24, Millipore, Burlington, MA, USA) at a density of 105 cells/insert (0.5 mL) and allowed to differentiate over the next 15 days. The HT-29 monolayers were pretreated with BLLT1 and then infected with ESBL-E or only infected with ESBL-E with a multiplicity of infection (MOI) of 100. After 12 h the cell monolayer integrity was characterized using an epithelial volt-ohm-meter (EVOM WPI, Friedberg (Hessen), Germany). Researches were conducted according to the manufacturer’s instructions.

4.12. Paracellular Permeability Evaluation

The assessment of HT-29 monolayers paracellular permeability was carried out as described earlier in our work [168].

4.13. Zonulin Quantification

The concentration of soluble Zonulin in the supernatants of HT-29 monolayers was evaluated using a special ELISA kit (AssayGenie, Dublin, Ireland) in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions.

4.14. Statistical Analysis

The data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and represents means ± standard deviation (SD) from six independent experiments, each tested in triplicate. Statistical significance was assessed using Student’s t-tests, and results were considered significant at p < 0.05.

5. Conclusions

BLLT1 is resistant to gastric and intestinal stresses and exhibits high adhesive activity to calf, pig, chicken, and human enterocytes. This indicates the ability of BLLT1 to inhabit the intestines of animals and humans. For the first time, it was shown that BLLT1 has antibacterial activity against the spectrum of ESBL-E pathogens isolated from animals and humans. The antibacterial activity of BLLT1 was associated with the effective production of acetic acid and a decrease in the pH of the nutrient medium from 6.8 to 5.2. The study of BLLT1 strain complete genome revealed the presence of ABC-type carbohydrate transporter gene clusters responsible for the synthesis of acetic acid with its antibacterial activity against ESBL-E pathogens. BLLT1 controls the ESBL-E-stimulated intestinal inflammation by inhibiting TLR4 mRNA expression in enterocytes. In enterocyte monolayers, BLLT1 protects the intestinal barrier functions, inhibits paracellular permeability, and zonulin secretion. BLLT1 increases the expression of IAP mRNA in enterocytes, which is one of the main molecular factors that ensures intestinal homeostasis. In future, we plan to conduct preclinical and clinical studies of BLLT1 according to the established medical and veterinary requirements, and create functional nutritional products for humans and feed additives for farm animals based on it in order to implement a strategy to eliminate of ESBL-E through the food chain. The effect of BLLT1 on the intestinal microbiota of broilers and the effectiveness of elimination of ESBL-E pathogens from the intestines of chickens will be studied. As a functional nutritional product for humans, a yogurt will be created containing Streptococcus thermophilus, fermenting cow’s milk and providing the technological parameters of a yogurt and a BLLT1 responsible for the functional properties of the innovative food product. Freeze-dried BLLT1 will be used as a feed additive for broiler chickens and other types of farm animals.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/antibiotics13100924/s1, Table S1: Human primers used for qRT-PCR analysis of host immune response and homeostasis regulation by BLLT1 are shown in Supplementary Table S1. References [169,170] are cited in the Supplementary Materials.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, V.M.A., A.V.M., T.V.P., G.T.S., A.N.P. and A.V.K.; methodology, V.M.A.; validation, I.V.K., A.V.M., E.I.D., I.O.C., T.N.A., D.A.B., O.E.I., T.T.P., I.N.N., N.E.S., V.G.M., V.S.K., V.K.S., V.A.S., A.B.G., V.N.U. and A.V.K.; investigation, I.V.K., A.V.M., E.I.D., I.O.C., T.N.A., A.M.M., D.A.B., O.E.I., T.T.P., I.N.N., N.E.S., V.G.M., V.S.K., V.K.S., V.A.S., A.B.G., V.N.U. and A.V.K.; data curation, V.M.A. and I.V.K.; writing—original draft preparation, V.M.A., I.V.K. and A.V.M.; writing—review and editing, E.I.D., T.V.P., V.N.U. and A.V.K.; visualization, I.V.K. and A.V.M.; supervision, V.M.A., V.N.U. and A.V.K.; project administration, V.M.A. and A.V.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Government of the Russian Federation (Agreement No. 075-15-2022-1124 dated 1 July 2022).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data are contained within the article and Supplementary Materials.

Conflicts of Interest

T.T. Papazyan is affiliated with Alltech Company (Moscow, Russia). T.T. Papazyan declares that he has no financial interests, direct or indirect, that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported in this paper. We disclose this potential conflict of interest to maintain transparency and ensure that readers can assess the study’s objectivity.

References

  1. Coque, T.M.; Novais, A.; Carattoli, A.; Poirel, L.; Pitout, J.; Peixe, L.; Baquero, F.; Cantón, R.; Nordmann, P. Dissemination of clonally related Escherichia coli strains expressing extended-spectrum beta-lactamase CTX-M-15. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2008, 14, 195–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Nicolas-Chanoine, M.-H.; Blanco, J.; Leflon-Guibout, V.; Demarty, R.; Alonso, M.P.; Caniça, M.M.; Park, Y.-J.; Lavigne, J.-P.; Pitout, J.; Johnson, J.R. Intercontinental emergence of Escherichia coli clone O25:H4-ST131 producing CTX-M-15. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2008, 61, 273–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Kiratisin, P.; Apisarnthanarak, A.; Laesripa, C.; Saifon, P. Molecular characterization and epidemiology of extended-spectrum-beta-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates causing health care-associated infection in Thailand, where the CTX-M family is endemic. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2008, 52, 2818–2824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Carattoli, A. Resistance plasmid families in Enterobacteriaceae. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2009, 53, 2227–2238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Onnberg, A.; Mölling, P.; Zimmermann, J.; Söderquist, B. Molecular and phenotypic characterization of Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae producing extended-spectrum β-lactamases with focus on CTX-M in a low-endemic area in Sweden. APMIS 2011, 119, 287–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Klemm, E.J.; Wong, V.K.; Dougan, G. Emergence of dominant multidrug-resistant bacterial clades: Lessons from history and whole-genome sequencing. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2018, 115, 12872–12877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Tchesnokova, V.L.; Rechkina, E.; Chan, D.; Haile, H.G.; Larson, L.; Ferrier, K.; Schroeder, D.W.; Solyanik, T.; Shibuya, S.; Hansen, K.; et al. Pandemic Uropathogenic Fluoroquinolone-resistant Escherichia coli Have Enhanced Ability to Persist in the Gut and Cause Bacteriuria in Healthy Women. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2020, 70, 937–939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Machado, E.; Costa, P.; Carvalho, A.; on behalf of the Sarel Investigators. Occurrence of Healthcare-Associated Infections (HAIs) by Escherichia coli and Klebsiella spp. Producing Extended-Spectrum β-lactamases (ESBL) and/or Carbapenemases in Portuguese Long-Term Care Facilities. Pathogens 2022, 11, 1019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kathayat, D.; Lokesh, D.; Ranjit, S.; Rajashekara, G. Avian Pathogenic Escherichia coli (APEC): An Overview of Virulence and Pathogenesis Factors, Zoonotic Potential, and Control Strategies. Pathogens 2021, 10, 467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Leverstein-van Hall, M.A.; Dierikx, C.M.; Cohen Stuart, J.; Voets, G.M.; van den Munckhof, M.P.; van Essen-Zandbergen, A.; Platteel, T.; Fluit, A.C.; van de Sande-Bruinsma, N.; Scharinga, J.; et al. Dutch patients, retail chicken meat and poultry share the same ESBL genes, plasmids and strains. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2011, 17, 873–880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Dierikx, C.M.; van der Goot, J.A.; Smith, H.E.; Kant, A.; Mevius, D.J. Presence of ESBL/AmpC-producing Escherichia coli in the broiler production pyramid: A descriptive study. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e79005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Agersø, Y.; Jensen, J.D.; Hasman, H.; Pedersen, K. Spread of extended spectrum cephalosporinase-producing Escherichia coli clones and plasmids from parent animals to broilers and to broiler meat in a production without use of cephalosporins. Foodborne Pathog. Dis. 2014, 11, 740–746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Nilsson, O.; Börjesson, S.; Landén, A.; Bengtsson, B. Vertical transmission of Escherichia coli carrying plasmid-mediated AmpC (pAmpC) through the broiler production pyramid. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2014, 69, 1497–1500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Zurfluh, K.; Jakobi, G.; Stephan, R.; Hächler, H.; Nüesch-Inderbinen, M. Replicon typing of plasmids carrying bla CTX-M-1 in Enterobacteriaceae of animal, environmental and human origin. Front. Microbiol. 2014, 5, 555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Zurfluh, K.; Wang, J.; Klumpp, J.; Nüesch-Inderbinen, M.; Fanning, S.; Stephan, R. Vertical transmission of highly similar bla CTX-M-1-harboring IncI1 plasmids in Escherichia coli with different MLST types in the poultry production pyramid. Front. Microbiol. 2014, 5, 519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Dahms, C.; Hübner, N.-O.; Kossow, A.; Mellmann, A.; Dittmann, K.; Kramer, A. Occurrence of ESBL-Producing Escherichia coli in Livestock and Farm Workers in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Germany. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0143326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Ghodousi, A.; Bonura, C.; Di Noto, A.M.; Mammina, C. Extended-Spectrum ß-Lactamase, AmpC-Producing, and Fluoroquinolone-Resistant Escherichia coli in Retail Broiler Chicken Meat, Italy. Foodborne Pathog. Dis. 2015, 12, 619–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Maciuca, I.E.; Williams, N.J.; Tuchilus, C.; Dorneanu, O.; Guguianu, E.; Carp-Carare, C.; Rimbu, C.; Timofte, D. High Prevalence of Escherichia coli-Producing CTX-M-15 Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamases in Poultry and Human Clinical Isolates in Romania. Microb. Drug Resist. 2015, 21, 651–662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Huijbers, P.M.C.; Graat, E.A.M.; van Hoek, A.H.A.M.; Veenman, C.; de Jong, M.C.M.; van Duijkeren, E. Transmission dynamics of extended-spectrum β-lactamase and AmpC β-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli in a broiler flock without antibiotic use. Prev. Vet. Med. 2016, 131, 12–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Saliu, E.-M.; Vahjen, W.; Zentek, J. Types and prevalence of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase producing Enterobacteriaceae in poultry. Anim. Health Res. Rev. 2017, 18, 46–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ye, Q.; Wu, Q.; Zhang, S.; Zhang, J.; Yang, G.; Wang, J.; Xue, L.; Chen, M. Characterization of Extended-Spectrum β-Lactamase-Producing Enterobacteriaceae from Retail Food in China. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 1709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Projahn, M.; Daehre, K.; Semmler, T.; Guenther, S.; Roesler, U.; Friese, A. Environmental adaptation and vertical dissemination of ESBL-/pAmpC-producing Escherichia coli in an integrated broiler production chain in the absence of an antibiotic treatment. Microb. Biotechnol. 2018, 11, 1017–1026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Freire Martín, I.; AbuOun, M.; Reichel, R.; La Ragione, R.M.; Woodward, M.J. Sequence analysis of a CTX-M-1 IncI1 plasmid found in Salmonella 4,5,12:i:-, Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae on a UK pig farm. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2014, 69, 2098–2101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Hammad, A.M.; Hoffmann, M.; Gonzalez-Escalona, N.; Abbas, N.H.; Yao, K.; Koenig, S.; Allué-Guardia, A.; Eppinger, M. Genomic features of colistin resistant Escherichia coli ST69 strain harboring mcr-1 on IncHI2 plasmid from raw milk cheese in Egypt. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2019, 73, 126–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Dantas Palmeira, J.; Ferreira, H.M.N. Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae in cattle production—A threat around the world. Heliyon 2020, 6, e03206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Waade, J.; Seibt, U.; Honscha, W.; Rachidi, F.; Starke, A.; Speck, S.; Truyen, U. Multidrug-resistant enterobacteria in newborn dairy calves in Germany. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0248291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Founou, L.L.; Founou, R.C.; Allam, M.; Ismail, A.; Essack, S.Y. Genome Analysis of ESBL-Producing Escherichia coli Isolated from Pigs. Pathogens 2022, 11, 776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Heikkilä, A.-M.; Liski, E.; Pyörälä, S.; Taponen, S. Pathogen-specific production losses in bovine mastitis. J. Dairy Sci. 2018, 101, 9493–9504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Eisenberger, D.; Carl, A.; Balsliemke, J.; Kämpf, P.; Nickel, S.; Schulze, G.; Valenza, G. Molecular Characterization of Extended-Spectrum β-Lactamase-Producing Escherichia coli Isolates from Milk Samples of Dairy Cows with Mastitis in Bavaria, Germany. Microb. Drug Resist. 2018, 24, 505–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Su, Y.; Yu, C.-Y.; Tsai, Y.; Wang, S.-H.; Lee, C.; Chu, C. Fluoroquinolone-resistant and extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli from the milk of cows with clinical mastitis in Southern Taiwan. J. Microbiol. Immunol. Infect. 2016, 49, 892–901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Freitag, C.; Michael, G.B.; Kadlec, K.; Hassel, M.; Schwarz, S. Detection of plasmid-borne extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) genes in Escherichia coli isolates from bovine mastitis. Vet. Microbiol. 2017, 200, 151–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Filioussis, G.; Kachrimanidou, M.; Christodoulopoulos, G.; Kyritsi, M.; Hadjichristodoulou, C.; Adamopoulou, M.; Tzivara, A.; Kritas, S.K.; Grinberg, A. Short communication: Bovine mastitis caused by a multidrug-resistant, mcr-1-positive (colistin-resistant), extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli clone on a Greek dairy farm. J. Dairy Sci. 2020, 103, 852–857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Goulart, D.B.; Mellata, M. Escherichia coli Mastitis in Dairy Cattle: Etiology, Diagnosis, and Treatment Challenges. Front. Microbiol. 2022, 13, 928346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. El-Mohandes, S.S.; Eid, R.H.; Allam, A.M.; Abou-Zeina, H.A.A.; Elbayoumy, M.K. Phenotyping and genotyping studies on extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli isolates from mastitic cows on dairy farms in Egypt. Vet. World 2022, 15, 890–897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Blanco, M.; Alonso, M.P.; Nicolas-Chanoine, M.-H.; Dahbi, G.; Mora, A.; Blanco, J.E.; López, C.; Cortés, P.; Llagostera, M.; Leflon-Guibout, V.; et al. Molecular epidemiology of Escherichia coli producing extended-spectrum {beta}-lactamases in Lugo (Spain): Dissemination of clone O25b:H4-ST131 producing CTX-M-15. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2009, 63, 1135–1141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Zhong, Y.-M.; Liu, W.-E.; Liang, X.-H.; Li, Y.-M.; Jian, Z.-J.; Hawkey, P.M. Emergence and spread of O16-ST131 and O25b-ST131 clones among faecal CTX-M-producing Escherichia coli in healthy individuals in Hunan Province, China. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2015, 70, 2223–2227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Gonçalves, D.; Cecílio, P.; Ferreira, H. Nursing homes and long-term care facilities: Reservoirs of CTX-M-15-producing Escherichia coli O25b-ST131 in Portugal. J. Glob. Antimicrob. Resist. 2016, 7, 69–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Koutsianos, D.; Athanasiou, L.; Mossialos, D.; Koutoulis, K.C. Colibacillosis in poultry: A disease overview and the new perspectives for its control and prevention. J. Hell. Vet. Med. Soc. 2021, 71, 2425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Fisher, J.F.; Meroueh, S.O.; Mobashery, S. Bacterial resistance to beta-lactam antibiotics: Compelling opportunism, compelling opportunity. Chem. Rev. 2005, 105, 395–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Carattoli, A. Plasmids and the spread of resistance. Int. J. Med. Microbiol. 2013, 303, 298–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Paterson, D.L.; Mulazimoglu, L.; Casellas, J.M.; Ko, W.C.; Goossens, H.; Von Gottberg, A.; Mohapatra, S.; Trenholme, G.M.; Klugman, K.P.; McCormack, J.G.; et al. Epidemiology of ciprofloxacin resistance and its relationship to extended-spectrum beta-lactamase production in Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates causing bacteremia. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2000, 30, 473–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Bradford, P.A. Extended-spectrum beta-lactamases in the 21st century: Characterization, epidemiology, and detection of this important resistance threat. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2001, 14, 933–951, table of contents. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Paterson, D.L.; Hujer, K.M.; Hujer, A.M.; Yeiser, B.; Bonomo, M.D.; Rice, L.B.; Bonomo, R.A. International Klebsiella Study Group Extended-spectrum beta-lactamases in Klebsiella pneumoniae bloodstream isolates from seven countries: Dominance and widespread prevalence of SHV- and CTX-M-type beta-lactamases. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2003, 47, 3554–3560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Blaak, H.; Hamidjaja, R.A.; van Hoek, A.H.A.M.; de Heer, L.; de Roda Husman, A.M.; Schets, F.M. Detection of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Escherichia coli on flies at poultry farms. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2014, 80, 239–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Balbuena-Alonso, M.G.; Camps, M.; Cortés-Cortés, G.; Carreón-León, E.A.; Lozano-Zarain, P.; Rocha-Gracia, R.D.C. Strain belonging to an emerging, virulent sublineage of ST131 Escherichia coli isolated in fresh spinach, suggesting that ST131 may be transmissible through agricultural products. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 2023, 13, 1237725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Kaper, J.B.; Nataro, J.P.; Mobley, H.L. Pathogenic Escherichia coli. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2004, 2, 123–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Koçak, M.; Büyükkaragöz, B.; Çelebi Tayfur, A.; Çaltik, A.; Köksoy, A.Y.; Çizmeci, Z.; Günbey, S. Causative pathogens and antibiotic resistance in children hospitalized for urinary tract infection. Pediatr. Int. 2016, 58, 467–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Russo, T.A.; Johnson, J.R. Medical and economic impact of extraintestinal infections due to Escherichia coli: Focus on an increasingly important endemic problem. Microbes Infect. 2003, 5, 449–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Yun, K.W.; Lee, M.-K.; Kim, W.; Lim, I.S. Uropathogenic Escherichia coli ST131 in urinary tract infections in children. Korean J. Pediatr. 2017, 60, 221–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Tumbarello, M.; Sanguinetti, M.; Montuori, E.; Trecarichi, E.M.; Posteraro, B.; Fiori, B.; Citton, R.; D’Inzeo, T.; Fadda, G.; Cauda, R.; et al. Predictors of mortality in patients with bloodstream infections caused by extended-spectrum-beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae: Importance of inadequate initial antimicrobial treatment. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2007, 51, 1987–1994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Kolman, K.B. Cystitis and Pyelonephritis: Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prevention. Prim. Care 2019, 46, 191–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Lautenbach, E.; Patel, J.B.; Bilker, W.B.; Edelstein, P.H.; Fishman, N.O. Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae: Risk factors for infection and impact of resistance on outcomes. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2001, 32, 1162–1171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Le, J.; Briggs, G.G.; McKeown, A.; Bustillo, G. Urinary tract infections during pregnancy. Ann. Pharmacother. 2004, 38, 1692–1701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Lane, M.C.; Mobley, H.L.T. Role of P-fimbrial-mediated adherence in pyelonephritis and persistence of uropathogenic Escherichia coli (UPEC) in the mammalian kidney. Kidney Int. 2007, 72, 19–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Suff, N.; Karda, R.; Diaz, J.A.; Ng, J.; Baruteau, J.; Perocheau, D.; Tangney, M.; Taylor, P.W.; Peebles, D.; Buckley, S.M.K.; et al. Ascending Vaginal Infection Using Bioluminescent Bacteria Evokes Intrauterine Inflammation, Preterm Birth, and Neonatal Brain Injury in Pregnant Mice. Am. J. Pathol. 2018, 188, 2164–2176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Shah, N.M.; Charani, E.; Ming, D.; Cheah, F.-C.; Johnson, M.R. Antimicrobial stewardship and targeted therapies in the changing landscape of maternal sepsis. J. Intensive Med. 2024, 4, 46–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Al-Assil, B.; Mahfoud, M.; Hamzeh, A.R. Resistance trends and risk factors of extended spectrum β-lactamases in Escherichia coli infections in Aleppo, Syria. Am. J. Infect. Control 2013, 41, 597–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Reid, R.; Al-Bayati, M.; Samarasinghe, S. Genotypic Identification of Extended-Spectrum β-Lactamase (ESBL)—Producing Enterobacteriaceae from Urinary Tract Infections in the Leicestershire Area, United Kingdom: A One Health Prospective. J. Infect. Dis. Diagn. 2018, 3, 1000122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Zeynudin, A.; Pritsch, M.; Schubert, S.; Messerer, M.; Liegl, G.; Hoelscher, M.; Belachew, T.; Wieser, A. Prevalence and antibiotic susceptibility pattern of CTX-M type extended-spectrum β-lactamases among clinical isolates of gram-negative bacilli in Jimma, Ethiopia. BMC Infect. Dis. 2018, 18, 524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Uddin, F.; Imam, S.H.; Khan, S.; Khan, T.A.; Ahmed, Z.; Sohail, M.; Elnaggar, A.Y.; Fallatah, A.M.; El-Bahy, Z.M. NDM Production as a Dominant Feature in Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae Isolates from a Tertiary Care Hospital. Antibiotics 2021, 11, 48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Lin, Q.; Wang, Y.; Yu, J.; Li, S.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, H.; Lai, X.; Liu, D.; Mao, L.; Luo, Y.; et al. Bacterial characteristics of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) colonized strains and their correlation with subsequent infection. BMC Infect. Dis. 2021, 21, 638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Lowe, M.; Kock, M.M.; Coetzee, J.; Hoosien, E.; Peirano, G.; Strydom, K.-A.; Ehlers, M.M.; Mbelle, N.M.; Shashkina, E.; Haslam, D.B.; et al. Klebsiella pneumoniae ST307 with blaOXA-181, South Africa, 2014–2016. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2019, 25, 739–747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez, B.; Pérez-Galera, S.; Salamanca, E.; de Cueto, M.; Calbo, E.; Almirante, B.; Viale, P.; Oliver, A.; Pintado, V.; Gasch, O.; et al. A Multinational, Preregistered Cohort Study of β-Lactam/β-Lactamase Inhibitor Combinations for Treatment of Bloodstream Infections Due to Extended-Spectrum-β-Lactamase-Producing Enterobacteriaceae. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2016, 60, 4159–4169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Muhammed, M.; Flokas, M.E.; Detsis, M.; Alevizakos, M.; Mylonakis, E. Comparison Between Carbapenems and β-Lactam/β-Lactamase Inhibitors in the Treatment for Bloodstream Infections Caused by Extended-Spectrum β-Lactamase-Producing Enterobacteriaceae: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Open Forum Infect. Dis. 2017, 4, ofx099. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Harris, P.N.A.; Tambyah, P.A.; Lye, D.C.; Mo, Y.; Lee, T.H.; Yilmaz, M.; Alenazi, T.H.; Arabi, Y.; Falcone, M.; Bassetti, M.; et al. Effect of Piperacillin-Tazobactam vs Meropenem on 30-Day Mortality for Patients with E. coli or Klebsiella pneumoniae Bloodstream Infection and Ceftriaxone Resistance: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2018, 320, 984–994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez, B.; Rodríguez-Baño, J. Current options for the treatment of infections due to extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae in different groups of patients. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2019, 25, 932–942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Abubakar, U.; Tangiisuran, B.; Elnaem, M.H.; Sulaiman, S.A.S.; Khan, F.U. Mortality and its predictors among hospitalized patients with infections due to extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) Enterobacteriaceae in Malaysia: A retrospective observational study. Futur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2022, 8, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. ElBaradei, A.; Maharem, D.A.; Kader, O.; Ghareeb, M.K.; Naga, I.S. Fecal carriage of ESBL-producing Escherichia coli in Egyptian patients admitted to the Medical Research Institute hospital, Alexandria University. AIMS Microbiol. 2020, 6, 422–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Giedraitienė, A.; Vitkauskienė, A.; Pavilonis, A.; Patamsytė, V.; Genel, N.; Decre, D.; Arlet, G. Prevalence of O25b-ST131 clone among Escherichia coli strains producing CTX-M-15, CTX-M-14 and CTX-M-92 β-lactamases. Infect. Dis. 2017, 49, 106–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Gonçalves, D.; Cecílio, P.; Faustino, A.; Iglesias, C.; Branca, F.; Estrada, A.; Ferreira, H. Intra- and Extra-Hospital Dissemination of IMP-22-Producing Klebsiella pneumoniae in Northern Portugal: The Breach of the Hospital Frontier Toward the Community. Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12, 777054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Biehl, L.M.; Schmidt-Hieber, M.; Liss, B.; Cornely, O.A.; Vehreschild, M.J.G.T. Colonization and infection with extended spectrum beta-lactamase producing Enterobacteriaceae in high-risk patients—Review of the literature from a clinical perspective. Crit. Rev. Microbiol. 2016, 42, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Sharaf, M.; Sewid, A.H.; Hamouda, H.I.; Elharrif, M.G.; El-Demerdash, A.S.; Alharthi, A.; Hashim, N.; Hamad, A.A.; Selim, S.; Alkhalifah, D.H.M.; et al. Rhamnolipid-Coated Iron Oxide Nanoparticles as a Novel Multitarget Candidate against Major Foodborne E. coli Serotypes and Methicillin-Resistant S. aureus. Microbiol. Spectr. 2022, 10, e0025022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Dawwam, G.E.; Al-Shemy, M.T.; El-Demerdash, A.S. Green synthesis of cellulose nanocrystal/ZnO bio-nanocomposites exerting antibacterial activity and downregulating virulence toxigenic genes of food-poisoning bacteria. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 16848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Becker, E.; Projahn, M.; Burow, E.; Käsbohrer, A. Are There Effective Intervention Measures in Broiler Production against the ESBL/AmpC Producer Escherichia coli? Pathogens 2021, 10, 608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Ishnaiwer, M.; Bezabih, Y.; Javaudin, F.; Sassi, M.; Bemer, P.; Batard, E.; Dion, M. In vitro and in vivo activity of new strains of Bacillus subtilis against ESBL-producing Escherichia coli: An experimental study. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2022, 132, 2270–2279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Ceccarelli, D.; van Essen-Zandbergen, A.; Smid, B.; Veldman, K.T.; Boender, G.J.; Fischer, E.A.J.; Mevius, D.J.; van der Goot, J.A. Competitive Exclusion Reduces Transmission and Excretion of Extended-Spectrum-β-Lactamase-Producing Escherichia coli in Broilers. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2017, 83, e03439-16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Dame-Korevaar, A.; Fischer, E.A.J.; van der Goot, J.; Velkers, F.; Ceccarelli, D.; Mevius, D.; Stegeman, A. Early life supply of competitive exclusion products reduces colonization of extended spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli in broilers. Poult. Sci. 2020, 99, 4052–4064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Ebrahem, A.F.; El-Demerdash, A.S.; Orady, R.M.; Nabil, N.M. Modulatory Effect of Competitive Exclusion on the Transmission of ESBL E. coli in Chickens. Probiotics Antimicrob. Proteins 2024, 16, 1087–1098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. FAO; UNEP; WHO. One Health Joint Plan of Action, 2022–2026; World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) (Founded as OIE): Paris, France, 2022; ISBN 978-92-5-136957-9. [Google Scholar]
  80. Bergmann, K.R.; Liu, S.X.L.; Tian, R.; Kushnir, A.; Turner, J.R.; Li, H.-L.; Chou, P.M.; Weber, C.R.; De Plaen, I.G. Bifidobacteria stabilize claudins at tight junctions and prevent intestinal barrier dysfunction in mouse necrotizing enterocolitis. Am. J. Pathol. 2013, 182, 1595–1606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Park, Y.W.; Nam, M.S. Bioactive Peptides in Milk and Dairy Products: A Review. Korean J. Food Sci. Anim. Resour. 2015, 35, 831–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Arboleya, S.; Watkins, C.; Stanton, C.; Ross, R.P. Gut Bifidobacteria Populations in Human Health and Aging. Front. Microbiol. 2016, 7, 1204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Grant, J.R.; Enns, E.; Marinier, E.; Mandal, A.; Herman, E.K.; Chen, C.-Y.; Graham, M.; Van Domselaar, G.; Stothard, P. Proksee: In-depth characterization and visualization of bacterial genomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2023, 51, W484–W492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Karlyshev, A.V.; Gould, S. Ligilactobacillus salivarius 2102–15 complete genome sequence data. Data Brief 2023, 50, 109564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Lobry, J.R. Asymmetric substitution patterns in the two DNA strands of bacteria. Mol. Biol. Evol. 1996, 13, 660–665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. de Jong, A.; van Hijum, S.A.F.T.; Bijlsma, J.J.E.; Kok, J.; Kuipers, O.P. BAGEL: A web-based bacteriocin genome mining tool. Nucleic Acids Res. 2006, 34, W273–W279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Wishart, D.S.; Han, S.; Saha, S.; Oler, E.; Peters, H.; Grant, J.R.; Stothard, P.; Gautam, V. PHASTEST: Faster than PHASTER, better than PHAST. Nucleic Acids Res. 2023, 51, W443–W450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Fukuda, S.; Toh, H.; Hase, K.; Oshima, K.; Nakanishi, Y.; Yoshimura, K.; Tobe, T.; Clarke, J.M.; Topping, D.L.; Suzuki, T.; et al. Bifidobacteria can protect from enteropathogenic infection through production of acetate. Nature 2011, 469, 543–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Fukuda, S.; Toh, H.; Taylor, T.D.; Ohno, H.; Hattori, M. Acetate-producing bifidobacteria protect the host from enteropathogenic infection via carbohydrate transporters. Gut Microbes 2012, 3, 449–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Abe, F.; Ishibashi, N.; Shimamura, S. Effect of administration of bifidobacteria and lactic acid bacteria to newborn calves and piglets. J. Dairy Sci. 1995, 78, 2838–2846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Laursen, M.F.; Pekmez, C.T.; Larsson, M.W.; Lind, M.V.; Yonemitsu, C.; Larnkjær, A.; Mølgaard, C.; Bode, L.; Dragsted, L.O.; Michaelsen, K.F.; et al. Maternal milk microbiota and oligosaccharides contribute to the infant gut microbiota assembly. ISME Commun. 2021, 1, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Masco, L.; Huys, G.; Gevers, D.; Verbrugghen, L.; Swings, J. Identification of Bifidobacterium species using rep-PCR fingerprinting. Syst. Appl. Microbiol. 2003, 26, 557–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Jarocki, P.; Podleśny, M.; Komoń-Janczara, E.; Kucharska, J.; Glibowska, A.; Targoński, Z. Comparison of various molecular methods for rapid differentiation of intestinal bifidobacteria at the species, subspecies and strain level. BMC Microbiol. 2016, 16, 159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Jena, R.; Choudhury, P.K.; Puniya, A.K.; Tomar, S.K. Efficacy of BOX-PCR fingerprinting for taxonomic discrimination of bifidobacterial species isolated from diverse sources. 3 Biotech 2021, 11, 270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Odamaki, T.; Bottacini, F.; Kato, K.; Mitsuyama, E.; Yoshida, K.; Horigome, A.; Xiao, J.-Z.; van Sinderen, D. Genomic diversity and distribution of Bifidobacterium longum subsp. longum across the human lifespan. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Zhao, L.; Wang, S.; Dong, J.; Shi, J.; Guan, J.; Liu, D.; Liu, F.; Li, B.; Huo, G. Identification, Characterization, and Antioxidant Potential of Bifidobacterium longum subsp. longum Strains Isolated from Feces of Healthy Infants. Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12, 756519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Kelly, W.J.; Cookson, A.L.; Altermann, E.; Lambie, S.C.; Perry, R.; Teh, K.H.; Otter, D.E.; Shapiro, N.; Woyke, T.; Leahy, S.C. Genomic analysis of three Bifidobacterium species isolated from the calf gastrointestinal tract. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 30768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Dong, Y.; Wu, Z.; Gai, Z.; Han, M. Bifidobacterium longum subsp. longum BL21 ameliorates alcoholic liver disease in mice through enhancement of the hepatic antioxidant capacity and modulation of the gut microbiota. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2023, 134, lxad251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Arboleya, S.; Stanton, C.; Ryan, C.A.; Dempsey, E.; Ross, P.R. Bosom Buddies: The Symbiotic Relationship between Infants and Bifidobacterium longum ssp. longum and ssp. infantis. Genetic and Probiotic Features. Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 7, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Underwood, M.A.; German, J.B.; Lebrilla, C.B.; Mills, D.A. Bifidobacterium longum subspecies infantis: Champion colonizer of the infant gut. Pediatr. Res. 2015, 77, 229–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Sela, D.A.; Chapman, J.; Adeuya, A.; Kim, J.H.; Chen, F.; Whitehead, T.R.; Lapidus, A.; Rokhsar, D.S.; Lebrilla, C.B.; German, J.B.; et al. The genome sequence of Bifidobacterium longum subsp. infantis reveals adaptations for milk utilization within the infant microbiome. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2008, 105, 18964–18969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Meng, D.; Zhu, W.; Ganguli, K.; Shi, H.N.; Walker, W.A. Anti-inflammatory effects of Bifidobacterium longum subsp infantis secretions on fetal human enterocytes are mediated by TLR-4 receptors. Am. J. Physiol. Gastrointest. Liver Physiol. 2016, 311, G744–G753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. O’Callaghan, A.; van Sinderen, D. Bifidobacteria and Their Role as Members of the Human Gut Microbiota. Front. Microbiol. 2016, 7, 925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Bueno, D.; Juan, D.; Latorre, J.; Shehata, A.; Eisenreich, W.; Tellez-Isaias, G. Strategies to attack pathogenic avian microorganisms: From probiotics to postbiotics. Ger. J. Vet. Res. 2024, 4, 95–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Turroni, F.; Foroni, E.; Serafini, F.; Viappiani, A.; Montanini, B.; Bottacini, F.; Ferrarini, A.; Bacchini, P.L.; Rota, C.; Delledonne, M.; et al. Ability of Bifidobacterium breve to grow on different types of milk: Exploring the metabolism of milk through genome analysis. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2011, 77, 7408–7417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Martín, R.; Jiménez, E.; Heilig, H.; Fernández, L.; Marín, M.L.; Zoetendal, E.G.; Rodríguez, J.M. Isolation of bifidobacteria from breast milk and assessment of the bifidobacterial population by PCR-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis and quantitative real-time PCR. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2009, 75, 965–969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Ugolev, A.M. Membrane digestion. Gut 1972, 13, 735–747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Di Gioia, D.; Aloisio, I.; Mazzola, G.; Biavati, B. Bifidobacteria: Their impact on gut microbiota composition and their applications as probiotics in infants. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2014, 98, 563–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Monteagudo-Mera, A.; Rastall, R.A.; Gibson, G.R.; Charalampopoulos, D.; Chatzifragkou, A. Adhesion mechanisms mediated by probiotics and prebiotics and their potential impact on human health. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2019, 103, 6463–6472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Chichlowski, M.; De Lartigue, G.; German, J.B.; Raybould, H.E.; Mills, D.A. Bifidobacteria isolated from infants and cultured on human milk oligosaccharides affect intestinal epithelial function. J. Pediatr. Gastroenterol. Nutr. 2012, 55, 321–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Arboleya, S.; Bottacini, F.; O’Connell-Motherway, M.; Ryan, C.A.; Ross, R.P.; van Sinderen, D.; Stanton, C. Gene-trait matching across the Bifidobacterium longum pan-genome reveals considerable diversity in carbohydrate catabolism among human infant strains. BMC Genom. 2018, 19, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Garrido, D.; Ruiz-Moyano, S.; Kirmiz, N.; Davis, J.C.; Totten, S.M.; Lemay, D.G.; Ugalde, J.A.; German, J.B.; Lebrilla, C.B.; Mills, D.A. A novel gene cluster allows preferential utilization of fucosylated milk oligosaccharides in Bifidobacterium longum subsp. longum SC596. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 35045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Kelly, S.M.; Munoz-Munoz, J.; van Sinderen, D. Plant Glycan Metabolism by Bifidobacteria. Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12, 609418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  114. Oki, K.; Akiyama, T.; Matsuda, K.; Gawad, A.; Makino, H.; Ishikawa, E.; Oishi, K.; Kushiro, A.; Fujimoto, J. Long-term colonization exceeding six years from early infancy of Bifidobacterium longum subsp. longum in human gut. BMC Microbiol. 2018, 18, 209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  115. Asahara, T.; Shimizu, K.; Nomoto, K.; Hamabata, T.; Ozawa, A.; Takeda, Y. Probiotic bifidobacteria protect mice from lethal infection with Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli O157:H7. Infect. Immun. 2004, 72, 2240–2247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Henrick, B.M.; Hutton, A.A.; Palumbo, M.C.; Casaburi, G.; Mitchell, R.D.; Underwood, M.A.; Smilowitz, J.T.; Frese, S.A. Elevated Fecal pH Indicates a Profound Change in the Breastfed Infant Gut Microbiome Due to Reduction of Bifidobacterium over the Past Century. mSphere 2018, 3, 10-1128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Duncan, S.H.; Holtrop, G.; Lobley, G.E.; Calder, A.G.; Stewart, C.S.; Flint, H.J. Contribution of acetate to butyrate formation by human faecal bacteria. Br. J. Nutr. 2004, 91, 915–923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Peng, L.; Li, Z.-R.; Green, R.S.; Holzman, I.R.; Lin, J. Butyrate enhances the intestinal barrier by facilitating tight junction assembly via activation of AMP-activated protein kinase in Caco-2 cell monolayers. J. Nutr. 2009, 139, 1619–1625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Zimmerman, M.A.; Singh, N.; Martin, P.M.; Thangaraju, M.; Ganapathy, V.; Waller, J.L.; Shi, H.; Robertson, K.D.; Munn, D.H.; Liu, K. Butyrate suppresses colonic inflammation through HDAC1-dependent Fas upregulation and Fas-mediated apoptosis of T cells. Am. J. Physiol. Gastrointest. Liver Physiol. 2012, 302, G1405–G1415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Medzhitov, R.; Janeway, C.A. Innate immunity: Impact on the adaptive immune response. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 1997, 9, 4–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Kumar, H.; Kawai, T.; Akira, S. Pathogen recognition by the innate immune system. Int. Rev. Immunol. 2011, 30, 16–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Brubaker, S.W.; Bonham, K.S.; Zanoni, I.; Kagan, J.C. Innate immune pattern recognition: A cell biological perspective. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 2015, 33, 257–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  123. Płóciennikowska, A.; Hromada-Judycka, A.; Borzęcka, K.; Kwiatkowska, K. Co-operation of TLR4 and raft proteins in LPS-induced pro-inflammatory signaling. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 2015, 72, 557–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Cao, X. Self-regulation and cross-regulation of pattern-recognition receptor signalling in health and disease. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2016, 16, 35–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Fitzgerald, K.A.; Kagan, J.C. Toll-like Receptors and the Control of Immunity. Cell 2020, 180, 1044–1066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Kumar, H.; Kawai, T.; Akira, S. Toll-like receptors and innate immunity. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2009, 388, 621–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Kawai, T.; Akira, S. The role of pattern-recognition receptors in innate immunity: Update on Toll-like receptors. Nat. Immunol. 2010, 11, 373–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Kircheis, R.; Planz, O. Special Issue “The Role of Toll-Like Receptors (TLRs) in Infection and Inflammation 2.0”. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 9709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Poltorak, A.; He, X.; Smirnova, I.; Liu, M.Y.; Van Huffel, C.; Du, X.; Birdwell, D.; Alejos, E.; Silva, M.; Galanos, C.; et al. Defective LPS signaling in C3H/HeJ and C57BL/10ScCr mice: Mutations in Tlr4 gene. Science 1998, 282, 2085–2088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Zhou, X.; Gao, X.-P.; Fan, J.; Liu, Q.; Anwar, K.N.; Frey, R.S.; Malik, A.B. LPS activation of Toll-like receptor 4 signals CD11b/CD18 expression in neutrophils. Am. J. Physiol. Lung Cell. Mol. Physiol. 2005, 288, L655-62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Steimle, A.; Autenrieth, I.B.; Frick, J.-S. Structure and function: Lipid A modifications in commensals and pathogens. Int. J. Med. Microbiol. 2016, 306, 290–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Yang, Y.; Wandler, A.M.; Postlethwait, J.H.; Guillemin, K. Dynamic Evolution of the LPS-Detoxifying Enzyme Intestinal Alkaline Phosphatase in Zebrafish and Other Vertebrates. Front. Immunol. 2012, 3, 314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  133. Chow, J.C.; Young, D.W.; Golenbock, D.T.; Christ, W.J.; Gusovsky, F. Toll-like receptor-4 mediates lipopolysaccharide-induced signal transduction. J. Biol. Chem. 1999, 274, 10689–10692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  134. Horng, T.; Barton, G.M.; Flavell, R.A.; Medzhitov, R. The adaptor molecule TIRAP provides signalling specificity for Toll-like receptors. Nature 2002, 420, 329–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Bonham, K.S.; Orzalli, M.H.; Hayashi, K.; Wolf, A.I.; Glanemann, C.; Weninger, W.; Iwasaki, A.; Knipe, D.M.; Kagan, J.C. A promiscuous lipid-binding protein diversifies the subcellular sites of toll-like receptor signal transduction. Cell 2014, 156, 705–716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  136. Kagan, J.C.; Su, T.; Horng, T.; Chow, A.; Akira, S.; Medzhitov, R. TRAM couples endocytosis of Toll-like receptor 4 to the induction of interferon-beta. Nat. Immunol. 2008, 9, 361–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Yi, Y.-S. Caspase-11 non-canonical inflammasome: A critical sensor of intracellular lipopolysaccharide in macrophage-mediated inflammatory responses. Immunology 2017, 152, 207–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Barker, J.H.; Weiss, J.P. Detecting lipopolysaccharide in the cytosol of mammalian cells: Lessons from MD-2/TLR4. J. Leukoc. Biol. 2019, 106, 127–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Kelley, N.; Jeltema, D.; Duan, Y.; He, Y. The NLRP3 Inflammasome: An Overview of Mechanisms of Activation and Regulation. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 3328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Swanson, K.V.; Deng, M.; Ting, J.P.-Y. The NLRP3 inflammasome: Molecular activation and regulation to therapeutics. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2019, 19, 477–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Ciesielska, A.; Matyjek, M.; Kwiatkowska, K. TLR4 and CD14 trafficking and its influence on LPS-induced pro-inflammatory signaling. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 2021, 78, 1233–1261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Gribar, S.C.; Anand, R.J.; Sodhi, C.P.; Hackam, D.J. The role of epithelial Toll-like receptor signaling in the pathogenesis of intestinal inflammation. J. Leukoc. Biol. 2008, 83, 493–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  143. Takahashi, K.; Sugi, Y.; Hosono, A.; Kaminogawa, S. Epigenetic regulation of TLR4 gene expression in intestinal epithelial cells for the maintenance of intestinal homeostasis. J. Immunol. 2009, 183, 6522–6529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Guzzo, C.; Ayer, A.; Basta, S.; Banfield, B.W.; Gee, K. IL-27 enhances LPS-induced proinflammatory cytokine production via upregulation of TLR4 expression and signaling in human monocytes. J. Immunol. 2012, 188, 864–873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Mayr, F.B.; Yende, S.; Angus, D.C. Epidemiology of severe sepsis. Virulence 2014, 5, 4–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Cani, P.D.; Bibiloni, R.; Knauf, C.; Waget, A.; Neyrinck, A.M.; Delzenne, N.M.; Burcelin, R. Changes in gut microbiota control metabolic endotoxemia-induced inflammation in high-fat diet-induced obesity and diabetes in mice. Diabetes 2008, 57, 1470–1481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Cani, P.D.; Amar, J.; Iglesias, M.A.; Poggi, M.; Knauf, C.; Bastelica, D.; Neyrinck, A.M.; Fava, F.; Tuohy, K.M.; Chabo, C.; et al. Metabolic endotoxemia initiates obesity and insulin resistance. Diabetes 2007, 56, 1761–1772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Velloso, L.A.; Folli, F.; Saad, M.J. TLR4 at the Crossroads of Nutrients, Gut Microbiota, and Metabolic Inflammation. Endocr. Rev. 2015, 36, 245–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Molteni, M.; Gemma, S.; Rossetti, C. The Role of Toll-Like Receptor 4 in Infectious and Noninfectious Inflammation. Mediat. Inflamm. 2016, 2016, 6978936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Rohm, T.V.; Meier, D.T.; Olefsky, J.M.; Donath, M.Y. Inflammation in obesity, diabetes, and related disorders. Immunity 2022, 55, 31–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Malo, M.S. A High Level of Intestinal Alkaline Phosphatase Is Protective Against Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Irrespective of Obesity. eBioMedicine 2015, 2, 2016–2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Bates, J.M.; Akerlund, J.; Mittge, E.; Guillemin, K. Intestinal alkaline phosphatase detoxifies lipopolysaccharide and prevents inflammation in zebrafish in response to the gut microbiota. Cell Host Microbe 2007, 2, 371–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  153. Goldberg, R.F.; Austen, W.G.; Zhang, X.; Munene, G.; Mostafa, G.; Biswas, S.; McCormack, M.; Eberlin, K.R.; Nguyen, J.T.; Tatlidede, H.S.; et al. Intestinal alkaline phosphatase is a gut mucosal defense factor maintained by enteral nutrition. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2008, 105, 3551–3556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Malo, M.S.; Alam, S.N.; Mostafa, G.; Zeller, S.J.; Johnson, P.V.; Mohammad, N.; Chen, K.T.; Moss, A.K.; Ramasamy, S.; Faruqui, A.; et al. Intestinal alkaline phosphatase preserves the normal homeostasis of gut microbiota. Gut 2010, 59, 1476–1484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  155. Alam, S.N.; Yammine, H.; Moaven, O.; Ahmed, R.; Moss, A.K.; Biswas, B.; Muhammad, N.; Biswas, R.; Raychowdhury, A.; Kaliannan, K.; et al. Intestinal alkaline phosphatase prevents antibiotic-induced susceptibility to enteric pathogens. Ann. Surg. 2014, 259, 715–722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Fawley, J.; Gourlay, D.M. Intestinal alkaline phosphatase: A summary of its role in clinical disease. J. Surg. Res. 2016, 202, 225–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Lallès, J.-P. Recent advances in intestinal alkaline phosphatase, inflammation, and nutrition. Nutr. Rev. 2019, 77, 710–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Santos, G.M.; Ismael, S.; Morais, J.; Araújo, J.R.; Faria, A.; Calhau, C.; Marques, C. Intestinal Alkaline Phosphatase: A Review of This Enzyme Role in the Intestinal Barrier Function. Microorganisms 2022, 10, 746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Tam, J.S.Y.; Coller, J.K.; Hughes, P.A.; Prestidge, C.A.; Bowen, J.M. Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) antagonists as potential therapeutics for intestinal inflammation. Indian J. Gastroenterol. 2021, 40, 5–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Esteban-Torres, M.; Ruiz, L.; Sanchez-Gallardo, R.; van Sinderen, D. Isolation of Chromosomal and Plasmid DNA from Bifidobacteria. Methods Mol. Biol. 2021, 2278, 21–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Versalovic, J.; Koeuth, T.; Lupski, J.R. Distribution of repetitive DNA sequences in eubacteria and application to fingerprinting of bacterial genomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 1991, 19, 6823–6831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Huang, Y.; Adams, M.C. In vitro assessment of the upper gastrointestinal tolerance of potential probiotic dairy propionibacteria. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2004, 91, 253–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  163. Schierack, P.; Nordhoff, M.; Pollmann, M.; Weyrauch, K.D.; Amasheh, S.; Lodemann, U.; Jores, J.; Tachu, B.; Kleta, S.; Blikslager, A.; et al. Characterization of a porcine intestinal epithelial cell line for in vitro studies of microbial pathogenesis in swine. Histochem. Cell Biol. 2006, 125, 293–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  164. Rath, N.C.; Liyanage, R.; Gupta, A.; Packialakshmi, B.; Lay, J.O. A method to culture chicken enterocytes and their characterization. Poult. Sci. 2018, 97, 4040–4047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Katwal, P.; Thomas, M.; Uprety, T.; Hildreth, M.B.; Kaushik, R.S. Development and biochemical and immunological characterization of early passage and immortalized bovine intestinal epithelial cell lines from the ileum of a young calf. Cytotechnology 2019, 71, 127–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Coman, M.M.; Verdenelli, M.C.; Cecchini, C.; Silvi, S.; Orpianesi, C.; Boyko, N.; Cresci, A. In vitro evaluation of antimicrobial activity of Lactobacillus rhamnosus IMC 501(®), Lactobacillus paracasei IMC 502(®) and SYNBIO(®) against pathogens. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2014, 117, 518–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Dubey, U.K.; Mistry, V.V. Growth characteristics of bifidobacteria in infant formulas. J. Dairy Sci. 1996, 79, 1146–1155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Abramov, V.M.; Kosarev, I.V.; Machulin, A.V.; Deryusheva, E.I.; Priputnevich, T.V.; Panin, A.N.; Chikileva, I.O.; Abashina, T.N.; Manoyan, A.M.; Akhmetzyanova, A.A.; et al. Anti-Salmonella Defence and Intestinal Homeostatic Maintenance In Vitro of a Consortium Containing Limosilactobacillus fermentum 3872 and Ligilactobacillus salivarius 7247 Strains in Human, Porcine, and Chicken Enterocytes. Antibiotics 2024, 13, 30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Lu, C.-C.; Kuo, H.-C.; Wang, F.-S.; Jou, M.-H.; Lee, K.-C.; Chuang, J.-H. Upregulation of TLRs and IL-6 as a marker in human colorectal cancer. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2014, 16, 159–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Takeuchi, A.; Hisamatsu, K.; Okumura, N.; Sugimitsu, Y.; Yanase, E.; Ueno, Y.; Nagaoka, S. IIAEK Targets Intestinal Alkaline Phosphatase (IAP) to Improve Cholesterol Metabolism with a Specific Activation of IAP and Downregulation of ABCA1. Nutrients 2020, 12, 2859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. The light microscopy of pure cultures of B. longum subsp. longum isolates. (A)—BLLT1 obtained initially from the milk of a calved cow. (B)—BLLT2 obtained from the feces of a newborn calf. (C)—BLLT3 obtained from the feces of a three-year-old child who received fresh milk of a calved cow for 1 month. The magnification is 1350×. The cells were stained with methylene blue.
Figure 1. The light microscopy of pure cultures of B. longum subsp. longum isolates. (A)—BLLT1 obtained initially from the milk of a calved cow. (B)—BLLT2 obtained from the feces of a newborn calf. (C)—BLLT3 obtained from the feces of a three-year-old child who received fresh milk of a calved cow for 1 month. The magnification is 1350×. The cells were stained with methylene blue.
Antibiotics 13 00924 g001
Figure 2. Analysis of PCR products using electrophoresis in 2% agarose gel. M—marker of molecular weight 100 bp. k—control PCR in the absence of template DNA. 1—BLLT1; 2—BLLT2; 3—BLLT3.
Figure 2. Analysis of PCR products using electrophoresis in 2% agarose gel. M—marker of molecular weight 100 bp. k—control PCR in the absence of template DNA. 1—BLLT1; 2—BLLT2; 3—BLLT3.
Antibiotics 13 00924 g002
Figure 3. The dynamics of acetic acid production by the BLLT1 strain (●) and a decrease of the culture medium pH (♦). Data are presented as the means ± SD of six independent experiments, tested in triplicate.
Figure 3. The dynamics of acetic acid production by the BLLT1 strain (●) and a decrease of the culture medium pH (♦). Data are presented as the means ± SD of six independent experiments, tested in triplicate.
Antibiotics 13 00924 g003
Figure 4. Genetic map of B. longum subsp. longum strain T1 (BLLT1) genome. GC skew+ and GC skew- strands in an inner circle are designated with green and pink, respectively. Positions of the four rRNA gene clusters are indicated by green lines. Position of a highly repetitive 5.2 kb region (at 1,824,994–1,830,209 bp) with an unknown function is indicated by a red line.
Figure 4. Genetic map of B. longum subsp. longum strain T1 (BLLT1) genome. GC skew+ and GC skew- strands in an inner circle are designated with green and pink, respectively. Positions of the four rRNA gene clusters are indicated by green lines. Position of a highly repetitive 5.2 kb region (at 1,824,994–1,830,209 bp) with an unknown function is indicated by a red line.
Antibiotics 13 00924 g004
Table 1. Tolerance of BLLT1 to gastric and intestinal stresses in vitro.
Table 1. Tolerance of BLLT1 to gastric and intestinal stresses in vitro.
Gastric Stress *Intestinal Stress *
10 min30 min60 min5 h
Experiment, ×107 CFU/mLControl, ×107 CFU/mLExperiment, ×107 CFU/mLControl, ×107 CFU/mLExperiment, ×107 CFU/mLControl, ×107 CFU/mLExperiment, ×107 CFU/mLControl, ×108 CFU/mL
2.85 ± 0.583.14 ± 0.522.92 ± 0.493.21 ± 0.552.84 ± 0.443.16 ± 0.472.95 ± 0.621.15 ± 0.51
RD = 1.1 ± 0.2
Very good
RD = 1.1 ± 0.1
Very good
RD = 1.1 ± 0.3
Very good
RD = 3.9 ± 0.4
Very good
* Data are presented as the means ± SD of six independent experiments, tested in triplicate.
Table 2. Adhesion of BLLT1 to human, porcine, chicken, and bovine enterocytes.
Table 2. Adhesion of BLLT1 to human, porcine, chicken, and bovine enterocytes.
EnterocytesBLLT1 Adhesion Indicators
Adhesion Activity (%)Adhesion Index
Human HT-2910034 ± 3
Porcine IPEC-j210025 ± 3
Chicken CPCE10029 ± 3
Bovine BPCE10036 ± 3
Data are presented as the means ±SD of six independent experiments, tested in triplicate.
Table 3. Antibacterial activity of BLLT1 against ESBL-E pathogens.
Table 3. Antibacterial activity of BLLT1 against ESBL-E pathogens.
StrainSLBL Type0 h24 h
C 1JC 2C 1JC 2
E. coli ATCC BAA 2326STX-M-151 × 1062 × 1069 × 108<102
E. coli ATCC BAA 204SHV-22 × 1053 × 1058 × 108<102
E. coli ATCC BAA 198TEM-263 × 1053 × 1057 × 108<102
E. coli IIE Wo 8015OXA2 × 1053 × 1057 × 108<102
E. coli IIE Wo 8034SHV1 × 1061 × 1066 × 108<102
E. coli IIE Wo 8042STX-M4 × 1054 × 1058 × 108<102
E. coli IIE Wo 8059TEM2 × 1052 × 1057 × 108<102
E. coli IIE Wo 8123TEM3 × 1053 × 1058 × 108<102
E. coli IIE Wo 8147 STX-M2 × 1052 × 1057 × 108<102
E. coli IIE WLM 8194STX-M5 × 1055 × 1058 × 108<102
E. coli IIE NB 8215TEM3 × 1053 × 1058 × 108<102
E. coli IIE NB 8224STX-M4 × 1054 × 1058 × 108<102
E. coli IIE Co 8316STX-M2 × 1053 × 1059 × 108<102
E. coli IIE Ca 8320STX-M5 × 1055 × 1058 × 108<102
E. coli IIE Co 8356TEM3 × 1053 × 1058 × 108<102
E. coli IIE Ca 8341TEM2 × 1052 × 1058 × 108<102
E. coli IIE Pi 8420SHV4 × 1053 × 1058 × 108<102
E. coli IIE WP 8436SHV1 × 1051 × 1059 × 108<102
E. coli IIE LH 8508OXA2 × 1053 × 1057 × 108<102
E. coli IIE Egg 8517OXA3 × 1053 × 1058 × 108<102
E. coli IIE LH 8525STX-M4 × 1054 × 1058 × 108<102
E. coli IIE Egg 8532STX-M1 × 1051 × 1059 × 108<102
E. coli IIE BC 8644TEM6 × 1056 × 1058 × 108<102
E. coli IIE BC 8650STX-M4 × 1054 × 1058 × 108<102
E. coli IIE BC 8675OXA2 × 1053 × 1058 × 108<102
E. coli IIE BC 8689SHV3 × 1053 × 1058 × 108<102
1 Control; number of ESBL-E cells in monoculture (CFU/mL). 2 Number of ESBL-E cells in co-culture with BLLT1 (CFU/mL). Data are presented as the means ± SD of six independent experiments, tested in triplicate.
Table 4. BLLT1 inhibits TLR4 mRNA expression induced by ESBL-E in HT-29 enterocytes.
Table 4. BLLT1 inhibits TLR4 mRNA expression induced by ESBL-E in HT-29 enterocytes.
E. coli StrainsTLR4 mRNA (Fold Change)
ControlBLLT1E. coliBLLT1+ E. coli
E. coli ATCC BAA 23260.9 ± 0.10.8 ± 0.1 *10.1 ± 0.5 **1.0 ± 0.2 *
E. coli ATCC BAA 2041.0 ± 0.20.7 ± 0.1 * 10.3 ± 0.3 ** 1.2 ± 0.2 *
E. coli ATCC BAA 1980.8 ± 0.20.8 ± 0.1 * 9.1 ± 0.4 **1.0 ± 0.1 *
E. coli IIE Wo 80150.9 ± 0.30.8 ± 0.1 * 10.5 ± 0.6 ** 1.1 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE Wo 80340.9 ± 0.20.8 ± 0.1 * 11.8 ± 0.8 ** 1.0 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE Wo 80420.8 ± 0.20.8 ± 0.1 * 10.4 ± 0.7 **1.0 ± 0.1 *
E. coli IIE Wo 80590.9 ± 0.30.7 ± 0.1 * 9.4 ± 0.5 ** 1.2 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE Wo 81230.9 ± 0.2 0.7 ± 0.1 * 11.0 ± 0.6 ** 1.0 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE Wo 8147 0.8 ± 0.2 0.7 ± 0.1 * 10.9 ± 0.9 ** 1.0 ± 0.1 *
E. coli IIE WLM 81941.1 ± 0.3 0.9 ± 0.2 * 9.5 ± 0.5 ** 1.1 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE NB 82150.9 ± 0.1 0.8 ± 0.1 * 11.3 ± 0.7 ** 1.3 ± 0.1 *
E. coli IIE NB 82240.9 ± 0.2 0.7 ± 0.1 * 10.1 ± 0.6 ** 1.0 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE Co 83160.8 ± 0.1 0.7 ± 0.1 * 9.0 ± 0.4 **1.2 ± 0.1 *
E. coli IIE Ca 83201.0 ± 0.2 0.9 ± 0.2 * 11.8 ± 0.5 **1.3 ± 0.1 *
E. coli IIE Co 83560.8 ± 0.2 0.6 ± 0.1 * 10.2 ±0.4 ** 1.3 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE Ca 83411.1 ± 0.2 0.7 ± 0.2 * 12.6 ±0.7 ** 1.4 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE Pi 84200.9 ± 0.2 0.8 ± 0.1 * 11.2 ±0 6 ** 1.0 ± 0.1 *
E. coli IIE WP 84360.8 ± 0.1 0.7 ± 0.1 * 10.7 ± 0.8 **1.3 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE LH 85080.9 ± 0.1 0.7 ± 0.1 * 8.2 ± 0.4 ** 1.1 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE Egg 85170.9 ± 0.2 0.8 ± 0.1 * 9.0 ± 0.5** 1.0 ± 0.1 *
E. coli IIE LH 85250.8 ± 0.1 0.7 ± 0.1 * 10.4 ± 0.6 ** 1.2 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE Egg 85320.9 ± 0.10.7 ± 0.1 * 11.6 ± 0.7 **1.0 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE BC 86440.9 ± 0.20.8 ± 0.1 * 10.1 ± 0.4 **1.3 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE BC 86500.8 ± 0.20.7 ± 0.1 * 9.3 ± 0.6 **1.2 ± 0.1 *
E. coli IIE BC 86751.1 ± 0.10.9 ± 0.1 * 12.0 ±0.7 **1.4 ± 0.1 *
E. coli IIE BC 86891.0 ± 0.10.8 ± 0.1 * 11.5 ± 0.6 ** 1.3 ± 0.2 *
Data are presented as the means ± SD of six independent experiments, tested in triplicate. * p > 0.05—Control vs. BLLT1 or Control vs. BLLT1+ ESBL-E strain; ** p < 0.01—ESBL-E strain vs. Control.
Table 5. BLLT1 protects the barrier function in HT-29 enterocyte monolayers from destruction by ESBL-E pathogens.
Table 5. BLLT1 protects the barrier function in HT-29 enterocyte monolayers from destruction by ESBL-E pathogens.
E. coli StrainsTEER Value (Ω × cm2)
ControlBLLT1E. coliBLLT1+ E. coli
E. coli ATCC BAA 2326254 ± 9267 ± 10 *106 ± 5 ** 238 ± 8 *
E. coli ATCC BAA 204257 ± 11265 ± 8 * 110 ± 6 ** 242 ± 10 *
E. coli ATCC BAA 198249 ± 8260 ± 11 * 104 ± 8 **235 ± 9 *
E. coli IIE Wo 8015252 ± 9264 ± 10 * 112 ± 5 ** 232 ± 9 *
E. coli IIE Wo 8034245 ± 12258 ± 11 * 105 ± 9 ** 230 ± 10 *
E. coli IIE Wo 8042247 ± 8255 ± 10 * 109 ± 7 **229 ± 8 *
E. coli IIE Wo 8059250 ± 10268 ± 12 * 111 ± 6 ** 232 ± 11 *
E. coli IIE Wo 8123245 ± 7 252 ± 10 * 107 ± 5 ** 234 ± 9 *
E. coli IIE Wo 8147 253 ± 11 274 ± 10 * 112 ± 8 ** 240 ± 11 *
E. coli IIE WLM 8194256 ± 9 283 ± 11 * 111 ± 9 ** 238 ± 10 *
E. coli IIE NB 8215248 ± 12 265 ± 10 * 108 ± 6 ** 226 ± 8 *
E. coli IIE NB 8224250 ± 8 267 ± 10 * 109 ± 7 ** 235 ± 9 *
E. coli IIE Co 8316257 ± 11 284 ± 9 * 112 ± 5 **240 ± 10 *
E. coli IIE Ca 8320259 ± 10 272 ± 11 * 108 ± 9 **239 ± 8 *
E. coli IIE Co 8356252 ± 8 279 ± 10 * 106 ± 7 ** 241 ± 10 *
E. coli IIE Ca 8341254 ± 12 268 ± 11 * 113 ± 6 ** 235 ± 9 *
E. coli IIE Pi 8420247 ± 11 269 ± 10 * 104 ± 9 ** 232 ± 10 *
E. coli IIE WP 8436255 ± 9 284 ± 12 * 111 ± 7 **238 ± 11 *
E. coli IIE LH 8508243 ± 11 269 ± 10 * 105 ± 8 ** 229 ± 12 *
E. coli IIE Egg 8517252 ± 8 271 ± 9 * 104 ± 5 ** 233 ± 8 *
E. coli IIE LH 8525258 ± 10 275 ± 10 * 103 ± 6 ** 237 ± 10 *
E. coli IIE Egg 8532240 ± 7267 ± 11 * 99 ± 5 **234 ± 11 *
E. coli IIE BC 8644248 ± 12273 ± 10 * 105 ± 9 **236 ± 10 *
E. coli IIE BC 8650253 ± 8285 ± 11 * 111 ± 8 **232 ± 11 *
E. coli IIE BC 8675259 ± 8274 ± 10 * 108 ± 9 **241 ± 10 *
E. coli IIE BC 8689250 ± 10282 ± 11 * 104 ± 6 ** 235 ± 9 *
Data are presented as the means ± SD of six independent experiments, tested in triplicate. * p > 0.05—Control vs. BLLT1 or Control vs. BLLT1+ ESBL-E strain; ** p < 0.01—ESBL-E strain vs. Control.
Table 6. BLLT1 inhibits paracellular permeability induced by ESBL-E strains in the HT-29 enterocyte monolayers.
Table 6. BLLT1 inhibits paracellular permeability induced by ESBL-E strains in the HT-29 enterocyte monolayers.
E. coli StrainsParacellular Permeability (%)
ControlBLLT1E. coliBLLT1+ E. coli
E. coli ATCC BAA 23263.2 ±0.62.0 ± 0.5 *46 ± 2 **4.8 ± 0.9 *
E. coli ATCC BAA 2043.6 ± 0.82.6 ± 0.7 *43 ± 2 **4.9 ± 1.2 *
E. coli ATCC BAA 1983.7 ± 0.72.3 ± 0.4 *47 ± 3 **5.5 ± 0.6 *
E. coli IIE Wo 80153.3 ± 0.52.4 ± 0.6 *42 ± 4 **4.8 ± 1.1 *
E. coli IIE Wo 80343.3 ± 0.42.2 ± 0.5 *48 ± 5 **4.5 ± 1.0 *
E. coli IIE Wo 80423.9 ± 1.02.6 ± 0.6 *45 ± 2 **4.8 ± 0.9 *
E. coli IIE Wo 80593.6 ± 0.62.3 ± 0.7 *47 ± 3 **5.4 ± 0.5 *
E. coli IIE Wo 81233.4 ±0.82.0 ± 0.5 *49 ± 2 **4.9 ± 1.1 *
E. coli IIE Wo 8147 3.5 ± 0.72.7 ± 0.8 *42 ± 3 **3.3 ± 1.4 *
E. coli IIE WLM 81943.1 ± 0.42.8 ± 0.7 *47 ± 2 **4.5 ± 0.7 *
E. coli IIE NB 82153.8 ± 1.02.4 ± 0.6 *43 ± 4 **4.2 ± 1.2 *
E. coli IIE NB 82243.8 ± 0.92.6 ± 0.7 *46 ± 2 **4.9 ± 0.8 *
E. coli IIE Co 83163.2 ± 0.72.5 ± 0.8 *44 ± 3 **4.4 ± 1.1 *
E. coli IIE Ca 83203.5 ± 0.82.2 ± 0.6 *49 ± 2 **3.9 ± 1.4 *
E. coli IIE Co 83563.2 ± 0.52.9 ± 0.9 *47 ± 3 **4.3 ± 1.2 *
E. coli IIE Ca 83413.9 ± 0.92.4 ± 0.5 *51 ± 2 **5.8 ± 0.9 *
E. coli IIE Pi 84203.1 ± 0.42.8 ± 0.8 *45 ± 3 **4.5 ± 0.9 *
E. coli IIE WP 84363.6 ± 0.62.7 ± 0.9 *53 ± 2 **4.8 ± 0.6 *
E. coli IIE LH 85083.8 ± 1.02.8 ± 0.7 *48 ± 3 **5.2 ± 0.8 *
E. coli IIE Egg 85173.9 ± 0.92.7 ± 0.6 *46 ± 2 **4.4 ± 1.1 *
E. coli IIE LH 85253.1 ± 0.72.5 ± 0.5 *49 ± 2 **4.8 ± 1.2 *
E. coli IIE Egg 85323.7 ± 0.92.5 ± 0.8 *52 ± 2 **5.6 ± 0.7 *
E. coli IIE BC 86443.6 ± 0.62.7 ± 0.7 *47 ± 3 **4.8 ± 0.9 *
E. coli IIE BC 86503.8 ± 1.02.0 ± 0.4 *45 ± 3 **4.9 ± 1.2 *
E. coli IIE BC 86753.2 ± 0.72.7 ± 0.8 *50 ± 2 **5.3 ± 0.6 *
E. coli IIE BC 86893.0 ± 0.52.7 ± 0.9 *44 ± 3 **4.5 ± 1.1 *
Data are presented as the means ± SD of six independent experiments, tested in triplicate. * p > 0.05—Control vs. BLLT1 or Control vs. BLLT1+ ESBL-E strain; ** p < 0.01—ESBL-E strain vs. Control.
Table 7. BLLT1 inhibits zonulin secretion induced by ESBL-E-producing strains in the enterocyte monolayers HT-29.
Table 7. BLLT1 inhibits zonulin secretion induced by ESBL-E-producing strains in the enterocyte monolayers HT-29.
E. coli StrainsZonulin (ng/mL)
ControlBLLT1E. coliBLLT1+ E. coli
E. coli ATCC BAA 23261.7 ± 0.41.4 ± 0.2 *15 ± 2 **1.8 ± 0.3 *
E. coli ATCC BAA 2041.6 ± 0.31.5 ± 0.2 *15 ± 2 **1.7 ± 0.3 *
E. coli ATCC BAA 1981.8 ± 0.21.4 ± 0.3 *14 ± 3 **1.9 ± 0.4 *
E. coli IIE Wo 80151.7 ± 0.31.4 ± 0.2 *16 ± 2 **1.9 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE Wo 80341.6 ± 0.21.5 ± 0.3 *15 ± 3 **1.8 ± 0.3 *
E. coli IIE Wo 80421.6 ± 0.21.3 ± 0.2 *14 ± 2 **1.8 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE Wo 80591.6 ± 0.31.4 ± 0.2 *15 ± 2 **1.9 ± 0.3 *
E. coli IIE Wo 81231.7 ± 0.21.3 ± 0.2 *14 ± 3 **1.8 ± 0.3 *
E. coli IIE Wo 8147 1.6 ± 0.21.5 ± 0.2 *15 ± 3 **1.8 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE WLM 81941.6 ± 0.31.4 ± 0.2 *14 ± 2 **1.9 ± 0.3 *
E. coli IIE NB 82151.5 ± 0.21.3 ± 0.4 *15 ± 3 **1.7 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE NB 82241.7 ± 0.31.4 ± 0.2 *14 ± 2 **1.9 ± 0.3 *
E. coli IIE Co 83161.6 ± 0.41.5 ± 0.2 *15 ± 3 **1.9 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE Ca 83201.6 ± 0.31.5 ± 0.3 *14 ± 3 **1.8 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE Co 83561.6 ± 0.31.4 ± 0.3 *15 ± 3 **1.9 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE Ca 83411.7 ± 0.31.4 ± 0.2 *15 ± 2 **1.9 ± 0.3 *
E. coli IIE Pi 84201.7 ± 0.21.5 ± 0.2 *15 ± 3 **2.0 ± 0.3 *
E. coli IIE WP 84361.6 ± 0.31.4 ± 0.3 *15 ± 2 **1.8 ± 0.3 *
E. coli IIE LH 85081.5 ± 0.31.4 ± 0.2 *14 ± 3 **1.8 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE Egg 85171.6 ± 0.21.3 ± 0.2 *15 ± 2 **1.8 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE LH 85251.7 ± 0.21.5 ± 0.3 *15 ± 2 **1.9 ± 0.3 *
E. coli IIE Egg 85321.6 ± 0.21.4 ± 0.2 *15 ± 2 **2.0 ± 0.3 *
E. coli IIE BC 86441.7 ± 0.31.4 ± 0.3 *16 ± 3 **1.8 ± 0.3 *
E. coli IIE BC 86501.6 ± 0.31.3 ± 0.2 *15 ± 2 **1.8 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE BC 86751.7 ± 0.21.4 ± 0.3 *16 ± 2 **1.9 ± 0.2 *
E. coli IIE BC 86891.6 ± 0.21.5 ± 0.2 *14 ± 3 **1.9 ± 0.3 *
Data are presented as the means ± SD of six independent experiments, tested in triplicate. * p > 0.05—Control vs. BLLT1 or Control vs. BLLT1+ ESBL-E strain; ** p < 0.01—ESBL-E strain vs. Control.
Table 8. Effect of BLLT1 on IAP mRNA expression in enterocytes.
Table 8. Effect of BLLT1 on IAP mRNA expression in enterocytes.
E. coli StrainsIAP mRNA of Control (%)
ControlBLLT1E. coliBLLT1+ E. coli
E. coli ATCC BAA 2326100126 ± 5 *37 ± 4 **120 ± 3 *
E. coli ATCC BAA 204100135 ± 3 *33 ± 4 **127 ± 4 *
E. coli ATCC BAA 198100128 ± 4 *32 ± 5 **121 ± 3 *
E. coli IIE Wo 8015100129 ± 5 *35 ± 3 **122 ± 3 *
E. coli IIE Wo 8034100134 ± 3 *37 ± 3 **128 ± 5 *
E. coli IIE Wo 8042100131 ± 3 *33 ± 4 **124 ± 3 *
E. coli IIE Wo 8059100125 ± 2 *38 ± 4 **119 ± 4 *
E. coli IIE Wo 8123100137 ± 3 *39 ± 3 **125 ± 3 *
E. coli IIE Wo 8147 100130 ± 4 *36 ± 4 **124 ± 5 *
E. coli IIE WLM 8194100135 ± 4 *38 ± 3 **126 ± 4 *
E. coli IIE NB 8215100132 ± 4 *37 ± 3 **123 ± 3 *
E. coli IIE NB 8224100137 ± 4 *28 ± 2 *125 ± 4 *
E. coli IIE Co 8316100138 ± 2 *36 ± 3 **130 ± 5 *
E. coli IIE Ca 8320100129 ± 3 *27 ± 2 **121 ± 4 *
E. coli IIE Co 8356100133 ± 4 *24 ± 2 **125 ± 3 *
E. coli IIE Ca 8341100127 ± 4 *39 ± 5 **118 ± 3 *
E. coli IIE Pi 8420100130 ± 5 *31 ± 4 **122 ± 4 *
E. coli IIE WP 8436100126 ± 4 *32 ± 5 **119 ± 3 *
E. coli IIE LH 8508100134 ± 5 *38 ± 3 **127 ± 4 *
E. coli IIE Egg 8517100137 ± 5 *34 ± 3 **128 ± 5 *
E. coli IIE LH 8525100129 ± 3 *31 ± 4 **120 ± 3 *
E. coli IIE Egg 8532100136 ± 4 *39 ± 5 **127 ± 4 *
E. coli IIE BC 8644100125 ± 6 *37 ± 4 **118 ± 3 *
E. coli IIE BC 8650100128 ± 3 *33 ± 5 **119 ± 3 *
E. coli IIE BC 8675100133 ± 5 *38 ± 2 **126 ± 4 *
E. coli IIE BC 8689100139 ± 4 *35 ± 3 **130 ± 3 *
Data are presented as the means ± SD of six independent experiments, tested in triplicate. * p < 0.05—Control vs. BLLT1 or Control vs. BLLT1+ ESBL-E strain; ** p < 0.01—ESBL-E strain vs. Control.
Table 9. Bacteria used in this study and growth conditions.
Table 9. Bacteria used in this study and growth conditions.
BacteriaStrain ESBL 3 TypeGrowth Conditions
B. longum subsp. longumIIE 1 T1 MRS a 37 °C anaerobically 24 h
B. longum subsp. longumIIE T2The same
B. longum subsp. longumIIE T3The same
E. coliATCC 2 BAA2326 STX-M-15LB b 37 °C aerobically 18 h
E. coliATCC BAA 204 SHV-2The same
E. coliATCC BAA 198 TEM-26The same
E. coliIIE PW 4 8015 5 OXAThe same
E. coliIIE PW 8034 6 SHVThe same
E. coliIIE PW 8042 7 STX-MThe same
E. coliIIE PW 8059 8 TEMThe same
E. coliIIE PW 8123 9 TEMThe same
E. coliIIE PW 8147 10 STX-MThe same
E. coliIIE WLM 11 8194 12 TEMThe same
E. coliIIE NB 13 8215 14 TEMThe same
E. coliIIE NB 8224 15 STX-MThe same
E. coliIIE Co 16 8316 17 STX-MThe same
E. coliIIE Ca 18 8320 19 STX-MThe same
E. coliIIE Co 8356 20 TEMThe same
E. coliIIE Ca 8341 21 TEMThe same
E. coliIIE Pi 22 8420 23 SHVThe same
E. coliIIE WP 24 8436 25 SHVThe same
E. coliIIE LH 26 8508 27 OXAThe same
E. coliIIE Egg 28 8517 29 OXAThe same
E. coliIIE LH 8525 30 STX-MThe same
E. coliIIE Egg 8532 31 STX-M The same
E. coliIIE BC 32 8648 TEM The same
E. coliIIE BC 8650 STX-M The same
E. coliIIE BC 8675 OXA The same
E. coliIIE BC 8689 SHVThe same
1—Collection of Microorganisms at the Institute of Immunological Engineering (IIE), Lyubuchany, Moscow Region, Russia; 2—American Type Culture Collection, Manassas, VA, USA; 3—Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase; 4—Pregnant Woman. Human clinical ESBL-E isolates from urine; 5—pregnant woman, cystitis, premature birth (<36 weeks); 6—pregnant woman, cystitis, premature birth (<35 weeks); 7—pregnant woman, pyelonephritis, premature birth (<34 weeks); 8—pregnant woman, pyelonephritis, premature birth (<33 weeks); 9—pregnant woman, pyelonephritis, premature birth (<32 weeks); 10—pregnant woman, pyelonephritis, premature birth (<32 weeks); 11—Woman lactational mastitis; 12—from milk of a woman with lactation mastitis; 13—Neonatal baby: 14—from feces of preterm born (<36 weeks); 15—from feces of preterm born (<32 weeks), necrotizing enterocolitis; 16—Dairy cow; 17—from the milk of a dairy cow with mastitis; 18—Calf; 19—from the feces of a calf that received milk from a cow with mastitis; 20—from the milk of a dairy cow with mastitis; 21—from the feces of a calf that received milk from a cow with mastitis; 22—Pig (lactating sow); 23—from the milk of a lactating sow; 24—Weaned piglet; 25—from the feces of a weaned piglet; 26—Laying hen; 27—from the feces of a laying hen; 28—Chicken eggs; 29—from a chicken eggs; 30—from the feces of a laying hen; 31—from chicken eggs; 32—from a fresh broiler carcass (ESBL-E strains: 8648, 8650, 8675, 8689). a—Broth for bifidobacteria (HiMedia, Mumbai, India); b—Luria-Bertani medium.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Machulin, A.V.; Abramov, V.M.; Kosarev, I.V.; Deryusheva, E.I.; Priputnevich, T.V.; Panin, A.N.; Manoyan, A.M.; Chikileva, I.O.; Abashina, T.N.; Blumenkrants, D.A.; et al. A Novel Bifidobacterium longum Subsp. longum T1 Strain from Cow’s Milk: Homeostatic and Antibacterial Activity against ESBL-Producing Escherichia coli. Antibiotics 2024, 13, 924. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics13100924

AMA Style

Machulin AV, Abramov VM, Kosarev IV, Deryusheva EI, Priputnevich TV, Panin AN, Manoyan AM, Chikileva IO, Abashina TN, Blumenkrants DA, et al. A Novel Bifidobacterium longum Subsp. longum T1 Strain from Cow’s Milk: Homeostatic and Antibacterial Activity against ESBL-Producing Escherichia coli. Antibiotics. 2024; 13(10):924. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics13100924

Chicago/Turabian Style

Machulin, Andrey V., Vyacheslav M. Abramov, Igor V. Kosarev, Evgenia I. Deryusheva, Tatiana V. Priputnevich, Alexander N. Panin, Ashot M. Manoyan, Irina O. Chikileva, Tatiana N. Abashina, Dmitriy A. Blumenkrants, and et al. 2024. "A Novel Bifidobacterium longum Subsp. longum T1 Strain from Cow’s Milk: Homeostatic and Antibacterial Activity against ESBL-Producing Escherichia coli" Antibiotics 13, no. 10: 924. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics13100924

APA Style

Machulin, A. V., Abramov, V. M., Kosarev, I. V., Deryusheva, E. I., Priputnevich, T. V., Panin, A. N., Manoyan, A. M., Chikileva, I. O., Abashina, T. N., Blumenkrants, D. A., Ivanova, O. E., Papazyan, T. T., Nikonov, I. N., Suzina, N. E., Melnikov, V. G., Khlebnikov, V. S., Sakulin, V. K., Samoilenko, V. A., Gordeev, A. B., ... Karlyshev, A. V. (2024). A Novel Bifidobacterium longum Subsp. longum T1 Strain from Cow’s Milk: Homeostatic and Antibacterial Activity against ESBL-Producing Escherichia coli. Antibiotics, 13(10), 924. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics13100924

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop