Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Mar;79(3):445-52.
doi: 10.1038/pr.2015.244. Epub 2015 Nov 16.

Validating Bifidobacterial Species and Subspecies Identity in Commercial Probiotic Products

Affiliations
Free PMC article

Validating Bifidobacterial Species and Subspecies Identity in Commercial Probiotic Products

Zachery T Lewis et al. Pediatr Res. .
Free PMC article

Abstract

Background: The ingestion of probiotics to attempt to improve health is increasingly common; however, quality control of some commercial products can be limited. Clinical practice is shifting toward the routine use of probiotics to aid in prevention of necrotizing enterocolitis in premature infants, and probiotic administration to term infants is increasingly common to treat colic and/or prevent atopic disease. Since bifidobacteria dominate the feces of healthy breast-fed infants, they are often included in infant-targeted probiotics.

Methods: We evaluated 16 probiotic products to determine how well their label claims describe the species of detectable bifidobacteria in the product. Recently developed DNA-based methods were used as a primary means of identification, and were confirmed using culture-based techniques.

Results: We found that the contents of many bifidobacterial probiotic products differ from the ingredient list, sometimes at a subspecies level. Only 1 of the 16 probiotics perfectly matched its bifidobacterial label claims in all samples tested, and both pill-to-pill and lot-to-lot variation were observed.

Conclusion: Given the known differences between various bifidobacterial species and subspecies in metabolic capacity and colonization abilities, the prevalence of misidentified bifidobacteria in these products is cause for concern for those involved in clinical trials and consumers of probiotic products.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Statement:

DAM is a co-founder and SAF an employee of Evolve Biosystems, a company focused on diet-based manipulation of the gut microbiota.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Mock community composition and measurement. The expected values (as defined by the ratios of input DNA initially measured by A260) and observed values for each of the 20 different mock communities assayed are shown here.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Bifidobacterial composition of probiotic products by PCR-based methods. Each product was assayed four times, shown here in order grouped by product, lot 1 pill 1, lot 1 pill 2, lot 2 pill 1, lot 2 pill 2. Blank plot area not between two different products indicates no amplicon was detected.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 25 articles

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Fasoli S, Marzotto M, Rizzotti L, Rossi F, Dellaglio F, Torriani S. Bacterial composition of commercial probiotic products as evaluated by PCR-DGGE analysis. Int J Food Microbiol. 2003;82:59–70. - PubMed
    1. Canganella F, Paganini S, Ovidi M, et al. A microbiological investigation on probiotic pharmaceutical products used for human health. Microbiol Res. 1997;152:171–179. - PubMed
    1. Angelakis E, Million M, Henry M, Raoult D. Rapid and Accurate Bacterial Identification in Probiotics and Yoghurts by MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry. J Food Sci. 2011;76:568–572. - PubMed
    1. Goldstein EJC, Citron DM, Claros MC, Tyrrell KL. Bacterial counts from five over-the-counter probiotics: Are you getting what you paid for? Anaerobe [Internet] 2014;25:1–4. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.anaerobe.2013.10.005. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Marcobal A, Underwood MA, Mills Da. Rapid determination of the bacterial composition of commercial probiotic products by terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr [Internet] 2008;46:608–611. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18493222. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Feedback