The <scp>d</scp>‐alanine content of lipoteichoic acid is crucial for <i>Lactobacillus plantarum‐</i>mediated protection from visceral pain perception in a rat colorectal distension model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mechanisms leading to positive effects of probiotics in irritable bowel syndrome and inflammatory bowel disease have not been clarified, but the possible involvement of cell wall components is widely discussed. Reduction of the D-alanine content of lipoteichoic acid (LTA) in Lactobacillus plantarum (Dlt(-) mutant) enhanced its anti-inflammatory properties in a mouse colitis model. Another lactobacillus species inhibited visceral pain perception in response to colorectal distension (CRD) in rats. Therefore, we investigated if LTA modification influences the constitutive intestinal pain perception in addition to modulation of cytokine release. Male Sprague-Dawley rats were gavaged with L. plantarum, L. plantarum Dlt(-) mutant or buffer control, respectively and the responses to CRD were tested in this non-inflammatory model. Tumour necrosis factor (TNF), interferon (IFN)-gamma and interleukin (IL)-10 release were measured in colon tissue homogenates and upon anti-CD3/CD28 activation of isolated splenocytes and mesenteric lymphocytes. Control animals showed significant bradycardia following noxious CRD, whereas only the L. plantarum Dlt(-) mutant inhibited the response. The mutant also decreased the activation-induced release of TNF and IFN-gamma from mesenteric T cells and the IL-10 concentration in colonic tissue, while increasing the activation-induced secretion of IL-10 in splenocytes and mesenteric lymphocytes and the baseline IL-10 release of splenocytes. In conclusion, d-alanine depletion of LTA in L. plantarum inhibited visceral pain perception in healthy, non-inflamed rats. Regardless of the non-inflammatory nature of the model decreased visceral pain perception was seen in parallel with anti-inflammatory properties.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".