In vitro and in vivo characterization and strain safety of <i>Lactobacillus reuteri</i> NCIMB 30253 for probiotic applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lactobacillus reuteri NCIMB 30253 was shown to have potential as a probiotic by reducing the proinflammatory chemokine interleukin-8. Moreover, this strain was evaluated, by in vitro and in vivo techniques, for its safety for human consumption. The identity of the strain was investigated by metabolic profiling and 16S rRNA gene sequencing, and in vitro safety evaluations were performed by molecular and metabolic techniques. Genetic analysis was confirmed by assessing the minimum inhibitory concentration to a panel of antibiotics, showing that the strain was susceptible to 8 antibiotics tested. The ability of the strain to produce potentially harmful by-products and antimicrobial compounds was evaluated, showing that the strain does not produce biogenic amines and does not show bacteriocin activity or reuterin production. A 28-day repeated oral dose study was conducted in normal Sprague-Dawley rats to support the in vivo strain safety. Oral administration of the strain resulted in no changes in general condition and no clinically significant changes to biochemical and haematological markers of safety relative to vehicle control treated animals. This comprehensive assessment of safety of L. reuteri NCIMB 30253 supports the safety of the strain for use as a probiotic.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".