Isolation and Characterization of Potentially Probiotic Bacterial Strains from Mice: Proof of Concept for Personalized Probiotics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modulation of the gut microbiota through the use of probiotics has been widely used to treat or prevent several intestinal diseases. However, inconsistent results have compromised the efficacy of this approach, especially in severe conditions such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The purpose of our study was to develop a personalized probiotic strategy and assess its efficacy in a murine model of intestinal inflammation. Commensal bacterial strains were isolated from the feces of healthy mice and then administered back to the host as a personalized treatment in dextran sodium sulfate (DSS)-induced colitis. Colonic tissues were collected for histological analysis and to investigate inflammatory markers such as Il-1β, Il-6, TGF-β, and Il-10, and the enzyme myeloperoxidase as a neutrophil marker. The group that received the personalized probiotic showed reduced susceptibility to DSS-colitis as compared to a commercial probiotic. This protection was characterized by a lower disease activity index and reduced histopathological damage in the colon. Moreover, the personalized probiotic was more effective in modulating the host immune response, leading to decreased Il-1β and Il-6 and increased TGF-β and Il-10 expression. In conclusion, our study suggests that personalized probiotics may possess an advantage over commercial probiotics in treating dysbiotic-related conditions, possibly because they are derived directly from the host’s own microbiota.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".