Comprehensive analysis of the metabolic and genomic features of tannin-transforming Lactiplantibacillus plantarum strains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extracellular tannase Lactiplantibacillus plantarum-producing strains (TanA+) release bioactive metabolites from dietary tannins. However, there is a paucity of knowledge of TanA+ strains and their hydrolyzing capacities. This study aimed to shed light on the metabolic and genomic features of TanA+ L. plantarum strains and to develop a screening technique. The established spectrophotometric was validated by UPLC-UV-QToF. Eight of 115 screened strains harbored the tanA gene, and six presented TanA activity (PROBI S126, PROBI S204, RKG 1-473, RKG 1-500, RKG 2-219, and RKG 2-690). When cultured with tannic acid (a gallotannin), TanA+ strains released 3.2-11 times more gallic acid than a lacking strain (WCFS1) (p < 0.05). TanA+ strains with gallate decarboxylase (n = 5) transformed this latter metabolite, producing 2.2-4.8 times more pyrogallol than the TanA lacking strain (p < 0.05). However, TanA+ strains could not transform punicalagin (an ellagitannin). Genomic analysis revealed high similarity between TanA+ strains, as only two variable regions of phage and polysaccharide synthesis were distinguished. A phylogenetic analysis of 149 additional genome sequences showed that tanA harboring strains form a cluster and present two bacteriocin coding sequences profile. In conclusion, TanA+ L. plantarum strains are closely related and possess the ability to resist and transform gallotannins. TanA can be screened by the method proposed herein.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".