A Potential Novel Probiotic Strain and its Comparative Antagonism Evaluation with a Multi-Strain Probiotic Combination along with an Innovative Approach for Quantifying the Viable Microbiota
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of the current study was to discover a novel potential probiotic strain of Lactobacillus spp. with anti-Escherichia coli activity from locally produced yogurt in Tongi, Gazipur, Bangladesh, compare its antagonistic activity with a commercial probiotic mixture of several strains, and approve a novel method for confirming the viability and relative abundance of the microbial community in a probiotic mixer. We carried out 16S sequencing, 16S metagenomics, Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) analysis, and other in vitro laboratory experiments to reach this objective. The strain TY-11 was identified as Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. indicus (16S sequence accession number OQ652026). It was gram-positive, anaerobic, lactose fermenting, and round-ended rod that typically measured 0.7 to 1.3 µm by 2.2 to 9 µm. In addition to having seven probiotic characteristics, it also showed an antagonistic impact on six different pathogens, but what's more noteworthy is that E. coli was the pathogen it inhibited most strongly (inhibition zone diameter was 18.88±0.18 mm). The most important and ground-breaking finding of this work was determining the probiotic features of a new probiotic strain, TY-11, whose antibacterial activity was virtually as effective as that of the probiotic combination with three different strains. Furthermore, the results of 16S high throughput sequencing and the conventional plate count method demonstrated a strong correlation (0.999) at the genus level, indicating that the use of both of these approaches in combination may be a practical way to assess the relative abundance of the microbial community and their viability in commercially available probiotic blends.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".