26
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Authenticity of probiotic foods and dietary supplements: A pivotal issue to address

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references125

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Expert consensus document. The International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics consensus statement on the scope and appropriate use of the term probiotic.

          An expert panel was convened in October 2013 by the International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics (ISAPP) to discuss the field of probiotics. It is now 13 years since the definition of probiotics and 12 years after guidelines were published for regulators, scientists and industry by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the WHO (FAO/WHO). The FAO/WHO definition of a probiotic--"live microorganisms which when administered in adequate amounts confer a health benefit on the host"--was reinforced as relevant and sufficiently accommodating for current and anticipated applications. However, inconsistencies between the FAO/WHO Expert Consultation Report and the FAO/WHO Guidelines were clarified to take into account advances in science and applications. A more precise use of the term 'probiotic' will be useful to guide clinicians and consumers in differentiating the diverse products on the market. This document represents the conclusions of the ISAPP consensus meeting on the appropriate use and scope of the term probiotic.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A standardized bacterial taxonomy based on genome phylogeny substantially revises the tree of life

            Taxonomy is an organizing principle of biology and is ideally based on evolutionary relationships among organisms. Development of a robust bacterial taxonomy has been hindered by an inability to obtain most bacteria in pure culture and, to a lesser extent, by the historical use of phenotypes to guide classification. Culture-independent sequencing technologies have matured sufficiently that a comprehensive genome-based taxonomy is now possible. We used a concatenated protein phylogeny as the basis for a bacterial taxonomy that conservatively removes polyphyletic groups and normalizes taxonomic ranks on the basis of relative evolutionary divergence. Under this approach, 58% of the 94,759 genomes comprising the Genome Taxonomy Database had changes to their existing taxonomy. This result includes the description of 99 phyla, including six major monophyletic units from the subdivision of the Proteobacteria, and amalgamation of the Candidate Phyla Radiation into a single phylum. Our taxonomy should enable improved classification of uncultured bacteria and provide a sound basis for ecological and evolutionary studies.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A taxonomic note on the genus Lactobacillus: Description of 23 novel genera, emended description of the genus Lactobacillus Beijerinck 1901, and union of Lactobacillaceae and Leuconostocaceae

              The genus Lactobacillus comprises 261 species (at March 2020) that are extremely diverse at phenotypic, ecological and genotypic levels. This study evaluated the taxonomy of Lactobacillaceae and Leuconostocaceae on the basis of whole genome sequences. Parameters that were evaluated included core genome phylogeny, (conserved) pairwise average amino acid identity, clade-specific signature genes, physiological criteria and the ecology of the organisms. Based on this polyphasic approach, we propose reclassification of the genus Lactobacillus into 25 genera including the emended genus Lactobacillus, which includes host-adapted organisms that have been referred to as the Lactobacillus delbrueckii group, Paralactobacillus and 23 novel genera for which the names Holzapfelia, Amylolactobacillus, Bombilactobacillus, Companilactobacillus, Lapidilactobacillus, Agrilactobacillus, Schleiferilactobacillus, Loigolactobacilus, Lacticaseibacillus, Latilactobacillus, Dellaglioa, Liquorilactobacillus, Ligilactobacillus, Lactiplantibacillus, Furfurilactobacillus, Paucilactobacillus, Limosilactobacillus, Fructilactobacillus, Acetilactobacillus, Apilactobacillus, Levilactobacillus, Secundilactobacillus and Lentilactobacillus are proposed. We also propose to emend the description of the family Lactobacillaceae to include all genera that were previously included in families Lactobacillaceae and Leuconostocaceae. The generic term 'lactobacilli' will remain useful to designate all organisms that were classified as Lactobacillaceae until 2020. This reclassification reflects the phylogenetic position of the micro-organisms, and groups lactobacilli into robust clades with shared ecological and metabolic properties, as exemplified for the emended genus Lactobacillus encompassing species adapted to vertebrates (such as Lactobacillus delbrueckii, Lactobacillus iners, Lactobacillus crispatus, Lactobacillus jensensii, Lactobacillus johnsonii and Lactobacillus acidophilus) or invertebrates (such as Lactobacillus apis and Lactobacillus bombicola).
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition
                Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition
                Informa UK Limited
                1040-8398
                1549-7852
                April 05 2021
                : 1-18
                Affiliations
                [1 ]National Research Council of Italy, Institute of Sciences of Food Production (CNR-ISPA), Bari, Italy
                Article
                10.1080/10408398.2021.1907300
                33819118
                e7028fcd-b62c-403d-8a40-a14cbd38bf94
                © 2021
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article