Interspecific Relationship of Lactobacillus paracasei Co-cultured with Bacillus sp. Affects Bacteriocin Production

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2020-0724

Abstract

Abstract:

To form a stable ecological environment through interspecific information exchange between Lactobacillus paracasei HD1.7 and Bacillus sp., the initial inoculation amount of Bacillus sp. was increased to study the ecological relationship of Lactobacillus paracasei co-cultured with Bacillus sp.. When Bacillus subtilis was co-cultured with L. paracasei HD1.7 at the initial inoculation ratio of 5%:1%, the bacteriocin produced by L. paracasei HD1.7 was 1.21 times that of monoculture. L. paracasei HD1.7 quorum sensing-related genes luxS, prcK, and prcR were upregulated (up to 3.14, 4.98 and 5.41 folds, respectively) while B. subtilis formed more spores to avoid the attack of bacteriocins. Expression levels of spo0A, sigE, sigF, and sigG, genes related to B. subtilis endospore formation, were correspondingly upregulated (up to 2.37, 2.71, 3.15 and 2.56 folds, respectively). At this time, a cooperative ecological relationship was formed between L. paracasei HD1.7 and Bacillus sp.. The redundancy analysis revealed that the number of spores, incubation time and B. subtilis viable counts were the most closely related to the production of bacteriocin. Different ecological relationships were found between L. paracasei HD1.7 and Bacillus sp., and some Bacillus are beneficial to L. paracasei HD1.7 and some are harmful to it.

Key words: Lactobacillus paracasei, Bacillus sp., co-culture, bacteriocin, interspecific relationship, secondary metabolite, biotic stress

CLC Number:

S182

Jiang Xueyong, Yue Yuanchun, Sun Yangcun, Gao Dongni, Ping Wenxiang, Ge Jingping. Interspecific Relationship of Lactobacillus paracasei Co-cultured with Bacillus sp. Affects Bacteriocin Production[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(24): 124-132.

Figures/Tables 9

References 30

[1]	Bertrand S, Bohni N, Schnee S, et al. Metabolite induction via microorganism co-culture: a potential way to enhance chemical diversity for drug discovery[J]. Biotechnology advances, 2014, 32(6):1180-1204. doi: 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2014.03.001 pmid: 24651031
[2]	Chanos P, Mygind T. Co-culture-inducible bacteriocin production in lactic acid bacteria[J]. Applied microbiology and biotechnology, 2016, 100(10):4297-4308. doi: 10.1007/s00253-016-7486-8 URL
[3]	Xu D, Wang L, Du C. Progress in microbial co-culture--A review[J]. Acta Microbiologica Sinica, 2015, 55(9):1089-1096.
[4]	Bertrand S, Azzollini A, Schumpp O, et al. Fungal co-culture as a new source of bioactive induced metabolites: A MS-based metabolomic study[J]. Planta Medica, 2012.
[5]	Marques J D L, Funck G D, Dannenberg G D S, et al. Bacteriocin-like substances of Lactobacillus curvatus P99: characterization and application in biodegradable films for control of Listeria monocytogenes in cheese[J]. Food Microbiology, 2017, 63(MAY):159-163. doi: 10.1016/j.fm.2016.11.008 URL
[6]	Mtimet N, Trunet C, Mathot A G, et al. Walking dead: Permeabilization of heat-treated Geobacillus stearothermophilus ATCC 12980 spores under growth-preventing conditions[J]. Food Microbiology, 2017, 64(jun.):126-134. doi: 10.1016/j.fm.2016.12.013 URL
[7]	Hu Y, Liu X, Shan C, et al. Novel bacteriocin produced by Lactobacillus alimentarius FM-MM4 from a traditional Chinese fermented meat Nanx Wudl: Purification, identification and antimicrobial characteristics[J]. Food Control, 2017, 77:290-297. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2017.02.007 URL
[8]	Horie M, Koike T, Sugino S, et al. Evaluation of probiotic and prebiotic-like effects of Bacillus subtilis BN on growth of lactobacilli [J]. Journal of General and Applied Microbiology, 2017, 64(1):26-33. doi: 10.2323/jgam.2017.03.002 URL
[9]	徐薇薇, 林永华, 阮晖, 等. 纳豆芽孢杆菌与干酪乳杆菌共发酵制备富含纳豆激酶和吡咯喹啉醌的凝固型酸豆乳[C]. 中国食品科学技术学会第十一届年会论文摘要集, 2014:63-64.
[10]	RSsland E, Langsrud T, SRhaug T. Influence of controlled lactic fermentation on growth and sporulation of Bacillus cereus in milk[J]. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 2005, 103(1):69-77. doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2004.11.027 URL
[11]	Karetkin B, Guseva E, Evdokimova S, et al. A quantitative model of Bacillus cereus ATCC 9634 growth inhibition by bifidobacteria for synbiotic effect evaluation[J]. World journal of microbiology & biotechnology, 2019, 35(6):89. doi: 10.1007/s11274-019-2665-2 URL
[12]	Jhan J K, Chang W F, Wang P M, et al. Production of fermented red beans with multiple bioactivities using co-cultures of Bacillus subtilis and Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus [J]. LWT - Food Science and Technology, 2015, 63(2):1281-1287. doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2015.03.107 URL
[13]	Ge J, Ping W, Song G, et al. Paracin 1.7, a bacteriocin produced by Lactobacillus paracasei HD1.7 isolated from Chinese cabbage sauerkraut, a traditional Chinese fermented vegetable food[J]. W Sheng Wu Xue Bao, 2009, 49(5):609-616.
[14]	Ge J, Sun Y, Xin X, et al. Purification and Partial Characterization of a Novel Bacteriocin Synthesized by Lactobacillus paracasei HD1-7 Isolated from Chinese Sauerkraut Juice[J]. Scientific reports, 2016, 6:19366. doi: 10.1038/srep19366 URL
[15]	Ge J, Fang B, Wang Y, et al. Bacillus subtilis enhances production of Paracin1.7, a bacteriocin produced by Lactobacillus paracasei HD1-7, isolated from Chinese fermented cabbage[J]. Annals of Microbiology, 2014, 64(4):1735-1743. doi: 10.1007/s13213-014-0817-z URL
[16]	Quinto E J, Marín J M, Schaffner DW. Effect of the competitive growth of Lactobacillus sakei MN on the growth kinetics of Listeria monocytogenes Scott A in model meat gravy[J]. Food Control, 2016, 63:34-45. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2015.11.025 URL
[17]	Valerio F, Bellis P D, Lonigro S L, et al. Use of Lactobacillus plantarum fermentation products in bread-making to prevent Bacillus subtilis ropy spoilage[J]. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 2008, 122(3):328-332. doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2008.01.005 URL
[18]	Tabasco R, García-Cayuela T, Peláez C, et al. Lactobacillus acidophilus La-5 increases lactacin B production when it senses live target bacteria[J]. International journal of food microbiology, 2009, 132(2-3):109-116. doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2009.04.004 pmid: 19411126
[19]	Man L, Meng X, Zhao R, et al. The role of plNC8HK-plnD genes in bacteriocin production in Lactobacillus plantarum KLDS1.0391[J]. International Dairy Journal, 2014, 34(2):267-274. doi: 10.1016/j.idairyj.2013.08.009 URL
[20]	Wu Q Q, You J H, Ahn H J, et al. Changes in growth and survival of Bifidobacterium by coculture with Propionibacterium in soy milk, cow's milk, and modified MRS medium[J]. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 2012, 157(1):65-72. doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2012.04.013 URL
[21]	Chauhan A, Maheshwari D, Bajpai V. Isolation and preliminary characterization of a bacteriocin-producer Bacillus strain inhibiting methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus[J]. Acta biologica Hungarica, 2017, 68(2):208-219. doi: 10.1556/018.68.2017.2.8 pmid: 28605978
[22]	苑婷婷. 产细菌素Paracin1.7菌株群体感应行为初探[D]. 哈尔滨:黑龙江大学, 2010.
[23]	易健明, 屈武斌, 张成岗. 实时荧光定量PCR的数据分析方法[J]. 生物技术通讯, 2015, 26(1):140-145.
[24]	马艳莉, 段哲, 梁静静, 等. 青方腐乳中丁酸梭菌分离鉴定及与乳酸菌共培养研究[J]. 中国调味品, 2020, 45(09):64-68.
[25]	Saxena R K, Dutt K, Agarwal L, et al. A highly thermostable and alkaline amylase from a Bacillus sp. PN5[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2007, 98(2):260-265. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2006.01.016 URL
[26]	Ariana M, Hamedi J. Enhanced production of nisin by co-culture of Lactococcus lactis sub sp. lactis and Yarrowia lipolytica in molasses based medium[J]. Journal of biotechnology, 2017, 256:21-26. doi: S0168-1656(17)31521-3 pmid: 28694185
[27]	Zhu Y, Liu J, Du G, et al. Sporulation and spore stability of Bacillus megaterium enhance Ketogulonigenium vulgare propagation and 2-keto-l-gulonic acid biosynjournal[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2012, 107:399-404. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2011.12.080 URL
[28]	Fossi B T, Tavea F, Fontem L A, et al. Microbial interactions for enhancement of α-amylase production by Bacillus amyloliquefaciens 04BBA15 and Lactobacillus fermentum 04BBA19[J]. Biotechnol Rep:amst, 2014, 4:99-106.
[29]	Tremonte P, Reale A, Renzo T D, et al. Interactions between Lactobacillus sakei and CNC (Staphylococcus xylosus and Kocuria varians) and their influence on proteolytic activity[J]. Letters in Applied Microbiology, 2010, 51(5):586-594. doi: 10.1111/j.1472-765X.2010.02939.x pmid: 20875035
[30]	Mascia T, Gallitelli D. Synergies and antagonisms in virus interactions[J]. Plant ence, 2016, 252:176-192.

比例/时间	0h	4h	8h	12h	24h	36h	48h	60h
3%:1%	1.750	0.875	2.000	5.923	8.250	3.682	1.724	2.563
5%:1%	0.556	0.444	0.900	8.429	6.444	5.947	5.957	3.829
5%:2%	0.556	0.556	0.600	0.786	4.389	4.880	4.044	2.714

比例/时间	0h	4h	8h	12h	24h	36h	48h	60h
3%:1%	1.750	0.875	2.000	5.923	8.250	3.682	1.724	2.563
5%:1%	0.556	0.444	0.900	8.429	6.444	5.947	5.957	3.829
5%:2%	0.556	0.556	0.600	0.786	4.389	4.880	4.044	2.714

菌株/时间	0h	4h	8h	12h	24h	36h	48h	60h
B. licheniformis	0	0.13	1.80	4.00	3.57	3.02	2.93	4.00
B. megaterium	1.00	0.13	0.80	1.37	3.65	2.23	1.76	1.88
B. pumilus	0.18	0.10	0.32	2.70	5.50	6.00	3.46	4.88
B. cereus	0.76	0.29	0.42	0.40	0.40	1.05	1.01	1.02
B. laterosporus	0.45	0.15	0.43	1.55	1.30	7.50	1.55	1.24
B. thuringiensis	0.75	0.33	1.20	1.50	2.33	1.48	1.26	1.14

菌株/时间	0h	4h	8h	12h	24h	36h	48h	60h
B. licheniformis	0	0.13	1.80	4.00	3.57	3.02	2.93	4.00
B. megaterium	1.00	0.13	0.80	1.37	3.65	2.23	1.76	1.88
B. pumilus	0.18	0.10	0.32	2.70	5.50	6.00	3.46	4.88
B. cereus	0.76	0.29	0.42	0.40	0.40	1.05	1.01	1.02
B. laterosporus	0.45	0.15	0.43	1.55	1.30	7.50	1.55	1.24
B. thuringiensis	0.75	0.33	1.20	1.50	2.33	1.48	1.26	1.14