Overview
Probiotics are currently defined as “live microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit on the host” (Hill et al., 2014) and often include Lactobacillus spp., Bifidobacterium spp. or Bacillus spp., which are ‘generally recognized as safe’ (GRAS) per os and/or are members of a ‘healthy’ gut microbiota (Rainard and Foucras, 2018).
The gut microbiota and its functions are considered crucial for host health and disease (Dogra et al., 2020). Therefore, seeking to modify the composition of the gut microbiota and/or its functions are regarded as opportune ways to influence host health. Probiotic mechanisms include those interactions primarily occurring between the supplemented probiotic microorganisms and the indigenous intestinal microbiota, perhaps within the gut lumen, as well as more direct interactions with the host via mucosal receptors or more distally following absorption of microbial components (Broom, 2020).
As relatively stable or less permissive microbiomes are reportedly more resistant to colonisation by exogenous microbes, non-colonising probiotic mechanisms are probably important for success. However, such microbiomes may be receptive to novel microbes or functions, while supplemented probiotics may dominate luminal populations, particularly in less populated regions of the intestine. Moreover, host-adapted microbes or microbiomes may elicit different host responses and/or be more effective, while administering few microbial taxa might prevent the (re)establishment of a diverse microbial community, which could have negative implications (Wilkinson et al., 2020; Suez et al., 2018).
Good studies with probiotics in target species are providing confidence for certain applications and further mechanistic insight, including interactions with other feed (or water) components or other interventions (e.g. prebiotics, vaccines, etc.) (Redweik et al., 2020). Avoiding a ‘one size fits all’ approach should improve the consistency and perception of probiotics, as well as appreciating potential pitfalls in extrapolating findings from specific experimental approaches, or across strains or species.
References
Broom, 2020. Probiotic mechanisms and practical considerations for monogastric livestock. www.preprints.org/manuscript/202011.0498/v1
Redweik et al., 2020. Live bacterial prophylactics in modern poultry. doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.592312
Suez et al., 2019. The pros, cons, and many unknowns of probiotics. doi.org/10.1038/s41591-019-0439-x
Wang and Ganzle, 2019. Toward rational selection criteria for selection of probiotics in pigs. doi.org/10.1016/bs.aambs.2019.03.003
Probiotics are currently defined as “live microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit on the host” (Hill et al., 2014) and often include Lactobacillus spp., Bifidobacterium spp. or Bacillus spp., which are ‘generally recognized as safe’ (GRAS) per os and/or are members of a ‘healthy’ gut microbiota (Rainard and Foucras, 2018).
The gut microbiota and its functions are considered crucial for host health and disease (Dogra et al., 2020). Therefore, seeking to modify the composition of the gut microbiota and/or its functions are regarded as opportune ways to influence host health. Probiotic mechanisms include those interactions primarily occurring between the supplemented probiotic microorganisms and the indigenous intestinal microbiota, perhaps within the gut lumen, as well as more direct interactions with the host via mucosal receptors or more distally following absorption of microbial components (Broom, 2020).
As relatively stable or less permissive microbiomes are reportedly more resistant to colonisation by exogenous microbes, non-colonising probiotic mechanisms are probably important for success. However, such microbiomes may be receptive to novel microbes or functions, while supplemented probiotics may dominate luminal populations, particularly in less populated regions of the intestine. Moreover, host-adapted microbes or microbiomes may elicit different host responses and/or be more effective, while administering few microbial taxa might prevent the (re)establishment of a diverse microbial community, which could have negative implications (Wilkinson et al., 2020; Suez et al., 2018).
Good studies with probiotics in target species are providing confidence for certain applications and further mechanistic insight, including interactions with other feed (or water) components or other interventions (e.g. prebiotics, vaccines, etc.) (Redweik et al., 2020). Avoiding a ‘one size fits all’ approach should improve the consistency and perception of probiotics, as well as appreciating potential pitfalls in extrapolating findings from specific experimental approaches, or across strains or species.
References
Broom, 2020. Probiotic mechanisms and practical considerations for monogastric livestock. www.preprints.org/manuscript/202011.0498/v1
Redweik et al., 2020. Live bacterial prophylactics in modern poultry. doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.592312
Suez et al., 2019. The pros, cons, and many unknowns of probiotics. doi.org/10.1038/s41591-019-0439-x
Wang and Ganzle, 2019. Toward rational selection criteria for selection of probiotics in pigs. doi.org/10.1016/bs.aambs.2019.03.003