Research Article

Improvement of Lyophilized Probiotics Viability Using a Histidine-based Rehydration Formula

Kyuyeon Lee1https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1721-4948, Nayeon Kim1https://orcid.org/0009-0007-8138-0760, Bobae Kim2https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1624-8337, Hyeshin Kim2https://orcid.org/0009-0007-6862-2665, Kyoungjun Han3https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8101-0021, Jieun Yeu3https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0034-0972, Wilhelm H. Holzapfel1,2,*https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3669-1419, Hyeji Kang1,2,*https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8982-7420
Author Information & Copyright
1HEM Pharma Inc., 404, Ace Gwanggyo Tower 3, Suwon 16229, Republic of Korea
2HEM Pharma Inc., Business Incubator Center 204, Handong Global University, Pohang 37554, Republic of Korea
3COSMAX NBT Inc., 504, Pangyo Inno Valley E, 255, Pangyo-ro, Bundang-gu, Seongnam 13486, Republic of Korea
*Corresponding author : Hyeji Kang, HEM Pharma Inc., 404, Ace Gwanggyo Tower 3, Suwon 16229, Republic of Korea. Tel: +82-31-214-9402, Fax: +82-31-5186-6074, E-mail: hjkang@hempharma.bio
*Corresponding author : Wilhelm H. Holzapfel, HEM Pharma Inc., 404, Ace Gwanggyo Tower 3, Suwon 16229, Republic of Korea. Tel: +82-31-214-9402, Fax: +82-31-5186-6074, E-mail: wilhelm@woodapple.net

Copyright © Korean Society for Lactic Acid Bacteria and Probiotics. This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Received: Nov 02, 2023; Revised: Jan 15, 2024; Accepted: Feb 01, 2024

Published Online: Jun 30, 2024

Abstract

Bacteria get stressed and damaged during freeze-drying process for commercialization and this result in loss of its effect. Viability is important for its efficacy, but this drying process can deteriorate viability by damaging the integrity of the cell membrane as well. In this study, we propose 0.03 M histidine for rehydration of freeze-dried probiotics to improve their viability. The freeze-dried bacteria mixture with 0.03 M histidine showed augmented survivability during in vitro simulated gastric and duodenum stress conditions and increased viability during 60 min rehydration. It exhibited a significantly increased adherence ability of lyophilized bacteria to the HT-29 cell-line. Therefore, this shows possibility of probiotics commercialization with damage of lyophilization restored and survivability ameliorated.

Keywords: lactic acid bacteria (LAB); zeta-potential; simulated stomach-duodenum passage (SSDP); cell adhesion; cell stability

Introduction

Probiotics are defined as “live microorganisms which when administered in adequate amounts confer health benefits to the host” by the Food and Agriculture Organization and World Health Organization (Joint, 2002). It has been known that probiotics beneficially impact all over the human body including prevention and alleviation of infectious diseases, immune-related disorders, metabolic diseases, atherosclerosis, cancers, and neurological disorders (Bomba et al., 2012; Kwon et al., 2010; Liu et al., 2018; Suganya et al., 2020).

Probiotics have been consumed in the form of tablets or capsules manufactured through the drying process (Yeo et al., 2018). Lyophilization is a commonly used method to increase microorganism viability during extended preservation in the industry field (Gwak et al., 2015; Lodato et al., 1999). In the process of lyophilization, however, probiotic cells are exposed to conditions with extreme stress and damage, which gives rise to the loss of viability by osmotic shock and the disruption of cell membrane structure by dehydration and oxidation damage (De Wouters et al., 2015; Fiocco et al., 2019; Lodato et al., 1999; Ramírez-García et al., 2018). When those damaged probiotic cells were consumed orally, their probiotic activity would be compromised because of the deterioration in survival in the gastrointestinal tract and adherence to intestinal epithelial cells (Arellano et al., 2021).

To overcome this limitation, rehydration has been introduced as a method to recover normal probiotic function from inactivated, lyophilized form of bacteria (De Valdez et al., 1985). Rehydration is a critical step in the recovery of lyophilized bacteria. Bacteria was damaged during the freeze dry. Damaged cell may be repaired and regain moral function if it is rehydrated with optimized condition considered composition of the rehydrating solution, osmolarity, etc. Lyophilized bacteria cells could experience another osmotic shock during the rehydration process, which could also decrease the cell viability in the gastrointestinal tract (Fiocco et al., 2019; Leach et al., 1959). Several cryoprotective agents and additives for the process of lyophilization and rehydration have been recommended to minimize cell damage and to improve its stability including proteins, amino acids, sugars, and carbohydrates (Bron et al., 2011; Hubálek et al., 2003).

Several microbial factors such as surface proteins, cell hydrophobicity, and electric charge are known to be related to enhance these probiotic characteristics (De Wouters et al., 2015). Especially, zeta-potential is a major factor which can affect electrostatic interactions in particle dispersions, and it is important for understanding the stability of colloidal dispersions such as probiotic solution. The zeta-potential of microbial cell is developed at the interface between the cell surface composition (solid) and the surrounding medium (liquid) (De Wouters et al., 2015). Since Ramírez-García (2018) showed that a higher absolute value of zeta-potential generates more stable the dispersion, the zeta-potential value may serve as a novel parameter to predict cell viability affected by cell membrane damage and its permeability (Halder et al., 2015).

In this study, we have named mixture “Zeta-bio®” technology, which proposed to be freeze-dried probiotics with a special activated substance-based formulation for support the re-activation of a probiotics in water and utilizing this technology, we tried to develop optimal rehydration conditions by adding special activated substance to commercial probiotic mixture (Lc. rhamnosus HN001, Lactobacillushelviticus R-52, Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis HN019 and B. bifidum R0071) (Arellano et al., 2021). First, changes of zeta-potential by 14 putative activators were measured in each probiotic strain, and the competency was evaluated by simulated stomach-duodenum passage (SSDP) assay and cell adhesion assay with the mixture and its representative strain, Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus HN001.

Materials and Methods

Bacterial strains and culture conditions

Lc. rhamnosus HN001 and L. helviticus R-52 were cultured in MRS broth (BD, Franklin Lakes, NJ) at 37°C for 18~20 h. B. lactis HN019 and B. bifidum R0071 were cultured in BL broth (KisanBio Inc., Seoul, South Korea) at 37°C under anaerobic condition for 18h. All strains were provided by COSMAX NBT Inc. (Seongnam, South Korea).

Zeta-potential screening

The candidate chemicals were selected based on “Food Additive Status List” provided by the U. S. Food & Drug Administration (Silver Spring, MA) (Table 1). Each ingredient was dissolved in pH 2.5 HPLC pure water and lyophilized strains were rehydrated with HPLC pure water. To measure the zeta-potential, 1 mL of the ingredient solution (0.3 M) and 1 mL of test strains (1×109 CFU/mL) were added to 8 mL of pH 2.5 HPLC pure water, at the final concentration of 1×108 CFU/mL of bacteria and 0.03 M of the supplement. The sample was transferred to a folded capillary zeta cell (DTS1060C, Malvern Panalytical Inc., Westborough, MA) and measured at 25°C using Zetasizer Nano ZEN 3600 (Malvern Panalytical Inc.).

Table 1. The list of potential additive candidates for changing zeta potential activity
Ingredient Chemical formula Molecular weight (g/mol) Purity (%) Brand Cat. No.
Amino acids
L-Phenylalanine C9H11NO2 165.19 99.0 SIGMA 78019
L-Lysine monohydrochloride C6H14N2O2-HCl 182.65 98.0 SIGMA L5626
L-Threonine C4H9NO3 119.12 99.8 SIGMA 89179
L-Tryptophan C11H12N2O2 204.23 99.0 SIGMA T8941
L-Tyrosine C9H11NO3 181.19 99.0 SIGMA 93829
L-Histidine C6H9N3O2 155.15 99.5 SIGMA 53319
Carbohydrates
Fructooligosaccharide C72H121O61 - 90.0 SIGMA F8052
Sucrose C12H22O11 342.30 99.5 SIGMA S7903
Glucose C6H12O6 180.16 99.5 SIGMA G7021
Trehalose C12H22O11-2H2O 378.33 99.0 SIGMA T9531
Vitamins
Thiamine hydrochloride C12H17CIN4OS-HCl 337.27 99.0 SIGMA T1270
Riboflavin C17H20N4O6 376.36 98.0 SIGMA R9504
L-Ascorbic acid C6H8O6 176.12 99.5 SIGMA 95209
Osmolytes
Taurine C2H7NO3S 125.15 99.0 SIGMA 15224
Download Excel Table
Simulated stomach duodenum passage (SSDP) assay

SSDP assay was conducted according to Ji et al. (2013) with minor modifications. Freeze-dried Lc. rhamnosus HN001 was separately mixed with each of the amino acid, threonine, phenylalanine, lysine, and histidine, at a concentration of 0.03M, resulting in a final concentration of 1×109 CFU/mL. After 5 min rehydration, 1 mL of each sample was added with 9 mL of acidic phosphate buffer saline (PBS, pH 3.0), and then incubated at 37°C for 1 h. Subsequently, 17 mL of duodenum juice (NaHCO3: 6.4 g/L, KCl: 0.239 g/L and NaCl: 1.28 g/L, pH 7.4) and 4 mL of bile salts solution (10% oxgall, BD) were added and incubated for additional 2 h. To check the survival rate, samples were collected at each point of exposure (0h for unexposed, 1h for acid-exposed and 3h for acid and duodenum juice-exposed) and counted using serial dilution with MRS (BD) under anaerobic condition at 37°C for 48 h. With 4-strain bacterial mixture, the SSDP assay was conducted with histidine supplementation at concentrations from 0.01 M to 0.05 M. Samples collected at each time point was cultured using MRS agar and BL agar (BD, USA) under anaerobic conditions at 37°C for 48 h.

Measurement of cell viability by rehydration time

The lyophilized probiotic mixture as was rehydrated with 0.03 M histidine-PBS solution or normal PBS solution for 5 min to verify the effect of histidine on the stability of bacteria. Samples were collected at 0, 15, 30, 45 and 60 min after rehydration, and the viability was checked by serial dilution using MRS agar incubated under anaerobic conditions at 37°C for 48 h.

HT-29 cell adhesion assay

The human intestinal epithelial cells (HT-29, distributed by the Korean Cell Line Bank) were grown and maintained in RPMI 1640 (Corning, NY) containing 10% fetal bovine serum (Gibco, Thermo Fishcer Scientific, Waltham, MA) and 1% antibiotics (antibiotic-antimycotic, Gibco) at 36.5°C and 5% CO2 condition. Cell adhesion test was performed according to Botes (2008) and Kavanaugh (2013) with modification. Briefly, eukaryotic cells were seeded into 12-well plate (Corning) at 1×106/well and incubated overnight. Two hours prior to assay, cells were washed with PBS to remove antibiotics and then media was substituted for serum-free RPMI 1640. The lyophilized bacterial strain and the 4-strain bacterial mixture were rehydrated in 10 mL of 0.03M histidine for 5 min. HT-29 monolayer was treated with the bacteria suspension at the ratio of 100:1 (Bacteria: cell) and incubated at 37°C for 40 min in an anaerobic chamber (Whitley DG250 anaerobic workstation, Don Whitley Scientific, Bingley, United Kingdom). After incubation, cells were washed to remove excessive bacteria, detached with 500 μL of trypsin-EDTA solution (Gibco), and then subsequently added with additional 500 μL of RPMI 1640. The cell suspension and the original inoculum were serially diluted, and bacterial count was carried out in MRS or BL agar (BD, USA) incubated under anaerobic condition at 37°C for 48 h. The percentage of adherent bacteria was calculated, and relative changes were expressed as fold changes compared to the non-reactivated control group.

Statistical analyses

All data were presented as mean ± S.D. (n=3). Statistical analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism version 9.3.1 (GraphPad, La Jolly, CA) and Microsoft Excel. Comparisons of experimental groups were performed using ordinary one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with proper post hoc analysis with α = 0.05. P values < 0.05 were considered as statistically significant.

Results

Screening for potent rehydration ingredients using zeta-potential as a parameter

The zeta-potential of 4 rehydrated bacterial powder was measured with 14 candidate materials each (Table 1) to select ingredients which would improve dispersion stability of probiotic bacteria. Addition of L-histidine, L-tyrosine, L- threonine, and L-phenylalanine increased negative charge values of Lc. rhamnosus HN001 zeta-potential (Fig. 1A). L-histidine, L-tryptophan, L-threonine, L-lysine, and L-phenylalanine gave higher negative charge value than control sample with B. lactis HN019 (Fig. 1B). The zeta-potential of B. bifidum R0071 was altered by adding L-histidine, L-tryptophan, L-threonine, L-lysine, and L-phenylalanine (Fig. 1C). For L. helviticus R-52 strain, addition of L-histidine significantly changed the zeta-potential to have extremely negative charge value (Fig. 1D).

labp-10-1-16-g1
Fig. 1. Changes in zeta-potential of 4 probiotic strains rehydrated with each candidate material. Rehydrated four probiotic strains were subjected to measure zeta-potential value with each candidate material supplementation. (A) Lc rhamnosus HN001, (B) B. lactis HN019, (C) B. bifidum R0071, (D) L. helviticus R-52. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA compared to each strain’s freeze-dried (FD) sample. *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001.
Download Original Figure
SSDP (Simulated stomach-duodenum passage) assay

Based on the zeta-potential assay result, 4 potent ingredients were selected as additive candidates for the rehydration process: L-histidine, L-threonine, L-lysine, and L-phenylalanine. To validate their effect on probiotic properties, the survivability in the gastrointestinal tract was examined by SSDP assay with the 4-strain mixture and its representative strain, Lc. rhamnosus HN001. Lyophilized powder of Lc. rhamnosus HN001 showed significantly deteriorated survival rate compared to the live control group. Among 4 amino acid (AA) candidates, L-phenylalanine and L-histidine significantly increased the survival rate, and L-histidine showed higher potency than L-phenylalanine (Table 2). To optimize L-histidine concentration, the 4-probiotic strain mixture powder was rehydrated with different concentrations of L-histidine from 0.01 M to 0.05 M. L-histidine supplementation notably increased the bacteria survival rate (Table 3), and the highest survival rate was observed at the concentration of 0.03 M.

Table 2. Simulated stomach-duodenum passage (SSDP) results of Lc. rhamnosus HN001
Sample name Strain Material (concentration) Initial Stomach Duodenum
log CFU/mL log CFU/mL Survival (%) log CFU/mL Survival (%)
Live Lc. rhamnosus HN001 None 9.45±0.13 9.55±0.35 145.98 9.53±0.09 118.30**
FD None 9.78±0.05 9.37±0.06 39.44 8.16±0.04 2.41
Threonine L-Threonine (0.03 M) 9.78±0.02 9.39±0.08 40.98 8.15±0.14 2.42
Phenylalanine L-Phenylalanine (0.03 M) 9.82±0.08 9.37±0.14 36.50 8.36±0.03 3.33**
Lysine L-Lysine (0.03 M) 9.84±0.01 9.48±0.02 43.96 8.24±0.01 2.52
Histidine L-Histidine (0.03 M) 9.91±0.03 9.77±0.14 73.68 9.35±0.05 27.22***

The data are shown as mean ± standard deviation. Statistical analysis for the Lc. rhamnosus HN001 was performed by student’s t-test compared to each sample’s freeze-dried (FD) sample.

* p<0.05,

** p<0.01,

*** p<0.001.

Download Excel Table
Table 3. SSDP results of four-strain-mixture with different concentrations of L-histidine
Sample name Strain Histidine concentration Initial Stomach Duodenum
log CFU/mL log CFU/mL Survival (%) log CFU/mL Survival (%)
Mix FD 4 strains mixture None 9.48±0.10 8.84±0.13 23.37 8.14±0.04 4.57
Mix 1 0.01M 9.44±0.11 9.21±0.08 57.00 8.86±0.04 25.21***
Mix 2 0.02M 9.50±0.12 9.35±0.09 70.56 9.01±0.06 31.48***
Mix 3 0.03M 9.42±0.11 9.28±0.14 73.46 9.00±0.12 38.71***
Mix 4 0.04M 9.58±0.06 9.30±0.19 55.94 8.93±0.04 22.43***
Mix 5 0.05M 9.45±0.05 9.23±0.18 63.34 8.96±0.05 32.20***

The data are shown as mean ± standard deviation. Statistical analysis was performed by student’s t-test compared to freeze-dried (FD) sample.

* p<0.05,

** p<0.01,

*** p<0.001.

Download Excel Table
Cell viability with different rehydration time

To evaluate the effect of L-histidine supplementation on the probiotic strain stability under extended rehydration time, bacterial cell viability was examined for 1 h was examined. With supplementation of L-histidine at optimal dose, 0.03 M, cell viability of the rehydrated probiotic mixture was maintained stably (105.9% at T=60 min, Table 4), while the control group without L-histidine showed relatively reduced survival rate (54.4% at T=60 min).

Table 4. Cell viability of probiotic mixture rehydrated with or without histidine
Sample name log CFU/mL (cell survival %)
T=0 min T=15 min T=30 min T=45 min T=60 min
Mixture with 0.03M histidine 7.47±0.11(100%) 7.46±0.10(95.6%)p=0.84 7.45±0.10(93.2%)p=0.73 7.44±0.05(90.1%)p=0.56 7.50±0.12(105.9%)p=0.72
Mixture without 0.03M histidine 7.23±0.20(100%) 7.18±0.14(84.1%)p=0.61 7.00±0.05(54.0%)p=0.06 7.03±0.08(57.6%)p=0.07 7.00±0.05(54.4%)p=0.07

The data are shown as mean ± standard deviation. Statistical analysis was performed by student’s t-test each time point compared to T0 of same group.

* p<0.05,

** p<0.01,

*** p<0.001.

Download Excel Table
Human intestinal epithelial cell adhesion assay

Next, bacterial cell adherence capability was examined by adhesion assay using human intestinal epithelial cell line. The lyophilized bacteria, 4 strains mixture or Lc. rhamnosus HN001, were rehydrated with 0.03 M L-histidine for 5 min and then treated to the enterocytes. L-histidine supplementation significantly increased the adhesion ratio 15.3-fold and 4.00-fold compared to each non-supplemented control in MRS agar (Fig. 2A) and BL agar (Fig. 2B), respectively. The adhesion ratio of Lc. rhamnosus HN001 was also increased 4.07-fold by histidine rehydration (Fig. 2C).

labp-10-1-16-g2
Fig. 2. Cell adhesion assay of probiotic strains rehydrated with histidine on human intestinal epithelial cell (HT-29). 4 strains mixture or Lc. rhamnosus HN001 rehydrated with histidine was applied on HT-29 cells at 100:1 ratio, and the cell attachment ratio was calculated. Adhesion ratio of 4 strain mixture was evaluated in MRS agar (A) and BL agar (B), and the ratio of Lc. rhamnosus HN001 was evaluated in MRS agar (C). Comparisons of experimental groups were performed using ordinary one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey’s multiple comparison test with α = 0.05. *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001.
Download Original Figure

Discussion

Previous research indicates the significance of bacterial viability for its efficacy. Nevertheless, the harsh gastrointestinal environment poses a considerable challenge to probiotics when orally ingested, primarily attributed to the presence of intestinal bile and stomach acid. Most of commercialized probiotics are lyophilized to be stably transported and to extend shelf-life by reducing water activity. On the other hand, the process is still stressful enough to substantially deteriorate bacteria viability since it damages the integrity of cell membrane as well (Govander et al., 2014). Rehydration is vital for recovering lyophilized bacteria, enabling damaged cells to potentially repair and regain normal function under optimized conditions. To overcome this problem, lyophilized bacteria must have similar viability as much as live bacteria (Schwab et al., 2007). It needs to be well dissolved lyophilized bacteria for similar stability of live bacteria.

Cell’s zeta potential will be determined by the cell surface composition and the properties of the surrounding medium (Soon et al., 2011). In this study, FDA-approved 14 ingredients were tested for their modulating effect on zeta-potential value of lyophilized bacterial strains (Fig. 1). Halder (2015) showed that decrease zeta-potential absolute value was related with the increase of bacterial membrane permeability, which leads to cell death. Previous studies showed that giving an appropriate negative charge of zeta-potential to the probiotics cell surface can reactive probiotic cells, recover damaged cells, and improve their viability (Arellano et al., 2021; Cowan et al., 1992). It was found that 4 AA, L-histidine, L-threonine, L-lysine, and L-phenylalanine enhanced zeta-potential value, and these chemicals could be utilized as potential additives for enhanced rehydration condition. AA are important for bacteria growth, biofilm formation, and dispersal (Idress et al., 2020). Bacterial peptidoglycan is an important polymer serving structural role in the bacterial cell wall, which is related with the strength of the wall. This polymer is composed of sugar and AA, and the strength and the elasticity of the wall show positive relation with AA supplementation. In our study, selected 4 AA for the lyophilized bacteria increased the stability of rehydrated bacteria, and this could be attributed to the strengthened function of bacterial cell walls.

Survivability of probiotics under gastrointestinal stress is also mainly related to its beneficial effect on the host. We evaluated the effect of 4 AA supplementation on the survival rates of the probiotic mixture using SSDP assay, a representative in vitro experiment method mimicking the environment of the stomach and small intestine (Mathara et al., 2008). Among those 4 AA, L-histidine at the concentration of 0.03 M showed the most enhanced survivability (Table 2 and Table 3). In addition, L-histidine supplementation improved bacteria viability during rehydration for extended time (Table 4). Several AA metabolisms such as histidine, glutamine, aspartic acid and arginine could be utilized to increase bacterial acid resistance, and histidine metabolism could be coupled with proton-consuming reactions in strain-dependent way (Hall et al., 2019; Trip et al., 2012). It is also possible that L-histidine is more effective for restoration of rehydrate bacteria which may experience damage in cell integrity during lyophilization process.

It is also important to verify adhesion ability of probiotic cells to intestinal mucosa which influence the interaction between probiotics and the host system. The adhesion ability is related with bacterial cell surface properties such as hydrophobicity, extracellular polymers (exopolysaccharides, adhesins), and the electric charge (Alander et al., 1999). In our study, rehydration with 0.03 M L-histidine significantly augmented the attachment to intestinal epithelial cell (Fig. 2).

L-histidine is considered an essential amino acid for infants and is related to growth in infants including weight gain when it is insufficient (Snyderman et al., 1963). It is not synthesized endogenously at necessary concentration of physical demand. Histidine is also used to make histamine, a common cause of allergy reaction, in human body (Holeček et al., 2020; Thalaker-Mercer et al., 2020). However, L-histidine is “generally regarded as safe” (GRAS) by the FDA and many studies suggested its use as food additives (US Food and Drug Administration, 2020). Gibbs (2020) reported effect of long-term histidine administration on young children and adult with atopic dermatitis (AD) and suggested that histidine is safe and convenient supplement for management of AD in both (young children and adult). L-histidine is known as an osmoprotectant, help enhance the resistance of a strain under unbalanced osmotic conditions (Bougouffa et al., 2014).

In conclusion, addition of 0.03M L-histidine mixture, designated “Zeta-bio®” can increase the viability of freeze-drying cells and can improve stability in in vitro gastric and duodenum condition and can improve effect of cell adherence function. Therefore, this study shows possibility that histidine is restored damage of lyophilization and ameliorated survivability for probiotics commercialization.

References

1.

Alander M, Satokari R, Korpela R, Saxelin M, Vilpponen T, Mattila T, Mattila-Sandholm, T and von Wright A (1999) Persistence of colonization of human colonic mucosa by a probiotic strain, Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, after oral consumption. Applied and Environmental Microbiology.65(1), 351-354.

2.

Arellano K, Lim J, Yeo S, Bucheli JEV, Todorov SD, Ji Y and Holzapfel, WH (2021) Rehydration before application improves functional properties of lyophilized Lactiplantibacillus plantarum HAC03. Microorganisms.9(5), 1013.

3.

Arellano K, Park H, Kim B, Yeo S, Jo H, Kim JH and Holzapfel, WH (2021) Improving the viability of freeze-dried probiotics using a lysine-based rehydration mixture. Microbiology and Biotechnology Letters. 49(2), 157-166.

4.

Bomba A, Brandeburová A, Ričanyová, J, Strojný, L, Chmelárová A, Szabadosová V and Čokášová, D (2012) The role of probiotics and natural bioactive compounds in modulation of the common molecular pathways in pathogenesis of atherosclerosis and cancer. Biologia.67(1), 1-13.

5.

Botes M, Loos B, van Reenen CA and Dicks LM (2008) Adhesion of the probiotic strains Enterococcus mundtii ST4SA and Lactobacillus plantarum 423 to Caco-2 cells under conditions simulating the intestinal tract, and in the presence of antibiotics and anti-inflammatory medicaments. Archives of Microbiology. 190, 573-584.

6.

Bougouffa S, Radovanovic A, Essack M and Bajic VB (2014) DEOP: A database on osmoprotectants and associated pathways. Database.

7.

Bron PA, Van Baarlen P and Kleerebezem M (2012) Emerging molecular insights into the interaction between probiotics and the host intestinal mucosa. Nature Reviews Microbiology. 10(1), 66-78.

8.

Cowan MM, Van der Mei HC, Stokroos I and Busscher HJ (1992) Heterogeneity of surfaces of subgingival bacteria as detected by zeta potential measurements. Journal of Dental Research.71(11), 1803-1806.

9.

De Valdez GF, de Gior GS, de Ruiz Holgado AP and Oliver G (1985) Rehydration conditions and viability of freeze-dried lactic acid bacteria. Cryobiology. 22(6), 574-577.

10.

De Wouters T, Jans C, Niederberger T, Fischer P and Rühs PA (2015) Adhesion potential of intestinal microbes predicted by physico-chemical characterization methods. PloS one.10(8).

11.

Fiocco D, Longo A, Arena M P, Russo P, Spano G, and Capozzi V (2020) How probiotics face food stress: They get by with a little help. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. 60(9), 1552-1580.

12.

Gibbs NK (2020) L-Histidine supplementation in adults and young children with atopic dermatitis (eczema). The Journal of Nutrition.150(Supplement_1), 2576S-2579S.

13.

Govender M, Choonara YE, Kumar P, du Toit LC, van Vuuren S and Pillay V (2014) A review of the advancements in probiotic delivery: Conventional vs. non-conventional formulations for intestinal flora supplementation. Aaps PharmSciTech.15, 29-43.

14.

Gwak H, Lee JH, Kim TW, Choi HJ, Jang JY, Le SI and Park HW (2015) Protective effect of soy powder and microencapsulation on freeze-dried Lactobacillus brevis WK12 and Lactococcus lactis WK11 during storage. Food Science and Biotechnology.24(6), 2155-2160.

15.

Halder S, Yadav KK, Sarkar R, Mukherjee S, Saha P, Haldar S and Sen T (2015) Alteration of zeta potential and membrane permeability in bacteria: A study with cationic agents. SpringerPlus. 4(1), 1-14.

16.

Hall AE, Engevik MA, Oezguen N, Haag A and Versalovic J (2019) ClC transporter activity modulates histidine catabolism in Lactobacillus reuteri by altering intracellular pH and membrane potential. Microbial Cell Factories.18(1), 1-18.

17.

Holeček M (2020) Histidine in health and disease: metabolism, physiological importance, and use as a supplement. Nutrients.12(3), 848.

18.

Hubálek Z (2003) Protectants used in the cryopreservation of microorganisms. Cryobiology.46(3), 205-229.

19.

Ji Y, Kim H, Park H, Lee J, Lee H, Shin H and Holzapfel WH (2013) Functionality and safety of lactic bacterial strains from Korean kimchi. Food Control. 31(2), 467-473.

20.

Joint FAO (2002) WHO Working Group Report on Drafting Guidelines for the Evaluation of Probiotics in Food. Vol. 30 FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization); London UK: WHO (World Health Organization); Ottawa, ON, Canada.

21.

Kavanaugh DW, O’Callaghan J, Butto LF, Slattery H, Lane J, Clyne M and Hickey RM (2013) Exposure of Bifidobacterium longum subsp. infantis to milk oligosaccharides increases adhesion to epithelial cells and induces a substantial transcriptional response. PloS one. 8(6).

22.

Kwon HK, Lee CG, So JS, Chae CS, Hwang JS, Sahoo A and Im SH (2010) Generation of regulatory dendritic cells and CD4+ Foxp3+ T cells by probiotics administration suppresses immune disorders. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.107(5), 2159-2164.

23.

Leach RH and Scott WJ (1959) The influence of rehydration on the viability of dried micro-organisms. Microbiology.21(2), 295-307.

24.

Liu Y, Tran DQ and Rhoads JM (2018) Probiotics in disease prevention and treatment. The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. 58, S164-S179.

25.

Lodato P, Segovia de Huergo M and Buera MP (1999) Viability and thermal stability of a strain of Saccharomyces cerevisiae freeze-dried in different sugar and polymer matrices. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology.52, 215-220.

26.

Mathara JM, Schillinger U, Guigas C, Franz C, Kutima PM, Mbugua SK and Holzapfel WH (2008) Functional characteristics of Lactobacillus spp. from traditional Maasai fermented milk products in Kenya. International Journal of Food Microbiology.126(1-2), 57-64.

27.

Ramírez-García G, Trapiella-Alfonso L, D’orlyé F and Varenne A (2018) Electrophoretic methods for characterizing nanoparticles and evaluating their bio-interactions for their further use as diagnostic, imaging, or therapeutic tools. In capillary electromigration separation methods. Elsevier. 397-421.

28.

Schwab C, Vogel R and Gänzle MG (2007) Influence of oligosaccharides on the viability and membrane properties of Lactobacillus reuteri TMW1. 106 during freeze-drying. Cryobiology. 55(2), 108-114.

29.

Snyderman SE, Boyer A, Roitman E, Holt Jr LE and Prose PH (1963) The histidine requirement of the infant. Pediatrics.31, 786-801.

30.

Soon RL, Nation RL, Cockram S, Moffatt JH, Harper M, Adler B and Li J (2011) Different surface charge of colistin-susceptible and-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii cells measured with zeta potential as a function of growth phase and colistin treatment. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. 66(1), 126-133.

31.

Suganya K and Koo BS (2020) Gut–brain axis, role of gut microbiota on neurological disorders and how probiotics/prebiotics beneficially modulate microbial and immune pathways to improve brain functions. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 21(20), 7551.

32.

Thalacker-Mercer AE and Gheller ME (2020) Benefits and adverse effects of histidine supplementation. The Journal of Nutrition.50(Supplement_1), 2588S-2592S.

33.

Trip H, Mulder NL and Lolkema JS (2012) Improved acid stress survival of Lactococcus lactis expressing the histidine decarboxylation pathway of Streptococcus thermophilus CHCC1524. Journal of Biological Chemistry.287(14), 11195-11204.

34.

US Food and Drug Administration (2020) Substances added to food L-histidine.

35.

Yeo S, Shin HS, Lee HW, Hong D, Park H, Holzapfel WH and Huh CS (2018) Determination of optimized growth medium and cryoprotective additives to enhance the growth and survival of Lactobacillus salivarius. Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology.28(5), 718-731.