Comparative effects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria
Yıl: 2020 Cilt: 91 Sayı: 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 1 - 8 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.33188/vetheder.591867 İndeks Tarihi: 29-04-2021
Comparative effects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria
Öz: Nisin is a low molecular weight bacteriocin which is produced by Lactococcus lactis. Literature about the effects ofnisin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria is scarce. The objective of the present study was to investigate the comparativeeffects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of some Gram-positive and Gram-negative rumen bacteria. Theantibacterial activity assays of nisin and monensin were carried out using broth microdilution method in anaerobicconditions. Antibacterial effect of monensin on Gram-positive rumen bacteria was higher than nisin. Ruminococcusalbus and Eubacterium ruminantium were the most sensitive bacteria to monensin. Growth of these bacteria wasinhibited completely by monensin, at 6 and 12 µg/mL concentrations respectively. Nisin exhibited stimulatory effectson R. albus, E. ruminantium and, Streptecoccus bovis (p<0.05), unlike monensin. Both nisin and monensin showedpotential antibacterial activity on Ruminococcus flavefaciens and Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens (p<0.05), although they didnot inhibit these bacteria completely. Nisin and monensin also did not show inhibitory effect on Methanobacteriumformicicum, however the potential antimicrobial activity of monensin on this methanogen was more evident. Gramnegative rumen bacteria, Megasphaera elsdenii and Fibrobacter succinogenes, were resistant to both of nisin andmonesin. It was concluded that the different effects of nisin and monensin particularly on some Gram-positive rumenbacteria may be responsible for their inconsistent effects on ruminal fermentation.
Anahtar Kelime: Nisin ve monensin’in rumen bakterilerinin saf kültürleri üzerine karşılaştırmalı etkileri
Öz: Nisin, Lactococcus lactis tarafından üretilen düşük moleküler ağırlıklı bir bakteriyosindir. Nisin’in rumen bakterilerinin saf kültürleri üzerine etkileri hakkında oldukça sınırlı düzeyde literatür bilgisi bulunmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, nisin ve monensin’in bazı Gram-pozitif ve Gram-negatif rumen bakterilerinin saf kültürleri üzerine karşılaştırmalı etkilerini araştırmaktır. Nisin ve monensin’in antibakteriyal aktivite analizleri, anaerobik koşullarda mikrodilüsyon yöntemi kullanılarak yapılmıştır. Monensin’in Gram-pozitif rumen bakterileri üzerine antibakteriyal etkisi nisin’den daha yüksek bulunmuştur. Ruminococcus albus ve Eubacterium ruminantium monensin’e karşı en duyarlı bakteriler olarak belirlenmiştir. Bu bakterilerin büyümesi, monensin tarafından sırasıyla 6 ve 12 µg/mL konsantrasyonlarında tamamen baskılanmıştır. Nisin, monensin’den farklı olarak R. albus, E. ruminantium ve Streptecoccus bovis üzerine uyarıcı etkiler göstermiştir (p<0,05). Hem nisin hem de monensin, Ruminococcus flavefaciens ve Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens üzerine potansiyel antibakteriyal aktivite sergilemişler (p<0,05), ancak bu bakterileri tamamen baskılamamışlardır. Nisin ve monensin ayrıca Methanobacterium formicicum üzerine baskılayıcı etki göstermemekle birlikte, monensin’in bu metanojen üzerine potansiyel antimikrobiyal etkinliğinin daha belirgin olduğu gözlenmiştir. Gram-negatif rumen bakterileri olan Megasphaera elsdenii ve Fibrobacter succinogenes’in, hem nisin hem de monensin’e karşı dirençli oldukları belirlenmiştir. Nisin ve monensin’in özellikle bazı Gram-pozitif rumen bakterileri üzerine olan farklı etkilerinin ruminal fermentasyon üzerine uyumlu olmayan etkilerinden sorumlu olabileceği sonucuna varılmıştır.
Anahtar Kelime: Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
- 1. Aura AM (2008): Microbial metabolism of dietary phenolic compounds in the colon. Phytochem Rev, 7, 407– 429.
- 2. Breukink E, de Kruijff B (1999): The lantibiotic nisin, a special case or not? BBA-Biomembranes 1462, 223– 234.
- 3. Brulc JM, Antonopoulos DA, Miller ME, Wilson MK, Yannarell AC, Dinsdale EA, Edwards RE, Frank, ED, Emerson JB, Wacklin P, Coutinho PM, Henrissat B, Nelson KE, White BA (2009): Gene-centric metagenomics of the fiber-adherent bovine rumen microbiome reveals forage specific glycoside hydrolases. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 106, 1948–1953.
- 4. Callaway TR, De Melo AMC, Russell JB (1997): The effect of nisin and monensin on ruminal fermentations in vitro. Curr Microbiol, 35, 90–96.
- 5. Castillejos L, Calsamiglia S, Ferret A, Losa R (2007): Effects of dose and adaptation time of a specific blend of essential oil compounds on rumen fermentation. Anim Feed Sci Tech, 132, 186–201.
- 6. Chalupa W (1977): Manipulating rumen fermentation. J Anim Sci, 46, 585–599.
- 7. Chung KT, Dickson JS, Crouse JD (1989): Effects of nisin on growth of bacteria attached to meat. Appl Environ Microbiol, 55, 1329–1333.
- 8. CLSI (Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute) (2016): Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing: 26th Informational Supplement. In: M100-S26, CLSI, Wayne, PA.
- 9. Dawson KA, Boling JA (1984): Factors affecting resistance of monensin-resistant and sensitive strains of Bacteroides ruminicola. Can J Anim Sci, 64, 132–133.
- 10.DeVuyst L (1994): Nisin production variability between natural Lactococcus lactis subsp. lactis strains. Biotechnol Lett, 16, 287–292.
- 11.Henderson C, Stewart CS, Nekrep FV (1981): The effect of monensin on pure and mixed cultures of rumen bacteria. J Appl Bacteriol, 51, 159–169.
- 12.Jack RW, Tagg JR, Ray B (1995): Bacteriocins of Gram-positive bacteria. Microbiol Rev, 59, 171–200.
- 13.Jalc D, Lauková A (2002): Effect of nisin and monensin on rumen fermentation in the artificial rumen. Berl Munch Tierarztl, 115, 6–10.
- 14.Jami E, Mizrahi I (2012): Composition and similarity of bovine rumen microbiota across individual animals. Plos One, 7, e33306.
- 15.Kang MS, Oh JS, Kang IC, Hong SJ, Choi CH (2008): Inhibitory effect of methyl gallate and gallic acid on oral bacteria. J Microbiol, 46, 744–750.
- 16.Kišidayová S, Laukova A, Jalč D (2009): Comparison of nisin and monensin effects on ciliate and selected bacterial populations in artificial rumen. Folia Microbiol, 54, 527–532.
- 17.Ko HH, Lareu RR, Dix BR, Hughes JD (2018): In vitro antibacterial effects of statins against bacterial pathogens causing skin infections. Eur J Clin Microbiol, 37, 1125–1135.
- 18.Mantovani HC, Russell JB (2001): Nisin resistance of Streptococcus bovis. Appl Environ Microbiol, 67, 808– 813.
- 19.Nagaraja TG, Taylor MB (1987): Susceptibility and resistance of ruminal bacteria to antimicrobial feed additives. Appl Environ Microbiol, 53, 1620–1625.
- 20.Oeztuerk H, Emre B, Sagmanligil V, Piskin I, Fidanci UR, Pekcan M (2010): Effects of nisin and propolis on ruminal fermentation in vitro. J Anim Vet Adv, 9, 2752–2758.
- 21.OJEU (2003): OJEU Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 of the European Parliament and the Council of 22 September 2003 on Additives for Use in Animal Nutrition. Official Journal of European Union. Page L268/36 in OJEU of 18/10/2003.
- 22.Orpin CG (1976): Studies on the rumen flagellate Sphaeromonas communis. J Gen Microbiol, 94, 270–280.
- 23.Patra AK, Stiverson J, Yu Z (2012): Effects of quillaja and yucca saponins on communities and select populations of rumen bacteria and archaea, and fermentation in vitro. J Appl Microbiol, 113, 1329–1340.
- 24.Pol IE, Smid EJ (1999): Combined action of nisin and carvacrol on Bacillus cereus and Listeria monocytogenes. Lett Appl Microbiol, 29, 166–170.
- 25.Russell JB, Mantovani HC (2002): The bacteriocins of ruminal bacteria and their potential as an alternative to antibiotics. J Mol Microb Biotech, 4, 347–355.
- 26.Russell JB, Strobel HJ (1989): Mini-Review: The effect of ionophores on ruminal fermentation. Appl Environ Microbiol, 55, 1–6.
- 27.Rychlik JL, Russell JB (2002): Bacteriocin-like activity of Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens JL5 and its effect on other ruminal bacteria and ammonia production. Appl Environ Microbiol, 68, 1040–1046.
- 28.Severina E, Severin A, Tomasz A (1998): Antibacterial efficacy of nisin against multidrug-resistant Grampositive pathogens. J Antimicrob Chemoth, 41, 341–347.
- 29.Shen J, Liu Z, Yu Z, Zhu W (2017): Monensin and nisin affect rumen fermentation and microbiota differently in vitro. Front Microbiol, 8, 1111.
- 30.Slyter LL, Tung RS, Kung Jr L (1992): Effect of monensin and lysocellin on growth and fermentation by pure cultures of ruminal bacteria. J Appl Anim Res, 1, 1–12.
| APA | DEMIRTAS A (2020). Comparative effects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria. , 1 - 8. 10.33188/vetheder.591867 |
| Chicago | DEMIRTAS Ahu Comparative effects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria. (2020): 1 - 8. 10.33188/vetheder.591867 |
| MLA | DEMIRTAS Ahu Comparative effects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria. , 2020, ss.1 - 8. 10.33188/vetheder.591867 |
| AMA | DEMIRTAS A Comparative effects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria. . 2020; 1 - 8. 10.33188/vetheder.591867 |
| Vancouver | DEMIRTAS A Comparative effects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria. . 2020; 1 - 8. 10.33188/vetheder.591867 |
| IEEE | DEMIRTAS A "Comparative effects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria." , ss.1 - 8, 2020. 10.33188/vetheder.591867 |
| ISNAD | DEMIRTAS, Ahu. "Comparative effects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria". (2020), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.33188/vetheder.591867 |
| APA | DEMIRTAS A (2020). Comparative effects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria. Veteriner Hekimler Derneği Dergisi, 91(1), 1 - 8. 10.33188/vetheder.591867 |
| Chicago | DEMIRTAS Ahu Comparative effects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria. Veteriner Hekimler Derneği Dergisi 91, no.1 (2020): 1 - 8. 10.33188/vetheder.591867 |
| MLA | DEMIRTAS Ahu Comparative effects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria. Veteriner Hekimler Derneği Dergisi, vol.91, no.1, 2020, ss.1 - 8. 10.33188/vetheder.591867 |
| AMA | DEMIRTAS A Comparative effects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria. Veteriner Hekimler Derneği Dergisi. 2020; 91(1): 1 - 8. 10.33188/vetheder.591867 |
| Vancouver | DEMIRTAS A Comparative effects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria. Veteriner Hekimler Derneği Dergisi. 2020; 91(1): 1 - 8. 10.33188/vetheder.591867 |
| IEEE | DEMIRTAS A "Comparative effects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria." Veteriner Hekimler Derneği Dergisi, 91, ss.1 - 8, 2020. 10.33188/vetheder.591867 |
| ISNAD | DEMIRTAS, Ahu. "Comparative effects of nisin and monensin on pure cultures of rumen bacteria". Veteriner Hekimler Derneği Dergisi 91/1 (2020), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.33188/vetheder.591867 |
