Functional profiling of lactic acid bacteria reveals antimicrobial activity and immune benefits in canines.
The global rise in pet ownership has increased demand for health-promoting products, particularly probiotics designed to support gastrointestinal and immune health in companion animals. However, most commercial products rely on non-host-adapted strains, which may limit gastrointestinal colonization and host-specific benefits. To address this gap, 56 bacterial isolates were obtained from the fecal and milk microbiota of clinically healthy dogs and cats. Among these, Limosilactobacillus reuteri DF/KS2, derived from the fecal microbiota of a Kangal Shepherd dog, and Enterococcus faecium CM/BS2 derived from the milk microbiota British Shorthair cat, were selected based on their broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity. Both strains exhibited a safe profile, as evidenced by γ-hemolysis and susceptibility to a panel of clinically relevant antibiotics. Under simulated gastrointestinal conditions, CM/BS2 and DF/KS2 tolerated highly acidic environments and demonstrated resilience against digestive enzymes and bile salts. Furthermore, both isolates displayed strong auto-aggregation and co-aggregation abilities with key pathogens, while adhesion assays using Caco-2 cells confirmed their capacity to inhibit pathogen attachment. Immunomodulatory evaluations further revealed that both strains effectively reduced pro-inflammatory cytokines (TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-6) and enhanced anti-inflammatory IL-10 production in canine and feline macrophages. Optimal growth occurred at 37 °C after 24 h in 2% molasses medium, and shelf-life studies demonstrated that freeze-dried cultures retained high viability over six months at - 20 °C. Collectively, these findings highlight the probiotic potential of host-adapted L. reuteri DF/KS2 and E. faecium CM/BS2, emphasizing their suitability for inclusion in species-specific probiotic formulations aimed at supporting gastrointestinal and immune health in dogs and cats.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kiran et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: