Health benefits of probiotics: are mixtures more effective than single strains?

PURPOSE: Most studies on probiotics utilise single strains, sometimes incorporated into yoghurts. There are fewer studies on efficacy of mixtures of probiotic strains. This review examines the evidence that (a) probiotic mixtures are beneficial for a range of health-related outcomes and (b) mixtures are more or less effective than their component strains administered separately. RESULTS: Mixtures of probiotics had beneficial effects on the end points including irritable bowel syndrome and gut function, diarrhoea, atopic disease, immune function and respiratory tract infections, gut microbiota modulation, inflammatory bowel disease and treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection. However, only 16 studies compared the effect of a mixture with that of its component strains separately, although in 12 cases (75%), the mixture was more effective. CONCLUSION: Probiotic mixtures appear to be effective against a wide range of end points. Based on a limited number of studies, multi-strain probiotics appear to show greater efficacy than single strains, including strains that are components of the mixtures themselves. However, whether this is due to synergistic interactions between strains or a consequence of the higher probiotic dose used in some studies is at present unclear.

Modulation of vaccine response by concomitant probiotic administration

Evidence suggests that probiotic bacteria modulate both innate and adaptive immunity in the host, and in some situations can result in reduced severity of common illnesses, such as acute rotavirus infection and respiratory infections. Responses to vaccination are increasingly being used to provide high quality information on the immunomodulatory effects of dietary components in humans. The present review focuses on the effect of probiotic administration upon vaccination response. The majority of studies investigating the impact of probiotics on responses to vaccination have been conducted in healthy adults, and at best they show modest effects of probiotics on serum or salivary IgA titres. Studies in infants and in elderly subjects are very limited, and it is too early to draw any firm conclusions regarding the potential for probiotics to act as adjuvants in vaccination. Although some studies are comparable in terms of duration of the intervention and age and characteristics of the subjects, most differ in terms of the probiotic selected. Further well designed, randomized, placebo-controlled studies are needed to fully understand the immunomodulatory properties of probiotics, whether the effects exerted are strain-dependent and age-dependent, and their clinical relevance in enhancing immune protection following vaccination.

Review of current in vivo measurement techniques for quantifying enteric methane emission from ruminants

Ruminant husbandry is a major source of anthropogenic greenhouse gases (GHG). Filling knowledge gaps and providing expert recommendation are important for defining future research priorities, improving methodologies and establishing science-based GHG mitigation solutions to government and non-governmental organisations, advisory/extension networks, and the ruminant livestock sector. The objectives of this review is to summarize published literature to provide a detailed assessment of the methodologies currently in use for measuring enteric methane (CH4) emission from individual animals under specific conditions, and give recommendations regarding their application. The methods described include respiration chambers and enclosures, sulphur hexafluoride tracer (SF6) technique, and techniques based on short-term measurements of gas concentrations in samples of exhaled air. This includes automated head chambers (e.g. the GreenFeed system), the use of carbon dioxide (CO2) as a marker, and (handheld) laser CH4 detection. Each of the techniques are compared and assessed on their capability and limitations, followed by methodology recommendations. It is concluded that there is no ‘one size fits all’ method for measuring CH4 emission by individual animals. Ultimately, the decision as to which method to use should be based on the experimental objectives and resources available. However, the need for high throughput methodology e.g. for screening large numbers of animals for genomic studies, does not justify the use of methods that are inaccurate. All CH4 measurement techniques are subject to experimental variation and random errors. Many sources of variation must be considered when measuring CH4 concentration in exhaled air samples without a quantitative or at least regular collection rate, or use of a marker to indicate (or adjust) for the proportion of exhaled CH4 sampled. Consideration of the number and timing of measurements relative to diurnal patterns of CH4 emission and respiratory exchange are important, as well as consideration of feeding patterns and associated patterns of rumen fermentation rate and other aspects of animal behaviour. Regardless of the method chosen, appropriate calibrations and recovery tests are required for both method establishment and routine operation. Successful and correct use of methods requires careful attention to detail, rigour, and routine self-assessment of the quality of the data they provide.