Comparative Evaluation of Culture Media for Quantification of Lactic Acid Bacteria in Various Dairy Products

0Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Dairy products are extensively used as carriers of probiotic strains that have potential health benefits. Assessment of the viability of probiotic strains during manufacturing is important to ensure that products meet recommended levels. Hence, the method for accurately quantifying lactic acid bacteria (LAB) in probiotic or dairy products is required. The present study aims to examine the performance of de-Man Rogosa Sharpe (MRS), plate count agar with bromocresol purple (PCA with BCP), and glucose blood liver (BL) agars recommended in the Korea Food Code guidelines for counting LAB. Analysis of the performance of culture media containing 19 lactic acid bacterial species commonly encountered in probiotic and dairy products showed no statistically significant difference between 18 reference strains and three culture media (p > 0.01). Furthermore, the suitability of three culture media was verified for the quantitative assessment of LAB in 25 probiotic and dairy products. The number of LAB in three culture media was determined to be more than 107 colony-forming unit (CFU)/ml for fermented milk products and 108 CFU/ml for condensed fermented milk and probiotic products, indicating that they all satisfied the Korea Food Code guidelines. Moreover, there was no statistically significant difference in the amount of LAB counted in all three culture media, suggesting that they can be used to isolate or enumerate LAB in commercial products. Finally, three culture media will be useful for isolating and enumerating LAB from fermented foods as well as gut microflora.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kim, E., Lee, S. Y., Gwak, Y. S., Kim, H. J., Kim, I. S., Kwak, H. S., & Kim, H. Y. (2023). Comparative Evaluation of Culture Media for Quantification of Lactic Acid Bacteria in Various Dairy Products. Microbiology and Biotechnology Letters, 51(1), 10–17. https://doi.org/10.48022/mbl.2301.01009

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free