Antimicrobial and antibiofilm activities of supernatants of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum A2 and Lactiplantibacillus plantarum 2.1 against Escherichia coli ATCC 25922

Antimicrobial and antibiofilm activities of supernatants of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum A2 and Lactiplantibacillus plantarum 2.1 against Escherichia coli ATCC 25922 | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Antimicrobial and antibiofilm activities of supernatants of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum A2 and Lactiplantibacillus plantarum 2.1 against Escherichia coli ATCC 25922 Milena Evangelista Almeida, Maisah Meyhr D’Carmo Sodré, Samuel Santana Oliveira, and 5 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4978949/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background Urinary tract infections are the most common infections in humans. Furthermore, they are relevant for public health for being closely related to the phenomenon of dispersion of multi-resistant strains of bacteria. Most cases are caused by Escherichia coli , a commensal microorganism that colonizes the urinary tract by translocating from the gastrointestinal tract. In this context, the present work was dedicated to finding alternatives for controlling the dispersion of its multidrug-resistant strains by studying the inhibitory effect of the cell-free supernatants of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum A2 (LPA2) and Lactiplantibacillus Plantarum 2.1 (LP2.1). Among a group of eight strains isolated from cocoa fermentation, these two stood out in terms of their probiotic potential and possible applications in the health sector. This study conducted the in vitro investigation of the antimicrobial and antibiofilm activities of both supernatants and the preliminary analysis of their composition. Results Both supernatants evaluated showed antimicrobial and antibiofilm activity against E.coli ATCC 25922. In the semi-solid agar diffusion assay, LPA2 formed a 17 mm inhibition halo and LP2.1 formed a 12 mm one. In the 96-well microplate assay, LPA2 showed 89.22% inhibition and LP2.1 showed 91.22%. Regarding antibiofilm activity, LPA2 showed 80.96% inhibition and LP2.1 showed 81%. Preliminary analysis of the metabolites indicated that thermostable substances dependent on acidic pH may be responsible for the anti- E.coli action observed in the experiments. Conclusions LPA2 and LP2.1 supernatants are capable of antagonizing E.coli ATCC 25922 in vitro and can be used to control its proliferation in cases of asymptomatic bacteriuria, maintain the balance of the microbiota, and reestablish the microbiota after antimicrobial therapy. lactobacilli cell-free supernatants antimicrobial activity antibiofilm activity bioactive molecules Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 1. INTRODUCTION Lactiplantibacillus plantarum are Gram-positive bacteria that belong to the phylum Firmicutes. Within this phylum, L.plantarum is included in the class Bacilli and, subsequently, in the order Lactobacillales (Cui et al. , 2019; Zheng et al., 2020 ). L.plantarum presents a coccobacillus morphology and is considered a flexible habitat species, able to survive in different environments, such as the mammalian gastrointestinal tract, vaginal mucosa, food matrices, the ground, and niches associated with vegetables (Mani-López et al, 2022 ). It is most traditionally used in the food industry to improve the sensory aspects of food and increase its nutritional value (Echegaray et al., 2023 ). However, L.plantarum also has properties that enable its use in healthcare, such as antimicrobial and antibiofilm activity, resistance to adverse gastrointestinal transit conditions, and ability to adhere to mucous membranes (Onbas et al., 2019 ; Jung et al. , 2019; Wieers et al., 2020 ; Rocchetti et al., 2021 ). Regarding antimicrobial activity, it occurs through several mechanisms, such as competition for nutrients and adhesion sites, production of metabolites that can act on different microorganisms, and modulation of the immune system (Bajaj et al., 2015 ; Pereira et al., 2018 ; Fidanza et al, 2021 ). As for its anti-biofilm activity, recent publications have demonstrated that lactobacilli supernatants can inhibit biofilm formation (Kiousi et al., 2023 ) or disorganize the structure of already-formed biofilms (Carvalho et al., 2021 ). The substances responsible for this inhibitory effect are produced during the fermentative metabolism of L.plantarum and include organic acids, bacteriocins, exopolysaccharides, and biosurfactants, among others (Pereira et al., 2018 ). In vitro studies have already demonstrated that the substances produced during the metabolism of L.plantarum - also called cell-free supernatants - are capable of inhibiting different types of microorganisms, such as Gram-positive bacteria (Arief et al., 2015 ; Yan et al., 2019 ; Lee et al., 2021 ; Shaaban et al., 2022 ), Gram-negative bacteria (Khodaii et al., 2017 ; Chen et al., 2019 ; Pazhoohan et al., 2020 ; Selis et al., 2021 ), and yeast (Srivastava et al., 2020 ; Pino et al., 2022 ). Furthermore, after ingestion, L.plantarum develops mechanisms of adaptation to the intestinal environment that involve interaction with resident microorganisms and with factors intrinsic and extrinsic to the host, such as age and diet (Huang et al., 2021 ). Adapting to the intestinal environment produces evolutionary forces capable of remodeling the composition of the intestinal microbiota and, consequently, modulating the physiological functions of the host (Echegaray et al., 2023 ). Studies focused on the inhibitory effect exerted by cell-free supernatants have become especially relevant after antimicrobial resistance was considered one of the three main health threats of the 21st century by the World Health Organization (Asenjo et al., 2021 ). Furthermore, the use of antimicrobials is associated with an imbalance of the endogenous microbiota, leading to episodes of diarrhea. In cases where infections are recurrent and, therefore, their treatment, these events become frequent and uncomfortable. Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are the most common infections in humans, with 20% of their occurrence reported as recurrence (persistence or reappearance of the same bacteria) and 80% as reinfection, when caused by bacteria other than the one responsible for the first infection (Pigrau et al. , 2020; Naziri et al., 2021 ). UTIs can be community or hospital-acquired and, in both cases, the microorganism predominantly isolated from them is Escherichia coli , followed by Klebsiella pneumoniae (Flores-Mireles et al, 2015 ; Zhao et al, 2020 ; Naziri et al, 2021 ). Normally, E.coli is considered a commensal member of the intestinal microbiota (Jang et al, 2017 ; Daga et al, 2019 ). However, depending on the virulence factors expressed, it can access the bloodstream, colonize other niches, and cause extraintestinal infections, such as UTIs, sepsis, and neonatal meningitis (Mora-Rillo et al., 2015 ; Daga et al., 2019 ). One of the most worrying virulence factors, from a public health point of view, is the ability to form biofilms since they are responsible for approximately 60% of all human infections (Preda et al. , 2019). Bacterial biofilms are made up of clusters of cells protected by exopolysaccharides produced by the same microorganisms that compose the biofilm (Jamal et al., 2018 ; Rather et al., 2021 ; Assefa et al. , 2022). The biofilm formation process is sequential and involves four basic steps: adhesion of the microorganism to a surface; formation of microcolonies; maturation of microcolonies; and dispersion of cells to colonize new surfaces (Santos et al., 2018 ; Mirzaei et al., 2020 ). In addition to causing a considerable part of human infections, biofilm formation is also related to the dispersion of multidrug-resistant strains, as it allows bacterial cells to protect against the action of antimicrobials and escape the immune system, impairing the effectiveness of treatment and contributing to the dispersion of resistant strains (Shah et al., 2019 ; Zhao et al., 2020 ). In this context, cell-free supernatants derived from the lactobacilli metabolism emerge as an alternative for controlling E.coli proliferation and maintaining the balance of the intestinal microbiota during and after antimicrobial therapy. Lactiplantibacillus plantarum A2 and Lactiplantibacillus plantarum 2.1 were analyzed by our group in a previous study and stood out in terms of probiotic potential among a group of eight strains of lactobacilli isolated from cocoa fermentation. In order to expand their application within the health sector, this study conducted an in vitro investigation regarding the antimicrobial and antibiofilm activities of their supernatants. 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS 2.1 Conditions for growth and maintenance of microorganisms The strains of both Lactiplantibacillus plantarum 2.1 and Lactiplantibacillus plantarum A2 were previously isolated, identified, and sequenced by our research group (Santos et al, 2016 ). These strains were stored in MRS plus 30% glycerol at -80ºC, and were cultivated in MRS (De Man, Rogosa and Sharpe, HiMedia), under microaerophilic conditions, at 37°C, for the assays. Escherichia coli ATCC 25922 was provided by the Mycology Laboratory of the State University of Santa Cruz and was maintained in Mueller-Hinton (KASVI) plus 30% glycerol at -80ºC. 2.2 Preparation of cell-free supernatants To obtain cell-free supernatants, L.plantarum 2.1 and L.plantarum A2 were initially cultivated in MRS broth for 48 hours at 37ºC. After growth, the cultures were centrifuged at 8000 x g for 15 minutes. Then, the pellets were discarded, and the supernatants were collected. The recovered supernatants were filtered through 0.22 µm membranes and stored in a freezer at -20°C. Samples containing only MRS medium (no bacterial growth) were prepared. These samples were also filtered through 0.22 µm membranes before being stored in the freezer at -20ºC. 2.3 Antimicrobial activity 2.3.1 Semi-solid agar diffusion For the semi-solid agar diffusion assay (Alameri et al., 2022 ), E. coli was inoculated in MRS broth for 18–24 hours at 37°C, under shaking. The following day, a suspension of E.coli at 10 8 CFU/mL was prepared in MRS broth. Twenty µl of this suspension was inoculated into 7 mL of semi-solid MRS agar (0,7%). After solidification, wells were made in the agar with 200 µl tips and then these wells were filled with 100 µl of the lactobacilli supernatants ( L.plantarum A2 and L.plantarum 2.1), and with 100 µl of the MRS control. Plates were incubated at 37°C for 18–24 hours. To verify the antimicrobial activity, the presence of the inhibition halo was observed and measured with a ruler. 2.3.2 96-well microplate assay For the 96-well microplate assay (Scillato et al., 2021 ), E. coli was grown in Mueller-Hinton broth for 18–24 hours, under shaking. Then, a suspension of 10 8 CFU/mL of E.coli was prepared and 100 µL of it was added to all the wells of a microplate. In the first ones, 100 µL of new and sterile Mueller-Hinton broth was added (wells without treatment). Then, 100 µL of LPA2, LP2.1, and MRS were added to the following wells separately. The microplate was incubated for 18–24 hours at 37°C. After incubation, the microplate was analyzed in an ELISA reader (VERSAmax Tunable, 600 nm). Then, the percentage of inhibition of the supernatants was calculated using the following formula: %Growth inhibition = 100x[1-(OD T /OD CN )], where OD T refers to the optical density value of the wells containing lactobacilli and MRS supernatants and OD CN refers to the well with untreated E.coli . The contents of the wells were plated on Mueller-Hinton agar plates with the aid of the replicator. Then, the plates were incubated at 37ºC for 18–24 hours and, after this, bacterial growth was observed. 2.4 Assessment of the biofilm formation capacity of Escherichia coli ATCC25922 The biofilm formation ability of E.coli ATCC 25922 was evaluated in a 96-well microplate, as described by Stepanovic et al. ( 2007 ) and Cepas et al. ( 2019 ), with some modifications. First, 200 µL of Luria-Bertani medium (LB, KASVI) plus 0.25% glucose (Exodus Científica) were added to all wells of the microplate. The wells intended for evaluating biofilm formation received 20 µL of E.coli suspension 10 8 CFU/mL in LB plus 0.25% glucose. Then, the microplate was incubated at 37°C for 24 hours. The negative control for this assay was composed of LB plus 0.25% glucose, without bacterial growth. After the incubation time, the samples were fixed with 200 µL of 96% methanol (Exodus Científica) for 20 minutes at room temperature. Next, the microplates remained on the bench in an inverted position, overnight. The following day, the microplates were stained with 150 µL of 2% crystal violet for 15 minutes at room temperature. After staining, 150 µL of 33% acetic acid (Êxodo Científica) was added to all wells, before analysis in an ELISA reader (595nm). Using the OD 595nm values ​​found, the cutoff value of the microplate was obtained (OD C = average OD CN + 3 x standard deviation CN ) and from the cut-off value it was possible to obtain a final value of OD 595nm (OD F = average OD T - OD C ). These final OD 595nm values (OD F ) allowed us to classify E.coli into non-biofilm producer (OD F ≤ OD C ), weak biofilm producer (OD C < OD F ≤ 2xOD C ), moderate biofilm producer (2xOD C < OD F ≤ 4xOD C ), or strong biofilm producer (4xOD C < OD F ). 2.5 Inhibition of biofilm formation by lactobacilli supernatants For this assay, 100 µL of LB medium, supplemented with sterile 0.25% glucose, was added to all wells of a 96-well microplate. The wells tested for biofilm inhibition received 100 µL of LPA2, LP2.1, and MRS without growth. Then, 20 µL of an E.coli bacterial suspension (10 8 CFU/mL) was added to them. The control well received 100 µL of LB medium, supplemented with 0.25% glucose and 20 µL of bacterial suspension at 10 8 CFU/mL without treatment (Ghane et al, 2020 ). After preparation, the microplate was incubated at 37ºC for 24 hours. The steps for evaluating biofilm formation were performed: fixation with 96% methanol, staining with 2% crystal violet, and OD 595nm reading. The percentage of inhibition of biofilm formation was obtained according to the following formula: %Inhibition = 100 - [(OD 595 test x 100) / OD 595 control]. 2.5 Biofilm visualization by scanning electron microscopy Scanning electron microscopy was performed to observe the effect of supernatants on the ability of E.coli to adhere to the surface. Sample processing was conducted at the Electron Microscopy Center of the State University of Santa Cruz. For this, E.coli was inoculated in LB medium, supplemented with 0.25% glucose, and incubated at 37°C for 18–24 hours. The following day, coverslips were deposited into the wells of a 12-well microplate. From then on, the same protocol was followed to analyze the inhibition of biofilm formation. The microplate was incubated for 24 hours at 37°C. After this, the microplate was fixed with 2% glutaraldehyde in 0.1 M sodium cacodylate buffer (pH 7.4). The next step was dehydration in an increasing series of ethanol for 10 minutes each step: 30% alcohol, 50% alcohol, 70% alcohol, 90% alcohol, and 100% alcohol. After dehydration, the samples were dried in critical point equipment and the stubs were assembled. The images were obtained using a Quanta 250 scanning electron microscope (FEI Company 2010) at the SEM and TEM Microscopy Laboratory at the Federal University of Juiz de Fora. 2.6 Preliminary analysis of compounds present in supernatants 2.6.1 Evaluation of the influence of pH neutralization, heating to 100ºC and proteolysis on the inhibitory effect of supernatants This assay analyzed the presence of organic acids, protein compounds and thermostable substances in the supernatants, using a 96-well microplate technique (Scillato et al, 2021 ). To evaluate the presence of these compounds, the supernatants needed to be previously treated as follows: for the presence of organic acids, the supernatants had their pH neutralized to 7.0 with a NaOH solution (1 molar); for the presence of thermostable substances, the supernatants were heated at 100°C for 15 minutes; and for the presence of protein compounds, supernatants were incubated with trypsin (Sigma - Aldrich) at a concentration of 2.5 mg/mL for 2 hours at 37°C (Selis et al, 2021 ). To conduct this assay, E.coli was cultivated in Mueller-Hinton broth for 18–24 hours, under agitation. Then, a suspension of 10 8 CFU/mL of E.coli was prepared and 100 µL of this suspension was added to all wells of a sterile microplate. In the first wells, 100 µL of sterile Mueller-Hinton broth was added (wells without treatment). The next wells received 100 µL of LPA2, LP2.1, and MRS without prior treatment. Finally, 100 µL of supernatants and previously treated MRS were added to another group of wells. The microplate was incubated for 18–24 hours at 37°C and, after incubation, the contents of the wells were plated on Mueller-Hinton agar plates with the aid of the replicator to check the antimicrobial activity. 2.6.2 Assessment of Biosurfactant Production To evaluate biosurfactant production by lactobacilli, 2 mL of their supernatants were mixed with 2 mL of common kerosene (X9 Kerosene). The mixture was homogenized by vortexing for 2 minutes and then incubated at room temperature for 24 hours (Morais et al., 2017 ). The same procedure was performed for the MONTH without microbial growth, as an assay control. Based on the height of the mixture, the emulsifying activity index (E 24 ) could be calculated after 24 hours using the following formula: E 24 = emulsion layer height / total height of the mixture x 100 (Ciandrini et al. , 2020). 2.7 Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) The Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), in attenuated total reflection (ATR) mode, was used to recognize the functional groups that make up the LPA2 and LP2.1 supernatants and evaluate the differences between them and MRS (Morais et al, 2017 ). For this, LPA2, LP2.1, and MRS were concentrated for 7 days in a speed vac (Concentrator 5301 - Eppendorf). The measurements were conducted in the spectral range between 650 and 4000 cm − 1 using Spectrum 400 FT-IR/FT-NIR Spectrometer equipment from PerkinElmer. The spectra obtained were averages from 10 scans, with a resolution of 4 cm − 1 and were processed using PerkinElmer's Spectrum software. Each supernatant and MRS sample generated a spectrum. These spectra were compared and the MRS spectrum was subtracted from the LPA2 and LP2.1 spectra, which allowed the spectra to be obtained referring only to the contents of the lactobacilli supernatants. 2.8 Statistical analysis All assays were performed in triplicate. The values ​​presented represent the mean ± standard deviation and were analyzed by GraphPrism 5.0. Statistical differences between values ​​were determined using ANOVA and Tukey's post-test, with p˂0.05. 3. RESULTS 3.1 LPA2 and LP2.1 supernatants could inhibit E.coli growth The two lactobacilli supernatants studied showed antibacterial activity, demonstrated through the semi-solid agar diffusion and the 96-well microplate assays. In the semi-solid agar diffusion assay, LPA2 formed an inhibition halo of 17 mm and LP2.1 formed an inhibition halo of 12 mm. The MRS control, in turn, did not form an inhibition halo (Fig. 1 , in the Supplementary Material). In the microplate assay, lactobacilli supernatants also inhibited E.coli growth significantly compared to MRS. LP2.1 showed 91.22% inhibition and LPA2 showed 89.96%, while MRS showed only 48.15% (Fig. 1 ). Plating the contents of the microplate wells on Mueller-Hinton agar demonstrated the microbicidal profile of the action of the lactobacilli supernatants, since it was not possible to observe bacterial growth in the wells treated with these supernatants (Fig. 2 , in the Supplementary Material). 3.2 E.coli ATCC 25922 is a moderate biofilm producer In the present study, E.coli ATCC 25922 was classified as a moderate biofilm producer. This was possible due to a set of operations based on the OD 595nm values ​​found during the analysis of the microplate in the ELISA reader. The calculated cutoff value for the microplate (OD C = average OD CN + 3 x standard deviation CN ) was equivalent to 0.21559 and the OD F value (OD F = average OD T - OD C ) was equivalent to 0.58931. Replacing these values ​​in the classification equation allowed us to categorize E.coli ATCC 25922 as a moderate biofilm producer (2xOD C < OD F ≤ 4xOD C ↔ 0.43118 < 0.58931 ≤ 0.86236). 3.3 LPA2 and LP2.1 supernatants inhibit biofilm formation by E.coli After 24 hours of incubation, the lactobacilli supernatants were able to significantly inhibit the formation of the E.coli biofilm in relation to MRS. The inhibition percentages obtained were equivalent to 80.96% for LPA2, 81% for LP2.1, and 26.55% for the MRS control (Fig. 2 ). The biofilm structure, observed by scanning electron microscopy, demonstrated different degrees of integrity depending on the treatment received. The E.coli sample that did not receive treatment demonstrated a completely intact structure (Fig. 3 a). The samples that were treated with LP2.1 (Fig. 3 b) and LPA2 (Fig. 3 c) did not present any biofilm structure, only a few isolated bacteria. 3.4 Preliminary analysis of compounds present in supernatants 3.4.1 pH neutralization suspends the inhibitory effect of supernatants Without prior treatment, LPA2 and LP2.1 inhibited the growth of E.coli and MRS, conversely, they did not inhibit bacterial growth. Neutralizing the pH of both lactobacilli supernatants (LPA2 and LP2.1) to 7.0 suspended their inhibitory effect when compared to untreated supernatants. Differently, heating them at 100ºC for 15 minutes and treatment with trypsin (2.5 mg/mL) did not suspend their inhibitory effect (Table 1 , Fig. 3 in Supplementary Material). The MRS sample without bacterial growth was subjected to the same treatments as the lactobacilli supernatants and it was possible to observe, as a result, that none of the three treatments significantly influenced its inhibitory effect against E.coli growth (Table 1 , Fig. 3 in Supplementary Material). Table 1 Preliminary analysis of compounds in the supernatants in a 96-well microplate. LPA2 and LP2.1 continued to inhibit E.coli even after heating to 100ºC and after treatment with trypsin. However, they lost the ability to inhibit E.coli after having their pH neutralized. MRS control did not inhibit E.coli under any of the conditions presented. (+) indicates that there was growth of E.coli . Samples Treatments No treatment Heating to 100ºC Neutral pH Trypsin LP2.1 Inhibition Inhibition + Inhibition LPA2 Inhibition Inhibition + Inhibition MRS no growth + + + + 3.4.2 The emulsifying activity indexes of LPA2 and LP2.1 demonstrate the biosurfactant production of the respective strains The emulsifying activity rates after 24 hours were equivalent to 76.67% for LPA2, and 73.33% for LP2.1, which were statistically different from those observed for MRS without bacterial growth (45%, Fig. 4 ). 3.5 Analysis of the functional groups that make up lactobacilli supernatants The spectra of LPA2 and LP2.1 were analyzed in comparison to the MRS control, which enabled the analysis of the functional groups present in the supernatants as a result of the metabolism of L.plantarum A2 and L.plantarum 2.1 alone. Furthermore, obtaining these spectra also allowed the comparison between LPA2 and LP2.1. The infrared spectra of both supernatants were similar, with slight differences between them (Fig. 5 ), particularly in the range between 4000 − 1900 cm − 1 (Fig. 5 , Table 2 ), where LP2.1 presents the peak at 3620.71 cm − 1 . This peak indicates the presence of the hydroxyl functional group and was not observed in the LPA2 spectrum. LPA2 and LP2.1 also presented identical peaks, from 747.14 cm − 1 to 1721.43 cm − 1 (Table 2 ). Table 2 LPA2 and LP2.1 spectral bands in wavenumber (cm-1) and the possible connections they represent. The table lists the common and distinct spectral bands between both supernatants studied. Wavenumber (cm − 1 ) Possibles bonds LP2.1 3620,71 O - H 2991,43 C - H 2519,29 O - H 1957,14 N - H; O - H LPA2 2985,71 C - H 2525,71 O - H 1939,29 N - H; O - H Wavenumbers commons 1721,43 C - H; C = O 1582,14 N - H 1455,00 CH 2 1231,43 C - O 1128,57 C - H secondary 1043,57 N - H; O - H; C - O 928,57 C - H 856,43 825,71 N - H 747,14 Methyl group 4. DISCUSSION Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are the most common infections in clinical practice, especially in women of childbearing age (Foxman, 2014 ; Guglietta, 2017 ; Kenneally et al., 2022 ). From a public health perspective, UTIs represent an emerging concern due to their close relationship with the spread of antimicrobial-resistant strains. This relationship begins with the mistaken delimitation of asymptomatic bacteriuria and urinary tract infection. When there is an error in differentiation, asymptomatic bacteriuria is considered a UTI and the individual is unnecessarily subjected to the use of antimicrobials, favoring the development of resistant strains and recurrent urinary infections (Rossi et al., 2020 ; Lawati, Blair and Larnard, 2021). The recurrent use of antimicrobials in recurrent UTIs promotes a long-term change in the microbiome of the patient and contributes to the development of multidrug-resistant strains of bacteria (Kostakioti et al, 2012 ). The core of this study was the bioactivity of LPA2 and LP2.1 supernatants against E.coli ATCC25922, mainly because this bacterium represents around 70% of the causative agents of UTIs, both in the community and hospital-acquired types (Grey et al., 2023 ). The usual mechanism by which E.coli causes urinary tract infections is the colonization of the urethra and bladder from the gastrointestinal tract, triggering an inflammatory response in the host (Riley, 2020 ; Lawati, Blair and Larnard, 2021). The development of the ability to adapt to a new nutritional niche, to grow and multiply in the urinary tract involves the expression of virulence factors related to biofilm formation by commensal strains of E.coli (Foxman et al., 2000 ; Shah et al., 2019 ). The most studied virulence factors so far are the adhesive organelles fimbria type 1 and fimbria “curli”, which act in the initial stage of biofilm formation and are responsible for bacteria-surface interaction and cell-cell communication, strengthening the maturation of the structured biofilm (Shah et al., 2019 ; Ruhal e Kataria, 2021). The biofilm organization also promotes the development of multidrug-resistant strains and their subsequent dispersion, as it delays the penetration of antimicrobial agents through the extracellular matrix (Soto et al., 2006 ; Dumaru et al., 2019 ). Given the problems related to the increase in the dispersion of multi-resistant strains, as well as the financial burden on health systems, the National Health Surveillance Agency (ANVISA) banned the sale of antimicrobials without a medical prescription in Brazil in October 2010. However, this measure was not enough to reduce the occurrence of multidrug-resistant strains (Rodrigues et al., 2021 ). Therefore, this study analyzes the viability of LPA2 and LP2.1 supernatants as a tool for controlling the proliferation of E.coli in cases of asymptomatic bacteriuria in healthy, non-pregnant women, reducing the need for traditional antimicrobials, stopping the development of multi-resistant strains and preserving the balance of the microbiota. Therefore, we began the study with the evaluation of antimicrobial activity using the semi-solid agar diffusion assay and the 96-well microplate assay. In the semi-solid agar diffusion assay, LPA2 exhibited a 17 mm inhibition halo and LP2.1 showed a 12 mm one, whereas the MRS control did not form an inhibition halo (Fig. 1 , in the Supplementary Material). The inhibition effect of the supernatants was repeated in the 96-well microplate assay, with LPA2 reaching 89.96% inhibition and LP2.1 reaching 91.22% (Fig. 1 ). Unlike in the semi-solid agar diffusion assay, MRS showed a slight inhibitory effect in the microplate assay, but it was not statistically significant when compared to those of the supernatants (Fig. 1 ). Lactobacilli are already recognized for their ability to antagonize other microorganisms through the production and release of antimicrobial substances, which can act by inhibiting adhesion to surfaces, blocking their ability to invade tissues, and limiting their growth (Kim et al., 2019 ). The inhibition effect of L.plantarum supernatants, more specifically, has been demonstrated through various in vitro techniques over time. In semi-solid agar diffusion assays, the size of the inhibition zones against E.coli formed by L.plantarum supernatants generally varies between 10 mm and 20 mm, in studies evaluating antimicrobial activity (Shim et al., 2016 ; Chen et al., 2021 ; Fijan et al., 2022 ). In the techniques conducted in a 96-well microplate, it is possible to understand that the inhibitory effect of L.plantarum supernatants is only perceived in supernatants produced within 48 hours of strain growth. After 72 hours, their inhibitory effect is lost (Danilova et al., 2019 ). The choice to evaluate antimicrobial activity by two different methods considered the assumption that the method used can also affect the degree of the inhibitory effect, in addition to factors related to the probiotic strain and the bacteria strain targeted by the inhibition (Pazhoohan et al, 2020 ). Microplate tests are more sensitive to inhibition effects because they facilitate the diffusion of the supernatant (Scillato et al., 2021 ), which can be seen in the high percentages of inhibition obtained in the microplate assay (Fig. 1 ). In tests in petri dishes, the solid or semi-solid culture medium acts as a limiting factor for the diffusion of the supernatant. Thus, the fact that LPA2 and LP2.1 demonstrate inhibition capacity in both methods tested proves their potential for antimicrobial activity against E.coli . In order to complement the information obtained on the inhibitory effect exerted by LPA2 and LP2.1, it was decided to also evaluate their capacity to inhibit the formation of E.coli biofilm. Firstly, it was necessary to classify E.coli according to its biofilm formation ability. This classification was based on the cutoff value (OD C =0.21559) calculated for the microplate, which determines a threshold for biofilm formation of the studied strain (Stepanovic et al, 2007 ; Cepas et al, 2019 ; Naziri et al, 2021 ). From the cutoff value, the final OD value was calculated (OD F = 0.58931), allowing the classification of E.coli as a moderate biofilm producer. After this, the ability of LPA and LP2.1 supernatants to inhibit biofilm formation was evaluated. Following 24 hours of treatment, LPA2 showed 80.96% inhibition, LP2.1 81%, and the MRS control 26.55% (Fig. 2 ). In general, studies evaluating antibiofilm activity demonstrate that lactobacilli supernatants of extraintestinal origin are efficient in inhibiting E.coli biofilm formation, with percentages ranging from 48.68–52.61% (Lee et al. , 2020; Sornsenee et al., 2021 ). The percentages of inhibition obtained by the present study, combined with the electron microscopy findings (Fig. 3 ), indicate that the antibiofilm activity of LPA2 and LP2.1 occurs through membrane disruption and cell death during the initial phase of biofilm formation, since the untreated E.coli sample presented a completely intact biofilm structure (Fig. 3 a), while those treated with LP2.1 (Fig. 3 b) and LPA2 (Fig. 3 c) did not present a formed biofilm structure. It is worth mentioning that images referring to the MRS control treatment were not obtained since its percentage of inhibition was not statistically significant when compared to those of LPA2 and LP2.1 (Fig. 2 ). In this study, MRS was used as a basis for the growth of lactobacilli and for the subsequent production of their supernatants. Therefore, it was used as a control for the bioactivity of LPA2 and LP2.1 throughout the work. The inhibitory effect of MRS is attributed to the presence of polysorbate 80 in its composition (Sloup et al., 2016 ; Wilson et al., 2021 ). As in the present study, the inhibition effect of MRS was not statistically significant when compared to that of LPA2 and LP2.1, it is possible to infer that the inhibitory effect demonstrated by LPA2 and LP2.1 is due to the production and release of biomolecules from the metabolism of the respective strains and not the presence of polysorbate 80. The second part of our study aimed to understand - albeit indirectly - which metabolites produced by L.plantarum A2 and L.plantarum 2.1 are involved in the inhibitory effect against E.coli . For this purpose, three tests were performed: the antimicrobial activity test in microplates with previously treated and untreated supernatants, the biosurfactant production test, and, by FTIR, the analysis of functional groups. The results obtained from the microplate assay indicated the presence of thermostable and acid pH-dependent substances in the lactobacilli supernatants (Table 1 , Fig. 3 of Supplementary Material). Chait et al. ( 2021 ) and Selis et al. ( 2021 ) found similar results when analyzing the metabolites involved in the antimicrobial activity of lactobacilli strains. Both proposed that the inhibitory activity of the supernatants was due to their acidic pH. According to our results, this effect could not be caused by the action of proteinaceous substances, since the enzymatic treatment did not suspend the inhibitory effect of any of the supernatants. However, when analyzing the ideal conditions for the action of bacteriocins produced by L.plantarum ST31, Todorov et al. ( 2000 ) found that they exerted their inhibitory action at an acidic pH. In 2022, Pei et al. found that plantaricin YKX can only form pores in the membrane of Staphylococcus aureus and promote a bactericidal effect at an acidic pH. This allows us to infer that the suspension of the antimicrobial action when neutralizing the acidic pH of the lactobacilli supernatants may have been a consequence of the alteration of the optimal pH range for the activity of molecules such as bacteriocins. Regarding biosurfactant production, the emulsifying activity indices obtained demonstrate that L.plantarum A2 and L.plantarum 2.1 are biosurfactant-producing strains (Fig. 4 ). The analysis of published studies on the subject allows us to state that the emulsifying activity index of lactobacilli supernatants varies considerably depending on the lactobacillus strain and the substrate used, ranging from 7.38–84.50% (Madhu & Prapulla, 2014 ; Mouafo et al. , 2020; Sakr et al., 2021 ). Furthermore, the analysis of these studies revealed that the most significant emulsifying activity indices were obtained after 24 hours of incubation (Patel et al., 2021 ; Sittisart et al. , 2022). The emulsifying activity index demonstrated by the MRS sample (Fig. 4 ) was not statistically significant, and it was attributed to the presence of polysorbate 80, a biosurfactant that is part of its composition. This denotes a difference in composition and properties between MRS and the LPA2 and LP2.1 supernatants produced on the MRS medium. Based on the results obtained so far, we have conducted a Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) to evaluate the functional groups present in both supernatants. The similarity between the spectra of LPA2 and LP2.1 was already expected (Fig. 5 ) since their performances in the assays on microplates were also similar. The verified hydroxyl groups (Table 2 ) can be found in biomolecules such as carbohydrates, carboxylic acids, and proteins or peptide structures (Yusof et al., 2020 ; Sakr et al., 2021 ). C-H bonds of aliphatic compounds (Table 2 ), in turn, are attributed to the lipid portions of the substances (Sakr et al., 2021 ). Furthermore, vibrations related to CH2 bonds (Table 2 ) are associated with lipids or regions containing proteins and lipids (Moen et al., 2005 ; Zoumpopoulou et al., 2010 ). The relationship between C = O double bonds, and waves at 1721.43 cm − 1 (Table 2 ), is associated with the presence of lipid esters. While C-O single bonds, in the region of 1100 − 1000 cm − 1 (Table 2 ), are associated with carbohydrates (Morais et al., 2017 ). The regions to which N-H bonds were provided (Table 2 ) are mainly related to proteinaceous compounds (Zoumpopoulou et al., 2010 ; Sakr et al., 2021 ; Sittisart et al. , 2022). In view of this, the functional groups indicated by the peaks in wavelengths (Table 2 ) suggest that LPA2 and LP2.1 are composed of chemically diverse molecules and signal the presence of sugars, proteinaceous acids, carboxylic acids, and lipids. Furthermore, FT-IR analysis confirmed the assumption that the inhibitory effects exerted by lactobacilli supernatants are triggered by all the metabolites that compose them, in synergy (Letizia et al., 2022 ). Therefore, it is possible to conclude that the LPA2 and LP2.1 supernatants consist of a complex of bioactive molecules, of different chemical natures, which may have their function impacted by changes in temperature and pH. As the identification of the biomolecules that make up the supernatants was not conducted in the present study, further research is needed, regarding molecular separation and characterization, to determine exactly which metabolites are involved in the antimicrobial and antibiofilm properties. Despite not having identified biomolecules, this study fulfilled its purpose by demonstrating that both supernatants studied are capable of antagonizing E.coli ATCC 25922 in vitro and that they have the potential to control its proliferation, maintain the balance of the microbiota during antimicrobial therapy, and reestablish the balance of the microbiota post-antimicrobial therapy. FINAL CONSIDERATIONS In summary, the set of data obtained by the present study attested that the supernatants LPA2 and LP2.1 can antagonize E.coli ATCC 25922 in vitro and control the proliferation of E.coli in cases of asymptomatic bacteriuria in healthy, non-pregnant women; maintain microbiota balance during antimicrobial therapy; and reestablish microbiota balance post-antimicrobial therapy. Therefore, we consider that LPA2 and LP2.1 are ready for molecular separation and characterization studies, to determine exactly which metabolites are involved in their antimicrobial and antibiofilm properties and, subsequently, for in vivo studies. Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate There were no experiments with animals or that required free and informed consent from participants. Consent for publication All authors agree regarding the publication of the data presented. Availability of data and material All data generated from the research is compiled in this article and is not available on any other website. Funding The research was financed with resources from the Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado da Bahia (FAPESB). Competing interests The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper. Authors' contributions Milena Evangelista de Almeida – development of the experimental part, data analysis and writing; Maysah Meyhr D'Carmo Sodré and Samuel Santana Oliveira - support for the development of experiments; Luciana Debortoli de Carvalho, Ana Carolina Morais Apolônio and Vinícius Novaes Rocha - support for the development of microscopy experiments; Rachel Passos Rezende – support to the supervision of the work developed; Carla Cristina Romano – supervision of all experimental parts, data analysis and writing review. Acknowledgements Our sincere thanks to FAPESB and the Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz for providing the necessary structure to carry out the research. References Alameri F, Tarique M, Osaili T, Obaid R, Abdalla A, Masad R et al. Lactic acid bacteria isolated from fresh vegetable products: potential probiotic and postbiotic characteristics including immunomodulatory effects. Microorganisms. 2022;10:389. Al Lawati H, Blair BM, Larnard J. Urinary tract infections: core curriculum 2024. Am J Kidney Dis. 2024;83(1):90-100. Almeida ME, Pessoa WF, Melgaço AC, Ramos LP, Rezende RP, Romano CC. In vitro selection and characterization of probiotic properties in eight lactobacillus strains isolated from cocoa fermentation. An Acad Bras Cienc. 2022;doi:10.1590/0001-3765202220220013. Arief I, Budiman C, Jenie B, Andreas E, Yuneni A. Plantaricin IIA-1A5 from Lactobacillus plantarum IIA-1A5 displays bactericidal activity against Staphylococcus aureus . Benef Microbes. 2015;(6)4:603-613. Asenjo A, Oteo-Iglesias J, Alós J. What’s new in mechanisms of antibiotic resistance in bacteria of clinical origin? Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin. 2021;39:291–299. Assefa M, Amare A. Biofilm-associated multi-drug resistance in hospital-acquired infections: a review. Infect Drug Resist. 2022;15:5061-5068. Bajaj BK, Claes IJ, Lebeer S. Functional mechanisms of probiotics. J Microbial Biotech Food Sci. 2015;4(4):321-327. Carvalho FM, Mergulhão FJ, Gomes LC. Using lactobacilli to fight Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus biofilms on urinary tract devices. Antibiotics. 2021;10:1525. Cepas V, López Y, Muñoz E, Rolo D, Ardanuy C, Martí S et al. Relationship between biofilm formation and antimicrobial resistance in Gram-negative bacteria. Microb Drug Resist. 2019;doi:10.1089/mdr.2018.0027. Chait YA, Gunenc A, Hosseinian F, Bendali F. Antipathogenic and probiotic potential of Lactobacillus brevis strains newly isolated from Algerian artisanal cheeses. Folia Microbiol. 2021;66:429-440. Chen C, Lai C, Huang H, Huang W, Toh H, Weng T et al. Antimicrobial activity of Lactobacillus species against Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae . Front Microbiol. 2019;10:789. Chen CC, Lai CC, Huang HL, Su YT, Chiu YH, Toh HS et al. Antimicrobial ability and mechanism analysis of Lactobacillus species against carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae . J Microbiol Immunol Infect. 2021;54:447-456. Ciandrini E, Campana R, Casettari L, Perinelli DR, Fagioli L, Manti A et al. Characterization of biosurfactants produced by Lactobacillus spp. and their activity against oral streptococci biofilm. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2016;100:6767–6777. Cui Y, Wang M, Zheng Y, Miao K, Qu X. The carbohydrate metabolism of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum . Int J Mol Sci. 2021; doi:10.3390/ijms222413452. Daga AP, Koga VL, Soncini JG, Matos CM, Perugini MR, Pelisson M et al. Escherichia coli bloodstream infections in patients at a University Hospital: virulence factors and clinical characteristics. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2019;9:191. Danilova ТA, Adzhieva AA, Danilina GA, Polyakov NB, Soloviev AI, Zhukhovitsky VG. Antimicrobial activity of supernatant of Lactobacillus plantarum against pathogenic microorganisms. Bull Exp Biol Med. 2019;doi:10.1007/s10517-019-04615-9. Dumaru R, Baral R, Shrestha LB. Study of biofilm formation and antibiotic resistance pattern of gram‑negative Bacilli among the clinical isolates at BPKIHS, Dharan. BMC Res Notes. 2019;doi:10.1186/s13104-019-4084-8. Echegaray N, Yilmaz B, Sharma H, Kumar M, Pateiro M, Ozogul F et al. A novel approach to Lactiplantibacillus plantarum : from probiotic properties to the omics insights. Microbiol Res. 2023; doi:10.1016/j.micres.2022.127289. Fidanza M, Panigrahi P, Kollmann TR. Lactiplantibacillus plantarum –nomad and ideal probiotic. Front Microbiol. 2021;12:712236. Fijan S, Kocbek P, Steyer A, Vodicar PM, Strauss M. The antimicrobial effect of various single-strain and multi-strain probiotics, dietary supplements or other beneficial microbes against common clinical wound pathogens. Microorganisms. 2022;10:2518. Foxman B, Barlow R, D’Arcy H, Gillespie B, Sobel JD. Urinary tract infection: self-reported incidence and associated costs. Ann Epidemiol. 2000;10(8):509-515. Foxman, B. Urinary tract infection syndromes: occurrence, recurrence, bacteriology, risk factors, and disease burden. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2014;doi:10.1016/j.idc.2013.09.003. Flores-Mireles AL, Walker JN, Caparon M, Hultgren SJ. Urinary tract infections:epidemiology, mechanisms of infection and treatment options. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2015;doi:10.1038/nrmicro3432. Ghane M, Babaeekhou L, Ketabi SS. Antibiofilm activity of kefir probiotic lactobacilli against Uropathogenic Escherichia coli (UPEC). Avicenna J Med Biotech. 2020;12(4):221-229. Grey B, Upton M, Joshi LT. Urinary tract infections: a review of the current diagnostics landscape. J Med Microbiol. 2023;doi:10.1099/jmm.0.001780. Guglietta, A. Recurrent urinary tract infections in women: risk factors, etiology, pathogenesis and prophylaxis. Future Microbiol. 2017;12(3):239-246. Huang S, Jiang S, Huo D, Allaband C, Estaki M, Cantu V et al. Candidate probiotic Lactiplantibacillus plantarum HNU082 rapidly and convergently evolves within human, mice, and zebrafish gut but differentially influences the resident microbiome. Microbiome. 2021;9:151 Jamal M, Ahmad W, Andleeb S, Jalil F, Imran M, Nawaz MA et al. Bacterial biofilm and associated infections. J Chin Med. 2018;81:7-11. Jang J, Hur H, Sadowsky MJ, Byappanahalli MN, Yan T, Ishii S. Environmental Escherichia coli :ecology and public health implications - a review. J Appl Microbiol. 2017;123:570-581. Jung JY, Han S, Kim Z, Kim MH, Kang HK, Jin HM et al. In vitro characterization of growth inhibition against the gut pathogen of potentially probiotic lactic acid bacteria strains isolated from fermented products. Microorganisms. 2021;9:2141. Kenneally C, Murphy CG, Sleator RD, Culligan EP. The urinary microbiome and biological therapeutics: novel therapies for urinary tract infections. Microbiol Res. 2022;doi:10.1016/j.micres.2022.127010. Kiousi DE, Efstathiou C, Tzampazlis V, Plessas S, Panopoulou M, Koffa M et al. Genetic and phenotypic assessment of the antimicrobial activity of three potential probiotic lactobacilli against human enteropathogenic bacteria. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2023;13:1127256. Khodaii Z, Ghaderian SM, Natanzi MM. Probiotic bacteria and their supernatants protect enterocyte cell lines from Enteroinvasive Escherichia coli (EIEC) Invasion. Int J Mol Cell Med. 2017;6:183-189. Kim SK, Guevarra RB, Kim YT, Kwon J, Kim H, Cho JH et al. Role of probiotics in human gut microbiome-associated diseases. J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2019;29(9):1335-1340. Kostakioti M, Hultgren SJ, Hadjifrangiskou M. Molecular blueprint of uropathogenic Escherichia coli virulence provides clues toward the development of anti-virulence therapeutics. Infect Immun. 2012;80:2826-2834. Lee J, Lee N, Paik H. Antimicrobial and anti-biofilm effects of probiotic Lactobacillus plantarum KU200265 isolated from kimchi. Food Sci Biotechnol. 2021;30(1):97-106. Letizia F, Albanese G, Testa B, Vergalito F, Bagnoli D, Martino CD et al. In vitro assessment of bio-functional properties from Lactiplantibacillus plantarum strains. Curr Issues Mol Biol. 2022;44:2321-2334. Madhu AN, Prapulla SG. Evaluation and functional characterization of a biosurfactant produced by Lactobacillus plantarum CFR 2194. Appl Biochem Biotechnol. 2014;172:1777-1789. Mani-López E, Arrioja-Bretón D, López-Malo A. The impacts of antimicrobial and antifungal activity of cell-free supernatants from lactic acid bacteria in vitro and foods. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2022;21:604-641. Mirzaei R, Mohammadzadeh R, Alikhani MY, Moghadam MS, Karampoor S, Kazemi S et al. The biofilm-associated bacterial infections unrelated to indwelling devices. IUBMB Life. 2020;72:1271-1285. Moen B, Oust A, Langsrud Ø, Dorrell N, Marsden GL, Hinds J et al. Explorative multifactor approach for investigating global survival mechanisms of Campylobacter jejuni under environmental conditions. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2005;71(4):2086-2094. Morais IM, Cordeiro AL, Teixeira GS, Domingues VS, Nardi RM, Monteiro AS et al. Biological and physicochemical properties of biosurfactants produced by Lactobacillus jensenii P6A and Lactobacillus gasseri P65. Microb Cell Fact. 2017;16:155. Mora-Rillo M, Fernández-Romero N, Navarro-San Francisco C, Díez-Sebastián J, Romero-Gómez MP, Fernández FA et al. Impact of virulence genes on sepsis severity and survival in Escherichia coli bacteremia. Virulence. 2015;6(1):93-100. Mouafo HT, Mbawala A, Somashekar D, Tchougang HM, Harohally NV, Ndjouenkeu R. Biological properties and structural characterization of a novel rhamnolipid like-biosurfactants produced by Lactobacillus casei subsp. casei TM1B. Biotechnol Appl Biochem. 2021;68(3):585-596. Naziri Z, Kilegolan JA, Moezzi MS, Derakhshandeh A. Biofilm formation by uropathogenic Escherichia coli : a complicating factor for treatment and recurrence of urinary tract infections. J Hosp Infect. 2021;117:9-16. Onbas T, Osmanagaoglu O, Kiran F. Potential properties of Lactobacillus plantarum F-10 as a bio-control strategy for wound infections. Probiotics & Antimicro Prot. 2019;11:1110-1123. Patel M, Siddiqui AJ, Hamadou WS, Surti M, Awadelkareem AM, Ashraf SA et al. Inhibition of bacterial adhesion and antibiofilm activities of a glycolipid biosurfactant from Lactobacillus rhamnosus with its physicochemical and functional properties. Antibiotics. 2021;10:1546. Pazhoohan M, Sadeghi F, Moghadami M, Soltanmoradi H, Davoodabadi A. Antimicrobial and antiadhesive effects of Lactobacillus isolates of healthy human gut origin on Enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) and Enteroaggregative Escherichia coli (EAEC). Microb Pathog. 2020;148:104271. Pei J, Huang Y, Ren T, Guo Y, Dang J, Tao Y et al. The antibacterial activity mode of action of plantaricin YKX against Staphylococcus aureus . Molecules. 2022;27:4280. Pereira GV, Coelho BO, Magalhães AI Júnior, Thomaz-Soccol V, Soccol CR. How to select a probiotic? A review and update of methods and criteria. Biotechnol Adv. 2018;36:2060-2076. Pigrau C, Escolà-Vergé L. Infecciones urinarias recurrentes: desde la patogenia a las estrategias de prevención. Med Clin. 2020;155(4):171-177. Pino A, Vaccalluzzo A, Caggia C, Balzaretti S, Vanella L, Sorrenti V et al. Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus CA15 (DSM 33960) as a candidate probiotic strain for human health. Nutrients. 2022;14:4902. Preda VG, Săndulescu O. Communication is the key: biofilms, quorum sensing, formation and prevention. Discoveries. 2019;doi:10.15190/d.2019.13. Rather MA, Gupta K, Mandal M. Microbial biofilm: formation, architecture, antibiotic resistance, and control strategies. Braz J Microbiol. 2021;52:1701-1718. Riley, LW. Distinguishing pathovars from nonpathovars: Escherichia coli . Microbiol Spectrum. 2020;doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.AME-0014-2020. Rocchetti MT, Russo P, Capozzi V, Drider D, Spano G, Fiocco D. Bioprospecting antimicrobials from Lactiplantibacillus plantarum : key factors underlying its probiotics action. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22:12076. Rodrigues FS, Amat HR, Fortaleza CM. Impact of restriction of over-the-counter sales of antimicrobials on antimicrobial resistance in Escherichia coli from community-onset urinary tract infections in inner São Paulo State, Brazil. PLoS ONE. 2021;doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0259632. Rossi P, Cimerman S, Truzzi JC, Cunha CA, Mattar R, Martino MD et al. Joint report of SBI (Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases), FEBRASGO (Brazilian Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Associations), SBU (Brazilian Society of Urology) and SBPC/ML (Brazilian Society of Clinical Pathology/Laboratory Medicine): recommendations for the clinical management of lower urinary tract infections in pregnant and non-pregnant women. Braz J Infect Dis. 2020;24(2):110-119. Ruhal R, Kataria R. Biofilm patterns in gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria. Microbiol Res. 2021;doi:10.1016/j.micres.2021.126829. Sakr EA, Ahmed HA, Saif FA. Characterization of low-cost glycolipoprotein biosurfactant produced by Lactobacillus plantarum 60 FHE isolated from cheese samples using food wastes through response surface methodology and its potential as antimicrobial, antiviral, and anticancer activities. Int J Biol Macromol. 2021;170:94-106. Santos TF, Melo TA, Santos DS, Rezende RP, Dias JC, Romano CC. Efficacy of oral administration of lactic acid bacteria isolated from cocoa in a fermented milk preparation: reduction of colitis in an experimental rat model. Genet Mol Res. 2016;15(3):gmr.15038097. Santos AL, Galdino AC, Mello TP, Ramos LS, Branquinha MH, Bolognese AM et al. What are the advantages of living in a community? A microbial biofilm perspective! Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 2018;113(9):e180212. Scillato M, Spitale A, Mongelli G, Privitera GF, Mangano K, Cianci A et al. Antimicrobial properties of Lactobacillus cell-free supernatants against multidrug-resistant urogenital pathogens. MicrobiologyOpen. 2021;10:e1173. Selis NN, Oliveira HB, Leão HF, Anjos YB, Sampaio BA, Correia TML et al. Lactiplantibacillus plantarum strains isolated from spontaneously fermented cocoa exhibit potential probiotic properties against Gardnerella vaginalis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae . BMC Microbiology. 2021;21:198-212. Shaaban S, Hamad G, Genena S, Meheissen M, Moussa S. Evaluation of the antibacterial activity of Lactobacilli probiotics supernatants against Enterococcus faecalis (in‑vitro study). BMC Oral Health. 2022;22:407. Shah C, Baral R, Bartaula B, Shrestha LB. Virulence factors of uropathogenic Escherichia coli (UPEC) and correlation with antimicrobial resistance. BMC Microbiology. 2019;19:204. Shim YH, Lee SJ, Lee JW. Antimicrobial activity of lactobacillus strains against uropathogens. Pediatr Int. 2016;58:1009-1013. Sittisart P, Gasaluck P. Biosurfactant production by Lactobacillus plantarum MGL-8 from mango waste. J Appl Microbiol. 2022;132:2883-2893. Sloup RE, Cieza RJ, Needle DB, Abramovitch RB, Torres AG, Waters CM. Polysorbates prevent biofilm formation and pathogenesis of Escherichia coli O104:H4. Biofouling. 2016;32(9):1131-1140. Sornsenee P, Chatatikun M, Mitsuwan W, Kongpol K, Kooltheat N, Sohbenalee S, et al. Lyophilized cell-free supernatants of Lactobacillus isolates exhibited antibiofilm, antioxidant, and reduces nitric oxide activity in lipopolysaccharide-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells. PeerJ. 2021;doi:10.7717/peerj.12586. Soto SM, Smithson A, Horcajada JP, Martinez JA, Mensa JP, Vila J. Implication of biofilm formation in the persistence of urinary tract infection caused by uropathogenic Escherichia coli . Clin Microbiol Infect. 2006;12:1034-1036. Srivastava N, Ellepola K, Venkiteswaran N, Chai LY, Ohshima T, Seneviratne CJ. Lactobacillus plantarum 108 inhibits Streptococcus mutans and Candida albicans mixed-species biofilm formation. Antibiotics. 2020;9:478. Stepanovic S, Vukovic D, Hola V, Bonaventura GD, Djukic S, Cirkovic I et al. Quantification of biofilm in microtiter plates: overview of testing conditions and practical recommendations for assessment of biofilm production by staphylococci. APMIS. 2007;115:891-899. Todorov S, Gotcheva B, Dousset X, Onno B, Ivanova I. Influence of growth medium on bacteriocin production in Lactobacillus plantarum ST31. Biotechnol & Biotechnol Equip. 2000;14(1):50-55. Wieers G, Belkhir L, Enaud R, Leclercq S, De Foy JM, Dequenne I, et al. How probiotics affect the microbiota. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2020;doi:10.3389/fcimb.2019.00454. Wilson RM, Walker JM, Yin K. Different concentrations of Lactobacillus acidophilus cell free filtrate have differing anti-biofilm and immunomodulatory effects. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2021;11:737392. Yan X, Gu S, Cui X, Shi Y, Wen S, Chen H et al. Antimicrobial, anti-adhesive and anti-biofilm potential of biosurfactants isolated from Pediococcus acidilactici and Lactobacillus plantarum against Staphylococcus aureus CMCC26003. Microb Pathog. 2019;127:12-20. Yusof HM, Rahman NA, Mohamad R, Zaidan UH, Samsudin AA. Biosynthesis of zinc oxide nanoparticles by cell‑biomass and supernatant of Lactobacillus plantarum TA4 and its antibacterial and biocompatibility properties. Nature Research. 2020;doi:10.1038/s41598-020-76402-w. Zhao F, Yang H, Bi D, Khaledi A, Qiao M. A systematic review and meta-analysis of antibiotic resistance patterns, and the correlation between biofilm formation with virulence factors in uropathogenic E.coli isolated from urinary tract infections. Microb Pathog. 2020;144:104196. Zheng J, Wittouck S, Salvetti E, Franz CM, Harris HM, Mattarelli P, et al. A taxonomic note on the genus Lactobacillus: Description of 23 novel genera, emended description of the genus Lactobacillus Beijerinck 1901, and union of Lactobacillaceae and Leuconostocaceae . Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2020;70:2782-2858. Zoumpopoulou G, Papadimitriou K, Polissiou MG, Tarantilis PA, Tsakalidou E. Detection of changes in the cellular composition of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium in the presence of antimicrobial compound(s) of Lactobacillus strains using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. Int J Food Microbiol. 2010;144:202-207. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files SupplementaryMaterial.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-4978949","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":351943517,"identity":"16300a59-b2e5-4ed8-8aa6-8245dd2e9f1a","order_by":0,"name":"Milena Evangelista Almeida","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"State University of Santa Cruz","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Milena","middleName":"Evangelista","lastName":"Almeida","suffix":""},{"id":351943518,"identity":"48fae26a-b983-4239-b743-69f2edc7a442","order_by":1,"name":"Maisah Meyhr D’Carmo Sodré","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"State University of Santa Cruz","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Maisah","middleName":"Meyhr D’Carmo","lastName":"Sodré","suffix":""},{"id":351943519,"identity":"8b7f5a0f-8b3f-48b7-aa91-c591cef03c26","order_by":2,"name":"Samuel Santana Oliveira","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"State University of Santa Cruz","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Samuel","middleName":"Santana","lastName":"Oliveira","suffix":""},{"id":351943520,"identity":"90ee9615-34ea-475e-8932-f157a03af9bf","order_by":3,"name":"Luciana Debortoli de Carvalho","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"State University of Santa Cruz","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Luciana","middleName":"Debortoli","lastName":"de Carvalho","suffix":""},{"id":351943521,"identity":"6367491e-a5c4-4494-a4d6-cf2822adf36c","order_by":4,"name":"Ana Carolina Morais Apolônio","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Juiz de Fora Federal University, Juiz de Fora - MG","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ana","middleName":"Carolina Morais","lastName":"Apolônio","suffix":""},{"id":351943522,"identity":"2de4ba42-f749-41ad-82b8-8a892bdb2480","order_by":5,"name":"Vinícius Novaes Rocha","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Juiz de Fora Federal University, Juiz de Fora - MG","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Vinícius","middleName":"Novaes","lastName":"Rocha","suffix":""},{"id":351943523,"identity":"ca429c56-b73c-40c8-8200-784337777ec3","order_by":6,"name":"Rachel Passos Rezende","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"State University of Santa Cruz","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Rachel","middleName":"Passos","lastName":"Rezende","suffix":""},{"id":351943524,"identity":"313c2918-98a6-4dae-99c6-82c5eaec116c","order_by":7,"name":"Carla Cristina Romano","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"State University of Santa Cruz","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Carla","middleName":"Cristina","lastName":"Romano","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-08-26 15:14:07","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4978949/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4978949/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":66946521,"identity":"709fdf26-55e6-4d08-bc2c-584bce60c365","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-10-18 09:46:40","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":106654,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInhibitory effect of lactobacilli supernatants in a 96-well microplate. \u003c/strong\u003eAfter 24 hours, LPA2 showed 89.96% inhibition against \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e and LP2.1 showed 91.22% inhibition. The MRS control exhibited 48.15% inhibition. Data are expressed as mean +/- standard deviation. *** represents statistical significance in relation to MRS (p\u0026lt;0.001). ANOVA, Tukey post-test.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4978949/v1/3d7cbdf2461b71c56e6edebe.png"},{"id":66948331,"identity":"4a84bdc4-b07d-4910-b5fe-0bd014254379","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-10-18 09:54:40","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":105834,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAbility of lactobacilli supernatants to inhibit biofilm formation. \u003c/strong\u003eLP2.1 showed 81% and LPA2 showed 80.96% inhibition for \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e biofilm formation. MRS presented an inhibition of 26.55%.\u003cstrong\u003e \u003c/strong\u003e*** represents the statistical significance of the percentages of LPA2 and LP2.1 inhibition in relation to the MRS control. GraphadPrism 5.0, ANOVA, Tukey post-test.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4978949/v1/0c4858635ff84265ef4b5a94.png"},{"id":66946526,"identity":"32c532ff-78f6-4db1-a2f1-7363099f7475","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-10-18 09:46:40","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":439771,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eScanning electron microscopy of \u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eE.coli\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e biofilm, both untreated and treated with LPA2 and LP2.1. \u003c/strong\u003ea) Untreated \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003ebiofilm; b) After treatment with LP2.1; c) After treatment with LPA2 supernatant.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4978949/v1/9c55fa1e5451d4e29546227f.png"},{"id":66946523,"identity":"ebfcd812-c1d7-4547-a247-bfe5aba574dc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-10-18 09:46:40","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":85353,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEmulsifying activity index of lactobacilli supernatants after 24 hours.\u003c/strong\u003e LP2.1 demonstrated 73.33% emulsifying activity and LPA2 showed 76.67%. The MRS control showed 45% emulsifying activity. ** represents statistical significance with respect to MRS.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4978949/v1/025c3a0dd599105c68a1cfc1.png"},{"id":66948330,"identity":"aa3f0ea1-7efb-4ce6-b9b3-595e15ff24b5","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-10-18 09:54:40","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":28384,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFTIR analysis in attenuated total reflection mode.\u003c/strong\u003e Spectral bands of LPA2 and LP2.1, after comparison and subtraction of the spectral band relative to the MRS control. In the figure legend, LP2.1 Sub refers to the supernatant LP2.1 and LPA2 Sub refers to LPA2\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4978949/v1/422be53a32ccd3422552c025.png"},{"id":67474682,"identity":"918fdbb0-b925-4f03-b3f8-61d52eea6288","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-10-25 12:16:46","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1857061,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4978949/v1/822e82ac-0d76-498a-8eda-37ead2e1185b.pdf"},{"id":66946524,"identity":"e176b248-5fb5-4543-a877-edc97c14b837","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-10-18 09:46:40","extension":"docx","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":714641,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"SupplementaryMaterial.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4978949/v1/f6ba2a1a5fa93462bdade2cb.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Antimicrobial and antibiofilm activities of supernatants of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum A2 and Lactiplantibacillus plantarum 2.1 against Escherichia coli ATCC 25922","fulltext":[{"header":"1. INTRODUCTION","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eLactiplantibacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e are Gram-positive bacteria that belong to the phylum Firmicutes. Within this phylum, \u003cem\u003eL.plantarum\u003c/em\u003e is included in the class Bacilli and, subsequently, in the order Lactobacillales (Cui \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2019; Zheng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR80\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). \u003cem\u003eL.plantarum\u003c/em\u003e presents a coccobacillus morphology and is considered a flexible habitat species, able to survive in different environments, such as the mammalian gastrointestinal tract, vaginal mucosa, food matrices, the ground, and niches associated with vegetables (Mani-L\u0026oacute;pez et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). It is most traditionally used in the food industry to improve the sensory aspects of food and increase its nutritional value (Echegaray et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, \u003cem\u003eL.plantarum\u003c/em\u003e also has properties that enable its use in healthcare, such as antimicrobial and antibiofilm activity, resistance to adverse gastrointestinal transit conditions, and ability to adhere to mucous membranes (Onbas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Jung \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2019; Wieers et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR75\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Rocchetti et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Regarding antimicrobial activity, it occurs through several mechanisms, such as competition for nutrients and adhesion sites, production of metabolites that can act on different microorganisms, and modulation of the immune system (Bajaj et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Pereira et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Fidanza et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). As for its anti-biofilm activity, recent publications have demonstrated that lactobacilli supernatants can inhibit biofilm formation (Kiousi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) or disorganize the structure of already-formed biofilms (Carvalho et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). The substances responsible for this inhibitory effect are produced during the fermentative metabolism of \u003cem\u003eL.plantarum\u003c/em\u003e and include organic acids, bacteriocins, exopolysaccharides, and biosurfactants, among others (Pereira et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eIn vitro\u003c/em\u003e studies have already demonstrated that the substances produced during the metabolism of \u003cem\u003eL.plantarum\u003c/em\u003e - also called cell-free supernatants - are capable of inhibiting different types of microorganisms, such as Gram-positive bacteria (Arief et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Yan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR77\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Lee et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Shaaban et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), Gram-negative bacteria (Khodaii et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Chen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Pazhoohan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Selis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), and yeast (Srivastava et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Pino et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, after ingestion, \u003cem\u003eL.plantarum\u003c/em\u003e develops mechanisms of adaptation to the intestinal environment that involve interaction with resident microorganisms and with factors intrinsic and extrinsic to the host, such as age and diet (Huang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Adapting to the intestinal environment produces evolutionary forces capable of remodeling the composition of the intestinal microbiota and, consequently, modulating the physiological functions of the host (Echegaray et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Studies focused on the inhibitory effect exerted by cell-free supernatants have become especially relevant after antimicrobial resistance was considered one of the three main health threats of the 21st century by the World Health Organization (Asenjo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, the use of antimicrobials is associated with an imbalance of the endogenous microbiota, leading to episodes of diarrhea. In cases where infections are recurrent and, therefore, their treatment, these events become frequent and uncomfortable.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUrinary tract infections (UTIs) are the most common infections in humans, with 20% of their occurrence reported as recurrence (persistence or reappearance of the same bacteria) and 80% as reinfection, when caused by bacteria other than the one responsible for the first infection (Pigrau \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2020; Naziri et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). UTIs can be community or hospital-acquired and, in both cases, the microorganism predominantly isolated from them is \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e, followed by \u003cem\u003eKlebsiella pneumoniae\u003c/em\u003e (Flores-Mireles et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Zhao et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR79\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Naziri et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Normally, \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e is considered a commensal member of the intestinal microbiota (Jang et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Daga et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). However, depending on the virulence factors expressed, it can access the bloodstream, colonize other niches, and cause extraintestinal infections, such as UTIs, sepsis, and neonatal meningitis (Mora-Rillo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Daga et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). One of the most worrying virulence factors, from a public health point of view, is the ability to form biofilms since they are responsible for approximately 60% of all human infections (Preda \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2019).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBacterial biofilms are made up of clusters of cells protected by exopolysaccharides produced by the same microorganisms that compose the biofilm (Jamal et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Rather et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Assefa \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2022). The biofilm formation process is sequential and involves four basic steps: adhesion of the microorganism to a surface; formation of microcolonies; maturation of microcolonies; and dispersion of cells to colonize new surfaces (Santos et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Mirzaei et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). In addition to causing a considerable part of human infections, biofilm formation is also related to the dispersion of multidrug-resistant strains, as it allows bacterial cells to protect against the action of antimicrobials and escape the immune system, impairing the effectiveness of treatment and contributing to the dispersion of resistant strains (Shah et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Zhao et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR79\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn this context, cell-free supernatants derived from the lactobacilli metabolism emerge as an alternative for controlling \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e proliferation and maintaining the balance of the intestinal microbiota during and after antimicrobial therapy. \u003cem\u003eLactiplantibacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e A2 and \u003cem\u003eLactiplantibacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e 2.1 were analyzed by our group in a previous study and stood out in terms of probiotic potential among a group of eight strains of lactobacilli isolated from cocoa fermentation. In order to expand their application within the health sector, this study conducted an \u003cem\u003ein vitro\u003c/em\u003e investigation regarding the antimicrobial and antibiofilm activities of their supernatants.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. MATERIALS AND METHODS","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1 Conditions for growth and maintenance of microorganisms\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe strains of both \u003cem\u003eLactiplantibacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e 2.1 and \u003cem\u003eLactiplantibacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e A2 were previously isolated, identified, and sequenced by our research group (Santos et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). These strains were stored in MRS plus 30% glycerol at -80\u0026ordm;C, and were cultivated in MRS (De Man, Rogosa and Sharpe, HiMedia), under microaerophilic conditions, at 37\u0026deg;C, for the assays. \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e ATCC 25922 was provided by the Mycology Laboratory of the State University of Santa Cruz and was maintained in Mueller-Hinton (KASVI) plus 30% glycerol at -80\u0026ordm;C.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2 Preparation of cell-free supernatants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo obtain cell-free supernatants, \u003cem\u003eL.plantarum\u003c/em\u003e 2.1 and \u003cem\u003eL.plantarum\u003c/em\u003e A2 were initially cultivated in MRS broth for 48 hours at 37\u0026ordm;C. After growth, the cultures were centrifuged at 8000 x g for 15 minutes. Then, the pellets were discarded, and the supernatants were collected. The recovered supernatants were filtered through 0.22 \u0026micro;m membranes and stored in a freezer at -20\u0026deg;C. Samples containing only MRS medium (no bacterial growth) were prepared. These samples were also filtered through 0.22 \u0026micro;m membranes before being stored in the freezer at -20\u0026ordm;C.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3 Antimicrobial activity\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3.1 Semi-solid agar diffusion\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor the semi-solid agar diffusion assay (Alameri et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), E.\u003cem\u003ecoli\u003c/em\u003e was inoculated in MRS broth for 18\u0026ndash;24 hours at 37\u0026deg;C, under shaking. The following day, a suspension of \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e at 10\u003csup\u003e8\u003c/sup\u003e CFU/mL was prepared in MRS broth. Twenty \u0026micro;l of this suspension was inoculated into 7 mL of semi-solid MRS agar (0,7%). After solidification, wells were made in the agar with 200 \u0026micro;l tips and then these wells were filled with 100 \u0026micro;l of the lactobacilli supernatants (\u003cem\u003eL.plantarum\u003c/em\u003e A2 and \u003cem\u003eL.plantarum\u003c/em\u003e 2.1), and with 100 \u0026micro;l of the MRS control. Plates were incubated at 37\u0026deg;C for 18\u0026ndash;24 hours. To verify the antimicrobial activity, the presence of the inhibition halo was observed and measured with a ruler.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3.2 96-well microplate assay\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor the 96-well microplate assay (Scillato et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), E.\u003cem\u003ecoli\u003c/em\u003e was grown in Mueller-Hinton broth for 18\u0026ndash;24 hours, under shaking. Then, a suspension of 10\u003csup\u003e8\u003c/sup\u003e CFU/mL of \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e was prepared and 100 \u0026micro;L of it was added to all the wells of a microplate. In the first ones, 100 \u0026micro;L of new and sterile Mueller-Hinton broth was added (wells without treatment). Then, 100 \u0026micro;L of LPA2, LP2.1, and MRS were added to the following wells separately. The microplate was incubated for 18\u0026ndash;24 hours at 37\u0026deg;C. After incubation, the microplate was analyzed in an ELISA reader (VERSAmax Tunable, 600 nm). Then, the percentage of inhibition of the supernatants was calculated using the following formula: %Growth inhibition\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;100x[1-(OD\u003csub\u003eT\u003c/sub\u003e/OD\u003csub\u003eCN\u003c/sub\u003e)], where OD\u003csub\u003eT\u003c/sub\u003e refers to the optical density value of the wells containing lactobacilli and MRS supernatants and OD\u003csub\u003eCN\u003c/sub\u003e refers to the well with untreated \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e. The contents of the wells were plated on Mueller-Hinton agar plates with the aid of the replicator. Then, the plates were incubated at 37\u0026ordm;C for 18\u0026ndash;24 hours and, after this, bacterial growth was observed.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4 Assessment of the biofilm formation capacity of \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e ATCC25922\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe biofilm formation ability of \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e ATCC 25922 was evaluated in a 96-well microplate, as described by Stepanovic et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e) and Cepas et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e), with some modifications. First, 200 \u0026micro;L of Luria-Bertani medium (LB, KASVI) plus 0.25% glucose (Exodus Cient\u0026iacute;fica) were added to all wells of the microplate. The wells intended for evaluating biofilm formation received 20 \u0026micro;L of \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e suspension 10\u003csup\u003e8\u003c/sup\u003e CFU/mL in LB plus 0.25% glucose. Then, the microplate was incubated at 37\u0026deg;C for 24 hours. The negative control for this assay was composed of LB plus 0.25% glucose, without bacterial growth.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter the incubation time, the samples were fixed with 200 \u0026micro;L of 96% methanol (Exodus Cient\u0026iacute;fica) for 20 minutes at room temperature. Next, the microplates remained on the bench in an inverted position, overnight. The following day, the microplates were stained with 150 \u0026micro;L of 2% crystal violet for 15 minutes at room temperature. After staining, 150 \u0026micro;L of 33% acetic acid (\u0026Ecirc;xodo Cient\u0026iacute;fica) was added to all wells, before analysis in an ELISA reader (595nm). Using the OD\u003csub\u003e595nm\u003c/sub\u003e values ​​found, the cutoff value of the microplate was obtained (OD\u003csub\u003eC\u003c/sub\u003e = average OD\u003csub\u003eCN\u003c/sub\u003e + 3 x standard deviation\u003csub\u003eCN\u003c/sub\u003e) and from the cut-off value it was possible to obtain a final value of OD\u003csub\u003e595nm\u003c/sub\u003e (OD\u003csub\u003eF\u003c/sub\u003e = average OD\u003csub\u003eT\u003c/sub\u003e - OD\u003csub\u003eC\u003c/sub\u003e). These final OD\u003csub\u003e595nm\u003c/sub\u003e values (OD\u003csub\u003eF\u003c/sub\u003e) allowed us to classify \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e into non-biofilm producer (OD\u003csub\u003eF\u003c/sub\u003e \u0026le; OD\u003csub\u003eC\u003c/sub\u003e), weak biofilm producer (OD\u003csub\u003eC\u003c/sub\u003e \u0026lt; OD\u003csub\u003eF\u003c/sub\u003e \u0026le; 2xOD\u003csub\u003eC\u003c/sub\u003e), moderate biofilm producer (2xOD\u003csub\u003eC\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;OD\u003csub\u003eF\u003c/sub\u003e \u0026le; 4xOD\u003csub\u003eC\u003c/sub\u003e), or strong biofilm producer (4xOD\u003csub\u003eC\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;OD\u003csub\u003eF\u003c/sub\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.5 Inhibition of biofilm formation by lactobacilli supernatants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor this assay, 100 \u0026micro;L of LB medium, supplemented with sterile 0.25% glucose, was added to all wells of a 96-well microplate. The wells tested for biofilm inhibition received 100 \u0026micro;L of LPA2, LP2.1, and MRS without growth. Then, 20 \u0026micro;L of an \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e bacterial suspension (10\u003csup\u003e8\u003c/sup\u003eCFU/mL) was added to them. The control well received 100 \u0026micro;L of LB medium, supplemented with 0.25% glucose and 20 \u0026micro;L of bacterial suspension at 10\u003csup\u003e8\u003c/sup\u003e CFU/mL without treatment (Ghane et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). After preparation, the microplate was incubated at 37\u0026ordm;C for 24 hours. The steps for evaluating biofilm formation were performed: fixation with 96% methanol, staining with 2% crystal violet, and OD\u003csub\u003e595nm\u003c/sub\u003e reading. The percentage of inhibition of biofilm formation was obtained according to the following formula: %Inhibition\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;100 - [(OD\u003csub\u003e595\u003c/sub\u003e test x 100) / OD\u003csub\u003e595\u003c/sub\u003e control].\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.5 Biofilm visualization by scanning electron microscopy\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eScanning electron microscopy was performed to observe the effect of supernatants on the ability of \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e to adhere to the surface. Sample processing was conducted at the Electron Microscopy Center of the State University of Santa Cruz. For this, \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e was inoculated in LB medium, supplemented with 0.25% glucose, and incubated at 37\u0026deg;C for 18\u0026ndash;24 hours. The following day, coverslips were deposited into the wells of a 12-well microplate. From then on, the same protocol was followed to analyze the inhibition of biofilm formation. The microplate was incubated for 24 hours at 37\u0026deg;C. After this, the microplate was fixed with 2% glutaraldehyde in 0.1 M sodium cacodylate buffer (pH 7.4). The next step was dehydration in an increasing series of ethanol for 10 minutes each step: 30% alcohol, 50% alcohol, 70% alcohol, 90% alcohol, and 100% alcohol. After dehydration, the samples were dried in critical point equipment and the stubs were assembled. The images were obtained using a Quanta 250 scanning electron microscope (FEI Company 2010) at the SEM and TEM Microscopy Laboratory at the Federal University of Juiz de Fora.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.6 Preliminary analysis of compounds present in supernatants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003e2.6.1 Evaluation of the influence of pH neutralization, heating to 100\u0026ordm;C and proteolysis on the inhibitory effect of supernatants\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis assay analyzed the presence of organic acids, protein compounds and thermostable substances in the supernatants, using a 96-well microplate technique (Scillato et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). To evaluate the presence of these compounds, the supernatants needed to be previously treated as follows: for the presence of organic acids, the supernatants had their pH neutralized to 7.0 with a NaOH solution (1 molar); for the presence of thermostable substances, the supernatants were heated at 100\u0026deg;C for 15 minutes; and for the presence of protein compounds, supernatants were incubated with trypsin (Sigma - Aldrich) at a concentration of 2.5 mg/mL for 2 hours at 37\u0026deg;C (Selis et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo conduct this assay, \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e was cultivated in Mueller-Hinton broth for 18\u0026ndash;24 hours, under agitation. Then, a suspension of 10\u003csup\u003e8\u003c/sup\u003e CFU/mL of \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e was prepared and 100 \u0026micro;L of this suspension was added to all wells of a sterile microplate. In the first wells, 100 \u0026micro;L of sterile Mueller-Hinton broth was added (wells without treatment). The next wells received 100 \u0026micro;L of LPA2, LP2.1, and MRS without prior treatment. Finally, 100 \u0026micro;L of supernatants and previously treated MRS were added to another group of wells. The microplate was incubated for 18\u0026ndash;24 hours at 37\u0026deg;C and, after incubation, the contents of the wells were plated on Mueller-Hinton agar plates with the aid of the replicator to check the antimicrobial activity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.6.2 Assessment of Biosurfactant Production\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo evaluate biosurfactant production by lactobacilli, 2 mL of their supernatants were mixed with 2 mL of common kerosene (X9 Kerosene). The mixture was homogenized by vortexing for 2 minutes and then incubated at room temperature for 24 hours (Morais et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). The same procedure was performed for the MONTH without microbial growth, as an assay control. Based on the height of the mixture, the emulsifying activity index (E\u003csub\u003e24\u003c/sub\u003e) could be calculated after 24 hours using the following formula: E\u003csub\u003e24\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;emulsion layer height / total height of the mixture x 100 (Ciandrini \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2020).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.7 Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), in attenuated total reflection (ATR) mode, was used to recognize the functional groups that make up the LPA2 and LP2.1 supernatants and evaluate the differences between them and MRS (Morais et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). For this, LPA2, LP2.1, and MRS were concentrated for 7 days in a \u003cem\u003espeed vac\u003c/em\u003e (Concentrator 5301 - Eppendorf). The measurements were conducted in the spectral range between 650 and 4000 cm\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e using Spectrum 400 FT-IR/FT-NIR Spectrometer equipment from PerkinElmer. The spectra obtained were averages from 10 scans, with a resolution of 4 cm\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e and were processed using PerkinElmer's Spectrum software. Each supernatant and MRS sample generated a spectrum. These spectra were compared and the MRS spectrum was subtracted from the LPA2 and LP2.1 spectra, which allowed the spectra to be obtained referring only to the contents of the lactobacilli supernatants.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.8 Statistical analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAll assays were performed in triplicate. The values ​​presented represent the mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;standard deviation and were analyzed by GraphPrism 5.0. Statistical differences between values ​​were determined using ANOVA and Tukey's post-test, with p˂0.05.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. RESULTS","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1 LPA2 and LP2.1 supernatants could inhibit \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e growth\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe two lactobacilli supernatants studied showed antibacterial activity, demonstrated through the semi-solid agar diffusion and the 96-well microplate assays. In the semi-solid agar diffusion assay, LPA2 formed an inhibition halo of 17 mm and LP2.1 formed an inhibition halo of 12 mm. The MRS control, in turn, did not form an inhibition halo (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, in the Supplementary Material). In the microplate assay, lactobacilli supernatants also inhibited \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e growth significantly compared to MRS. LP2.1 showed 91.22% inhibition and LPA2 showed 89.96%, while MRS showed only 48.15% (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Plating the contents of the microplate wells on Mueller-Hinton agar demonstrated the microbicidal profile of the action of the lactobacilli supernatants, since it was not possible to observe bacterial growth in the wells treated with these supernatants (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, in the Supplementary Material).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2 \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e ATCC 25922 is a moderate biofilm producer\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the present study, \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e ATCC 25922 was classified as a moderate biofilm producer. This was possible due to a set of operations based on the OD\u003csub\u003e595nm\u003c/sub\u003e values ​​found during the analysis of the microplate in the ELISA reader. The calculated cutoff value for the microplate (OD\u003csub\u003eC\u003c/sub\u003e = average OD\u003csub\u003eCN\u003c/sub\u003e + 3 x standard deviation\u003csub\u003eCN\u003c/sub\u003e) was equivalent to 0.21559 and the OD\u003csub\u003eF\u003c/sub\u003e value (OD\u003csub\u003eF\u003c/sub\u003e = average OD\u003csub\u003eT\u003c/sub\u003e - OD\u003csub\u003eC\u003c/sub\u003e) was equivalent to 0.58931. Replacing these values ​​in the classification equation allowed us to categorize \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e ATCC 25922 as a moderate biofilm producer (2xOD\u003csub\u003eC\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;OD\u003csub\u003eF\u003c/sub\u003e \u0026le; 4xOD\u003csub\u003eC\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026harr; 0.43118\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.58931\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.86236).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3 LPA2 and LP2.1 supernatants inhibit biofilm formation by \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter 24 hours of incubation, the lactobacilli supernatants were able to significantly inhibit the formation of the \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e biofilm in relation to MRS. The inhibition percentages obtained were equivalent to 80.96% for LPA2, 81% for LP2.1, and 26.55% for the MRS control (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The biofilm structure, observed by scanning electron microscopy, demonstrated different degrees of integrity depending on the treatment received. The \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e sample that did not receive treatment demonstrated a completely intact structure (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003ea). The samples that were treated with LP2.1 (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003eb) and LPA2 (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003ec) did not present any biofilm structure, only a few isolated bacteria.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.4 Preliminary analysis of compounds present in supernatants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.4.1 pH neutralization suspends the inhibitory effect of supernatants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWithout prior treatment, LPA2 and LP2.1 inhibited the growth of \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e and MRS, conversely, they did not inhibit bacterial growth. Neutralizing the pH of both lactobacilli supernatants (LPA2 and LP2.1) to 7.0 suspended their inhibitory effect when compared to untreated supernatants. Differently, heating them at 100\u0026ordm;C for 15 minutes and treatment with trypsin (2.5 mg/mL) did not suspend their inhibitory effect (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e in Supplementary Material). The MRS sample without bacterial growth was subjected to the same treatments as the lactobacilli supernatants and it was possible to observe, as a result, that none of the three treatments significantly influenced its inhibitory effect against \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e growth (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e in Supplementary Material).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePreliminary analysis of compounds in the supernatants in a 96-well microplate.\u003c/b\u003e LPA2 and LP2.1 continued to inhibit \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e even after heating to 100\u0026ordm;C and after treatment with trypsin. However, they lost the ability to inhibit \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e after having their pH neutralized. MRS control did not inhibit \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e under any of the conditions presented. (+) indicates that there was growth of \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSamples\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTreatments\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo treatment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHeating to\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e100\u0026ordm;C\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNeutral pH\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTrypsin\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLP2.1\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInhibition\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInhibition\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInhibition\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLPA2\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInhibition\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInhibition\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInhibition\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMRS no growth\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e+\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003e3.4.2 The emulsifying activity indexes of LPA2 and LP2.1 demonstrate the biosurfactant production of the respective strains\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe emulsifying activity rates after 24 hours were equivalent to 76.67% for LPA2, and 73.33% for LP2.1, which were statistically different from those observed for MRS without bacterial growth (45%, Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec21\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e\u003cb\u003e3.5 Analysis of the functional groups that make up lactobacilli supernatants\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe spectra of LPA2 and LP2.1 were analyzed in comparison to the MRS control, which enabled the analysis of the functional groups present in the supernatants as a result of the metabolism of \u003cem\u003eL.plantarum A2\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eL.plantarum 2.1\u003c/em\u003e alone. Furthermore, obtaining these spectra also allowed the comparison between LPA2 and LP2.1. The infrared spectra of both supernatants were similar, with slight differences between them (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e), particularly in the range between 4000\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1900 cm\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e), where LP2.1 presents the peak at 3620.71 cm\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e. This peak indicates the presence of the hydroxyl functional group and was not observed in the LPA2 spectrum. LPA2 and LP2.1 also presented identical peaks, from 747.14 cm\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e to 1721.43 cm\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLPA2 and LP2.1 spectral bands in wavenumber (cm-1) and the possible connections they represent.\u003c/b\u003e The table lists the common and distinct spectral bands between both supernatants studied.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWavenumber (cm\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePossibles bonds\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLP2.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3620,71\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eO - H\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2991,43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eC - H\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2519,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eO - H\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1957,14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eN - H; O - H\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLPA2\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2985,71\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eC - H\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2525,71\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eO - H\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1939,29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eN - H; O - H\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eWavenumbers commons\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1721,43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eC - H; C\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;O\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1582,14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eN - H\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1455,00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCH\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1231,43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eC - O\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1128,57\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eC - H secondary\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1043,57\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eN - H; O - H; C - O\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e928,57\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eC - H\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e856,43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e825,71\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eN - H\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e747,14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMethyl group\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. DISCUSSION","content":"\u003cp\u003eUrinary tract infections (UTIs) are the most common infections in clinical practice, especially in women of childbearing age (Foxman, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Guglietta, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Kenneally et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). From a public health perspective, UTIs represent an emerging concern due to their close relationship with the spread of antimicrobial-resistant strains. This relationship begins with the mistaken delimitation of asymptomatic bacteriuria and urinary tract infection. When there is an error in differentiation, asymptomatic bacteriuria is considered a UTI and the individual is unnecessarily subjected to the use of antimicrobials, favoring the development of resistant strains and recurrent urinary infections (Rossi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Lawati, Blair and Larnard, 2021). The recurrent use of antimicrobials in recurrent UTIs promotes a long-term change in the microbiome of the patient and contributes to the development of multidrug-resistant strains of bacteria (Kostakioti et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe core of this study was the bioactivity of LPA2 and LP2.1 supernatants against \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e ATCC25922, mainly because this bacterium represents around 70% of the causative agents of UTIs, both in the community and hospital-acquired types (Grey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). The usual mechanism by which \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e causes urinary tract infections is the colonization of the urethra and bladder from the gastrointestinal tract, triggering an inflammatory response in the host (Riley, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Lawati, Blair and Larnard, 2021). The development of the ability to adapt to a new nutritional niche, to grow and multiply in the urinary tract involves the expression of virulence factors related to biofilm formation by commensal strains of \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e (Foxman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e; Shah et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). The most studied virulence factors so far are the adhesive organelles fimbria type 1 and fimbria \u0026ldquo;curli\u0026rdquo;, which act in the initial stage of biofilm formation and are responsible for bacteria-surface interaction and cell-cell communication, strengthening the maturation of the structured biofilm (Shah et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Ruhal e Kataria, 2021). The biofilm organization also promotes the development of multidrug-resistant strains and their subsequent dispersion, as it delays the penetration of antimicrobial agents through the extracellular matrix (Soto et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; Dumaru et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGiven the problems related to the increase in the dispersion of multi-resistant strains, as well as the financial burden on health systems, the National Health Surveillance Agency (ANVISA) banned the sale of antimicrobials without a medical prescription in Brazil in October 2010. However, this measure was not enough to reduce the occurrence of multidrug-resistant strains (Rodrigues et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, this study analyzes the viability of LPA2 and LP2.1 supernatants as a tool for controlling the proliferation of \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e in cases of asymptomatic bacteriuria in healthy, non-pregnant women, reducing the need for traditional antimicrobials, stopping the development of multi-resistant strains and preserving the balance of the microbiota. Therefore, we began the study with the evaluation of antimicrobial activity using the semi-solid agar diffusion assay and the 96-well microplate assay. In the semi-solid agar diffusion assay, LPA2 exhibited a 17 mm inhibition halo and LP2.1 showed a 12 mm one, whereas the MRS control did not form an inhibition halo (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, in the Supplementary Material). The inhibition effect of the supernatants was repeated in the 96-well microplate assay, with LPA2 reaching 89.96% inhibition and LP2.1 reaching 91.22% (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Unlike in the semi-solid agar diffusion assay, MRS showed a slight inhibitory effect in the microplate assay, but it was not statistically significant when compared to those of the supernatants (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLactobacilli are already recognized for their ability to antagonize other microorganisms through the production and release of antimicrobial substances, which can act by inhibiting adhesion to surfaces, blocking their ability to invade tissues, and limiting their growth (Kim et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). The inhibition effect of \u003cem\u003eL.plantarum\u003c/em\u003e supernatants, more specifically, has been demonstrated through various in vitro techniques over time. In semi-solid agar diffusion assays, the size of the inhibition zones against \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e formed by \u003cem\u003eL.plantarum\u003c/em\u003e supernatants generally varies between 10 mm and 20 mm, in studies evaluating antimicrobial activity (Shim et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Chen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Fijan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). In the techniques conducted in a 96-well microplate, it is possible to understand that the inhibitory effect of \u003cem\u003eL.plantarum\u003c/em\u003e supernatants is only perceived in supernatants produced within 48 hours of strain growth. After 72 hours, their inhibitory effect is lost (Danilova et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). The choice to evaluate antimicrobial activity by two different methods considered the assumption that the method used can also affect the degree of the inhibitory effect, in addition to factors related to the probiotic strain and the bacteria strain targeted by the inhibition (Pazhoohan et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Microplate tests are more sensitive to inhibition effects because they facilitate the diffusion of the supernatant (Scillato et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), which can be seen in the high percentages of inhibition obtained in the microplate assay (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). In tests in petri dishes, the solid or semi-solid culture medium acts as a limiting factor for the diffusion of the supernatant. Thus, the fact that LPA2 and LP2.1 demonstrate inhibition capacity in both methods tested proves their potential for antimicrobial activity against \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn order to complement the information obtained on the inhibitory effect exerted by LPA2 and LP2.1, it was decided to also evaluate their capacity to inhibit the formation of \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e biofilm. Firstly, it was necessary to classify \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e according to its biofilm formation ability. This classification was based on the cutoff value (OD\u003csub\u003eC\u003c/sub\u003e=0.21559) calculated for the microplate, which determines a threshold for biofilm formation of the studied strain (Stepanovic et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e; Cepas et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Naziri et al, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). From the cutoff value, the final OD value was calculated (OD\u003csub\u003eF\u003c/sub\u003e = 0.58931), allowing the classification of \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e as a moderate biofilm producer. After this, the ability of LPA and LP2.1 supernatants to inhibit biofilm formation was evaluated. Following 24 hours of treatment, LPA2 showed 80.96% inhibition, LP2.1 81%, and the MRS control 26.55% (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). In general, studies evaluating antibiofilm activity demonstrate that lactobacilli supernatants of extraintestinal origin are efficient in inhibiting \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e biofilm formation, with percentages ranging from 48.68\u0026ndash;52.61% (Lee \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2020; Sornsenee et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR70\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). The percentages of inhibition obtained by the present study, combined with the electron microscopy findings (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e), indicate that the antibiofilm activity of LPA2 and LP2.1 occurs through membrane disruption and cell death during the initial phase of biofilm formation, since the untreated \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e sample presented a completely intact biofilm structure (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003ea), while those treated with LP2.1 (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003eb) and LPA2 (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003ec) did not present a formed biofilm structure. It is worth mentioning that images referring to the MRS control treatment were not obtained since its percentage of inhibition was not statistically significant when compared to those of LPA2 and LP2.1 (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). In this study, MRS was used as a basis for the growth of lactobacilli and for the subsequent production of their supernatants. Therefore, it was used as a control for the bioactivity of LPA2 and LP2.1 throughout the work. The inhibitory effect of MRS is attributed to the presence of polysorbate 80 in its composition (Sloup et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Wilson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR76\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). As in the present study, the inhibition effect of MRS was not statistically significant when compared to that of LPA2 and LP2.1, it is possible to infer that the inhibitory effect demonstrated by LPA2 and LP2.1 is due to the production and release of biomolecules from the metabolism of the respective strains and not the presence of polysorbate 80.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe second part of our study aimed to understand - albeit indirectly - which metabolites produced by \u003cem\u003eL.plantarum\u003c/em\u003e A2 and \u003cem\u003eL.plantarum\u003c/em\u003e 2.1 are involved in the inhibitory effect against \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e. For this purpose, three tests were performed: the antimicrobial activity test in microplates with previously treated and untreated supernatants, the biosurfactant production test, and, by FTIR, the analysis of functional groups. The results obtained from the microplate assay indicated the presence of thermostable and acid pH-dependent substances in the lactobacilli supernatants (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e of Supplementary Material). Chait et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) and Selis et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) found similar results when analyzing the metabolites involved in the antimicrobial activity of lactobacilli strains. Both proposed that the inhibitory activity of the supernatants was due to their acidic pH. According to our results, this effect could not be caused by the action of proteinaceous substances, since the enzymatic treatment did not suspend the inhibitory effect of any of the supernatants. However, when analyzing the ideal conditions for the action of bacteriocins produced by \u003cem\u003eL.plantarum\u003c/em\u003e ST31, Todorov et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e) found that they exerted their inhibitory action at an acidic pH. In 2022, Pei \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e found that plantaricin YKX can only form pores in the membrane of \u003cem\u003eStaphylococcus aureus\u003c/em\u003e and promote a bactericidal effect at an acidic pH. This allows us to infer that the suspension of the antimicrobial action when neutralizing the acidic pH of the lactobacilli supernatants may have been a consequence of the alteration of the optimal pH range for the activity of molecules such as bacteriocins.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding biosurfactant production, the emulsifying activity indices obtained demonstrate that \u003cem\u003eL.plantarum\u003c/em\u003e A2 and \u003cem\u003eL.plantarum\u003c/em\u003e 2.1 are biosurfactant-producing strains (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). The analysis of published studies on the subject allows us to state that the emulsifying activity index of lactobacilli supernatants varies considerably depending on the lactobacillus strain and the substrate used, ranging from 7.38\u0026ndash;84.50% (Madhu \u0026amp; Prapulla, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Mouafo \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2020; Sakr et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, the analysis of these studies revealed that the most significant emulsifying activity indices were obtained after 24 hours of incubation (Patel et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Sittisart \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2022). The emulsifying activity index demonstrated by the MRS sample (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e) was not statistically significant, and it was attributed to the presence of polysorbate 80, a biosurfactant that is part of its composition. This denotes a difference in composition and properties between MRS and the LPA2 and LP2.1 supernatants produced on the MRS medium.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBased on the results obtained so far, we have conducted a Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) to evaluate the functional groups present in both supernatants. The similarity between the spectra of LPA2 and LP2.1 was already expected (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e) since their performances in the assays on microplates were also similar. The verified hydroxyl groups (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) can be found in biomolecules such as carbohydrates, carboxylic acids, and proteins or peptide structures (Yusof et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR78\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Sakr et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). C-H bonds of aliphatic compounds (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e), in turn, are attributed to the lipid portions of the substances (Sakr et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, vibrations related to CH2 bonds (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) are associated with lipids or regions containing proteins and lipids (Moen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e; Zoumpopoulou et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR81\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). The relationship between C\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;O double bonds, and waves at 1721.43 cm\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e), is associated with the presence of lipid esters. While C-O single bonds, in the region of 1100\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1000 cm\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e), are associated with carbohydrates (Morais et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). The regions to which N-H bonds were provided (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) are mainly related to proteinaceous compounds (Zoumpopoulou et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR81\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Sakr et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Sittisart \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2022). In view of this, the functional groups indicated by the peaks in wavelengths (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) suggest that LPA2 and LP2.1 are composed of chemically diverse molecules and signal the presence of sugars, proteinaceous acids, carboxylic acids, and lipids. Furthermore, FT-IR analysis confirmed the assumption that the inhibitory effects exerted by lactobacilli supernatants are triggered by all the metabolites that compose them, in synergy (Letizia et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTherefore, it is possible to conclude that the LPA2 and LP2.1 supernatants consist of a complex of bioactive molecules, of different chemical natures, which may have their function impacted by changes in temperature and pH. As the identification of the biomolecules that make up the supernatants was not conducted in the present study, further research is needed, regarding molecular separation and characterization, to determine exactly which metabolites are involved in the antimicrobial and antibiofilm properties. Despite not having identified biomolecules, this study fulfilled its purpose by demonstrating that both supernatants studied are capable of antagonizing \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e ATCC 25922 \u003cem\u003ein vitro\u003c/em\u003e and that they have the potential to control its proliferation, maintain the balance of the microbiota during antimicrobial therapy, and reestablish the balance of the microbiota post-antimicrobial therapy.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eFINAL CONSIDERATIONS\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn summary, the set of data obtained by the present study attested that the supernatants LPA2 and LP2.1 can antagonize \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e ATCC 25922 \u003cem\u003ein vitro\u003c/em\u003e and control the proliferation of \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e in cases of asymptomatic bacteriuria in healthy, non-pregnant women; maintain microbiota balance during antimicrobial therapy; and reestablish microbiota balance post-antimicrobial therapy. Therefore, we consider that LPA2 and LP2.1 are ready for molecular separation and characterization studies, to determine exactly which metabolites are involved in their antimicrobial and antibiofilm properties and, subsequently, for \u003cem\u003ein vivo\u003c/em\u003e studies.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThere were no experiments with animals or that required free and informed consent from participants.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll authors agree regarding the publication of the data presented.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of data and material\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll data generated from the research is compiled in this article and is not available on any other website.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe research was financed with resources from the Funda\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o de Amparo \u0026agrave; Pesquisa do Estado da Bahia (FAPESB).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors\u0026apos; contributions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMilena Evangelista de Almeida \u0026ndash; development of the experimental part, data analysis and writing; Maysah Meyhr D\u0026apos;Carmo Sodr\u0026eacute; and Samuel Santana Oliveira - support for the development of experiments; Luciana Debortoli de Carvalho, Ana Carolina Morais Apol\u0026ocirc;nio and Vin\u0026iacute;cius Novaes Rocha - support for the development of microscopy experiments; Rachel Passos Rezende \u0026ndash; support to the supervision of the work developed; Carla Cristina Romano \u0026ndash; supervision of all experimental parts, data analysis and writing review.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOur sincere thanks to FAPESB and the Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz for providing the necessary structure to carry out the research.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAlameri F, Tarique M, Osaili T, Obaid R, Abdalla A, Masad R et al. Lactic acid bacteria isolated from fresh vegetable products: potential probiotic and postbiotic characteristics including immunomodulatory effects. Microorganisms. 2022;10:389.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAl Lawati H, Blair BM, Larnard J. Urinary tract infections: core curriculum 2024. Am J Kidney Dis. 2024;83(1):90-100.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAlmeida ME, Pessoa WF, Melga\u0026ccedil;o AC, Ramos LP, Rezende RP, Romano CC. In vitro selection and characterization of probiotic properties in eight lactobacillus strains isolated from cocoa fermentation. An Acad Bras Cienc. 2022;doi:10.1590/0001-3765202220220013.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eArief I, Budiman C, Jenie B, Andreas E, Yuneni A. Plantaricin IIA-1A5 from \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e IIA-1A5 displays bactericidal activity against \u003cem\u003eStaphylococcus\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003eaureus\u003c/em\u003e. Benef Microbes. 2015;(6)4:603-613.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAsenjo A, Oteo-Iglesias J, Al\u0026oacute;s J. What\u0026rsquo;s new in mechanisms of antibiotic resistance in bacteria of clinical origin? Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin. 2021;39:291\u0026ndash;299.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAssefa M, Amare A. Biofilm-associated multi-drug resistance in hospital-acquired infections: a review. Infect Drug Resist. 2022;15:5061-5068.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBajaj BK, Claes IJ, Lebeer S. Functional mechanisms of probiotics. J Microbial Biotech Food Sci. 2015;4(4):321-327.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCarvalho FM, Mergulh\u0026atilde;o FJ, Gomes LC. Using lactobacilli to fight \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eStaphylococcus aureus\u003c/em\u003e biofilms on urinary tract devices. Antibiotics. 2021;10:1525.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCepas V, L\u0026oacute;pez Y, Mu\u0026ntilde;oz E, Rolo D, Ardanuy C, Mart\u0026iacute; S et al. Relationship between biofilm formation and antimicrobial resistance in Gram-negative bacteria. Microb Drug Resist. 2019;doi:10.1089/mdr.2018.0027.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eChait YA, Gunenc A, Hosseinian F, Bendali F. Antipathogenic and probiotic potential of \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus brevis\u003c/em\u003e strains newly isolated from Algerian artisanal cheeses. Folia Microbiol. 2021;66:429-440.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eChen C, Lai C, Huang H, Huang W, Toh H, Weng T et al. Antimicrobial activity of Lactobacillus species against Carbapenem-Resistant \u003cem\u003eEnterobacteriaceae\u003c/em\u003e. Front Microbiol. 2019;10:789.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eChen CC, Lai CC, Huang HL, Su YT, Chiu YH, Toh HS et al. Antimicrobial ability and mechanism analysis of Lactobacillus species against carbapenemase-producing \u003cem\u003eEnterobacteriaceae\u003c/em\u003e. J Microbiol Immunol Infect. 2021;54:447-456.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCiandrini E, Campana R, Casettari L, Perinelli DR, Fagioli L, Manti A et al. Characterization of biosurfactants produced by Lactobacillus spp. and their activity against oral streptococci biofilm. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2016;100:6767\u0026ndash;6777.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCui Y, Wang M, Zheng Y, Miao K, Qu X. The carbohydrate metabolism of \u003cem\u003eLactiplantibacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e. Int J Mol Sci. 2021; doi:10.3390/ijms222413452.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDaga AP, Koga VL, Soncini JG, Matos CM, Perugini MR, Pelisson M et al. \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e bloodstream infections in patients at a University Hospital: virulence factors and clinical characteristics. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2019;9:191.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDanilova ТA, Adzhieva AA, Danilina GA, Polyakov NB, Soloviev AI, Zhukhovitsky VG. Antimicrobial activity of supernatant of \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e against pathogenic microorganisms. Bull Exp Biol Med. 2019;doi:10.1007/s10517-019-04615-9.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDumaru R, Baral R, Shrestha LB. Study of biofilm formation and antibiotic resistance pattern of gram‑negative Bacilli among the clinical isolates at BPKIHS, Dharan. BMC Res Notes. 2019;doi:10.1186/s13104-019-4084-8.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eEchegaray N, Yilmaz B, Sharma H, Kumar M, Pateiro M, Ozogul F et al. A novel approach to \u003cem\u003eLactiplantibacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e: from probiotic properties to the omics insights. Microbiol Res. 2023; doi:10.1016/j.micres.2022.127289.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFidanza M, Panigrahi P, Kollmann TR. \u003cem\u003eLactiplantibacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e\u0026ndash;nomad and ideal probiotic. Front Microbiol. 2021;12:712236.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFijan S, Kocbek P, Steyer A, Vodicar PM, Strauss M. The antimicrobial effect of various single-strain and multi-strain probiotics, dietary supplements or other beneficial microbes against common clinical wound pathogens. Microorganisms. 2022;10:2518.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFoxman B, Barlow R, D\u0026rsquo;Arcy H, Gillespie B, Sobel JD. Urinary tract infection: self-reported incidence and associated costs. Ann Epidemiol. 2000;10(8):509-515.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFoxman, B. Urinary tract infection syndromes: occurrence, recurrence, bacteriology, risk factors, and disease burden. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2014;doi:10.1016/j.idc.2013.09.003.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFlores-Mireles AL, Walker JN, Caparon M, Hultgren SJ. Urinary tract infections:epidemiology, mechanisms of infection and treatment options. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2015;doi:10.1038/nrmicro3432.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGhane M, Babaeekhou L, Ketabi SS. Antibiofilm activity of kefir probiotic lactobacilli against Uropathogenic \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (UPEC). Avicenna J Med Biotech. 2020;12(4):221-229.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGrey B, Upton M, Joshi LT. Urinary tract infections: a review of the current diagnostics landscape. J Med Microbiol. 2023;doi:10.1099/jmm.0.001780.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGuglietta, A. Recurrent urinary tract infections in women: risk factors, etiology, pathogenesis and prophylaxis. Future Microbiol. 2017;12(3):239-246.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHuang S, Jiang S, Huo D, Allaband C, Estaki M, Cantu V et al. Candidate probiotic \u003cem\u003eLactiplantibacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e HNU082 rapidly and convergently evolves within human, mice, and zebrafish gut but differentially influences the resident microbiome. Microbiome. 2021;9:151\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJamal M, Ahmad W, Andleeb S, Jalil F, Imran M, Nawaz MA et al. Bacterial biofilm and associated infections. J Chin Med. 2018;81:7-11.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJang J, Hur H, Sadowsky MJ, Byappanahalli MN, Yan T, Ishii S. Environmental \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e:ecology and public health implications - a review. J Appl Microbiol. 2017;123:570-581.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJung JY, Han S, Kim Z, Kim MH, Kang HK, Jin HM et al. In vitro characterization of growth inhibition against the gut pathogen of potentially probiotic lactic acid bacteria strains isolated from fermented products. Microorganisms. 2021;9:2141.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKenneally C, Murphy CG, Sleator RD, Culligan EP. The urinary microbiome and biological therapeutics: novel therapies for urinary tract infections. Microbiol Res. 2022;doi:10.1016/j.micres.2022.127010.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKiousi DE, Efstathiou C, Tzampazlis V, Plessas S, Panopoulou M, Koffa M et al. Genetic and phenotypic assessment of the antimicrobial activity of three potential probiotic lactobacilli against human enteropathogenic bacteria. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2023;13:1127256.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKhodaii Z, Ghaderian SM, Natanzi MM. Probiotic bacteria and their supernatants protect enterocyte cell lines from Enteroinvasive \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (EIEC) Invasion. Int J Mol Cell Med. 2017;6:183-189.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKim SK, Guevarra RB, Kim YT, Kwon J, Kim H, Cho JH et al. Role of probiotics in human gut microbiome-associated diseases. J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2019;29(9):1335-1340.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKostakioti M, Hultgren SJ, Hadjifrangiskou M. Molecular blueprint of uropathogenic \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e virulence provides clues toward the development of anti-virulence therapeutics. Infect Immun. 2012;80:2826-2834.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLee J, Lee N, Paik H. Antimicrobial and anti-biofilm effects of probiotic \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003eplantarum\u003c/em\u003e KU200265 isolated from kimchi. Food Sci Biotechnol. 2021;30(1):97-106.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLetizia F, Albanese G, Testa B, Vergalito F, Bagnoli D, Martino CD et al. In vitro assessment of bio-functional properties from \u003cem\u003eLactiplantibacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e strains. Curr Issues Mol Biol. 2022;44:2321-2334.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMadhu AN, Prapulla SG. Evaluation and functional characterization of a biosurfactant produced by \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e CFR 2194. Appl Biochem Biotechnol. 2014;172:1777-1789.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMani-L\u0026oacute;pez E, Arrioja-Bret\u0026oacute;n D, L\u0026oacute;pez-Malo A. The impacts of antimicrobial and antifungal activity of cell-free supernatants from lactic acid bacteria in vitro and foods. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2022;21:604-641.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMirzaei R, Mohammadzadeh R, Alikhani MY, Moghadam MS, Karampoor S, Kazemi S et al. The biofilm-associated bacterial infections unrelated to indwelling devices. IUBMB Life. 2020;72:1271-1285.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMoen B, Oust A, Langsrud \u0026Oslash;, Dorrell N, Marsden GL, Hinds J et al. Explorative multifactor approach for investigating global survival mechanisms of \u003cem\u003eCampylobacter\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003ejejuni\u003c/em\u003e under environmental conditions. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2005;71(4):2086-2094.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMorais IM, Cordeiro AL, Teixeira GS, Domingues VS, Nardi RM, Monteiro AS et al. Biological and physicochemical properties of biosurfactants produced by \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus jensenii\u003c/em\u003e P6A and \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus gasseri\u003c/em\u003e P65. Microb Cell Fact. 2017;16:155.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMora-Rillo M, Fern\u0026aacute;ndez-Romero N, Navarro-San Francisco C, D\u0026iacute;ez-Sebasti\u0026aacute;n J, Romero-G\u0026oacute;mez MP, Fern\u0026aacute;ndez FA et al. Impact of virulence genes on sepsis severity and survival in \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e bacteremia. Virulence. 2015;6(1):93-100.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMouafo HT, Mbawala A, Somashekar D, Tchougang HM, Harohally NV, Ndjouenkeu R. Biological properties and structural characterization of a novel rhamnolipid like-biosurfactants produced by \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus casei\u003c/em\u003e subsp. casei TM1B. Biotechnol Appl Biochem. 2021;68(3):585-596.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eNaziri Z, Kilegolan JA, Moezzi MS, Derakhshandeh A. Biofilm formation by uropathogenic \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e: a complicating factor for treatment and recurrence of urinary tract infections. J Hosp Infect. 2021;117:9-16.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eOnbas T, Osmanagaoglu O, Kiran F. Potential properties of \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e F-10 as a bio-control strategy for wound infections. Probiotics \u0026amp; Antimicro Prot. 2019;11:1110-1123.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePatel M, Siddiqui AJ, Hamadou WS, Surti M, Awadelkareem AM, Ashraf SA et al. Inhibition of bacterial adhesion and antibiofilm activities of a glycolipid biosurfactant from \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus rhamnosus\u003c/em\u003e with its physicochemical and functional properties. Antibiotics. 2021;10:1546.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePazhoohan M, Sadeghi F, Moghadami M, Soltanmoradi H, Davoodabadi A. Antimicrobial and antiadhesive effects of Lactobacillus isolates of healthy human gut origin on Enterotoxigenic \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (ETEC) and Enteroaggregative \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (EAEC). Microb Pathog. 2020;148:104271.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePei J, Huang Y, Ren T, Guo Y, Dang J, Tao Y et al. The antibacterial activity mode of action of plantaricin YKX against \u003cem\u003eStaphylococcus aureus\u003c/em\u003e. Molecules. 2022;27:4280.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePereira GV, Coelho BO, Magalh\u0026atilde;es AI J\u0026uacute;nior, Thomaz-Soccol V, Soccol CR. How to select a probiotic? A review and update of methods and criteria. Biotechnol Adv. 2018;36:2060-2076.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePigrau C, Escol\u0026agrave;-Verg\u0026eacute; L. Infecciones urinarias recurrentes: desde la patogenia a las estrategias de prevenci\u0026oacute;n. Med Clin. 2020;155(4):171-177.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePino A, Vaccalluzzo A, Caggia C, Balzaretti S, Vanella L, Sorrenti V et al. \u003cem\u003eLacticaseibacillus rhamnosus\u003c/em\u003e CA15 (DSM 33960) as a candidate probiotic strain for human health. Nutrients. 2022;14:4902.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePreda VG, Săndulescu O. Communication is the key: biofilms, quorum sensing, formation and prevention. Discoveries. 2019;doi:10.15190/d.2019.13.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRather MA, Gupta K, Mandal M. Microbial biofilm: formation, architecture, antibiotic resistance, and control strategies. Braz J Microbiol. 2021;52:1701-1718.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRiley, LW. Distinguishing pathovars from nonpathovars: \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e. Microbiol Spectrum. 2020;doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.AME-0014-2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRocchetti MT, Russo P, Capozzi V, Drider D, Spano G, Fiocco D. Bioprospecting antimicrobials from \u003cem\u003eLactiplantibacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e: key factors underlying its probiotics action. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22:12076.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRodrigues FS, Amat HR, Fortaleza CM. Impact of restriction of over-the-counter sales of antimicrobials on antimicrobial resistance in \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e from community-onset urinary tract infections in inner S\u0026atilde;o Paulo State, Brazil. PLoS ONE. 2021;doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0259632.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRossi P, Cimerman S, Truzzi JC, Cunha CA, Mattar R, Martino MD et al. Joint report of SBI (Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases), FEBRASGO (Brazilian Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Associations), SBU (Brazilian Society of Urology) and SBPC/ML (Brazilian Society of Clinical Pathology/Laboratory Medicine): recommendations for the clinical management of lower urinary tract infections in pregnant and non-pregnant women. Braz J Infect Dis. 2020;24(2):110-119.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRuhal R, Kataria R. Biofilm patterns in gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria. Microbiol Res. 2021;doi:10.1016/j.micres.2021.126829.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSakr EA, Ahmed HA, Saif FA. Characterization of low-cost glycolipoprotein biosurfactant produced by \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e 60 FHE isolated from cheese samples using food wastes through response surface methodology and its potential as antimicrobial, antiviral, and anticancer activities. Int J Biol Macromol. 2021;170:94-106.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSantos TF, Melo TA, Santos DS, Rezende RP, Dias JC, Romano CC. Efficacy of oral administration of lactic acid bacteria isolated from cocoa in a fermented milk preparation: reduction of colitis in an experimental rat model. Genet Mol Res. 2016;15(3):gmr.15038097.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSantos AL, Galdino AC, Mello TP, Ramos LS, Branquinha MH, Bolognese AM et al. What are the advantages of living in a community? A microbial biofilm perspective! Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 2018;113(9):e180212.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eScillato M, Spitale A, Mongelli G, Privitera GF, Mangano K, Cianci A et al. Antimicrobial properties of Lactobacillus cell-free supernatants against multidrug-resistant urogenital pathogens. MicrobiologyOpen. 2021;10:e1173.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSelis NN, Oliveira HB, Le\u0026atilde;o HF, Anjos YB, Sampaio BA, Correia TML et al. \u003cem\u003eLactiplantibacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e strains isolated from spontaneously fermented cocoa exhibit potential probiotic properties against \u003cem\u003eGardnerella vaginalis\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eNeisseria\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003egonorrhoeae\u003c/em\u003e. BMC Microbiology. 2021;21:198-212.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eShaaban S, Hamad G, Genena S, Meheissen M, Moussa S. Evaluation of the antibacterial activity of Lactobacilli probiotics supernatants against \u003cem\u003eEnterococcus\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003efaecalis\u003c/em\u003e (in‑vitro study). BMC Oral Health. 2022;22:407.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eShah C, Baral R, Bartaula B, Shrestha LB. Virulence factors of uropathogenic \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e (UPEC) and correlation with antimicrobial resistance. BMC Microbiology. 2019;19:204.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eShim YH, Lee SJ, Lee JW. Antimicrobial activity of lactobacillus strains against uropathogens. Pediatr Int. 2016;58:1009-1013.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSittisart P, Gasaluck P. Biosurfactant production by \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e MGL-8 from mango waste. J Appl Microbiol. 2022;132:2883-2893.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSloup RE, Cieza RJ, Needle DB, Abramovitch RB, Torres AG, Waters CM. Polysorbates prevent biofilm formation and pathogenesis of \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e O104:H4. Biofouling. 2016;32(9):1131-1140.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSornsenee P, Chatatikun M, Mitsuwan W, Kongpol K, Kooltheat N, Sohbenalee S, et al. Lyophilized cell-free supernatants of Lactobacillus isolates exhibited antibiofilm, antioxidant, and reduces nitric oxide activity in lipopolysaccharide-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells. PeerJ. 2021;doi:10.7717/peerj.12586.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSoto SM, Smithson A, Horcajada JP, Martinez JA, Mensa JP, Vila J. Implication of biofilm formation in the persistence of urinary tract infection caused by uropathogenic \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2006;12:1034-1036.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSrivastava N, Ellepola K, Venkiteswaran N, Chai LY, Ohshima T, Seneviratne CJ. \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e 108 inhibits \u003cem\u003eStreptococcus mutans\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eCandida albicans\u003c/em\u003e mixed-species biofilm formation. Antibiotics. 2020;9:478.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eStepanovic S, Vukovic D, Hola V, Bonaventura GD, Djukic S, Cirkovic I et al. Quantification of biofilm in microtiter plates: overview of testing conditions and practical recommendations for assessment of biofilm production by staphylococci. APMIS. 2007;115:891-899.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eTodorov S, Gotcheva B, Dousset X, Onno B, Ivanova I. Influence of growth medium on bacteriocin production in \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e ST31. Biotechnol \u0026amp; Biotechnol Equip. 2000;14(1):50-55.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWieers G, Belkhir L, Enaud R, Leclercq S, De Foy JM, Dequenne I, et al. How probiotics affect the microbiota. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2020;doi:10.3389/fcimb.2019.00454.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWilson RM, Walker JM, Yin K. Different concentrations of \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus acidophilus\u003c/em\u003e cell free filtrate have differing anti-biofilm and immunomodulatory effects. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2021;11:737392.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eYan X, Gu S, Cui X, Shi Y, Wen S, Chen H et al. Antimicrobial, anti-adhesive and anti-biofilm potential of biosurfactants isolated from \u003cem\u003ePediococcus acidilactici\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e against \u003cem\u003eStaphylococcus aureus\u003c/em\u003e CMCC26003. Microb Pathog. 2019;127:12-20.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eYusof HM, Rahman NA, Mohamad R, Zaidan UH, Samsudin AA. Biosynthesis of zinc oxide nanoparticles by cell‑biomass and supernatant of \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e TA4 and its antibacterial and biocompatibility properties. Nature Research. 2020;doi:10.1038/s41598-020-76402-w.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eZhao F, Yang H, Bi D, Khaledi A, Qiao M. A systematic review and meta-analysis of antibiotic resistance patterns, and the correlation between biofilm formation with virulence factors in uropathogenic \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e isolated from urinary tract infections. Microb Pathog. 2020;144:104196.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eZheng J, Wittouck S, Salvetti E, Franz CM, Harris HM, Mattarelli P, et al. A taxonomic note on the genus Lactobacillus: Description of 23 novel genera, emended description of the genus Lactobacillus Beijerinck 1901, and union of \u003cem\u003eLactobacillaceae\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eLeuconostocaceae\u003c/em\u003e. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2020;70:2782-2858.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eZoumpopoulou G, Papadimitriou K, Polissiou MG, Tarantilis PA, Tsakalidou E. Detection of changes in the cellular composition of \u003cem\u003eSalmonella enterica\u003c/em\u003e serovar Typhimurium in the presence of antimicrobial compound(s) of Lactobacillus strains using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. Int J Food Microbiol. 2010;144:202-207.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"lactobacilli, cell-free supernatants, antimicrobial activity, antibiofilm activity, bioactive molecules","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4978949/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4978949/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003ch2\u003eBackground\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eUrinary tract infections are the most common infections in humans. Furthermore, they are relevant for public health for being closely related to the phenomenon of dispersion of multi-resistant strains of bacteria. Most cases are caused by \u003cem\u003eEscherichia coli\u003c/em\u003e, a commensal microorganism that colonizes the urinary tract by translocating from the gastrointestinal tract. In this context, the present work was dedicated to finding alternatives for controlling the dispersion of its multidrug-resistant strains by studying the inhibitory effect of the cell-free supernatants of \u003cem\u003eLactiplantibacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e A2 (LPA2) and \u003cem\u003eLactiplantibacillus Plantarum\u003c/em\u003e 2.1 (LP2.1). Among a group of eight strains isolated from cocoa fermentation, these two stood out in terms of their probiotic potential and possible applications in the health sector. This study conducted the \u003cem\u003ein vitro\u003c/em\u003e investigation of the antimicrobial and antibiofilm activities of both supernatants and the preliminary analysis of their composition.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eResults\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eBoth supernatants evaluated showed antimicrobial and antibiofilm activity against \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e ATCC 25922. In the semi-solid agar diffusion assay, LPA2 formed a 17 mm inhibition halo and LP2.1 formed a 12 mm one. In the 96-well microplate assay, LPA2 showed 89.22% inhibition and LP2.1 showed 91.22%. Regarding antibiofilm activity, LPA2 showed 80.96% inhibition and LP2.1 showed 81%. Preliminary analysis of the metabolites indicated that thermostable substances dependent on acidic pH may be responsible for the anti-\u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e action observed in the experiments.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eConclusions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eLPA2 and LP2.1 supernatants are capable of antagonizing \u003cem\u003eE.coli\u003c/em\u003e ATCC 25922 \u003cem\u003ein vitro\u003c/em\u003e and can be used to control its proliferation in cases of asymptomatic bacteriuria, maintain the balance of the microbiota, and reestablish the microbiota after antimicrobial therapy.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Antimicrobial and antibiofilm activities of supernatants of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum A2 and Lactiplantibacillus plantarum 2.1 against Escherichia coli ATCC 25922","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-10-18 09:46:35","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4978949/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"760ee57a-b9d4-4491-8cca-263666bf89ca","owner":[],"postedDate":"October 18th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-10-25T12:08:32+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-10-18 09:46:35","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-4978949","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-4978949","identity":"rs-4978949","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}