Talk:Lacticaseibacillus casei

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lacticaseibacillus casei article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Agriculture Low‑importance

	Agriculture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Agriculture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of agriculture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AgricultureWikipedia:WikiProject AgricultureTemplate:WikiProject AgricultureAgriculture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Microbiology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microbiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microbiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MicrobiologyWikipedia:WikiProject MicrobiologyTemplate:WikiProject MicrobiologyMicrobiology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Lacticaseibacillus casei.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Due to the rapid pace of medical research please note that references in this article that are over ten years old are likely to be removed and/or replaced with more recent references.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 11 January 2022 and 29 April 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): YamsLeap (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Jondya Jar.

L. casei shirota

I've removed this text from the main entry as I've been unable to verify the status of L. casei shirota at any of the standard nomenclature sites (here, for example). If anyone can provide a authoritative reference for this sub-species, I'll be happy to integrate the info into the text. MarcoTolo 04:12, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discovered in 1930 by Dr Fag Sawchuck Shirota a retarded Microbiologist, it was originally isolated from Jordans anus tissue.
He then went on to begin the very sucessful company that is blahh Ltd in Uranus.
Appearance: Rods, Gram Positive, Length 1.5-5um, Width 0.4-0.8um. Optimum temperature 37 C.
Highly acid resistant, can stand pH as low as 3, therefore good in the use as a probiotic for hunman ingestion.
Lactobacilli casei shirota are homofermentative and the main products of the metabolism are lactic acid and acetylaldehyde.
There is generally thought to be around an 85-90% utilization of the sugars to lactic acid. L. casei shirota ferment sugars
through the use of various pathways depending on the availability of substrates the main pathway being glycolysis.
Other items produced are Vitamins B1, B2, B6 and B12.

Research

I don't think that these sentences are suitable for the article. They are too much specific. And when you read the article you feel that it goes suddenly from very general to too specific.--ArazZeynili 09:56, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"A team of scientists from Simón Bolívar University, Caracas, Venezuela, have developed a way of preparing beans to reduce flatulence. The researchers found that if beans are naturally fermented with Lactobacillus casei bacteria, they contain lower amounts of the compounds causing flatulence upon digestion. Raffinose, a flatulence-causing compound found in beans, was reduced by 88% with this method. Soluble fibre content went down by over 60%. The amount of insoluble fibre went up 97%."

"It has been claimed that patients with gastric troubles should try to avoid L. casei drinks, as the acetic acid produced by these bacteria would worsen one's condition. However, it's worth noticing that gastric problems occur in the stomach, while L. casei live and produce lactic acid in the intestines, and in general, the contents of the digestive tract move from mouth to anus, not the other way."

I've revised this H. pylori claim in the main entry because the cited paper did not draw the stated conclusion in two respects: (1) The researchers found a statistically significant suppressive effect of L. casei in vitro, and that only with live bacteria. They could not demonstrate a statistically significant suppressive effect in vivo and concluded only that a trend "may exist". (2) I found nothing in the paper about balancing other flora.--Larry Tesler (talk) 18:42, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Some L. casei has been shown to inhibit the growth of H. pylori, while helping balance the microflora of the large intestine."

plagiarism?

The third paragraph for this article has some lines that are exactly the same as the article linked below. Other lines are very similar.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/healthnews.php?newsid=42290 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.20.127.214 (talk) 03:00, 9 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

L. casei Immunitas

The drink DanActive brags incessently about how they have L. casei Immunitas in their drink and how this makes their product incredible. I want to know more about this so I can tell if this product is actually worth buying.AThousandYoung 08:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dannon has been sued for making claims about the DanActive product. See here: http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7009845724 Meta-Physician (talk) 16:25, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citations!

The first three paragraphs all need citations! (dont know how to do this) Dont want to remove the info yet, but you cant have unsourced potential lies on here. ClamsonJ (talk) 21:45, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Potential references

From [1]. See discussion: --Ronz (talk) 17:58, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Matsuzaki, T. et al. ”Intestinal microflora: probiotics and autoimmunity”, Journal of Nutrition (2007),137(3 Suppl. 2):798S-802S.
Nanno, M. et al. “Biological effects of probiotics: what impact does Lactobacillus casei shirota have on us?”, Int. J. Immunopathol. Pharmacol. (2011),24(1 Suppl):45S-50S. Abstract only.

Thank you for your opinion and suggestion.

These reviews are meant for readers who would like to delve deeper into the subject. The reviews are placed in the “further reading” – section because the Wikipedia guideline for this section read: “… publications that would help interested readers learn more about the article subject. The Further reading section (…) should normally not duplicate the content of the References section” (WP:FURTHER).

The Wikipedia content guideline for “Identifying reliable sources (medicine)” (WP:MEDRS) read: “It is usually best to use reviews and meta-analyses where possible.”

The reviews in question reflect the latest research (last 10 years) in the field, they are scholarly and peer-reviewed, and they are published in academic journals. Granateple (talk) 22:40, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lactobacillus casei. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:24, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Serious paracasei problem

The old casei vs paracasei problem plagues the entire article. It plagues the taxonomy section (cleanup template placed), the Dairy section with the casual ATCC mention, and even the probiotics part. Yes, the entire probiotics part.

Remember DN-114001 and Shirota, and how PMID 23815335 manages to sequence them? Here's the thing. The sequence classifies both as paracasei. See:

DN-114001 (LcA): https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/AQPP00000000 (NCBI reclassified in 2018, check "Taxonomic-Update-Statistics-START"), https://gtdb.ecogenomic.org/genome?gid=GCA_000400585.1 (GTDB)
Shirota (LcY): https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/ARNV00000000 (NCBI reclassified in 2018), https://gtdb.ecogenomic.org/genome?gid=GCA_000388095.2 (GTDB)

There will be no end to this pain. Well, by that I mean this is going to take hours of checking EVERY SOURCE and assigning EVERY STRAIN it mentions to the currently-correct species, then moving the content accordingly. (Or we actually need an article for the whole species complex. Still a lot of content movement.)

I'm just going to give up for now and chuck down some yogurt. Artoria 2e5 🌉 13:22, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, at least the taxonomy section is fixed now. Identification for the other mentions are as follows:

Cheese: Cannot identify, give to "group" article. Mentions both casei and paracasei, but being a review it probably mixes a bunch of taxonomic opinions. Also written before the 2008 Judicial Opinion.
ATCC 334: is paracasei, is isolated from cheese. Also unreferenced.
Olive: Cannot identify. Mentions 16S sequences, does not deposit on GenBank. Group.
Shirota, DN-114001, Lc01: paracasei.
Child diarrhea: strain GG is rhamnosus.
Child diarrhea review: deals with GG, acidophilus, bulgaricus, and reuteri. No casei; also probably too old of a review.
Black bean: analyzed by traditioanl microbiology, give to "group".
TISTR 1500: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/68226376, BLAST gives paracasei. No idea who came up with the genius idea of submitting it as lactis.

I'm still not bold enough to do the move and... wow, basically empty out this article! It's that bad! Oh, and the "Transformation" section should just go in Lactobacillaceae. --Artoria 2e5 🌉 02:12, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]