• Аdriana Hural Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University Lviv, Ukraine
  • Tetyana Rumynska Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University Lviv, Ukraine
  • Roksolana Shykula Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University Lviv, Ukraine
  • Olena Korniychuk Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University Lviv, Ukraine
Keywords: rats, microfl ora, symbionts, intestine, bacteria – antagonists, microbiocenosis


Introduction. When it is nessecery to apply to the antimicrobial elimination therapy, the application of appropriate biological drugs is thealternative treatment. One of them is Biosporin (includes Bacillus subtilis та Bacillus licheniformis). It has a high antagonistic activity against pathogenic and opportunistic pathogenic microorganisms and expresse the immunomodulatory effect. The purpose of our work was to investigate the effect of probiotic Biosporin on different representatives of intestinal microbiota and confirm its activity against opportunistic microorganisms while maintaining the normal symbionts of intestine.

Materials and methods. Experiments were conducted in the albino Wistar rats (males) with initial weighing 180-210 g, which were kept under standard vivarium conditions as required by ethics under the provisions of the European Convention for the protection of vertebrate animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes. Animals were in vivarium under appropriate lighting conditions, temperature and standard diet. During the study they had free access to water. The animals were divided into two groups: 1) control group (n = 12), 2) researched (n = 12). The first group was formed with intact rats. Animals of the second group were given the biological preparation Biosporin in a daily dose 0,2-0,3ml / animal per day. Calculation of doses were performed using doses of individual animals to humans. The biological preparation was administered intragastric every day for 10 days using nontraumatic probe. Faeces were collected on the 10th day into sterile container. When conducting microbiological investigations classic cultural method and differential diagnostic and special nutrient media for the cultivation of certain genera of microorganisms were used. The presence and quantitative values of enterococci, Escherichia, conditionally – pathogenic microorganisms, microaerophilic bacteria – lactobacilli and bifidobacteria were revealed. The results obtained in the investigations of intestinal microflora of experimental rats with the same ones in intact animals were compared. Number of the members of the intestinal microbial landscape was determined by counting of the colonies that grew on media in terms of 1g weight of feces.The conversion to lg of CFU /g (logarithm of the colony forming units in 1 g of faeces) was carry out. The identification of isolated cultures was carried out by morphological, tinctorial, cultural and biochemical properties. State microbiota of the colon was assessed by the population levels of certain species (groups) of microorganisms. Statistical analysis of the results was performed by the method of variational statistic with the determination of the average values of the quantities and the average error. Assessment of the reliability of the differences between average values during the analysis were obtained using unpaired t-Student test. The difference between the values was considered reliable when probability difference p ≤ 0,05.

Results and discussion. Giving the Biosporin to the healthy animals slightly affected the studied quantitative microbial symbionts. Thus, the level of representatives of coccal group (staphylococci and streptococci) was partly higher compared with the intact animals. Staphylococci were found in the number of (5,6 ± 0,48) in experimental animals to (5,2 ± 0,35) lg CFU/ g in control group. Deviation of enterococci compared with control were more significant (9,6 ± 0,60 to 7,0 ± 0,46 lgCFU / g). Streptococci, which do not belong to the genus Enterococcus, were not found in the feaces of intact animals, but after given to rats Biosporin, were found in small amounts (1,2 ± 0,2 lgCFU / g). The highest rate was in Escherichia. These enterobacteria were found in the experiment at 6,35 ± 0,57 lg CFU / g to 5.9 ± 0.40 in control. The absence of Proteus under the influence of Biosporin was noticed, at the time, Proteus mirabilis in the amounts 6,0 ± 0,58 in intact animals was found. Microaerophilic microorganisms (Lactobacillus) in experiment and in intact animals at 7.0 were found out. On the part of bifidoflora some of their elimination, accompanied by a decrease of bifidobacteria compared with controls from 7,5 ± 0,76 to 6,75 ± 0,72 lg CFU / g was recorded. Changes of the amount of yeast fungi Candida in both groups were not recorded.The results of the research of the influence of Biosporin on faecal microbiota of healthy rats is an evidence that the drug causes some redistribution of microbial symbionts. It is clear that in the presence of bacteria – antagonist in the organism of rat the proliferation of investigated microorganisms is unlikely. Increasing of the number of enterococci and streptococci appearance is the result of the movement of microbes from the upper digestive tract, where they are more at its distal. A similar phenomenon also explain an activation of Escherichia in faeces. The number of bifidobacteria does not go beyond the norm. Thus, under conditions of a healthy body Biosporin initiates translocation of symbionts from proximal to distal digestive tract. Moreover, the discharge of natural biological niches promotes renewal of the population. With an excess of opportunistic flora, which includes representatives of the genus Proteus, Biosporin causes their elimination, reflected an appreciable therapeutic effect.

Conclusions. The results of investigations of Biosporin influence on faecal microbiota indicate a redistribution of microbial symbionts. The increase of enterococci in the number and some activation of Escherichiain colon was established. Changes of lactobacilli and bifidobacteria number are insignificant. Obviously, the positive effect of Biosporin is more prominent in the case of dysbiotic changes (excessive proliferation of microflora). The proclivity of quantitative glycolytic microaerophilic microflora decreasing of Biosporin action, is the reason to use the probiotic preparations for reimplantation of lack bifidobacteria and lactobacilli as the next step after Biosporin utilisation.


Download data is not yet available.


Andruh VS. Mikrobiota. Ljudyna. Dysbakterioz. Bakterial’ni probiotyky. Pravda ta mify. Andruh Racional’naja farmakoterapija. 2013:56.

Berezhnyj VV. Novi mozhlyvosti vykorystannja mul’tyshtamovyh synbiotykiv u pediatrychnij praktyci. Berezhnyj VV, Kozachuk VG. Sovremennaja pedyatryja. 2016:

Bondarenko VM, Maculevych TV. Dysbakteryoz kyshechny kak akklynyko-laboratornіj syndrom: sovremennoe sostojanye problemy: Rukovodstvo dlja vrachej. M.: GЭOTAR-Medya. 2007:

Gryshel’ AY, Kyshkurko EP. Probyotyky y yh rol’ v sovremennoj medycyne. Vestnyk farmacyy. 2009;(6):15–16.

Kalinichenko SV. Suchasnyj stan rozrobky ta zastosuvannja probiotychnyh, prebiotychnyh ta synbiotychnyh preparativ (ogljad literatury). An. Mechnykivs’kogo Instytutu. 2013;(3):5–12.

Klymnjuk SI, Sytnyk IO, Tvorko MS, Shyrobokov VP. Praktychna mikrobiologija. Ternopil’: Ukrmedknyga. 2004:

Kordon TI. Pryncypy stvorennja, mehanizm dii’ ta klinichne zastosuvannja probiotykiv (Ogljad). An. Mechnykivs’kogo instytutu. 2014;(4):8–16.

Pohylenko VD, Perelgyn VV. Probyotyky na osnove sporoobrazujushhyh bakteryj y yh bezopasnost’. Hymycheskajay byologycheskaja bezopasnost’. 2007;(2–3):32–33.

Cafonova MA. Probyotycheskye preparatyy dlja korrekcyy mykroэkologycheskyh narushenyj kyshechnyka. Safonova MA, Kuznecov OJu. Vestn. Yvanovskoj med. akad. 2012;17(1):49–54.

Tkach SM. Kyshechnaja mykrobyota v norme y pry patologyy. Sovremennyye podhodyy k dyagnostykey kor rekcyy kyshechnogo dysbyoza. Tkach SM, Puchkov KS, Syzenko AK. Kyiv: Tvysa LTD. 2014:

Shyrobokov VP, Jankovs’kyj DS, Dyment GS. Novi strategii’ v oblasti stvorennja i klinichnogo vyprobuvannja probiotykiv.Visnyk farmakologii’ ta farmacii’. 2010;(2):18–30.

Hong HA, Khaneja R, Tam NM, Cazzato A, Tan S, Urdaci M, Brisson A, Gasbarrini A, Barnes I, Cutting SM. Bacillus subtilis isolated from the human gastrointestinal tract. Research in microbiology. 2009 Mar 1;160(2):134-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resmic.2008.11.002

Bader J. Sporeforming bacteria and the irutilisation as probiotics. Bader J, Albin A, Stahl U. Microbes. 2012; 3(1):67–75. 29.

Bergey’s Manual of Systematic Bacteriology. 2nd ed. Boone DR, Gastenhdz RW, George M. NewYork: Springer – Verlag. 2001.

Candela M, Maccaferri S, Turroni S, Carnevali P, Brigidi P. Functional intestinal microbiome, new frontiers in prebiotic design. International journal of food microbiology. 2010 Jun 15;140(2-3):93-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2010.04.017

Dobler G, Braveny I. Recent taxonomic changes and update of nomenclature for bacteria identified in clinical material. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. 2003 Nov 1;22(11):643-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-003-1017-0

Ford AC, Quigley EM, Lacy BE, Lembo AJ, Saito YA, Schiller LR, Soffer EE, Spiegel BM, Moayyedi P. Efficacy of prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics in irritable bowel syndrome and chronic idiopathic constipation: systematic review and meta-analysis. The American journal of gastroenterology. 2014 Oct;109(10):1547. https://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2014.202

Guandalini S, Cernat E, Moscoso D. Prebiotics and probiotics in irritable bowel syndrome and inflammatory bowel disease in children. Beneficial microbes. 2014 Nov 12;6(2):209-17. https://doi.org/10.3920/BM2014.0067

Naukovo–praktichni rekomendatsiji z utrimanya laboratornih tvarin ta robota z nimi. KozhemjakinYuM. Kyiv. – Avitsenna. 2002:156.

Chiu YH, Lin SL, Tsai JJ, Lin MY. Probiotic actions on diseases: implications for therapeutic treatments. Food & function. 2014;5(4):625-34. https://doi.org/10.1039/c3fo60600g

Plaza-Diaz J, Gomez-Llorente C, Abadia-Molina F, Saez-Lara MJ, Campana-Martin L, Muñoz-Quezada S, Fontana L. Effects of Lactobacillus paracasei CNCM I-4034. Bifidobacterium breve CNCM I-4035 and Lactobacillus. 2014. PLoS ONE. 2014. doi: 10.1371/journal

Murray PR. Manual of clinical microbiology. Murray PR, Baron EI, Jorgensen IH. Washington: ASM Press.

Abstract views: 169
PDF Downloads: 31 PDF Downloads: 0
How to Cite
HuralА, Rumynska T, Shykula R, Korniychuk O. EFFECT OF THE PROBIOTIC BIOSPORIN ON MICROBIOTA OF THE INTESTINE OF THE HEALTHY BODY IN EXPERIMENT. Proc Shevchenko Sci Soc Med Sci [Internet]. 2016Nov.16 [cited 2021Mar.5];47(2):41-6. Available from: https://mspsss.org.ua/index.php/journal/article/view/30