Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Supportive Role of Probiotic Strains in Protecting Rats from Ovariectomy-Induced Cortical Bone Loss

  • Published:
Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Osteoporosis is a major health problem that occurs as a result of an imbalance between bone formation and bone resorption. Different approaches have been established for treating osteoporosis. Recently, because of their health benefits and also low adverse reaction, probiotics have been receiving considerable attention. In this study, we compared the effectiveness of five probiotic strains, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus reuteri, Lactobacillus casei, Bifidobacterium longum, and Bacillus coagulans, in protecting rats from ovariectomized (OVX)-induced bone loss. Forty-nine adult female Sprague-Dawley rats were allocated into seven groups as follows: group 1, control; group 2, OVX; group 3, OVX + Lactobacillus acidophilus; group 4, OVX + Lactobacillus casei; group 5, OVX + Bacillus coagulans; group 6, OVX + Bifidobacterium longum; and group 7, OVX + Lactobacillus reuteri. Probiotics were fed to OVX groups at the concentration of (1 × 109 CFU/ml/day) for 4 weeks. Then, biochemical parameters, including vitamin D, calcium (Ca), phosphorus (P), and alkaline phosphatase (ALP), were assessed. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scans were used that assess bone mineral density (BMD), bone marrow concentration (BMC), and area of global, femur, spine, and tibia. Lactobacillus acidophilus and Lactobacillus casei significantly increased Ca and ALP and decreased P in treated groups. Lactobacillus casei, Lactobacillus reuteri, and Bifidobacterium longum increased vitamin D significantly. Lactobacillus acidophilus and Lactobacillus casei indicated the most effects on BMD. In terms of BMC, and bone area, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus reuteri, and Lactobacillus casei demonstrated the significant enhancement in OVX groups treated with. Among the probiotics used in this study, Lactobacillus acidophilus and Lactobacillus casei showed the most effects in terms of BMD, BMC, bone area, and biochemical parameters. It seems that probiotics effects on bone health are strain dependent, but further studies should be done to prove these findings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Vandenbroucke A et al (2017) Pharmacological treatment of osteoporosis in the oldest old. Clin Interv Aging 12:1065–1077

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. McCabe LR, Irwin R, Schaefer L, Britton RA (2013) Probiotic use decreases intestinal inflammation and increases bone density in healthy male but not female mice. J Cell Physiol 228:1793–1798

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Compston J et al (2017) UK clinical guideline for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Arch Osteoporos 12:43

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Parvaneh K et al (2015) Probiotics (Bifidobacterium longum) increase bone mass density and upregulate Sparc and Bmp-2 genes in rats with bone loss resulting from ovariectomy. Biomed Res Int 2015:897639

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Li JY, Chassaing B, Tyagi AM, Vaccaro C, Luo T, Adams J, Darby TM, Weitzmann MN, Mulle JG, Gewirtz AT, Jones RM, Pacifici R (2016) Sex steroid deficiency-associated bone loss is microbiota dependent and prevented by probiotics. J Clin Invest 126:2049–2063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Britton RA, Irwin R, Quach D, Schaefer L, Zhang J, Lee T, Parameswaran N, McCabe LR (2014) Probiotic L. reuteri treatment prevents bone loss in a menopausal ovariectomized mouse model. J Cell Physiol 229:1822–1830

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Weaver CM (2015) Diet, gut microbiome, and bone health. Curr Osteoporos Rep 13:125–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Shokri D, Khorasgani MR, Mohkam M, Fatemi SM, Ghasemi Y, Taheri-Kafrani A (2018) The inhibition effect of lactobacilli against growth and biofilm formation of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins 10:34–42

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Mohkam M et al (2016) Characterization and in vitro probiotic assessment of potential indigenous Bacillus strains isolated from soil rhizosphere. Minerva Biotec 28:19–28

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hemarajata P, Versalovic J (2013) Effects of probiotics on gut microbiota: mechanisms of intestinal immunomodulation and neuromodulation. Ther Adv Gastroenterol 6:39–51

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Grazul H, Kanda LL, Gondek D (2016) Impact of probiotic supplements on microbiome diversity following antibiotic treatment of mice. Gut Microbes 7:101–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Scholz-Ahrens KE, Ade P, Marten B, Weber P, Timm W, Aςil Y, Glüer CC, Schrezenmeir J (2007) Prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics affect mineral absorption, bone mineral content, and bone structure. J Nutr 137:838s–846s

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Legette LL, Lee WH, Martin BR, Story JA, Arabshahi A, Barnes S, Weaver CM (2011) Genistein, a phytoestrogen, improves total cholesterol, and synergy, a prebiotic, improves calcium utilization, but there were no synergistic effects. Menopause 18:923–931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Parvaneh K et al (2014) Effect of probiotics supplementation on bone mineral content and bone mass density. Sci World J 2014:5959–5962

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Chiang SS, Pan TM (2011) Antiosteoporotic effects of Lactobacillus-fermented soy skim milk on bone mineral density and the microstructure of femoral bone in ovariectomized mice. J Agric Food Chem 59:7734–7742

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Li F, Jiang X, Zhao J, Zhang S (2015) Graphene oxide: a promising nanomaterial for energy and environmental applications. Nano Energy 16:488–515

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Narva M, Collin M, Lamberg-Allardt C, Kärkkäinen M, Poussa T, Vapaatalo H, Korpela R (2004) Effects of long-term intervention with Lactobacillus helveticus-fermented milk on bone mineral density and bone mineral content in growing rats. Ann Nutr Metab 48:228–234

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Scholz-Ahrens KE, Adolphi B, Rochat F, Barclay DV, de Vrese M, Açil Y, Schrezenmeir J (2016) Effects of probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics on mineral metabolism in ovariectomized rats—impact of bacterial mass, intestinal absorptive area and reduction of bone turn-over. NFS J 3:41–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Chang Y, Yang ST, Liu JH, Dong E, Wang Y, Cao A, Liu Y, Wang H (2011) In vitro toxicity evaluation of graphene oxide on A549 cells. Toxicol Lett 200:201–210

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Thomas DW, Greer FR (2010) Probiotics and prebiotics in pediatrics. Pediatrics 126:1217–1231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kimoto-Nira H, Suzuki C, Kobayashi M, Sasaki K, Kurisaki J, Mizumachi K (2007) Anti-ageing effect of a lactococcal strain: analysis using senescence-accelerated mice. Br J Nutr 98:1178–1186

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Mutus R et al (2006) The effect of dietary probiotic supplementation on tibial bone characteristics and strength in broilers. Poult Sci 85:1621–1625

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. McCabe L, Britton RA, Parameswaran N (2015) Prebiotic and probiotic regulation of bone health: role of the intestine and its microbiome. Curr Osteoporos Rep 13:363–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Sjogren K et al (2012) The gut microbiota regulates bone mass in mice. J Bone Miner Res 27:1357–1367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kumar ASK, Jiang S-J (2016) Chitosan-functionalized graphene oxide: a novel adsorbent an efficient adsorption of arsenic from aqueous solution. J Environ Chem Eng 4:1698–1713

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Amdekar S, Kumar A, Sharma P, Singh R, Singh V (2012) Lactobacillus protected bone damage and maintained the antioxidant status of liver and kidney homogenates in female wistar rats. Mol Cell Biochem 368:155–165

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Ohlsson C, Engdahl C, Fåk F, Andersson A, Windahl SH, Farman HH, Movérare-Skrtic S, Islander U, Sjögren K (2014) Probiotics protect mice from ovariectomy-induced cortical bone loss. PLoS One 9:e92368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Rodrigues FC, Castro ASB, Rodrigues VC, Fernandes SA, Fontes EAF, de Oliveira TT, Martino HSD, de Luces Fortes Ferreira CL (2012) Yacon flour and Bifidobacterium longum modulate bone health in rats. J Med Food 15:664–670

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Campbell JM, Fahey GC Jr, Wolf BW (1997) Selected indigestible oligosaccharides affect large bowel mass, cecal and fecal short-chain fatty acids, pH and microflora in rats. J Nutr 127:130–136

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Villa ML, Marcus R, Ramírez Delay R, Kelsey JL (1995) Factors contributing to skeletal health of postmenopausal Mexican-American women. J Bone Miner Res 10:1233–1242

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Gilman J, Cashman KD (2006) The effect of probiotic bacteria on transepithelial calcium transport and calcium uptake in human intestinal-like Caco-2 cells. Curr Issues Intest Microbiol 7:1–5

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Pérez-Conesa D, López G, Abellán P, Ros G (2006) Bioavailability of calcium, magnesium and phosphorus in rats fed probiotic, prebiotic and synbiotic powder follow-up infant formulas and their effect on physiological and nutritional parameters. J Sci Food Agric 86:2327–2336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Mora-Gutierrez A, Farrell HM Jr, Attaie R, McWhinney VJ, Wang C (2007) Effects of bovine and caprine Monterey Jack cheeses fortified with milk calcium on bone mineralization in rats. Int Dairy J 17:255–267

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Law YY, Chiu HF, Lee HH, Shen YC, Venkatakrishnan K, Wang CK (2016) Consumption of onion juice modulates oxidative stress and attenuates the risk of bone disorders in middle-aged and post-menopausal healthy subjects. Food Funct 7:902–912

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Xu X et al (2017) Intestinal microbiota: a potential target for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Bone Res 5:201746–201764

    Google Scholar 

  36. Yan J, Herzog JW, Tsang K, Brennan CA, Bower MA, Garrett WS, Sartor BR, Aliprantis AO, Charles JF (2016) Gut microbiota induce IGF-1 and promote bone formation and growth. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113:E7554–E7563

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Xu X, Jia X, Mo L, Liu C, Zheng L, Yuan Q, Zhou X (2017) Intestinal microbiota: a potential target for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Bone Res 5:17046

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Dabbaghmanesh MH, Noorafshan A, Talezadeh P, Tanideh N, Koohpeyma F, Iraji A, Bakhshayeshkaram M, Montazeri-Najafabady N (2017) Stereological investigation of the effect of Elaeagnus angustifolia fruit hydroalcoholic extract on osteoporosis in ovariectomized rats. Avicenna J Phytomed 7:261–274

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Cao H, Zhang Y, Qian W, Guo XP, Sun C, Zhang L, Cheng XH (2017) Effect of icariin on fracture healing in an ovariectomized rat model of osteoporosis. Exp Ther Med 13:2399–2404

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Kim JG, Lee E, Kim SH, Whang KY, Oh S, Imm JY (2009) Effects of a Lactobacillus casei 393 fermented milk product on bone metabolism in ovariectomised rats. Int Dairy J 19:690–695

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Vice Chancellery of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences. Also, we would like to thank Dr. Milad Mohkam and Dr. Reza Heydari for their valuable comments to improve the quality of the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pharmaceutical Science Research Center and Department of Pharmaceutical Biotechnology, School of Pharmacy, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

    Nima Montazeri-Najafabady, Younes Ghasemi & Ahmad Gholami

  2. Endocrinology and Metabolism Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

    Nima Montazeri-Najafabady, Mohammad Hossein Dabbaghmanesh, Pedram Talezadeh & Farhad Koohpeyma

  3. Biotechnology Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

    Younes Ghasemi & Ahmad Gholami

Authors
  1. Nima Montazeri-Najafabady
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Younes Ghasemi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mohammad Hossein Dabbaghmanesh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Pedram Talezadeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Farhad Koohpeyma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ahmad Gholami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ahmad Gholami.

Ethics declarations

This work was approved by the Ethics Committee (No. 2225b125) of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Montazeri-Najafabady, N., Ghasemi, Y., Dabbaghmanesh, M.H. et al. Supportive Role of Probiotic Strains in Protecting Rats from Ovariectomy-Induced Cortical Bone Loss. Probiotics & Antimicro. Prot. 11, 1145–1154 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-018-9443-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-018-9443-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation