REVIEW

Review on the Function, Substrate Affinity, and Potential Application of Bile Salt Hydrolase Originated from Probiotic Strains of Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, and Enterococcus

Mo Hyeon Kang1https://orcid.org/0009-0007-4734-7385, Arxel G. Elnar1https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2716-4924, Geun-Bae Kim1,*https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8531-1104
Author Information & Copyright
1Department of Animal Science and Technology, Chung-Ang University, Anseong 17546, Korea
*Corresponding author : Geun-Bae Kim, Department of Animal Science and Technology, Chung-Ang University, Anseong 17546, Korea, Tel: +82-31-670-3027, Fax: +82-31-676-5986, E-mail: kimgeun@cau.ac.kr

© Korean Society for Food Science of Animal Resources. This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Received: Nov 28, 2024 ; Revised: Jan 06, 2025 ; Accepted: Jan 06, 2025

Published Online: Mar 01, 2025

Abstract

Bile salt hydrolase (BSH: EC.3.5.1.24) has been used as a biomarker for probiotics for an extended period. It is mostly present in the gut environment of vertebrates. Additionally, it influences the viability of probiotics. This biomarker is considered a promising nutritional supplement due to its unique ability to effectively address elevated blood cholesterol levels, a common issue in modern society. However, the commercialization of BSH has been limited by an incomplete understanding of the intestinal microbiota and the function of BSH. Hence, in this review, we aim to reveal the current advancements in BSH research and outline the necessary areas of investigation for future studies. The review highlights key findings related to the substrate affinity of BSH in probiotic bacteria and its BSH gene phylogeny that have been researched until today, suggesting further research regarding the differences in multiple BSH genes and corresponding differences in BSH affinity.

Keywords: bile salt hydrolase; penicillin V acylase; cholesterol lowering effect; hydrogel formation; antibiotic growth promoters

Introduction

Elucidating the relationship between probiotics and the deconjugation of bile salts through the activity of bile salt hydrolases (BSH; EC.3.5.1.24) remains an interesting topic. Duary et al. (2012) and Zhang et al. (2009) reported that Lactobacillus constitutively expressed BSH, which was slightly upregulated in the presence of bile acid. Furthermore, Begley et al. (2006) highlighted that most BSH activity is detected in gram-positive bacteria, specifically probiotic candidates. However, variation in enzyme activity across strains was significant, and the exact function or mechanism of the enzyme remains unclear (Horackova et al., 2020; Urdaneta and Casadesús, 2017; Yang et al., 2019).

Clarifying the exact mechanism of BSH activity is important. As reports of probiotics reveal blood cholesterol level reduction, potentially enabling further development of therapeutic applications (Agolino et al., 2024; Ahn et al., 2003; Begley et al., 2006; Mann and Spoerry, 1974). For modern people, Feingold (2016) reported elevated blood low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol levels were observed, a high-risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), possibly resulting from modern diets and high-nutrient ingredients. As a result, probiotics are emerging as important health components of food for the public and patients with high cholesterol levels. Drugs that manage blood LDL-C levels include statins and their derivatives, which lower cholesterol synthesis in the liver (Feingold, 2016), and ezetimibe, which prevents the reabsorption of bile acids, promoting excretion from the body (Florentin et al., 2008; Kashani et al., 2008). However, the side effects of these medications are concerning (i.e., muscle complications, myopathy, acute pancreatitis, liver toxicity, and increased risk of diabetes; Florentin et al., 2008; Kashani et al., 2008), which need the development of new compounds with fewer side effects. Accordingly, developing and commercializing BSH, a high-possibility reason for lower blood cholesterol (Agolino et al., 2024; Begley et al., 2006; Guo et al., 2012), as a drug or supplement (e.g., postbiotics or genetically extracted by cloned vector) is expected.

However, BSH, a candidate for cholesterol control, remains uncommercialized because the potential risks have not been identified. For example, Sun et al. (2023) analyzed the intestinal contents of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and found that secondary bile acid levels increased significantly by BSH activity (Evangelakos et al., 2021; Perez and Briz, 2009; Sun et al., 2023). Secondary bile acids can cause inflammatory responses, cell membrane destruction, and DNA damage. This affects the intestinal cells, ultimately leading to CRC (Ajouz et al., 2014). Another potential risk is BSH may act as an antibiotic resistance factor. Kusada et al. (2022a) reported that Lactobacillus paragasseri JCM 5343T has antimicrobial resistance (AMR) by BSH activity, which can pose an antibiotic resistance when transformed into other bacteria (Daly et al., 2021). Because potential risks of BSH are high, it is currently difficult to use for clinical purposes.

It is still difficult to understand why probiotics synthesize BSH and deconjugate bile salt. To get enough data, it is more important to understand the exact mechanism of BSH. Furthermore, it is impossible to stop the synthesis of BSH by probiotics or gut microbiome due to various safety and ethical issues regarding genetic manipulation. Therefore, this review pointed to how differences appear by species or phylogenetic tree through the substrate specificity analysis and makes foundation for further research.

In this review, 122 published articles on BSH and probiotics were examined. These studies explained BSH activity according to taxa in the past three decades. They were sourced from electronic databases, including Public/Publisher MEDLINE (PubMed), Google Scholar, National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), American Type Culture Collection (ATCC), American Society for Microbiology (ASM) journals, SpringerLink, Food Research International, Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI), Journal of Dairy Science, Frontiers, Korea Science, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), Animal Bioscience (AB), Royal Society, Nature, Institute of Food Technologists (IFT), Wiley-online library, British Medical Journal (BMJ), Europe PMC, Science Direct, Research Gate, Talyor and Francis Online, Cambridge University Press, Journal of Lipid Research (JLR), Public Library of Science (PLOS), Tennessee University Libraries, AUMA publication, Atherosclerosis Journal and OXFORD Academic. The keywords used were bile salt, bile acid, BSH, penicillin V acylase (PVA), blood cholesterol-lowering effect, probiotics, hydrogel formation, and antibiotic growth promoters (AGPs). Main review address information regarding BSH mechanisms and activities across lactic acid bacteria (LAB) species are discussed. Additionally, the structures and functions of BSH and PVA are compared. Finally, the current challenges and possible solutions, focusing on the potential use of BSH in clinical settings, are highlighted.

Function and Activity of Bile Salt Hydrolase

Bile salt distribution and function

Bile salt and bile acid are distinguished if glycine or taurine is conjugated or not. If no glycine or taurine is attached, the substance is referred to as bile acid; otherwise, it is called bile salt (Daly et al., 2021). Primary bile acids are synthesized in the liver and denatured by bacteria to form secondary bile acids (Daly et al., 2021). Haslewood (1967) reported that the primary bile acids, cholic acid (CA) and chenodeoxycholic acid (CDCA), are found in the bile of vertebrates. Similarly, secondary bile acids, including deoxycholic acid (DCA), lithocholic acid (LCA), and ursodeoxycholic acid, are found in this fluid (Haslewood, 1967). Notably, DCA is produced by modifying CA, and LCA is derived from CDCA (Bachmann et al., 2015; Evangelakos et al., 2021; García-Cañaveras et al., 2012; Perez and Briz, 2009). Tagliacozzi et al. (2003) and Thakare et al. (2018) reported that CDCA predominated in human plasma, followed by deoxycholic acid (DCA), and glycochenodeoxycholic acid was three times higher than taurochenodeoxycholic acid.

A wide range of bile acids are distributed across different species (Kuhajda et al., 2006; Li and Dawson, 2019). Bile salts conjugated with taurine are dominant in most cases, excluding those in humans and other animals. In addition, Karakus et al. (2024) reported that glycine-conjugated bile salts are dominant in humans, and taurine-conjugated bile salts are most common in dogs (García-Cañaveras et al., 2012; Kakimoto et al., 2017; Rabin et al., 1976; Vessey, 1978).

Bile salts primarily aid in food digestion (Maldonado-Valderrama et al., 2011). de Buy Wenniger and Beuers (2010) and Redinger (2003) reported that bile salts are synthesized in the liver, stored in the gallbladder, and secreted along with pancreatic enzymes in the duodenum upon ingestion of food. Notably, these salts have amphipathic characteristics (Daly et al., 2021). The hydrophobic part attaches to ingested lipid droplets and divides them into smaller particles. These fine lipid particles help lipolytic enzymes, such as lipase, to work better, and the bile salt is reabsorbed 95% near the ileum when the process is complete. It enters the portal vein along the capillaries and re-enters the liver thereafter. The 5% of bile salt that was not absorbed from the ileum was fermented or deconjugated by the gut microbiome. Most of the affected bile salt is excreted with feces but some of it is reabsorbed. The whole circulation and enzyme effect for bile circulation is shown in Fig. 1 (Daly et al., 2021; de Buy Wenniger and Beuers, 2010; Redinger, 2003).

kosfa-45-2-353-g1
Fig. 1. Bile salt circulation (copyright by Bio-Render@). PCBA, primary conjugated bile acid; PDBA, primary deconjugated bile acid; SCBA, secondary conjugated bile acid; SDBA, secondary deconjugated bile acid; FXR, farnesoid X receptor; GCA, glycocholic acid; TCA, taurocholic acid; GCDCA, glycochenodeoxycholic acid; TCDCA, taurochenodeoxycholic acid; GDCA, glycodeoxycholic acid; TDCA, taurodeoxycholic acid; CA, cholic acid; DCA, deoxycholic acid; CDCA, chenodeoxycholic acid.
Download Original Figure
High blood cholesterol level and role of bile salt hydrolase in probiotics for low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol effect

Several study reports revealed that high blood cholesterol levels (LDL-C>190 mg/dL; Bittencourt et al., 2020), accompanied by a sedentary lifestyle, are increasingly prevalent across generations (Evangelakos et al., 2021; Perez and Briz, 2009; Sun et al., 2023). Individuals with high plasma LDL-C levels have a high risk of developing CVD and a shorter life expectancy. Prescription of statins or ezetimibe to patients with high-cholesterol syndrome may relieve symptoms. However, they cause side effects, such as myopathy, acute pancreatitis, and liver toxicity (Florentin et al., 2008; Kashani et al., 2008). Furthermore, patients with liver or CVDs are particularly vulnerable to these side effects (Begley et al., 2006; Schuster, 2004).

Several studies have reported that probiotics can lower blood cholesterol levels with almost no side effects and have positive effects on various conditions, including the treatment of atopic dermatitis, colon cancer, Crohn’s disease, diarrhea, and constipation (Ishimwe et al., 2015; Ooi and Liong, 2010; Sivamaruthi et al., 2019). However, their respective mechanisms remain unclear (Gill and Guarner, 2004; Mercenier et al., 2003; Reid et al., 2003; Sanders and Klaenhammer, 2001; Tuohy et al., 2003; Woo et al., 2023). Ahn et al. (2003) reported that cholesterol was reduced following 4 weeks of consuming milk containing Lactobacillus acidophilus SNUL01, and Fuentes et al. (2013) highlighted that cholesterol was lowered by consuming the capsule form of Lactobacillus plantarum (CECT 7527, CECT 7528, and CECT 7529). The hypothesis supporting the reduction of blood cholesterol levels as a function of BSH revealed so far can be explained as follows: more than 95% of bile salts are reabsorbed in the human ileum (Li and Chiang, 2020; Naumann et al., 2020), and the remaining 5% passes through the ileum. Colonic bile salts are deconjugated by BSH activity, forming deconjugated bile salts. BSH has a specific active site (Fig. 2), especially the cys-2 (or 22) site, which is essential for BSH catalysis (Begley et al., 2006). In bile salt deconjugation, cys-2 attacks the carbonyl carbon of the excision amide bond in bile salt, followed by the removal of glycine or taurine by hydrolysis (Chand et al., 2018). Deconjugated bile salts are water-soluble in a colonic pH environment of 7–8 (Trivedi and Puranik, 2017; Yamamura et al., 2023). The metabolic activity of intestinal microorganisms, particularly lactic acid and short-chain fatty acid production, further lowers the pH, causing the precipitation of deconjugated bile salt (Begley et al., 2006). Therefore, colon enterocytes no longer absorb it, leading to its excretion in the feces, which in turn lowers blood cholesterol.

kosfa-45-2-353-g2
Fig. 2. Comparative analysis of BSH and PVA active site. The genes used for the phylogenetic tree were translated and aligned using the MEGA 11software. The black arrows indicate the amino acid residues involved in the active site for BSH while red arrows pertain to PVA. The black and red numbers next to each amino acid indicate the location of the residue along the length of the peptide sequence. BSH, bile salt hydrolase; PVA, penicillin V acylase.
Download Original Figure

Nonetheless, confirming whether BSH is a factor remains difficult because microorganisms that reduce blood cholesterol levels exist despite the absence of the BSH gene, such as Streptococcus thermophilus MCC0200 (Kapse et al., 2024). In addition, Choi et al. (2015) reported that deconjugated bile salt has a stronger affinity for the farnesoid X receptor that regulates bile synthesis, reducing hepatic bile acid synthesis; by this result, the effect of BSH does not alter the blood cholesterol concentration. Consequently, current experimental results do not identify BSH activity as a major factor for the LDL-C-lowering effect in the presence of probiotics.

Role of bile salt hydrolase in probiotics

Even if probiotics do not have an LDL-C-lowering effect, maintaining high survival rates in the intestine is critical to elicit other health benefits to the host. This concept originated from the study of Fuller (1995). According to Dobson et al. (2012), probiotics are resistant to acid and produce antibacterial substances, including bacteriocins, hydrogen peroxide, and organic acids. Furthermore, probiotics are highly resistant to bile salts compared with other bacteria (da Silva et al., 2024; Gu et al., 2024; Horackova et al., 2020; Spínello et al., 2024; Urdaneta and Casadesús, 2017; Yang et al., 2019). The study by De Smet et al. (1995) suggested that BSH-positive probiotics would have stronger bile resistance than negative. However, subsequent studies showed no correlation between probiotic bile tolerance and BSH levels by enzyme knockout experiments (Begley et al., 2005; Moser and Savage, 2001). In addition, genomic analyses suggest no relationship between bile concentration and BSH gene expression (Horackova et al., 2020; Yang et al., 2019). Recently, Jarocki et al. (2014) hypothesized that deconjugated bile salt reacts with other organic substances, producing a hydrogel that can promote the colonization of intestinal microorganisms (Jarocki et al., 2014; Sobotka and Czeczowiczka, 1958). If these experiments can be replicated in vivo, new insights between BSH and probiotics can be processed.

Interspecies Characteristics of Bile Salt Hydrolase

The following data analysis is that which integrates the affinity between a single enzyme and bile. BSH activity has primarily been studied within the context of LAB research, and many full-length genomes of the strains studied have been identified. Begley et al. (2006) analyzed BSH activity mainly in Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Enterococcus, Clostridium, and Bacteroides. However, most studies correlating enzyme activity with genomic data have used Lactobacillus species only (O’Flaherty et al., 2018). Considering that the taxonomy of Lactobacillus is newly defined, a new method for direct genetic analysis of the population is needed for comparison with other strains (Oberg et al., 2022). Furthermore, the current knowledge regarding the substrate affinity of BSH could enhance future genetic analyses of enzymatic mechanisms.

Table 1 summarizes the measured enzyme affinities for various BSH derived from different species. Notably, the taxonomy of Lactobacillus was recently updated as reported by Oberg et al. (2022). The affinity results of each BSH for conjugated bile salts (CA, DCA, and CDCA) were categorized to show the differences in affinity between glycine- and taurine-conjugated bile salts for each substrate. Higher affinity differences mean that an enzyme can hydrolyze a particular substrate faster or to a greater extent in a given data analysis method.

Table 1. Interspecies characteristics of BSH
Strain Q1) CA DCA CDCA Reference
Lactobacillus
L.acidophilus ATCC 4356 2 - Liong and Shah (2005)
L.acidophilus ATCC 4356-A
L.acidophilus ATCC 4356-B
L.acidophilus ATCC 4357 2 + Liong and Shah (2005)
L.acidophilus ATCC 4357-A
L.acidophilus ATCC 4357-B
L.casei ASCC 1521 1 Liong and Shah (2005)
L rhamnosus strain ASCC 290 1 + Liong and Shah (2005)
L. casei ATCC 15820 1 + Liong and Shah (2005)
L. acidophilus LA1 2 + + Kumar et al. (2012)
L. acidophilus LA1-A
L. acidophilus LA1-B
L.fermentum K73 + +++ Hernández-Gómez et al. (2021)
L.plantarum 299v 1 + ++ Hernández-Gómez et al. (2021)
L.rhamnosus GG 1 + +++ Hernández-Gómez et al. (2021)
L.johnsonii YB334 + Zhu et al. (2022)
L. plantarum Y14 ++ Liu et al. (2021)
L. paracasei subsp. X11 Zhang et al. (2021)
L. acidophilus NCK 1909 Foley et al. (2021)
L. acidophilus NCK 1909-A
L. acidophilus NCK 1909-B
L. gasseri NCK2253 Foley et al. (2021)
L. gasseri NCK2253-A −−− −−− −−−
L. gasseri NCK2253-B +++ +++ +++
L. paragasseri strain JCM 5343T 3
L. paragasseri strain JCM 5343T-A −− + Kusada et al. (2022a)
L. paragasseri strain JCM 5343T-B
L. paragasseri strain JCM 5343T-C + Kusada et al. (2022b)
L. salivarius NRRL B-30514 + + Wang et al. (2012)
L. gasseri strain FR4 + + Rani et al. (2017)
L. brevis ATCC 367 1 ++ ++ +++ Ru et al. (2019)
L.acidophilus NCDC291 ++ + Kumar et al. (2012)
L. plantarum Lp91 1 + Kumar et al. (2012)
L. plantarum WCFS1 4 Lambert et al. (2008)
L. plantarum WCFS1-1 +++ +++ +++
L. plantarum WCFS1-2 NA NA NA
L. plantarum WCFS1-3 + + +
L. plantarum WCFS1-4 +++ +++ +++
L. rhamnosus strain E9 1 + + + Kaya et al. (2017)
L. fermentum NCDO394 1 + + + Kumar et al. (2013)
L. acidophilus PF01 1 −−− −−− −−− Oh et al. (2008)
L. johnsonii PF01 2 Chae et al. (2013)
L. johnsonii PF01-A −−− −− −−
L. johnsonii PF01-C ++ ++ ++
Bifidobacterium
B.longum ATCC 15708 + + + Kim et al. (2004b)
B. infantis KL 412 + + + + + + Kim et al. (2004b)
B.suis NRRL B-41407 1 + + + Jarocki et al. (2014)
B.pseudocatenulatum DSM 20439 1 + + + Jarocki et al. (2014)
B.animalis subsp. lactis NRRL B-41405 1 + + Jarocki et al. (2014)
B.catenulatum DSM 20224 1 + Jarocki et al. (2014)
B.longum SBT2928 + + + + Tanaka et al. (2000)
B.bifidum ATCC 11863 1 + + + Kim et al. (2004a)
B. animalis Bi30 1 + + + + + + Jarocki (2011)
B.longum BB536 + + Grill et al. (1995);
Li et al. (2021)
Enterococcus
E. faecalis CU30-2 1 + + + + + + + + + Eom and Kim (2011)
E. faecalis T2 1 + + + + Chand et al. (2016)
E. faecium CRL183 - Taranto et al. (2000)
Bacteroides
B. fragilis ATCC 25285 2 + + + Li et al. (2021);
Stellwag and Hylemon (1976)
B. fragilis ATCC 25285-A
B. fragilis ATCC 25285-B

Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Enterococcus, and Bacteroides bile salt hydrolase information about G/T ratio by cholic acid, deoxycholic acid, and chenodeoxycholic acid affinity of BSH.

The affinity of glycine-conjugated bile salt is greater, and the difference is less than 3 times is (+), between 3 and 10 times is (++), and more than 10 times is (+++). The same applies to taurine-conjugated bile salt, denoted with (−). Inactive BSH is denoted by NA.

1) In addition, the number of multiple BSH genes present in the strain was reported as “Q”.

BSH, bile salt hydrolase; CA, cholic acid; DCA, deoxycholic acid; CDCA, chenodeoxycholic acid.

Download Excel Table

Table 1 only indicated the affinity between glycine-conjugated bile salt and taurine-conjugated bile salt for each BSH. Generally, the BSH data of Bifidobacterium and Enterococcus showed greater affinity for glycine-conjugated bile salts. In contrast, Lactobacillus showed varying affinities, and several strains harbored multiple copies of BSH genes (including L. acidophilus NCK 1909, Lactobacillus gasseri NCK2253, and Lactobacillus johnsonii PF01). These strains exhibited a higher affinity for taurine-conjugated bile salts.

Zhao et al. (2024) conducted a gene cloning experiment to heterologously express the BSH gene, explaining the relationship between probiotic bile acid affinity and the cholesterol-lowering effect, which specifically acts on either glycine- or taurine-conjugated bile salt. In addition, they administered them in mouse models to track their activity. This study reported that blood cholesterol levels decreased in post-germ-free mice carrying a mutant bacterium, F67A, that preferentially degrades taurocholic acid (TCA). However, the mutant bacteria, YB81, that preferentially degrades glycocholic acid (GCA), does not affect host blood cholesterol levels. In contrast, in specific pathogen-free mice, YB81 also reduced cholesterol levels. Therefore, the cholesterol-reducing mechanism of F67A involves altering the intestinal bile acid ratio, whereas YB81 lowers cholesterol levels by controlling the BSH activity of intestinal microorganisms. The results showed that YB81, which has a strong BSH affinity for glycine-conjugated bile salts in this case, changed the BSH activity of microorganisms in the gut in a way that does not directly lower cholesterol or have other metabolic effects. Lactobacillus fermentum K73, Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, and Enterococcus faecalis CU30-2’s high affinity for glycine-conjugated bile salts might directly change the gut ecosystem compared with lower cholesterol based on Zhao’s hypothesis. In this regard, L. gasseri NCK2253 and L. johnsonii PF01 strains are important (Table 1). L. gasseri NCK2253-A and L. johnsonii PF01-A showed high affinities for the taurine-conjugated bile salt. L. gasseri NCK2253-B and L. johnsonii PF01-C BSHs showed opposite affinities (glycine-conjugated bile salts). Examining these two strains in vivo could provide more concrete evidence for the different substrate affinities of microbial BSH. Despite the abundance of data on BSH produced by Lactobacillus, additional studies on Bifidobacterium and Enterococcus are still needed to draw better comparisons of the BSH properties of different bacteria, particularly with the advent of tailored probiotics.

Potential Bile Salt Hydrolase Inhibitor for Feed Efficiency and Probiotics

Antibiotics are widely used in farms to improve domestic animal growth and maintain animal health. This phenomenon refers to antibiotics as AGPs (Lin, 2014). However, the use of antibiotics has caused the uncontrolled development of AMR in various niches. AMR is a driving force that promotes pools of resistant pathogenic bacteria and poses a serious threat to food safety and public health (Davies, 2014; Perry et al., 2014). For this reason, the incorporation of antibiotics in feed is legally restricted or completely banned in the EU, UK, USA, and other countries. Consequently, animal nutrition studies have focused on finding AGP alternatives and improving feed efficiency (Kim and Lee, 2005). To maximize feed efficiency, a substitution for antibiotics is necessary. The solution is yet to be determined, but currently, BSH control has the best consequences since suppressing BSH can achieve feed efficiency similar to that of using antibiotics.

Negga (2015) reported that BSH activity lowers blood cholesterol levels and feed efficiency. Furthermore, Rani et al. (2017) studied BSH inhibitors and found that riboflavin showed almost 98% inhibition. Notably, Negga hypothesized that riboflavin could increase the growth performance of domestic animals. Broiler chickens showed an increase in body weight after consuming 20 mg/kg of riboflavin for 21 days. Animal experiments using chickens and pigs proved that feeding vitamins, especially riboflavin, resulted in a similar level of increased productivity compared to that of antibiotic treatments (Geng, 2018; Negga, 2015; Yang et al., 2020). This phenomenon can be attributed to the functional inhibition of BSH by riboflavin and β-lactam antibiotics (penicillin V, ampicillin), especially penicillin (Adhikari et al., 2020; Daly et al., 2021; Geng and Lin, 2016; Li et al., 2022; Rani et al., 2017; Suresh et al., 1999). Given that the hypothesis is true, it is highly likely that BSH is the cause of the AGP effect. In order to achieve the AGP effect, an alternative to antibiotics, such as a BSH inhibitor, is required. However, the most effective treatments were limited to β-lactam antibiotics and riboflavin (Lin et al., 2014; Rani et al., 2017).

Therefore, to obtain sufficient feed effects from livestock, a biochemical mechanism and a more effective BSH inhibitor are necessary. For improved results, it is crucial to figure out the evolution of BSH and define the optimal binding site for the inhibitor. The following chapter presents the results of analyses based on the BSH peptide sequence and active site identified so far.

Bile Salt Hydrolase and Penicillin V Acylase Active Site and Mechanism of Action

Bile salt hydrolase phylogeny

BSH and PVA may be considered moonlighting proteins because of similar structures. Moonlighting proteins are defined as the same enzyme that performs more than one distinct action (Jeffery, 2018). However, the results of the experiment by Kumar et al. (2006) show that the enzymes presumed to be BSH or PVA from Bacillus sphaericus, Clostridium perfringens, and Bifidobacterium longum have only about 30% peptide similarity (not moonlighting protein). Otherwise, BSH and PVA are classified as choloylglycine hydrolases (CGH) within the N-terminal nucleophilic (Ntn) hydrolase enzyme superfamily (Daly et al., 2021).

These two enzymes, which appear to be similar only in structure, can hydrolyze each other’s substrates. There are genomic analyses for this phenomenon. O’Flaherty et al. (2018) reported that Lactobacillus gorillae, Lactobacillus frumenti, Lactobacillus vaginalis, Lactobacillus panis, Lactobacillus antri, Lactobacillus agilis, Lactobacillus salivarius, and L. plantarum strains are simultaneously active against bile acids and penicillin. For in vitro tests, Lambert et al. (2008) reported that L. plantarum WCFS1 has four bsh genes, including bsh-1, bsh-3, and bsh-4, which possess BSH activity. In contrast, bsh-2, bsh-3, and bsh-4 showed PVA activity, with bsh-3 showing the strongest activity. Furthermore, Kusada et al. (2022a) reported that L. paragasseri JCM 5343 bsh-A showed common substrate specificity for PVA.

However, because Lactobacillus was the primary focus of these results, it was necessary to compare strains belonging to Bifidobacterium or Enterococcus. For advanced data, phylogenetic analysis based on BSH peptide sequences obtained from the NCBI or ATCC databases was performed to determine the conserved domains of BSH. A phylogenetic tree was constructed using the data described in Table 2. The bacteria information source is based on Table 1 and searched against ATCC and NCBI databases. A Neighbor-Joining tree was constructed using the Jukes-Cantor model with uniform rates and bootstrap replications of 1,000 datasets using MEGA-11 software. Nodes farther apart are genetically distant, while genes on the same bridge are phylogenetically closer (Fig. 3).

Table 2. BSH gene location in Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Enterococcus, Bacteroides, Clostridium
Strain Source ID1) Gene location Protein ID or locus tag2)
Lactobacillus
L.acidophilus ATCC 4356 ATCC® 4356TM
L.acidophilus ATCC 4356-A 856359..857336 HPHOBLBD_00910
L.acidophilus ATCC 4356-B 1045312..1046289 HPHOBLBD_01086
L.acidophilus ATCC 4357 ATCC® 4357TM
L.acidophilus ATCC 4357-A 831210..832187 GCNKGLDF_00859
L.acidophilus ATCC 4357-B 1059984..1060961 GCNKGLDF_01066
L.casei ASCC 1521 MLKA01000007.1 129107..130123 OHF11431.1
L. rhamnosus ASCC 290 CP014645.1 294027..295043 AMQ02171.1
L. casei ATCC 15820 ATCC® 15820TM 1580898..1581914 LHLEJOBK_01553
L. plantarum Lp91 NZ_AXDQ00000000.1 NZ_AXDQ00000000.1
L.plantarum 299v NZ_LEAV00000000.1 NZ_LEAV00000000.1 NZ_LEAV00000000.1
L.rhamnosus GG FM179322.1 510599..511615 LGG_00501
L.gasseri JCM 1131T NZ_WBMG00000000.1 NZ_WBMG00000000.1
L. paragasseri JCM 5343T NZ_BEXH00000000.1
L. paragasseri JCM 5343T-A 44935..45885 GBA85885.1
L. paragasseri JCM 5343T-B 328042..329019 GBA84956.1
L. paragasseri JCM 5343T-C 539487..540467 GBA85403.1
L. brevis ATCC 367 ATCC® 367TM 1918238..1919221 NFLFJFFJ_01948
L. rhamnosus E9 ANQ47241.1
L fermentum NCDO394 JQ293998.1 AEZ06356.1
L. acidophilus PF01 DI175191.1 DI175191.1
L. johnsonii PF01 CP024781.1
L. johnsonii PF01-A 905340..906320
L. johnsonii PF01-C 1090170..1091147
L. acidophilus LA1 NZ_CP017062.1
L. acidophilus LA1-A 869305..870282 WP_013086210.1
L. acidophilus LA1-B 1058266..1059243 WP_013437974.1
L. plantarum WCFS1 AL935263.2
L. plantarum WCFS1-1 3154512..3155486 CCC80500.1
L. plantarum WCFS1-2 64823..65839 CCC77632.1
L. plantarum WCFS1-3 2987554..2988540 CCC80350.1
L. plantarum WCFS1-4 2290117..2291070 CCC79725.1
Bifidobacterium
B.suis NRRL B-41407 JQ696822.1 AFK13062.1
B.pseudocatenulatum DSM 20439 JQ696820.1 AFK13060.1
B.animalis subsp. lactis NRRL B-41405 JQ696813.1 AFK13053.1
B.catenulatum DSM 20224 JQ696817.1 AFK13057.1
B. longum SBT2928
B.bifidum ATCC 11863 ATCC® 11863TM 1014541..1015491 MKIGBIAF_00835
B. animalis Bi30 HQ845206.1 AEK27050.1
B. bifidum ATCC 29521 Orla-Jensen 29521TM 1056525..1057475 HGNFBAPB_00881
B.dentium ATCC 27534 Scardovi and Crociani 27534TM 1251641..1252591 FMGAMNED_01090
Enterococcus
E. faecalis CU30-2 Lab source
E. faecalis T2 GG692840.1 EET97240.1
Bacteroides
B. fragilis ATCC 25285 NZ_MTGH00000000.1
B. fragilis ATCC 25285-A 118929..119984 OOD28746.1
B. fragilis ATCC 25285-B 125353..126432 OOD24735.1
Clostridium
C. perfringens A19-1 AP024982.1
C. perfringens A19-1-A 634265..635254 BDA33526.1
C. perfringens A19-1-B 1315101..1316084 BDA34151.1

1) The bacteria information source is based on Table 1 and searched against ATCC and NCBI databases. The Source ID starts with ATCC® is searched ATCC strain name using a search engine: https://www.atcc.org/?matchtype=&network=x&device=c&adposition=&keyword=&gad_source=1. The Source ID starts with the other searched strain name using a search engine: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/.

2) Protein ID or locus tag is the code written in ATCC and NCBI BSH protein fasta-format information.

BSH, bile salt hydrolase.

Download Excel Table
kosfa-45-2-353-g3
Fig. 3. BSH phylogenetic tree of Lactobacillus and 29 other species based on the BSH gene. The orange line represents the gene of Lactobacillus, the blue line represents Bifidobacterium, the green line represents Enterococcus, the purple line represents Bacteroides, and the black line represents Closteridium. The orange boxes indicate genes that simultaneously or preferentially have PVA activity, and black boxes indicate genes from strains that are judged to be highly likely also to exhibit PVA activity. BSH, bile salt hydrolase; PVA, penicillin V acylase.
Download Original Figure

To explain Fig. 3, genes from Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Enterococcus, Bacteroides, and Clostridium were represented using orange and blue lines. BSH genes that simultaneously or preferentially exhibit PVA activity were indicated using orange boxes, and BSH genes from strains that are highly likely to exhibit PVA activity were denoted using black boxes because they share the same bridge.

The reconstructed phylogeny suggests that Lactobacillus may have originated the BSH genes of Enterococcus and Bifidobacterium, in line with reports from Morinaga et al. (2022). Several clusters showed highly similar genetic distances from each other: Cluster 1 (Lactobacillus casei ASCC 1521, L. rhamnosus ASCC 290, and L.rhamnosus GG), and Cluster 2 (L. plantarum WCFS1-3, L. plantarum LP91, and L.plantarum 299V), and Cluster 3 (L.acidophilus ATCC 4356-A, L.acidophilus ATCC 4357-A, and L. acidophilus LA1-A), and Cluster 4 (L.acidophilus ATCC 4356-B, L.acidophilus ATCC 4357-B, and L.acidophilus LA1-B). The sequence identity percentage of the BSH gene was identical in each group. There is likely no affinity difference and the enzymes function similarly.

Table 1 shows differences in bile acid affinity within the same cluster, as revealed by the analysis. Within cluster 1, L. rhamnosus ASCC 290 and L. rhamnosus GG exhibited a strong affinity for GCA, whereas L. casei ASCC 1521 demonstrates a strong affinity for TCA. L. plantarum LP91, L. plantarum 299V and L. plantarum WCFS1-3 exhibited a strong affinity for GCA within cluster 2. However, L. plantarum 299V, and L. plantarum WCFS1-3 exhibited a strong affinity for GDCA, whereas L. plantarum LP91 demonstrates a strong affinity for TDCA. The BSH genes of L. acidophilus ATCC 4356, L. acidophilus ATCC 4357, and L. acidophilus LA1 in Cluster 3 exhibited a completely identical gene sequence with 100% similarity. Cluster 4 exhibited the same characteristics. Therefore, in either Cluster 3 or Cluster 4, the BSH should display identical affinities. However, comparing clusters 3 and 4 was challenging because an established BSH affinity for each substrate was lacking, as indicated in Table 1.

We conducted a comprehensive analysis to draw more conclusive interpretations of BSH and PVA activities from various LAB. Particularly with bsh genes that encode enzymes with PVA, such as L. paragasseri JCM 5343T-A and L. plantarum WCFS1-3, are important (Kusada et al., 2022a; Lambert et al., 2008). In addition, in Cluster 2, L. plantarum WCFS1-3, L. plantarum LP91, and L.plantarum 299V had highly similar nucleotide sequences. Therefore, it was necessary to determine whether LP91 and 299V can also metabolize penicillin.

Comparative analysis of bile salt hydrolase and penicillin V acylase active site

The phylogenetic tree significantly correlated the BSH across the same species, as demonstrated in the previous chapter. It is important to analyze genetically connected, but the active site of these enzymes is also important. The active site is predicted using point mutations as explained in Chand et al. (2018). Most active sites reported for BSH appear to be highly conserved.

To determine whether this fact appears not only in Lactobacillus but also in Bifidobacterium or Enterococcus, sequence alignment was performed based on the active site. Chand et al. (2018) confirmed the active site of BSH by using point mutations in a predicted region. Most active sites reported for BSH appear to be highly conserved. In B. bifidum, Cys-2, Arg-18, Asp-21, Asn-72, Asn-173, and Arg-226 are predicted to be the residues involved in active sites (Kim et al., 2004a; Song et al., 2019). Regarding this, the BSH gene sequence was aligned and compared with the peptides described above using MEGA. Except for Bacteroides fragilis ATCC 25285-B, which changed Asp-21 to Glu-43 as shown in Fig. 2, all samples shared the same active site.

These results confirm the homogeneity of almost all active sites, making it difficult to distinguish between PVA and BSH based on this aspect. Finding the difference between the two is very important for understanding the identity and mechanism of BSH in the future. Meanwhile, Avinash et al. (2016) reported that two Trp residues (at positions 23 and 87, based on B. bifidum) of PVA were important for interactions having the benzene ring of penicillin. In addition to Trp, Phe, and Tyr (benzene ring amino acids) were discovered in PVA’s peptide sequence of PVA (Chand et al., 2018; Daly et al., 2021; Suresh et al., 1999).

Based on this theory, Fig. 2 is analyzed additionally. The bsh-A gene of L. paragasseri strain JCM 5343T and the second, third, and fourth bsh genes of L. plantarum WCFS1 showed experimentally verified PVA activity. The 2nd, 3rd, and 4thbsh genes in L. plantarum WCFS1 have conserved Phe-23 and Tyr-87 residues. In contrast, the first bsh gene in L. plantarum WCFS1 did not exhibit PVA activity and contained only one benzene ring amino acid (Tyr-22 and Asn-87). However, the bsh-A gene of L. paragasseri strain JCM 5343T contains Val-23 and Asn-87 except for the benzene ring amino acid, with an affinity for ampicillin (Kusada et al., 2022a). These results make it difficult to conclude that the amino acids at positions 23 and 87 of the benzene ring are critical for PVA activity. Therefore, further research is vital and required to determine which amino acid sequence produces PVA activity.

Challenges and proposed solutions in bile salt hydrolase research

If BSH is intended for use in medication, postbiotics (cell-free supernatants and soluble factors secreted by live bacteria; Martyniak et al., 2021) or an overexpression protocol can be used without the genetic manipulation of probiotics. However, postbiotics safety has not yet been verified (Zhong et al., 2023). Also, BSH has unknown risks proved by in vitro and in vivo analyses.

Several studies reported that DCA, in reaction to BSH, can be a causal factor for CRC. Analysis revealed that patients with CRC had high levels of secondary bile acids in their large intestine (Aguirre et al., 2022; Choi et al., 2015; Sun et al., 2023). Ajouz et al. (2014) reported that excessive concentration of secondary bile acids that pass into the large intestine may cause inflammatory responses, cell membrane destruction, and DNA damage. This affects the intestinal cells, ultimately leading to CRC.

Another potential risk is that BSH may act as an antibiotic resistance factor, given that both BSH and PVA belong to the CGH family. In this regard, investigation of the active site or peptide sequence holds little relevance in distinguishing BSH with PVA activity. The PVA enzyme inhibits penicillin activity, allowing bacteria to survive in the presence of the said antibiotics (Lambert et al., 2008; Sunder et al., 2017). Kusada et al. (2022a) reported that L. paragasseri JCM 5343Tbsh-A has AMR by BSH activity. Furthermore, Lambert et al. (2008) reported that L. plantarum WCFS1 bsh-2, bsh-3, and bsh-4 showed PVA activity, with bsh-3 showing the strongest activity. However, these phenomena were observed mostly in vitro.

Until now, only the negative effects of secondary bile acids produced by BSH have been highlighted. Studies have indicated that certain intestinal diseases are caused by an imbalance of secondary bile acids. Diversity of intestinal microorganisms is needed for a healthy BSH pool, which therefore balances the secondary bile acids. In several studies, patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) had significantly reduced amounts of secondary bile acids, DCA and LCA (Fiorucci et al., 2021; Heinken et al., 2019; Larabi et al., 2023). Ultimately, the key is to prevent excessive formation of secondary bile acids.

Complete inhibition of BSH activity would eliminate its cholesterol-lowering effect in the blood, which would be a disadvantage in various aspects. Instead, preventing the conversion of primary deconjugated bile salt to secondary deconjugated bile salt could effectively maintain an appropriate amount of primary and secondary bile acids. Bustos et al. (2018) reported that the 7α-dehydroxylase of gut bacteria removes the 7α-hydroxy group and converts primary deconjugated bile salts to secondary deconjugated bile salts (Fig. 1). However, LAB do not have this function. According to Takahashi and Morotomi (1994), bacterial genera used as probiotics (bifidobacteria and lactobacilli) cannot dehydrogenate primary deconjugated bile salts. Thus, if we can control the 7α-dehydroxylation pathway, we will also be able to suppress the formation of excessive secondary bile acids.

To summarize, the effects of BSH need to be studied further for safe use. While the suppression of BSH generally has positive effects, it can also lead to various side effects, underscoring the importance of mitigating methods to control the 7-dehydroxylation pathway.

Future Research

Necessity to differentiate between bile salt hydrolase and penicillin V acylase

Multiple BSH genes and their surrounding regions showed minimal sequence similarity, indicating that BSH is the product of horizontal gene transfer. Furthermore, insertion into similar regions and the existence of mobile genetic markers support this theory (Daly et al., 2021). The PVA enzyme inactivates penicillin activity, allowing bacteria to survive in the presence of antibiotics (Lambert et al., 2008; Sunder et al., 2017). BSH and PVA are difficult to distinguish based on structural or peptide sequence differences because BSH and PVA share about 30% sequence similarity with each other, but in fact, about 30% similarity is also found among BSHs across different species (Kumar et al., 2006). Also show different substrate specificities for each strain (Lambert et al., 2008). Understanding the causes of these characteristics is important for future gut microbiome research.

Correlation between the microbiome and the toxicity of deconjugated bile salt

Many studies have examined the correlation between IBD and CRC, the amount of BSH, and the proportion of bile acid (Evangelakos et al., 2021; Fiorucci et al., 2021; Heinken et al., 2019; Larabi et al., 2023; Perez and Briz, 2009; Sun et al., 2023). However, it was only found that representative microorganisms produced active BSH and did not measure the colonic pH of healthy people and patients or sufficiently investigate the composition of LAB. A recent study measured the real-time colonic pH and showed that the normal cecal pH is approximately 5.5, and the large intestine is approximately pH 5.5 to pH 7 (31, 32). If the production of deconjugated bile salt occurs at the beginning of the large intestine, the pH at which it precipitates sufficiently matches this. Therefore, further research is needed on changes in the ratio of intestinal LAB, colonic pH, and the toxicity of deconjugated bile salt.

Correlation between substrate specificity of bile salt hydrolase and microbiome

Recently, a published paper showed that BSH with different substrate specificities towards glycine- and taurine-bile acids has differences in how the microorganism regulates cholesterol (Zhao et al., 2024). This study explains the reason for the difference in bile salt affinity, which was previously difficult to interpret solely based on the BSH sequence. However, the lack of relevant papers necessitates sufficient verification, allowing us to directly design cholesterol control mechanisms in patients or healthy individuals using probiotics.

Bile salt hydrolase specificity of lactic acid bacteria other than Lactobacillus

To date, most studies on BSH have focused on those involving LAB, especially Lactobacillus. However, understanding the relationship between BSH and PVA, the evolutionary history of BSH and PVA, and the biological flow of genes requires a deeper understanding of the relationship between BSH and various microorganisms. Therefore, in addition to Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, and Enterococcus, research on the BSH of Listeria, Clostridium, and other microorganisms is required.

Conclusion

Compared to other blood cholesterol-reducing drugs, the body naturally uses BSH as part of food consumption, which makes it commercially valuable. Understanding the risks, functions, and characteristics of BSH can further ensure the safety of probiotics, which can directly impact the intestinal survival rate. Therefore, it is important to clarify the cause of the characteristic strains with substrate specificity and measure the pH of the patient’s colon who suffered from IBD or CRC.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Science and ICT (2021R1A2C1093838).

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: Kang MH, Kim GB. Data curation: Kang MH. Formal analysis: Kang MH, Elnar AG, Kim GB. Methodology: Kang MH, Elnar AG, Kim GB. Software: Kang MH, Elnar AG, Kim GB. Validation: Kim GB. Investigation: Kang MH, Elnar AG. Writing - original draft: Kang MH, Elnar AG. Writing - review & editing: Kang MH, Elnar AG, Kim GB.

Ethics Approval

This article does not require IRB/IACUC approval because there are no human and animal participants.

References

1.

Adhikari AA, Seegar TCM, Ficarro SB, McCurry MD, Ramachandran D, Yao L, Chaudhari SN, Ndousse-Fetter S, Banks AS, Marto JA. 2020; Development of a covalent inhibitor of gut bacterial bile salt hydrolases. Nat Chem Biol. 16:318-326

2.

Agolino G, Pino A, Vaccalluzzo A, Cristofolini M, Solieri L, Caggia C, Randazzo CL. 2024; Bile salt hydrolase: The complexity behind its mechanism in relation to lowering-cholesterol lactobacilli probiotics. J Funct Foods. 120:106357

3.

Aguirre AM, Adegbite AO, Sorg JA. 2022; Clostridioides difficile bile salt hydrolase activity has substrate specificity and affects biofilm formation. npj Biofilms Microbiomes. 8:94

4.

Ahn YT, Kim GB, Lim KS, Baek YJ, Kim HU. 2003; Deconjugation of bile salts by Lactobacillus acidophilus isolates. Int Dairy J. 13:303-311

5.

Ajouz H, Mukherji D, Shamseddine A. 2014; Secondary bile acids: An underrecognized cause of colon cancer. World J Surg Oncol. 12:164

6.

Avinash VS, Panigrahi P, Chand D, Pundle A, Suresh CG, Ramasamy S. 2016; Structural analysis of a penicillin V acylase from Pectobacterium atrosepticum confirms the importance of two Trp residues for activity and specificity. J Struct Biol. 193:85-94

7.

Bachmann V, Kostiuk B, Unterweger D, Diaz-Satizabal L, Ogg S, Pukatzki S. 2015; Bile salts modulate the mucin-activated type VI secretion system of pandemic Vibrio cholerae. PLOS Negl Trop Dis. 9e0004031

8.

Begley M, Hill C, Gahan CGM. 2006; Bile salt hydrolase activity in probiotics. Appl Environ Microbiol. 72:1729-1738

9.

Begley M, Sleator RD, Gahan CGM, Hill C. 2005; Contribution of three bile-associated loci, bsh, pva, and btlB, to gastrointestinal persistence and bile tolerance of Listeria monocytogenes. Infect Immun. 73:894-904

10.

Bittencourt MS, Nasir K, Santos RD, Al-Mallah MH. 2020; Very high LDL cholesterol: The power of zero passes another test. Atherosclerosis. 292:207-208

11.

Bustos AY, de Valdez GF, Fadda S, Taranto MP. 2018; New insights into bacterial bile resistance mechanisms: The role of bile salt hydrolase and its impact on human health. Food Res Int. 112:250-262

12.

Chae JP, Valeriano VD, Kim GB, Kang DK. 2013; Molecular cloning, characterization and comparison of bile salt hydrolases from Lactobacillus johnsonii pf01. J Appl Microbiol. 114:121-133

13.

Chand D, Panigrahi P, Varshney N, Ramasamy S, Suresh CG. 2018; Structure and function of a highly active bile salt hydrolase (BSH) from Enterococcus faecalis and post-translational processing of BSH enzymes. Biochim Biophys Acta Proteins Proteom. 1866:507-518

14.

Chand D, Ramasamy S, Suresh CG. 2016; A highly active bile salt hydrolase from Enterococcus faecalis shows positive cooperative kinetics. Process Biochem. 51:263-269

15.

Choi SB, Lew LC, Yeo SK, Nair Parvathy S, Liong MT. 2015; Probiotics and the BSH-related cholesterol lowering mechanism: A jekyll and hyde scenario. Crit Rev Biotechnol. 35:392-401

16.

da Silva TF, Glória RA, Americo MF, Freitas AS, de Jesus LCL, Barroso FAL, Laguna JG, Coelho-Rocha ND, Tavares LM, le Loir Y, Jan G, Guédon É, de Carvalho Azevedo VA. 2024; Unlocking the potential of probiotics: A comprehensive review on research, production, and regulation of probiotics. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins. 16:1687-1723

17.

Daly JW, Keely SJ, Gahan CGM. 2021; Functional and phylogenetic diversity of BSH and PVA enzymes. Microorganisms. 9:732

18.

Davies J. 2014; Antibiotic resistance in and from nature. In One health: People, animals, and the environment. In: Ronald MA, Stanley M, editors.edAmerican Society for Microbiology. Washington, DC, USA: pp p. 185-194

19.

de Buy Wenniger LM, Beuers U. 2010; Bile salts and cholestasis. Dig Liver Dis. 42:409-418

20.

De Smet I, Van Hoorde L, Vande Woestyne M, Christiaens H, Verstraete W. 1995; Significance of bile salt hydrolytic activities of Lactobacilli. J Appl Bacteriol. 79:292-301

21.

Dobson A, Cotter PD, Ross RP, Hill C. 2012; Bacteriocin production: A probiotic trait?. Appl Environ Microbiol. 78:1-6

22.

Duary RK, Batish VK, Grover S. 2012; Relative gene expression of bile salt hydrolase and surface proteins in two putative indigenous Lactobacillus plantarum strains under in vitro gut conditions. Mol Biol Rep. 39:2541-2552

23.

Eom SJ, Kim GB. 2011; Cloning and characterization of a bile salt hydrolase from Enterococcus faecalis strain isolated from healthy elderly volunteers. J Dairy Sci Technol. 29:49-54.

24.

Evangelakos I, Heeren J, Verkade E, Kuipers F. 2021; Role of bile acids in inflammatory liver diseases. Semin Immunopathol. 43:577-590

25.

Feingold KR. 2016 Cholesterol lowering drugs. Available from: https://europepmc.org/article/NBK/nbk395573#__NBK 395573_dtls__ Accessed at Nov 28, 2024.

26.

Fiorucci S, Carino A, Baldoni M, Santucci L, Costanzi E, Graziosi L, Distrutti E, Biagioli M. 2021; Bile acid signaling in inflammatory bowel diseases. Dig Dis Sci. 66:674-693

27.

Florentin M, Liberopoulos EN, Elisaf MS. 2008; Ezetimibe-associated adverse effects: What the clinician needs to know. Int J Clin Pract. 62:88-96

28.

Foley MH, O’Flaherty S, Allen G, Rivera AJ, Stewart AK, Barrangou R, Theriot CM. 2021; Lactobacillus bile salt hydrolase substrate specificity governs bacterial fitness and host colonization. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 118e2017709118

29.

Fuentes MC, Lajo T, Carrión JM, Cuñé J. 2013; Cholesterol-lowering efficacy of Lactobacillus plantarum CECT 7527, 7528 and 7529 in hypercholesterolaemic adults. Br J Nutr. 109:1866-1872

30.

Fuller R. 1995; Probiotics: Their development and use. In Old Herborn University seminar monograph 8. In: Fuller R, Heidt PJ, Rusch V, van der Waaij D, editors.edInstitute for Microbioloy and Biochemistry. Gießen, Germany: pp p. 1-8.

31.

García-Cañaveras JC, Donato MT, Castell JV, Lahoz A. 2012; Targeted profiling of circulating and hepatic bile acids in human, mouse, and rat using a UPLC-MRM-MS-validated method. J Lipid Res. 53:2231-2241

32.

Geng W. 2018 Bile salt hydrolase: From basic science to translational innovation. Ph.D. dissertationTennessee Univ. Knoxville, TN, USA: .

33.

Geng W, Lin J. 2016; Bacterial bile salt hydrolase: An intestinal microbiome target for enhanced animal health. Anim Health Res Rev. 17:148-158

34.

Gill HS, Guarner F. 2004; Probiotics and human health: A clinical perspective. Postgrad Med J. 80:516-526

35.

Grill J, Schneider F, Crociani J, Ballongue J. 1995; Purification and characterization of conjugated bile salt hydrolase from Bifidobacterium longum BB536. Appl Environ Microbiol. 61:2577-2582

36.

Gu Q, Yan J, Lou Y, Zhang Z, Li Y, Zhu Z, Liu M, Wu D, Liang Y, Pu J. 2024; Bacteriocins: Curial guardians of gastrointestinal tract. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 23e13292

37.

Guo CF, Zhang LW, Han X, Yi HX, Li JY, Tuo YF, Zhang YC, Du M, Shan YJ, Yang L. 2012; Screening for cholesterol-lowering probiotic based on deoxycholic acid removal pathway and studying its functional mechanisms in vitro. Anaerobe. 18:516-522

38.

Haslewood GAD. 1967; Bile salt evolution. J Lipid Res. 8:535-550

39.

Heinken A, Ravcheev DA, Baldini F, Heirendt L, Fleming RMT, Thiele I. 2019; Systematic assessment of secondary bile acid metabolism in gut microbes reveals distinct metabolic capabilities in inflammatory bowel disease. Microbiome. 7:1-18

40.

Hernández-Gómez JG, López-Bonilla A, Trejo-Tapia G, Ãvila-Reyes SV, Jiménez-Aparicio AR, Hernández-Sánchez H. 2021; In vitro bile salt hydrolase (BSH) activity screening of different probiotic microorganisms. Foods. 10:674

41.

Horackova S, Vesela K, Klojdova I, Bercikova M, Plockova M. 2020; Bile salt hydrolase activity, growth characteristics and surface properties in Lactobacillus acidophilus. Eur Food Res Technol. 246:1627-1636

42.

Ishimwe N, Daliri EB, Lee BH, Fang F, Du G. 2015; The perspective on cholesterol-lowering mechanisms of probiotics. Mol Nutr Food Res. 59:94-105

43.

Jarocki P. 2011; Molecular characterization of bile salt hydrolase from Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis BI30. J Microbiol Biotechnol. 21:838-845

44.

Jarocki P, Podleśny M, Glibowski P, Targoński Z. 2014; A new insight into the physiological role of bile salt hydrolase among intestinal bacteria from the genus Bifidobacterium. PLOS ONE. 9e114379

45.

Jeffery CJ. 2018; Protein moonlighting: What is it, and why is it important?. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 373:20160523

46.

Kakimoto T, Kanemoto H, Fukushima K, Ohno K, Tsujimoto H. 2017; Bile acid composition of gallbladder contents in dogs with gallbladder mucocele and biliary sludge. Am J Vet Res. 78:223-229

47.

Kapse N, Pisu V, Dhakephalkar T, Margale P, Shetty D, Wagh S, Dagar S, Dhakephalkar PK. 2024; Unveiling the probiotic potential of Streptococcus thermophilus MCC0200: Insights from in vitro studies corroborated with genome analysis. Microorganisms. 12:347

48.

Karakus E, Proksch AL, Moritz A, Geyer J. 2024; Quantitative bile acid profiling in healthy adult dogs and pups from serum, plasma, urine, and feces using LC-MS/MS. Front Vet Sci. 11:1380920

49.

Kashani A, Sallam T, Bheemreddy S, Mann DL, Wang Y, Foody JM. 2008; Review of side-effect profile of combination ezetimibe and statin therapy in randomized clinical trials. Am J Cardiol. 101:1606-1613

50.

Kaya Y, Kök MŞ, Öztürk M. 2017; Molecular cloning, expression and characterization of bile salt hydrolase from Lactobacillus rhamnosus E9 strain. Food Biotechnol. 31:128-140

51.

Kim GB, Lee BH. 2005; Biochemical and molecular insights into bile salt hydrolase in the gastrointestinal microflora: A review. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci. 18:1505-1512

52.

Kim GB, Miyamoto CM, Meighen EA, Lee BH. 2004a; Cloning and characterization of the bile salt hydrolase genes (BSH) from Bifidobacterium bifidum strains. Appl Environ Microbiol. 70:5603-5612

53.

Kim GB, Yi SH, Lee BH. 2004b; Purification and characterization of three different types of bile salt hydrolases from Bifidobacterium strains. J Dairy Sci. 87:258-266

54.

Kuhajda K, Kandrac J, Kevresan S, Mikov M, Fawcett JP. 2006; Structure and origin of bile acids: An overview. Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet. 31:135-143

55.

Kumar R, Grover S, Batish VK. 2012; Bile salt hydrolase (BSH) activity screening of Lactobacilli: In vitro selection of indigenous Lactobacillus strains with potential bile salt hydrolysing and cholesterol-lowering ability. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins. 4:162-172

56.

Kumar R, Rajkumar H, Kumar M, Varikuti SR, Athimamula R, Shujauddin M, Ramagoni R, Kondapalli N. 2013; Molecular cloning, characterization and heterologous expression of bile salt hydrolase (BSH) from Lactobacillus fermentum NCDO394. Mol Biol Rep. 40:5057-5066

57.

Kumar RS, Brannigan JA, Prabhune AA, Pundle AV, Dodson GG, Dodson EJ, Suresh CG. 2006; Structural and functional analysis of a conjugated bile salt hydrolase from Bifidobacterium longum reveals an evolutionary relationship with penicillin V acylase. J Biol Chem. 281:32516-32525

58.

Kusada H, Arita M, Tohno M, Tamaki H. 2022a; Bile salt hydrolase degrades β-lactam antibiotics and confers antibiotic resistance on Lactobacillus paragasseri. Front Microbiol. 13:858263

59.

Kusada H, Arita M, Tohno M, Tamaki H. 2022b; Isolation of a highly thermostable bile salt hydrolase with broad substrate specificity from Lactobacillus paragasseri. Front Microbiol. 13:810872

60.

Lambert JM, Bongers RS, de Vos WM, Kleerebezem M. 2008; Functional analysis of four bile salt hydrolase and penicillin acylase family members in Lactobacillus plantarum WCFS1. Appl Environ Microbiol. 74:4719-4726

61.

Larabi AB, Masson HLP, Bäumler AJ. 2023; Bile acids as modulators of gut microbiota composition and function. Gut Microbes. 15:2172671

62.

Li C, Ji Q, He T, Liu Y, Ma Y. 2021; Characterization of a recombinant bile salt hydrolase (BSH) from Bifidobacterium bifidum for its glycine-conjugated bile salts specificity. Biocatal Biotransform. 39:61-70

63.

Li CY, Wang HN, He RJ, Huang J, Song LL, Song YQ, Huo PC, Hou J, Ji G, Ge GB. 2022; Discovery and characterization of amentoflavone as a naturally occurring inhibitor against the bile salt hydrolase produced by Lactobacillus salivarius. Food Funct. 13:3318-3328

64.

Li J, Dawson PA. 2019; Animal models to study bile acid metabolism. Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Basis Dis. 1865:895-911

65.

Li T, Chiang JYL. 2020; Bile acid metabolism in health and disease: An update. In The liver: Biology and pathobiology. 6th ed In: Arias IM, Alter HJ, Boyer JL, Cohen DE, Shafritz DA, Thorgeirsson SS, Wolkoff AW, editors.edJohn Wiley & Sons. Hoboken, NJ, USA: pp p. 271-278.

66.

Lin J. 2014; Antibiotic growth promoters enhance animal production by targeting intestinal bile salt hydrolase and its producers. Front Microbiol. 5:33

67.

Lin J, Negga R, Zeng X, Smith K. 2014; Effect of bile salt hydrolase inhibitors on a bile salt hydrolase from Lactobacillus acidophilus. Pathogens. 3:947-956

68.

Liong MT, Shah NP. 2005; Bile salt deconjugation ability, bile salt hydrolase activity and cholesterol co-precipitation ability of Lactobacilli strains. Int Dairy J. 15:391-398

69.

Liu Y, Zheng S, Cui J, Guo T, Zhang J. 2021; Effect of bile salt hydrolase-active Lactobacillus plantarum Y15 on high cholesterol diet induced hypercholesterolemic mice. CyTA J Food. 19:408-417

70.

Maldonado-Valderrama J, Wilde P, Macierzanka A, Mackie A. 2011; The role of bile salts in digestion. Adv Colloid Interface Sci. 165:36-46

71.

Mann GV, Spoerry A. 1974; Studies of a surfactant and cholesteremia in the maasai. Am J Clin Nutr. 27:464-469

72.

Martyniak A, Medyńska-Przęczek A, Wędrychowicz A, Skoczeń S, Tomasik PJ. 2021; Prebiotics, probiotics, synbiotics, paraprobiotics and postbiotic compounds in IBD. Biomolecules. 11:1903

73.

Mercenier A, Pavan S, Pot B. 2003; Probiotics as biotherapeutic agents: Present knowledge and future prospects. Curr Pharm Des. 9:175-191

74.

Morinaga K, Kusada H, Tamaki H. 2022; Bile salt hydrolases with extended substrate specificity confer a high level of resistance to bile toxicity on Atopobiaceae bacteria. Int J Mol Sci. 23:10980

75.

Moser SA, Savage DC. 2001; Bile salt hydrolase activity and resistance to toxicity of conjugated bile salts are unrelated properties in Lactobacilli. Appl Environ Microbiol. 67:3476-3480

76.

Naumann S, Haller D, Eisner P, Schweiggert-Weisz U. 2020; Mechanisms of interactions between bile acids and plant compounds: A review. Int J Mol Sci. 21:6495

77.

Negga R. 2015 Bile salt hydrolase: A microbiome target for enhanced animal health. M.S. thesis. Tennessee Univ. Knoxville, TN, USA: .

78.

Oberg TS, McMahon DJ, Culumber MD, McAuliffe O, Oberg CJ. 2022; Invited review: Review of taxonomic changes in dairy-related lactobacilli. J Dairy Sci. 105:2750-2770

79.

O’Flaherty S, Briner Crawley A, Theriot CM, Barrangou R. 2018 The Lactobacillus bile salt hydrolase repertoire reveals niche-specific adaptation. mSphere. 3e00140-18

80.

Oh HK, Lee JY, Lim SJ, Kim MJ, Kim GB, Kim JH, Hong SK, Kang DK. 2008; Molecular cloning and characterization of a bile salt hydrolase from Lactobacillus acidophilus PF01. J Microbiol Biotechnol. 18:449-456.

81.

Ooi LG, Liong MT. 2010; Cholesterol-lowering effects of probiotics and prebiotics: A review of in vivo and in vitro findings. Int J Mol Sci. 11:2499-2522

82.

Perez MJ, Briz O. 2009; Bile-acid-induced cell injury and protection. World J Gastroenterol. 15:1677-1689

83.

Perry JA, Westman EL, Wright GD. 2014; The antibiotic resistome: What’s new?. Curr Opin Microbiol. 21:45-50

84.

Rabin B, Nicolosi RJ, Hayes KC. 1976; Dietary influence on bile acid conjugation in the cat. J Nutr. 106:1241-1246

85.

Rani RP, Anandharaj M, Ravindran AD. 2017; Characterization of bile salt hydrolase from Lactobacillus gasseri FR4 and demonstration of its substrate specificity and inhibitory mechanism using molecular docking analysis. Front Microbiol. 8:1004

86.

Redinger RN. 2003; The coming of age of our understanding of the enterohepatic circulation of bile salts. Am J Surg. 185:168-172

87.

Reid G, Jass J, Sebulsky MT, Mccormick JK. 2003; Potential uses of probiotics in clinical practice. Clin Microbiol Rev. 16:658-672

88.

Ru X, Zhang CC, Yuan YH, Yue TL, Guo CF. 2019; Bile salt hydrolase activity is present in nonintestinal lactic acid bacteria at an intermediate level. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 103:893-902

89.

Sanders ME, Klaenhammer TR. 2001; Invited review: The scientific basis of Lactobacillus acidophilus NCFM functionality as a probiotic. J Dairy Sci. 84:319-331

90.

Schuster H. 2004; Improving lipid management: To titrate, combine or switch. Int J Clin Pract. 58:689-694

91.

Sivamaruthi BS, Kesika P, Chaiyasut C. 2019; A mini-review of human studies on cholesterol-lowering properties of probiotics. Sci Pharm. 87:26

92.

Sobotka H, Czeczowiczka N. 1958; The gelation of bile salt solutions. J Colloid Sci. 13:188-191

93.

Song Z, Cai Y, Lao X, Wang X, Lin X, Cui Y, Kalavagunta PK, Liao J, Jin L, Shang J, Li J. 2019; Taxonomic profiling and populational patterns of bacterial bile salt hydrolase (BSH) genes based on worldwide human gut microbiome. Microbiome. 7:1-16

94.

Spínello P, do Nascimento P, da Silveira VC, Staudt T, Omidian H, Tissiani AC, Bertol CD. 2024; In vitro development of enteric-coated tablets of the probiotic Lactobacillus fermentum LF-G89: A possible approach to intestinal colonization. Recent Adv Drug Deliv Formul. 18:131-137

95.

Stellwag EJ, Hylemon PB. 1976; Purification and characterization of bile salt hydrolase from Bacteroides fragilis subsp. fragilis. Biochim Biophys Acta Enzymol. 452:165-176

96.

Sun L, Zhang Y, Cai J, Rimal B, Rocha ER, Coleman JP, Zhang C, Nichols RG, Luo Y, Kim B, Chen Y, Krausz KW, Harris CC, Patterson AD, Zhang Z, Takahashi S, Gonzalez FJ. 2023; Bile salt hydrolase in non-enterotoxigenic bacteroides potentiates colorectal cancer. Nat Commun. 14:755

97.

Sunder AV, Utari PD, Ramasamy S, van Merkerk R, Quax W, Pundle A. 2017; Penicillin V acylases from gram-negative bacteria degrade n-acylhomoserine lactones and attenuate virulence in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 101:2383-2395

98.

Suresh CG, Pundle AV, Sivaraman H, Rao KN, Brannigan JA, McVey CE, Verma CS, Dauter Z, Dodson EJ, Dodson GG. 1999; Penicillin V acylase crystal structure reveals new Ntn-hydrolase family members. Nat Struct Biol. 6:414-416

99.

Tagliacozzi D, Mozzi AF, Casetta B, Bertucci P, Bernardini S, Ilio CD, Urbani A, Federici G. 2003; Quantitative analysis of bile acids in human plasma by liquid chromatography-electrospray tandem mass spectrometry: A simple and rapid one-step method. Clin Chem Lab Med. 41:1633-1641

100.

Takahashi T, Morotomi M. 1994; Absence of cholic acid 7α-dehydroxylase activity in the strains of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium. J Dairy Sci. 77:3275-3286

101.

Tanaka H, Hashiba H, Kok J, Mierau I. 2000; Bile salt hydrolase of Bifidobacterium longum: Biochemical and genetic characterization. Appl Environ Microbiol. 66:2502-2512

102.

Taranto MP, de Llano G, De Valdez FG. 2000; Inhibition of Listeria monocytogenes by lactic acid bacteria with bile salt hydrolase activity. Milchwissenschaft. 55:22-24.

103.

Thakare R, Alamoudi JA, Gautam N, Rodrigues AD, Alnouti Y. 2018; Species differences in bile acids I. Plasma and urine bile acid composition. J Appl Toxicol. 38:1323-1335

104.

Trivedi HD, Puranik PK. 2017; Colon targeted delivery system (CODESTM): Propitious approach in targeting colon. World J Pharm Pharm Sci. 6:768-789

105.

Tuohy KM, Probert HM, Smejkal CW, Gibson GR. 2003; Using probiotics and prebiotics to improve gut health. Drug Discov Today. 8:692-700

106.

Urdaneta V, Casadesús J. 2017; Interactions between bacteria and bile salts in the gastrointestinal and hepatobiliary tracts. Front Med. 4:163

107.

Vessey DA. 1978; The biochemical basis for the conjugation of bile acids with either glycine or taurine. Biochem J. 174:621-626

108.

Wang Z, Zeng X, Mo Y, Smith K, Guo Y, Lin J. 2012; Identification and characterization of a bile salt hydrolase from Lactobacillus salivarius for development of novel alternatives to antibiotic growth promoters. Appl Environ Microbiol. 78:8795-8802

109.

Woo AYM, Aguilar Ramos MA, Narayan R, Richards-Corke KC, Wang ML, Sandoval-Espinola WJ, Balskus EP. 2023; Targeting the human gut microbiome with small-molecule inhibitors. Nat Rev Chem. 7:319-339

110.

Yamamura R, Inoue KY, Nishino K, Yamasaki S. 2023; Intestinal and fecal pH in human health. Front Microbiomes. 2:1192316

111.

Yang P, Zhao J, Wang H, Li L, Ma Y. 2020; Effects of vitamin forms and levels on vitamin bioavailability and growth performance in piglets. Appl Sci. 10:4903

112.

Yang Y, Liu Y, Zhou S, Huang L, Chen Y, Huan H. 2019; Bile salt hydrolase can improve Lactobacillus plantarum survival in gastrointestinal tract by enhancing their adhesion ability. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 366fnz100

113.

Zhang WY, Wu RN, Sun ZH, Sun TS, Meng H, Zhang HP. 2009; Molecular cloning and characterization of bile salt hydrolase in Lactobacillus casei zhang. Ann Microbiol. 59:721-726

114.

Zhang Z, Zhou H, Zhou X, Sun J, Liang X, Lv Y, Bai L, Zhang J, Gong P, Liu T. 2021; Lactobacillus casei YRL577 ameliorates markers of non-alcoholic fatty liver and alters expression of genes within the intestinal bile acid pathway. Br J Nutr. 125:521-529

115.

Zhao M, Kuang W, Yang J, Liu Y, Yang M, Chen Y, Zhu H, Yang Y. 2024; Cholesterol lowering in diet-induced hypercholesterolemic mice using Lactobacillus bile salt hydrolases with different substrate specificities. Food Funct. 15:1340-1354

116.

Zhong X, Liu Y, Gao X, Krausz KW, Niu B, Gonzalez FJ, Xie C. 2023; Caffeic acid phenethyl ester suppresses intestinal FXR signaling and ameliorates nonalcoholic fatty liver disease by inhibiting bacterial bile salt hydrolase activity. Acta Pharmacol Sin. 44:145-156

117.

Zhu H, Zhao F, Zhang W, Xia W, Chen Y, Liu Y, Fan Z, Zhang Y, Yang Y. 2022; Cholesterol-lowering effect of bile salt hydrolase from a Lactobacillus johnsonii strain mediated by FXR pathway regulation. Food Funct. 13:725-736