食品工业科技

种类	菌株编号	模拟胃液处理存活率（%）		模拟肠液处理存活率（%）
发酵粘液乳杆菌（Limosilactobacillus fermentum）	YTJ1-2	94.84±0.01^a		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
YTM1-2	77.90±0.24^abc		11.18±0.19^c	0.16±0.00^e
TXK2-3	50.36±0.06^bcde		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
TXJ2-5	61.51±0.14^abcdef		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
TBK1-3	37.75±0.03^efg		0.03±0.00^c	<0.001^e
TPK2-0	43.78±0.06^cdefg		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
YTJ1-5	76.71±0.28^abcd		0.09±0.00^c	0.06±0.00^e
TXJ2-6	80.23±0.11^ab		38.31±0.03^ab	<0.001^e
TKJ1-1	71.59±0.29^abcde		35.14±0.03^ab	0.94±0.00^e
TBK1-5	34.78±0.02^fg		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
TXJ2-4	90.72±0.06^a		52.51±0.16^a	30.85±0.02^a
类消化伴生乳杆菌（Companilactobacillus paralimentarius）	HLB2-4	74.66±0.10^abcd		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
短乳杆菌（Levilactobacillus brevis）	TBK1-4	0.68±0.00^h		0.06±0.00^c	<0.001^e
MTB1-5	87.37±0.18^a		41.75±0.07^ab	31.07±0.04^a
植物乳植杆菌（Lactiplantibacillus plantarum）	THB1-1	63.19±0.05^abcdef		48.75±0.05^a	38.15±0.03^a
HLB2-3	93.30±0.06^a		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
类布氏迟缓乳杆菌（Lentilactobacillus parabuchneri）	TXK2-2	32.47±0.05^fgh		7.07±0.04^c	0.17±0.00^e
嗜酸乳杆菌（Lactobacillus acidophilus）	HZK2-4	76.08±0.11^abcd		35.51±0.01^ab	32.61±0.00^a
副干酪乳酪杆菌（Lacticaseibacillus paracasei）	YTJ1-4	45.70±0.10^bcdefg		45.15±0.09^a	20.07±0.04^b
TXJ2-1	63.99±0.21^abcdef		30.03±0.16^b	12.67±0.02^c
TKJ1-0	41.45±0.06^defg		5.29±0.05^c	5.05±0.03^d

种类

菌株编号

模拟胃液处理存活率（%）

模拟肠液处理存活率（%）

3 h

4 h

8 h

发酵粘液乳杆菌
（Limosilactobacillus fermentum）

YTJ1-2

94.84±0.01^a

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

YTM1-2

77.90±0.24^abc

11.18±0.19^c

0.16±0.00^e

TXK2-3

50.36±0.06^bcde

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

TXJ2-5

61.51±0.14^abcdef

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

TBK1-3

37.75±0.03^efg

0.03±0.00^c

<0.001^e

TPK2-0

43.78±0.06^cdefg

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

YTJ1-5

76.71±0.28^abcd

0.09±0.00^c

0.06±0.00^e

TXJ2-6

80.23±0.11^ab

38.31±0.03^ab

<0.001^e

TKJ1-1

71.59±0.29^abcde

35.14±0.03^ab

0.94±0.00^e

TBK1-5

34.78±0.02^fg

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

TXJ2-4

90.72±0.06^a

52.51±0.16^a

30.85±0.02^a

类消化伴生乳杆菌
（Companilactobacillus paralimentarius）

HLB2-4

74.66±0.10^abcd

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

短乳杆菌
（Levilactobacillus brevis）

TBK1-4

0.68±0.00^h

0.06±0.00^c

<0.001^e

MTB1-5

87.37±0.18^a

41.75±0.07^ab

31.07±0.04^a

植物乳植杆菌
（Lactiplantibacillus plantarum）

THB1-1

63.19±0.05^abcdef

48.75±0.05^a

38.15±0.03^a

HLB2-3

93.30±0.06^a

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

类布氏迟缓乳杆菌
（Lentilactobacillus parabuchneri）

TXK2-2

32.47±0.05^fgh

7.07±0.04^c

0.17±0.00^e

嗜酸乳杆菌
（Lactobacillus acidophilus）

HZK2-4

76.08±0.11^abcd

35.51±0.01^ab

32.61±0.00^a

副干酪乳酪杆菌
（Lacticaseibacillus paracasei）

YTJ1-4

45.70±0.10^bcdefg

45.15±0.09^a

20.07±0.04^b

TXJ2-1

63.99±0.21^abcdef

30.03±0.16^b

12.67±0.02^c

TKJ1-0

41.45±0.06^defg

5.29±0.05^c

5.05±0.03^d

种类	菌株编号	模拟胃液处理存活率（%）		模拟肠液处理存活率（%）
发酵粘液乳杆菌（Limosilactobacillus fermentum）	YTJ1-2	94.84±0.01^a		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
YTM1-2	77.90±0.24^abc		11.18±0.19^c	0.16±0.00^e
TXK2-3	50.36±0.06^bcde		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
TXJ2-5	61.51±0.14^abcdef		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
TBK1-3	37.75±0.03^efg		0.03±0.00^c	<0.001^e
TPK2-0	43.78±0.06^cdefg		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
YTJ1-5	76.71±0.28^abcd		0.09±0.00^c	0.06±0.00^e
TXJ2-6	80.23±0.11^ab		38.31±0.03^ab	<0.001^e
TKJ1-1	71.59±0.29^abcde		35.14±0.03^ab	0.94±0.00^e
TBK1-5	34.78±0.02^fg		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
TXJ2-4	90.72±0.06^a		52.51±0.16^a	30.85±0.02^a
类消化伴生乳杆菌（Companilactobacillus paralimentarius）	HLB2-4	74.66±0.10^abcd		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
短乳杆菌（Levilactobacillus brevis）	TBK1-4	0.68±0.00^h		0.06±0.00^c	<0.001^e
MTB1-5	87.37±0.18^a		41.75±0.07^ab	31.07±0.04^a
植物乳植杆菌（Lactiplantibacillus plantarum）	THB1-1	63.19±0.05^abcdef		48.75±0.05^a	38.15±0.03^a
HLB2-3	93.30±0.06^a		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
类布氏迟缓乳杆菌（Lentilactobacillus parabuchneri）	TXK2-2	32.47±0.05^fgh		7.07±0.04^c	0.17±0.00^e
嗜酸乳杆菌（Lactobacillus acidophilus）	HZK2-4	76.08±0.11^abcd		35.51±0.01^ab	32.61±0.00^a
副干酪乳酪杆菌（Lacticaseibacillus paracasei）	YTJ1-4	45.70±0.10^bcdefg		45.15±0.09^a	20.07±0.04^b
TXJ2-1	63.99±0.21^abcdef		30.03±0.16^b	12.67±0.02^c
TKJ1-0	41.45±0.06^defg		5.29±0.05^c	5.05±0.03^d

种类

菌株编号

模拟胃液处理存活率（%）

模拟肠液处理存活率（%）

3 h

4 h

8 h

发酵粘液乳杆菌
（Limosilactobacillus fermentum）

YTJ1-2

94.84±0.01^a

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

YTM1-2

77.90±0.24^abc

11.18±0.19^c

0.16±0.00^e

TXK2-3

50.36±0.06^bcde

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

TXJ2-5

61.51±0.14^abcdef

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

TBK1-3

37.75±0.03^efg

0.03±0.00^c

<0.001^e

TPK2-0

43.78±0.06^cdefg

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

YTJ1-5

76.71±0.28^abcd

0.09±0.00^c

0.06±0.00^e

TXJ2-6

80.23±0.11^ab

38.31±0.03^ab

<0.001^e

TKJ1-1

71.59±0.29^abcde

35.14±0.03^ab

0.94±0.00^e

TBK1-5

34.78±0.02^fg

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

TXJ2-4

90.72±0.06^a

52.51±0.16^a

30.85±0.02^a

类消化伴生乳杆菌
（Companilactobacillus paralimentarius）

HLB2-4

74.66±0.10^abcd

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

短乳杆菌
（Levilactobacillus brevis）

TBK1-4

0.68±0.00^h

0.06±0.00^c

<0.001^e

MTB1-5

87.37±0.18^a

41.75±0.07^ab

31.07±0.04^a

植物乳植杆菌
（Lactiplantibacillus plantarum）

THB1-1

63.19±0.05^abcdef

48.75±0.05^a

38.15±0.03^a

HLB2-3

93.30±0.06^a

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

类布氏迟缓乳杆菌
（Lentilactobacillus parabuchneri）

TXK2-2

32.47±0.05^fgh

7.07±0.04^c

0.17±0.00^e

嗜酸乳杆菌
（Lactobacillus acidophilus）

HZK2-4

76.08±0.11^abcd

35.51±0.01^ab

32.61±0.00^a

副干酪乳酪杆菌
（Lacticaseibacillus paracasei）

YTJ1-4

45.70±0.10^bcdefg

45.15±0.09^a

20.07±0.04^b

TXJ2-1

63.99±0.21^abcdef

30.03±0.16^b

12.67±0.02^c

TKJ1-0

41.45±0.06^defg

5.29±0.05^c

5.05±0.03^d

指标	成分
超氧阴离子自由基清除率	0.301	0.681	0.128	−0.323
DPPH自由基清除率	0.666	−0.042	−0.305	0.197
羟自由基清除率	0.713	0.102	0.128	0.305
3 h胃液处理	0.17	0.582	0.542	0.24
4 h肠液处理	0.751	0.38	0.197	−0.094
8 h肠液处理	0.793	0.448	−0.12	−0.039
大肠杆菌ATCC 25922	0.792	0.166	−0.467	−0.051
金黄色葡萄球菌ATCC 25923	0.836	−0.373	0.122	−0.019
枯草芽孢杆菌ATCC 6633	0.603	−0.325	0.032	0.304
白色念珠球菌ATCC 14053	0.355	0.111	0.754	0.348
蜡样芽孢杆菌ATCC 11778	0.799	−0.433	0.186	−0.029
铜绿假单胞菌ATCC 15442	0.722	−0.338	0.035	−0.18
鼠伤寒沙门氏菌ATCC 14028	0.668	−0.352	−0.437	0.035
单核增生李斯特菌ATCC 19115	0.306	0.66	0.033	−0.432
自聚性	0.092	0.692	−0.578	0.222
疏水性	−0.277	0.336	−0.246	0.721
特征值	5.865	2.898	1.897	1.312
方差贡献率（%）	36.658	18.113	11.858	8.199
累计贡献率（%）	36.658	54.771	66.629	74.828

指标

成分

超氧阴离子自由基清除率

0.301

0.681

0.128

−0.323

DPPH自由基清除率

0.666

−0.042

−0.305

0.197

羟自由基清除率

0.713

0.102

0.128

0.305

3 h胃液处理

0.17

0.582

0.542

0.24

4 h肠液处理

0.751

0.38

0.197

−0.094

8 h肠液处理

0.793

0.448

−0.12

−0.039

大肠杆菌ATCC 25922

0.792

0.166

−0.467

−0.051

金黄色葡萄球菌ATCC 25923

0.836

−0.373

0.122

−0.019

枯草芽孢杆菌ATCC 6633

0.603

−0.325

0.032

0.304

白色念珠球菌ATCC 14053

0.355

0.111

0.754

0.348

蜡样芽孢杆菌ATCC 11778

0.799

−0.433

0.186

−0.029

铜绿假单胞菌ATCC 15442

0.722

−0.338

0.035

−0.18

鼠伤寒沙门氏菌ATCC 14028

0.668

−0.352

−0.437

0.035

单核增生李斯特菌ATCC 19115

0.306

0.66

0.033

−0.432

自聚性

0.092

0.692

−0.578

0.222

疏水性

−0.277

0.336

−0.246

0.721

特征值

5.865

2.898

1.897

1.312

方差贡献率（%）

36.658

18.113

11.858

8.199

累计贡献率（%）

36.658

54.771

66.629

74.828

指标	成分
超氧阴离子自由基清除率	0.301	0.681	0.128	−0.323
DPPH自由基清除率	0.666	−0.042	−0.305	0.197
羟自由基清除率	0.713	0.102	0.128	0.305
3 h胃液处理	0.17	0.582	0.542	0.24
4 h肠液处理	0.751	0.38	0.197	−0.094
8 h肠液处理	0.793	0.448	−0.12	−0.039
大肠杆菌ATCC 25922	0.792	0.166	−0.467	−0.051
金黄色葡萄球菌ATCC 25923	0.836	−0.373	0.122	−0.019
枯草芽孢杆菌ATCC 6633	0.603	−0.325	0.032	0.304
白色念珠球菌ATCC 14053	0.355	0.111	0.754	0.348
蜡样芽孢杆菌ATCC 11778	0.799	−0.433	0.186	−0.029
铜绿假单胞菌ATCC 15442	0.722	−0.338	0.035	−0.18
鼠伤寒沙门氏菌ATCC 14028	0.668	−0.352	−0.437	0.035
单核增生李斯特菌ATCC 19115	0.306	0.66	0.033	−0.432
自聚性	0.092	0.692	−0.578	0.222
疏水性	−0.277	0.336	−0.246	0.721
特征值	5.865	2.898	1.897	1.312
方差贡献率（%）	36.658	18.113	11.858	8.199
累计贡献率（%）	36.658	54.771	66.629	74.828

指标

成分

超氧阴离子自由基清除率

0.301

0.681

0.128

−0.323

DPPH自由基清除率

0.666

−0.042

−0.305

0.197

羟自由基清除率

0.713

0.102

0.128

0.305

3 h胃液处理

0.17

0.582

0.542

0.24

4 h肠液处理

0.751

0.38

0.197

−0.094

8 h肠液处理

0.793

0.448

−0.12

−0.039

大肠杆菌ATCC 25922

0.792

0.166

−0.467

−0.051

金黄色葡萄球菌ATCC 25923

0.836

−0.373

0.122

−0.019

枯草芽孢杆菌ATCC 6633

0.603

−0.325

0.032

0.304

白色念珠球菌ATCC 14053

0.355

0.111

0.754

0.348

蜡样芽孢杆菌ATCC 11778

0.799

−0.433

0.186

−0.029

铜绿假单胞菌ATCC 15442

0.722

−0.338

0.035

−0.18

鼠伤寒沙门氏菌ATCC 14028

0.668

−0.352

−0.437

0.035

单核增生李斯特菌ATCC 19115

0.306

0.66

0.033

−0.432

自聚性

0.092

0.692

−0.578

0.222

疏水性

−0.277

0.336

−0.246

0.721

特征值

5.865

2.898

1.897

1.312

方差贡献率（%）

36.658

18.113

11.858

8.199

累计贡献率（%）

36.658

54.771

66.629

74.828

菌株编号	F1	F2	F3	F4	F	排名
THB1-1	17.27088671	−6.632896227	3.553937669	1.505148994	5.684202007	1
YTJ1-4	16.15881967	−5.309639193	2.641468846	0.122771031	5.293644143	2
HZK2-4	15.92708305	−5.856978841	1.943309524	2.401729006	5.213321922	3
TXJ2-4	16.19348615	−6.216680912	1.57167889	1.717313463	5.145639662	4
TXJ2-1	15.98975121	−7.027928206	2.504383058	1.898386	5.049872925	5
MTB1-5	13.33816756	−4.812729715	4.040425852	1.139557573	4.598257815	6
HLB2-3	10.68823086	−3.533196703	8.008441177	3.213253987	4.499563451	7
TKJ1-1	11.29057689	−3.85627063	7.409119417	1.162898229	4.422699602	8
YTJ1-5	12.55915515	−5.088474895	2.992692305	1.992957847	4.207748911	9
TXJ2-5	12.36142089	−8.376576361	4.322148119	6.037065112	4.029856112	10
YTJ1-2	11.91350162	−4.768901117	2.349699726	2.369208695	3.982973371	11
TPK2-0	12.5711146	−8.698995594	3.590482859	6.011172045	3.959264423	12
TXJ2-6	12.01155854	−8.274659124	4.614867594	5.97405379	3.949570336	13
TXK2-2	9.448186406	−2.11126432	3.484556244	4.081910449	3.834724419	14
TBK1-3	12.18011409	−8.029976488	2.572617436	5.800100856	3.798425873	15
YTM1-2	11.9310453	−3.790809979	1.964247248	−2.705967835	3.704413078	16
TXK2-3	12.54853665	−5.87899292	−2.632314777	−2.485985549	3.024118958	17
TKJ1-0	14.02866522	−9.901472286	−4.683845529	1.755136937	2.942897264	18
TBK1-5	11.76733676	−9.058136578	−2.545725935	2.259336633	2.561414089	19
TBK1-4	11.16235263	−4.826504952	−3.223479867	−3.571798435	2.546504444	20
HLB2-4	2.105597791	3.808212677	−2.142442888	−4.360923176	0.84949448	21

菌株编号

排名

THB1-1

17.27088671

−6.632896227

3.553937669

1.505148994

5.684202007

YTJ1-4

16.15881967

−5.309639193

2.641468846

0.122771031

5.293644143

HZK2-4

15.92708305

−5.856978841

1.943309524

2.401729006

5.213321922

TXJ2-4

16.19348615

−6.216680912

1.57167889

1.717313463

5.145639662

TXJ2-1

15.98975121

−7.027928206

2.504383058

1.898386

5.049872925

MTB1-5

13.33816756

−4.812729715

4.040425852

1.139557573

4.598257815

HLB2-3

10.68823086

−3.533196703

8.008441177

3.213253987

4.499563451

TKJ1-1

11.29057689

−3.85627063

7.409119417

1.162898229

4.422699602

YTJ1-5

12.55915515

−5.088474895

2.992692305

1.992957847

4.207748911

TXJ2-5

12.36142089

−8.376576361

4.322148119

6.037065112

4.029856112

YTJ1-2

11.91350162

−4.768901117

2.349699726

2.369208695

3.982973371

TPK2-0

12.5711146

−8.698995594

3.590482859

6.011172045

3.959264423

TXJ2-6

12.01155854

−8.274659124

4.614867594

5.97405379

3.949570336

TXK2-2

9.448186406

−2.11126432

3.484556244

4.081910449

3.834724419

TBK1-3

12.18011409

−8.029976488

2.572617436

5.800100856

3.798425873

YTM1-2

11.9310453

−3.790809979

1.964247248

−2.705967835

3.704413078

TXK2-3

12.54853665

−5.87899292

−2.632314777

−2.485985549

3.024118958

TKJ1-0

14.02866522

−9.901472286

−4.683845529

1.755136937

2.942897264

TBK1-5

11.76733676

−9.058136578

−2.545725935

2.259336633

2.561414089

TBK1-4

11.16235263

−4.826504952

−3.223479867

−3.571798435

2.546504444

HLB2-4

2.105597791

3.808212677

−2.142442888

−4.360923176

0.84949448

菌株编号	F1	F2	F3	F4	F	排名
THB1-1	17.27088671	−6.632896227	3.553937669	1.505148994	5.684202007	1
YTJ1-4	16.15881967	−5.309639193	2.641468846	0.122771031	5.293644143	2
HZK2-4	15.92708305	−5.856978841	1.943309524	2.401729006	5.213321922	3
TXJ2-4	16.19348615	−6.216680912	1.57167889	1.717313463	5.145639662	4
TXJ2-1	15.98975121	−7.027928206	2.504383058	1.898386	5.049872925	5
MTB1-5	13.33816756	−4.812729715	4.040425852	1.139557573	4.598257815	6
HLB2-3	10.68823086	−3.533196703	8.008441177	3.213253987	4.499563451	7
TKJ1-1	11.29057689	−3.85627063	7.409119417	1.162898229	4.422699602	8
YTJ1-5	12.55915515	−5.088474895	2.992692305	1.992957847	4.207748911	9
TXJ2-5	12.36142089	−8.376576361	4.322148119	6.037065112	4.029856112	10
YTJ1-2	11.91350162	−4.768901117	2.349699726	2.369208695	3.982973371	11
TPK2-0	12.5711146	−8.698995594	3.590482859	6.011172045	3.959264423	12
TXJ2-6	12.01155854	−8.274659124	4.614867594	5.97405379	3.949570336	13
TXK2-2	9.448186406	−2.11126432	3.484556244	4.081910449	3.834724419	14
TBK1-3	12.18011409	−8.029976488	2.572617436	5.800100856	3.798425873	15
YTM1-2	11.9310453	−3.790809979	1.964247248	−2.705967835	3.704413078	16
TXK2-3	12.54853665	−5.87899292	−2.632314777	−2.485985549	3.024118958	17
TKJ1-0	14.02866522	−9.901472286	−4.683845529	1.755136937	2.942897264	18
TBK1-5	11.76733676	−9.058136578	−2.545725935	2.259336633	2.561414089	19
TBK1-4	11.16235263	−4.826504952	−3.223479867	−3.571798435	2.546504444	20
HLB2-4	2.105597791	3.808212677	−2.142442888	−4.360923176	0.84949448	21

菌株编号

排名

THB1-1

17.27088671

−6.632896227

3.553937669

1.505148994

5.684202007

YTJ1-4

16.15881967

−5.309639193

2.641468846

0.122771031

5.293644143

HZK2-4

15.92708305

−5.856978841

1.943309524

2.401729006

5.213321922

TXJ2-4

16.19348615

−6.216680912

1.57167889

1.717313463

5.145639662

TXJ2-1

15.98975121

−7.027928206

2.504383058

1.898386

5.049872925

MTB1-5

13.33816756

−4.812729715

4.040425852

1.139557573

4.598257815

HLB2-3

10.68823086

−3.533196703

8.008441177

3.213253987

4.499563451

TKJ1-1

11.29057689

−3.85627063

7.409119417

1.162898229

4.422699602

YTJ1-5

12.55915515

−5.088474895

2.992692305

1.992957847

4.207748911

TXJ2-5

12.36142089

−8.376576361

4.322148119

6.037065112

4.029856112

YTJ1-2

11.91350162

−4.768901117

2.349699726

2.369208695

3.982973371

TPK2-0

12.5711146

−8.698995594

3.590482859

6.011172045

3.959264423

TXJ2-6

12.01155854

−8.274659124

4.614867594

5.97405379

3.949570336

TXK2-2

9.448186406

−2.11126432

3.484556244

4.081910449

3.834724419

TBK1-3

12.18011409

−8.029976488

2.572617436

5.800100856

3.798425873

YTM1-2

11.9310453

−3.790809979

1.964247248

−2.705967835

3.704413078

TXK2-3

12.54853665

−5.87899292

−2.632314777

−2.485985549

3.024118958

TKJ1-0

14.02866522

−9.901472286

−4.683845529

1.755136937

2.942897264

TBK1-5

11.76733676

−9.058136578

−2.545725935

2.259336633

2.561414089

TBK1-4

11.16235263

−4.826504952

−3.223479867

−3.571798435

2.546504444

HLB2-4

2.105597791

3.808212677

−2.142442888

−4.360923176

0.84949448

新疆传统谷物发酵饮料中乳酸菌的分离鉴定及其益生特性分析

PDF下载

赵志霞 , 罗峻渲 , 朱涵予 , 张健 , 张婷 ^* , 康峰 ^*

食品工业科技 | 生物工程 2026,47(11): 226-235

收起

食品工业科技 |生物工程 2026 , 47 (11) : 226 -235

新疆传统谷物发酵饮料中乳酸菌的分离鉴定及其益生特性分析

全屏

[Author(id=1320167154071225103, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, orderNo=0, firstName=null, middleName=null, lastName=null, nameCn=null, orcid=null, stid=null, country=null, authorPic=null, dead=0, email=997600907@qq.com, emailSecond=null, emailThird=null, correspondingAuthor=0, authorType=1, ext={EN=AuthorExt(id=1320167155736363793, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, authorId=1320167154071225103, language=EN, stringName=Zhixia ZHAO, firstName=Zhixia, middleName=null, lastName=ZHAO, prefix=null, suffix=null, authorComment=null, nameInitials=null, affiliation=null, department=null, xref=null, address=Institute of Agro-products Processing, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Xinjiang Agricultural and Sideline Products Deep Processing Engineering Technology Centre, Urumqi 830091, China, bio=null, bioImg=null, bioContent=null, aboutCorrespAuthor=null), CN=AuthorExt(id=1320167155807666962, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, authorId=1320167154071225103, language=CN, stringName=赵志霞, firstName=null, middleName=null, lastName=null, prefix=null, suffix=null, authorComment=null, nameInitials=null, affiliation=null, department=null, xref=null, address=新疆维吾尔自治区农业科学院农产品加工研究所，新疆农副产品精深加工工程技术研究中心，新疆乌鲁木齐 830091, bio={"content":"

赵志霞（1991−），女，硕士，助理研究员，研究方向：食品微生物，E-mail：997600907@qq.com

"}, bioImg=null, bioContent=

赵志霞（1991−），女，硕士，助理研究员，研究方向：食品微生物，E-mail：997600907@qq.com

, aboutCorrespAuthor=null)}, companyList=[AuthorCompany(id=1320167153861509899, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, xref=null, ext=[AuthorCompanyExt(id=1320167153869898508, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, companyId=1320167153861509899, language=EN, country=null, province=null, city=null, postcode=null, companyName=null, departmentName=null, remark=Institute of Agro-products Processing, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Xinjiang Agricultural and Sideline Products Deep Processing Engineering Technology Centre, Urumqi 830091, China), AuthorCompanyExt(id=1320167153878287117, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, companyId=1320167153861509899, language=CN, country=null, province=null, city=null, postcode=null, companyName=null, departmentName=null, remark=新疆维吾尔自治区农业科学院农产品加工研究所，新疆农副产品精深加工工程技术研究中心，新疆乌鲁木齐 830091)])]), Author(id=1320167156017382164, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, orderNo=1, firstName=null, middleName=null, lastName=null, nameCn=null, orcid=null, stid=null, country=null, authorPic=null, dead=0, email=null, emailSecond=null, emailThird=null, correspondingAuthor=0, authorType=1, ext={EN=AuthorExt(id=1320167156097073942, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, authorId=1320167156017382164, language=EN, stringName=Junxuan LUO, firstName=Junxuan, middleName=null, lastName=LUO, prefix=null, suffix=null, authorComment=null, nameInitials=null, affiliation=null, department=null, xref=null, address=Institute of Agro-products Processing, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Xinjiang Agricultural and Sideline Products Deep Processing Engineering Technology Centre, Urumqi 830091, China, bio=null, bioImg=null, bioContent=null, aboutCorrespAuthor=null), CN=AuthorExt(id=1320167156185154327, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, authorId=1320167156017382164, language=CN, stringName=罗峻渲, firstName=null, middleName=null, lastName=null, prefix=null, suffix=null, authorComment=null, nameInitials=null, affiliation=null, department=null, xref=null, address=新疆维吾尔自治区农业科学院农产品加工研究所，新疆农副产品精深加工工程技术研究中心，新疆乌鲁木齐 830091, bio=null, bioImg=null, bioContent=null, aboutCorrespAuthor=null)}, companyList=[AuthorCompany(id=1320167153861509899, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, xref=null, ext=[AuthorCompanyExt(id=1320167153869898508, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, companyId=1320167153861509899, language=EN, country=null, province=null, city=null, postcode=null, companyName=null, departmentName=null, remark=Institute of Agro-products Processing, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Xinjiang Agricultural and Sideline Products Deep Processing Engineering Technology Centre, Urumqi 830091, China), AuthorCompanyExt(id=1320167153878287117, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, companyId=1320167153861509899, language=CN, country=null, province=null, city=null, postcode=null, companyName=null, departmentName=null, remark=新疆维吾尔自治区农业科学院农产品加工研究所，新疆农副产品精深加工工程技术研究中心，新疆乌鲁木齐 830091)])]), Author(id=1320167156243874585, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, orderNo=2, firstName=null, middleName=null, lastName=null, nameCn=null, orcid=null, stid=null, country=null, authorPic=null, dead=0, email=null, emailSecond=null, emailThird=null, correspondingAuthor=0, authorType=1, ext={EN=AuthorExt(id=1320167156302594843, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, authorId=1320167156243874585, language=EN, stringName=Hanyu ZHU, firstName=Hanyu, middleName=null, lastName=ZHU, prefix=null, suffix=null, authorComment=null, nameInitials=null, affiliation=null, department=null, xref=null, address=Institute of Agro-products Processing, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Xinjiang Agricultural and Sideline Products Deep Processing Engineering Technology Centre, Urumqi 830091, China, bio=null, bioImg=null, bioContent=null, aboutCorrespAuthor=null), CN=AuthorExt(id=1320167156436812572, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, authorId=1320167156243874585, language=CN, stringName=朱涵予, firstName=null, middleName=null, lastName=null, prefix=null, suffix=null, authorComment=null, nameInitials=null, affiliation=null, department=null, xref=null, address=新疆维吾尔自治区农业科学院农产品加工研究所，新疆农副产品精深加工工程技术研究中心，新疆乌鲁木齐 830091, bio=null, bioImg=null, bioContent=null, aboutCorrespAuthor=null)}, companyList=[AuthorCompany(id=1320167153861509899, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, xref=null, ext=[AuthorCompanyExt(id=1320167153869898508, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, companyId=1320167153861509899, language=EN, country=null, province=null, city=null, postcode=null, companyName=null, departmentName=null, remark=Institute of Agro-products Processing, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Xinjiang Agricultural and Sideline Products Deep Processing Engineering Technology Centre, Urumqi 830091, China), AuthorCompanyExt(id=1320167153878287117, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, companyId=1320167153861509899, language=CN, country=null, province=null, city=null, postcode=null, companyName=null, departmentName=null, remark=新疆维吾尔自治区农业科学院农产品加工研究所，新疆农副产品精深加工工程技术研究中心，新疆乌鲁木齐 830091)])]), Author(id=1320167156491338526, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, orderNo=3, firstName=null, middleName=null, lastName=null, nameCn=null, orcid=null, stid=null, country=null, authorPic=null, dead=0, email=null, emailSecond=null, emailThird=null, correspondingAuthor=0, authorType=1, ext={EN=AuthorExt(id=1320167156562641696, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, authorId=1320167156491338526, language=EN, stringName=Jian ZHANG, firstName=Jian, middleName=null, lastName=ZHANG, prefix=null, suffix=null, authorComment=null, nameInitials=null, affiliation=null, department=null, xref=null, address=Institute of Agro-products Processing, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Xinjiang Agricultural and Sideline Products Deep Processing Engineering Technology Centre, Urumqi 830091, China, bio=null, bioImg=null, bioContent=null, aboutCorrespAuthor=null), CN=AuthorExt(id=1320167156621361953, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, authorId=1320167156491338526, language=CN, stringName=张健, firstName=null, middleName=null, lastName=null, prefix=null, suffix=null, authorComment=null, nameInitials=null, affiliation=null, department=null, xref=null, address=新疆维吾尔自治区农业科学院农产品加工研究所，新疆农副产品精深加工工程技术研究中心，新疆乌鲁木齐 830091, bio=null, bioImg=null, bioContent=null, aboutCorrespAuthor=null)}, companyList=[AuthorCompany(id=1320167153861509899, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, xref=null, ext=[AuthorCompanyExt(id=1320167153869898508, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, companyId=1320167153861509899, language=EN, country=null, province=null, city=null, postcode=null, companyName=null, departmentName=null, remark=Institute of Agro-products Processing, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Xinjiang Agricultural and Sideline Products Deep Processing Engineering Technology Centre, Urumqi 830091, China), AuthorCompanyExt(id=1320167153878287117, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, companyId=1320167153861509899, language=CN, country=null, province=null, city=null, postcode=null, companyName=null, departmentName=null, remark=新疆维吾尔自治区农业科学院农产品加工研究所，新疆农副产品精深加工工程技术研究中心，新疆乌鲁木齐 830091)])]), Author(id=1320167156688470819, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, orderNo=4, firstName=null, middleName=null, lastName=null, nameCn=null, orcid=null, stid=null, country=null, authorPic=null, dead=0, email=zhangtingkikie@163.com, emailSecond=null, emailThird=null, correspondingAuthor=1, authorType=1, ext={EN=AuthorExt(id=1320167156768162597, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, authorId=1320167156688470819, language=EN, stringName=Ting ZHANG, firstName=Ting, middleName=null, lastName=ZHANG, prefix=null, suffix=null, authorComment=null, nameInitials=null, affiliation=null, department=null, xref=^*, address=Institute of Agro-products Processing, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Xinjiang Agricultural and Sideline Products Deep Processing Engineering Technology Centre, Urumqi 830091, China, bio=null, bioImg=null, bioContent=null, aboutCorrespAuthor=null), CN=AuthorExt(id=1320167156877214502, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, authorId=1320167156688470819, language=CN, stringName=张婷, firstName=null, middleName=null, lastName=null, prefix=null, suffix=null, authorComment=null, nameInitials=null, affiliation=null, department=null, xref=^*, address=新疆维吾尔自治区农业科学院农产品加工研究所，新疆农副产品精深加工工程技术研究中心，新疆乌鲁木齐 830091, bio=null, bioImg=null, bioContent=null, aboutCorrespAuthor=null)}, companyList=[AuthorCompany(id=1320167153861509899, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, xref=null, ext=[AuthorCompanyExt(id=1320167153869898508, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, companyId=1320167153861509899, language=EN, country=null, province=null, city=null, postcode=null, companyName=null, departmentName=null, remark=Institute of Agro-products Processing, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Xinjiang Agricultural and Sideline Products Deep Processing Engineering Technology Centre, Urumqi 830091, China), AuthorCompanyExt(id=1320167153878287117, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, companyId=1320167153861509899, language=CN, country=null, province=null, city=null, postcode=null, companyName=null, departmentName=null, remark=新疆维吾尔自治区农业科学院农产品加工研究所，新疆农副产品精深加工工程技术研究中心，新疆乌鲁木齐 830091)])]), Author(id=1320167156935934760, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, orderNo=5, firstName=null, middleName=null, lastName=null, nameCn=null, orcid=null, stid=null, country=null, authorPic=null, dead=0, email=3454372224@qq.com, emailSecond=null, emailThird=null, correspondingAuthor=1, authorType=1, ext={EN=AuthorExt(id=1320167157011432234, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, authorId=1320167156935934760, language=EN, stringName=Feng KANG, firstName=Feng, middleName=null, lastName=KANG, prefix=null, suffix=null, authorComment=null, nameInitials=null, affiliation=null, department=null, xref=^*, address=Institute of Agro-products Processing, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Xinjiang Agricultural and Sideline Products Deep Processing Engineering Technology Centre, Urumqi 830091, China, bio=null, bioImg=null, bioContent=null, aboutCorrespAuthor=null), CN=AuthorExt(id=1320167157082735403, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, authorId=1320167156935934760, language=CN, stringName=康峰, firstName=null, middleName=null, lastName=null, prefix=null, suffix=null, authorComment=null, nameInitials=null, affiliation=null, department=null, xref=^*, address=新疆维吾尔自治区农业科学院农产品加工研究所，新疆农副产品精深加工工程技术研究中心，新疆乌鲁木齐 830091, bio=null, bioImg=null, bioContent=null, aboutCorrespAuthor=null)}, companyList=[AuthorCompany(id=1320167153861509899, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, xref=null, ext=[AuthorCompanyExt(id=1320167153869898508, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, companyId=1320167153861509899, language=EN, country=null, province=null, city=null, postcode=null, companyName=null, departmentName=null, remark=Institute of Agro-products Processing, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Xinjiang Agricultural and Sideline Products Deep Processing Engineering Technology Centre, Urumqi 830091, China), AuthorCompanyExt(id=1320167153878287117, tenantId=1146029695717560320, journalId=1260987677001138203, articleId=1320166415760475074, companyId=1320167153861509899, language=CN, country=null, province=null, city=null, postcode=null, companyName=null, departmentName=null, remark=新疆维吾尔自治区农业科学院农产品加工研究所，新疆农副产品精深加工工程技术研究中心，新疆乌鲁木齐 830091)])])]

赵志霞, 罗峻渲, 朱涵予, 张健, 张婷^*, 康峰^*

作者信息

新疆维吾尔自治区农业科学院农产品加工研究所，新疆农副产品精深加工工程技术研究中心，新疆乌鲁木齐 830091

通讯作者:

张婷（1980−），女，博士，研究员，研究方向：农产品加工，E-mail：zhangtingkikie@163.com。

康峰（1974−），男，本科，农艺师，研究方向：谷物加工，E-mail：3454372224@qq.com。

作者简介:

赵志霞（1991−），女，硕士，助理研究员，研究方向：食品微生物，E-mail：997600907@qq.com

Isolation, Identification, and Probiotic Characterization of Lactic Acid Bacteria from Traditional Cereal-fermented Beverages in Xinjiang

Zhixia ZHAO, Junxuan LUO, Hanyu ZHU, Jian ZHANG, Ting ZHANG^*, Feng KANG^*

Affiliations

Institute of Agro-products Processing, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Xinjiang Agricultural and Sideline Products Deep Processing Engineering Technology Centre, Urumqi 830091, China

出版时间: 2026-06-01 doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2025060194

文章导航

摘要

收起

本研究从新疆传统谷物发酵饮料中分离鉴定乳酸菌（lactic acid bacteria），进而对其体外益生特性进行研究，旨在探索新疆传统谷物发酵饮料中的潜在益生乳酸菌资源。本研究采用Rep-PCR结合16S rRNA基因测序技术从12份新疆传统谷物发酵饮料中分离出7个种21株乳酸菌，其中发酵粘液乳杆菌（Limosilactobacillus fermentum）为优势菌种，其次为副干酪乳酪杆菌（Lacticaseibacillus paracasei）。21株乳酸菌均表现出抗氧化活性，尤其在对超氧阴离子自由基清除能力方面表现优异；除类消化伴生乳杆菌（Companilactobacillus paralimentarius）HLB2-4外，其余菌株至少对6种致病菌具有抑菌活性，抑菌谱广；经模拟胃液3 h和模拟肠液8 h连续处理后，7株菌表现出强耐受性，其中植物乳植杆菌（Lactiplantibacillus plantarum）THB1-1存活率最高达38.15%；21株乳酸菌的疏水率范围为7.36%~76.46%，自聚率（4 h）为4.62%~67.09%，不同菌株间疏水性和自凝聚性均存在显著差异（P<0.05）。基于以上体外益生特性研究，通过主成分分析（PCA）和聚类分析方法筛选出副干酪乳酪杆菌YTJ1-4、TXJ2-1，发酵粘液乳杆菌TXJ2-4，嗜酸乳杆菌（Lactobacillus acidophilus）HZK2-4，植物乳植杆菌THB1-1和短乳杆菌（Levilactobacillus brevis）MTB1-5共6株作为潜在益生菌菌株，为新疆传统发酵饮料中益生菌的开发利用及其工业化应用奠定工作基础。

关键词

传统谷物发酵饮料 / 乳酸菌 / 分离鉴定 / 益生特性 / 主成分分析

Abstract

收起

The aim of this study was to explore potential probiotic resources in traditional cereal-fermented beverages in Xinjiang. To this end, strains of lactic acid bacteria were isolated from traditional cereal-fermented beverages and their probiotic properties were characterized. Repetitive polymerase chain reaction profiles and 16S rRNA gene sequencing identified 21 isolates of lactic acid bacteria in seven species from 12 traditional cereal-fermented beverages. Limosilactobacillus fermentum was the dominant species, followed by Lacticaseibacillus paracasei. All 21 strains of lactic acid bacteria had antioxidant activity, with particularly strong scavenging of superoxide anion radicals. In terms of antibacterial ability, all strains, except Companilactobacillus paralimentarius HLB2-4, effectively inhibited the development of at least six pathogenic bacteria, demonstrating broad-spectrum antibacterial activity. After continuous treatment with simulated gastric fluid for 3 h and simulated intestinal fluid for 8 h, seven strains had strong tolerance, with Lactiplantibacillus plantarum THB1-1 having the highest survival rate (38.15%). The hydrophobicity of the 21 strains ranged from 7.36% to 76.46%, and their auto-aggregation rates after 4 h ranged from 4.62% to 67.09%. There were significant differences in hydrophobicity and auto-aggregation among the strains (P<0.05). These results were used as inputs for principal component analysis and clustering analysis, which showed that six strains, Lactobacillus paracasei YTJ1-4, TXJ2-1, Limosilactobacillus fermentum TXJ2-4, Lactobacillus acidophilus HZK2-4, Lactiplantibacillus plantarum THB1-1, and Levilactobacillus brevis MTB1-5 were the most promising probiotics. This study lays the groundwork for the development, utilisation, and industrial application of probiotics from traditional cereal-fermented beverages in Xinjiang.

Key words

traditional cereal-fermented beverages / lactic acid bacteria / isolation and identification / probiotic characteristics / principal component analysis

引用本文

赵志霞, 罗峻渲, 朱涵予, 张健, 张婷, 康峰. 新疆传统谷物发酵饮料中乳酸菌的分离鉴定及其益生特性分析. 食品工业科技, 2026 , 47 (11) : 226 -235 . DOI: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2025060194

Zhixia ZHAO, Junxuan LUO, Hanyu ZHU, Jian ZHANG, Ting ZHANG, Feng KANG. Isolation, Identification, and Probiotic Characterization of Lactic Acid Bacteria from Traditional Cereal-fermented Beverages in Xinjiang[J]. Science and Technology of Food Industry, 2026 , 47 (11) : 226 -235 . DOI: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2025060194

正文

收起

新疆谷物资源丰富，且其独特的区位优势、地域特色和饮食文化，形成了具有民族地域特色的传统谷物发酵饮料，其中比较有代表性的为格瓦斯、波杂、玛格孜木等^[1−2]。它们通常是以大麦、玉米和糜子等一种或几种谷物为原料，经自然发酵而成的一类高酸度、低酒精的谷物发酵食品，在当地颇受欢迎，已被作为清凉解暑及具有保健功能的佳品^[3]。新疆传统谷物发酵饮料中蕴藏着丰富的微生物，因其原辅料、生产工艺、气候环境和地区差异等不同诱导产生了不同类型和代谢特征的微生物群^[3−4]。乳酸菌（lactic acid bacteria，LAB）是新疆传统谷物发酵饮料中的优势菌群^[5]。在谷物发酵过程中，LAB不仅能代谢产生多种有机酸和抗菌肽显著抑制腐败菌和致病菌的增殖，从而改善谷物发酵食品的风味、质地和安全性^[6]，而且其特有的抗氧化活性可减少人体在摄入谷物发酵食品过程中肠道内活性氧的积累，降低机体氧化应激水平^[7]，对谷物发酵食品营养品质的提升起着关键作用。

益生菌指摄入足够量时，可为宿主带来健康益处的活性微生物^[8]，具有极高的研究价值。LAB通常被归类为GRAS（Generally Recognized As Safe）微生物，是常见的益生菌^[9]。LAB能够耐受胃肠消化环境，并黏附或定殖于肠道表面，抑制病原微生物生长，调整胃肠道菌群平衡，进而改善宿主内部环境，对促进人体健康有着至关重要的作用^[10]。研究显示，传统谷物发酵食品是益生乳酸菌的良好来源^[11]。Meena等^[12]从印度土著居民制作的Makka ki Raab、Olia等传统谷物发酵食品中筛选出6株潜在益生乳酸菌菌株，其中1株Lactiplantibacillus plantarum KMUDR7表现出优异的体外益生特性；Xu等^[13]从酸面团及米酒等中国传统谷物发酵食品中筛选出3株具有高产淀粉酶活力的Lactiplantibacillus plantarum，进一步通过体外益生特性实验发现3株Lactiplantibacillus plantarum可作为潜在益生候选菌株；Akweya等^[14]从肯尼亚25份不同类型传统谷物发酵食品中筛选益生乳酸菌，结果筛选出5株耐酸耐胆盐能力强且具有安全性的潜在益生乳酸菌；Fan等^[15]从中国传统白酒谷物发酵酒糟中筛选出Levilactobacillus brevis OP2881585、Weissella cibaria OP288150和Pediococcus acidilactici OP288151等5株具有良好益生特性的乳酸菌。

新疆传统谷物发酵饮料独特的自然发酵体系及区域性特色基质，为益生乳酸菌资源的开发提供了丰富的来源。基于此，本研究以伊犁、巴州和塔城等新疆不同地区格瓦斯、波杂以及玛格孜木等12个传统谷物发酵饮料为研究试材，对其中乳酸菌进行分离鉴定，在此基础上，开展其抗氧化性、抑菌活性、胃肠耐受性及表面特性（疏水性和自聚性）等体外益生特性研究，综合分析并筛选其中潜在益生乳酸菌，以期为新疆传统谷物发酵饮料中益生菌资源的开发及工业化应用奠定工作基础。

1　材料与方法

收起

1.1　材料与仪器

12份新疆传统谷物发酵饮料样品　采集自新疆伊犁、巴州和塔城等地区的不同县市，均为当地少数民族采用传统发酵工艺制作的特色饮品，包括玛格孜木、波杂以及格瓦斯等。采集样品时手戴无菌手套从发酵容器中取成熟发酵液10~15 mL于无菌管中，随即用封口膜封口，放入4 ℃车载冰箱，并于24 h内运回实验室；大肠杆菌Escherichia coli（ATCC 25922）、鼠伤寒沙门氏菌Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica serovar TypHimurium（ATCC 14028）、单核增生李斯特氏菌Listeria monocytogenes（ATCC 19115）、金黄色葡萄球菌Staphylococcus aureus （ATCC 25923）、白色念珠菌Candida albicans （ATCC 14053）、枯草芽孢杆菌Bacillus subtilis （ATCC 6633）、蜡样芽孢杆菌Bacillus cereus （ATCC 11778）、铜绿假单胞菌Pseudomonas aeruginosa （ATCC 15442）　以上菌株均由新疆维吾尔自治区农业科学院提供；分菌培养基为含有0.01%放线菌酮的MRS5^[15]、改良的MRS（添加了0.5% L-半胱氨酸）、M17培养基；LB培养基用于培养ATCC 25922、ATCC 25923和ATCC 6633；NB培养基用于培养ATCC 14028和ATCC 11778；PDA培养基用于培养ATCC 14053；BHIA培养基用于培养ATCC 19115；TSB培养基用于培养ATCC 15442；细菌基因组DNA提取试剂盒　北京天根生化科技有限公司；PCR Master Mix、ddH₂O、Marker　南京诺唯赞生物科技股份有限公司；PCR引物　生工生物工程（上海）股份有限公司合成。

E200厌氧工作站　美国GENE SCIENCE公司；HRT16M高速台式冷冻离心机　湖南赫西仪器装备有限公司；UV-1800紫外分光光度计　上海美普达仪器有限公司；T1OS基因扩增仪　杭州朗基科学仪器有限公司；DYY-6D电泳仪、WD-9413B凝胶成像系统　北京六一生物科技有限公司。

1.2　实验方法

1.2.1　乳酸菌的分离鉴定

从采集管中吸取1 mL传统谷物发酵饮料样品于9 mL无菌生理盐水中，使用漩涡仪充分混匀，吸取上述液体100 μL梯度稀释至10²、10³、10⁴，吸取100 μL各稀释液于三种分菌培养基中进行涂布，涂布好的平皿置于厌氧工作站中37 ℃下微氧（2% O₂，10% CO₂和88% N₂）^[16]培养48 h，挑取菌落大小、形态、颜色等不同的单菌落连续转接划线培养3次直至同一平皿菌落形态一致。部分纯培养物进行革兰氏染色和过氧化氢酶实验，初步筛选得到疑似乳酸菌菌株。另一部分纯培养物于6 mL MRS液体培养基中37 ℃低氧培养36 h，用于后续菌种保藏及DNA提取鉴定。

使用细菌基因组DNA提取试剂盒提取DNA，于−20 ℃保存。参照Versalovic等^[17]的方法，采用单引物（GTG）₅（5’-GTGGTGGTGGTGGTG-3’）对分离菌株DNA进行基因分型。PCR扩增产物经1.5%（w/v）的琼脂糖凝胶在0.5×TAE Buffer中，80 V/cm电压下电泳检测1.2 h。电泳结束后，在紫外凝胶成像仪中观察电泳结果。DNA带型完全一致的菌株通常被认为属于同一物种，可据此将分离所得菌株归为若干种系型，并从每组中选取2~3株代表菌株作16S rRNA基因测序分析。采用扩增引物27F（5’-AGAGTTTGATCCTGGCTCAG-3’）和1510R（5’-ACGGTTACCTTGTTACGACTT-3’）^[18]进行16S rRNA基因的PCR扩增。所有反应在25 μL体系中进行，包括：PCR Master Mix 11.5 μL，引物各0.5 μL，DNA模板1 μL，ddH₂O 11.5 μL。扩增条件：95 ℃预变性5 min；30次循环（94 ℃变性30 s，60 ℃复性40 s，72 ℃延伸1 min）最后72 ℃延伸7 min。PCR产物纯化后，由上海生工生物工程股份有限公司测序，测序结果提交到GenBank数据库中，序列同源性分析利用BLAST在线进行。在MAGE7.0软件中构建系统发育树。

1.2.2　乳酸菌抗氧化能力测定

将乳酸菌以2%的接种量接种于MRS培养液中，37 ℃微氧条件下培养24 h，在4 ℃下以8500 r/min离心10 min，取上清液并用0.22 μm亲水性滤膜过滤，制得无细胞培养上清液（cell-free culture supernatant，CFCS）。

1.2.2.1　羟自由基清除能力测定

羟自由基清除能力测定参照Shi等^[19]的方法，稍有改动。将1 mL 0.75 mmol/L 1,10-邻菲咯啉溶液、1 mL 0.75 mmol/L FeSO₄溶液、1.5 mL 0.15 mol/L磷酸盐缓冲溶液（pH7.4）和1 mL 0.01% H₂O₂溶液混匀后，立即加入1 mL CFCS溶液，将混合物在37 ℃下反应30 min，测定536 nm波长处的吸光度。根据式（1）计算羟自由基清除率：

$ 羟自由基 \text{清除率}\left({\text{%}}\right)=\frac{{\mathrm{A}}_{\text{test}}-{\mathrm{A}}_{0}}{{\mathrm{A}}_{1}-{\mathrm{A}}_{0}}\times 100$

(1)

式中：A_test为CFCS和混合液反应后的吸光度；A₀为MRS代替CFCS反应后的吸光度；A₁为MRS代替CFCS和H₂O₂溶液反应后的吸光度。

1.2.2.2　DPPH自由基清除能力测定

DPPH自由基清除能力测定参照Łepecka等^[20]的方法，将l mL 0.2 mmol/L DPPH甲醇溶液和0.8 mL CFCS混合均匀，黑暗条件下反应30 min，在517 nm波长处测定吸光度。根据式（2）计算DPPH自由基清除率：

$ \text{DPPH自由基清除率}\left({\text{%}}\right)=\frac{{\mathrm{A}}_{0}-{\mathrm{A}}_{\text{test}}}{{\mathrm{A}}_{0}}\times 100$

(2)

式中：A_test为含有CFCS混合液反应后的吸光度；A₀为MRS代替CFCS反应后的吸光度。

1.2.2.3　超氧阴离子自由基清除能力测定

超氧阴离子自由基清除能力测定参照Gao等^[21]的方法，略有改动。将0.8 mL CFCS和0.2 mL 0.1 mol/L Tris-HCl缓冲液（pH8.0）混合均匀，在320 nm波长下测定吸光度。随后向混合液中加入0.1 mL 3 mmol/L焦性没食子酸溶液，再次在320 nm波长下测定吸光度。根据式（3）计算超氧阴离子自由基清除率：

$ 超氧阴离子自由基清除率\left({\text{%}}\right)=\left(1-\frac{{\mathrm{A}}_{\mathrm{test}1}-{\mathrm{A}}_{\mathrm{test}2}}{{\mathrm{A}}_{0}}\right)\times 100 $

(3)

式中：A_test1为加入焦性没食子酸溶液的吸光度；A_test2为未加入焦性没食子酸溶液的吸光度；A₀为不含CFCS溶液的吸光度。

1.2.3　乳酸菌抑菌能力

采用牛津杯法^[15]测定分离菌株对食源性致病菌的抗菌活性。将8种致病菌液体培养18 h，稀释至浓度为10⁷~10⁸ CFU/mL。取100 μL菌液均匀涂布于各自所需的固体培养基（LB、NB、BHIA及TSB培养基）上，随后在培养基表面等距离放入三个已灭菌的牛津杯（Φ 8.0 mm），向每个牛津杯中加入200 μL CFCS，以不加菌的MRS培养基作空白对照，4 ℃冰箱扩散6 h后，于37 ℃培养24 h，观察并测量抑菌圈直径。

1.2.4　体外模拟胃肠液耐受性

模拟胃液：制备含有2.05 g/L NaCl、0.6 g/L KH₂PO₄、0.37 g/L KCl和0.11 g/L CaCl₂的缓冲溶液，向其中加入3 g/L胃蛋白酶（500 U/mg），盐酸调节pH至2.5，经0.22 μm滤膜过滤除菌作为模拟胃液。模拟肠液：制备含有50.81 g/L Na₂HPO₄·7H₂O和8.5 g/L NaCl缓冲溶液，向其中加入0.1 g/L胰蛋白酶（250 U/mg）和3 g/L牛胆盐，充分溶解后用氢氧化钠调节pH至8.0，用0.22 μm滤膜过滤除菌作为模拟肠液^[22]。

乳酸菌菌株于37 ℃微氧条件下培养24 h，4 ℃下8000 r/min离心5 min，收集菌体，用无菌生理盐水（0.85% NaCl，w/v）将菌体洗涤两次，重悬于模拟胃液中使其OD_{600 nm}值为1.2，37 ℃下于200 r/min摇床中培养3 h，以模拟胃肠蠕动。在0 h和3 h分别取样，测定其活菌数。此外，收集模拟胃液中培养3 h的菌体，经生理盐水洗涤后重悬于相同体积的模拟肠液中，37 ℃下200 r/min持续振荡培养0、4和8 h，取培养不同时间后的样品并测定其活菌数。存活率计算公式如下：

$ \text{存活}\mathrm{率}\left({\text{%}}\right)=\frac{{\mathrm{T}}_{1}}{{\mathrm{T}}_{0}}\times 100$

(4)

式中：T₁为模拟胃液或肠液处理组的活菌数（CFU/mL）；T₀为模拟胃液或肠液初始时的活菌数（CFU/mL）。

1.2.5　疏水性与自聚性

通过测定分离菌株对二甲苯的黏附性来评价其疏水性^[23]。乳酸菌在MRS中过夜培养，4 ℃下6000 r/min离心10 min，弃上清液收集菌体，用无菌PBS缓冲溶液（pH7.0）洗涤两次后重悬，测定菌悬液OD_{600 nm}值A₀。取1 mL二甲苯加入3 mL乳酸菌悬液中，漩涡混合5 min，室温静置4 h，混合物分层后测定下层水相OD_{600 nm}的吸光度值，记为As。疏水率计算公式如下：

$ \text{疏水}\mathrm{率}\left({\text{%}}\right)=\left(1-\frac{{\mathrm{A}}_{\mathrm{S}}}{{\mathrm{A}}_{0}}\right)\times 100$

(5)

取4 mL上述菌悬液，振荡混匀，在37 ℃下恒温培养，4 h后从菌悬液上层取样本，并测定其OD_{600 nm}值At。自聚率计算公式如下：

$ \text{自聚率}\left({\text{%}}\right)=\left(1-\frac{{\mathrm{A}}_{\mathrm{t}}}{{\mathrm{A}}_{0}}\right)\times 100$

(6)

1.3　数据处理

每个实验平行测定3次，使用Excel 2019软件对数据进行处理，结果表示为平均值±标准差（x±s）。运用SPSS 26进行显著性分析（P<0.05），采用Origin 2022进行主成分分析（PCA）及绘图。

2　结果与分析

收起

2.1　乳酸菌的分离及鉴定

乳酸菌广泛存在于谷物发酵食品中，在提升其营养价值、感官特性和安全性方面发挥着至关重要的作用^[7]。本研究采集了12份新疆传统谷物发酵饮料样品，通过革兰氏染色、过氧化氢酶实验初步确定疑似乳酸菌共43株，如图1所示，菌株菌落形态多为白色或半透明的乳白色，边缘整齐，呈圆形突起或扁平状，表面湿润，易于挑起。如图2所示，革兰氏染色结果为紫色，所有分离菌株细胞形态呈长杆或短杆状。过氧化氢酶实验显示，所有测试菌株均呈阴性反应，表明其不具备分解过氧化氢的能力。

43株疑似乳酸菌经Rep-PCR去重后，挑选出21株代表菌株进行16S rRNA基因测序，经BLAST比对测序结果，21株菌株均为乳酸菌，分属为7个种，如图3所示，其中发酵粘液乳杆菌（Limosilactobacillus fermentum）数量最多为11株，占比达到52.38%，在新疆传统谷物发酵饮料中占绝对优势，其次为副干酪乳酪杆菌（Lacticaseibacillus paracasei）3株，占比为14.29%，短乳杆菌（Levilactobacillus brevis）和植物乳植杆菌（Lactiplantibacillus plantarum）所占比例均为9.52%，此外，分离鉴定得类布氏迟缓乳杆菌（Lentilactobacillus parabuchneri）、类消化伴生乳杆菌（Companilactobacillus paralimentarius）和嗜酸乳杆菌（Lactobacillus acidophilus）各1株，所占比例较低均为4.76%。

由于采集的新疆传统谷物发酵饮料多为自然发酵，其微生物多样性受生产环境条件和气候差异影响较大。本研究从伊犁地区源传统谷物发酵饮料中分离鉴定出的乳酸菌种类和数量最多，其次为塔城地区源传统谷物发酵饮料，从巴州地区源传统谷物发酵饮料中分离鉴定出的乳酸菌种类和数量均最少，可见伊犁地区源传统谷物发酵饮料中乳酸菌多样性最为丰富。此外，本研究从波杂样品中分离鉴定出发酵粘液乳杆菌、副干酪乳酪杆菌、植物乳植杆菌和类消化伴生乳杆菌；从格瓦斯样品中分离鉴定出发酵粘液乳杆菌、短乳杆菌、类布氏迟缓乳杆菌和嗜酸乳杆菌；从玛格孜木样品中仅分离鉴定出发酵粘液乳杆菌和短乳杆菌，通过对比可得波杂和格瓦斯乳酸菌多样性高于玛格孜木，这可能与其原辅料、加工工艺等多方面因素有关^[3]。

2.2　乳酸菌的抗氧化能力分析

氧化应激可诱导有害的细胞效应。益生菌通过加强人体的抗氧化反应和减少自由基的产生来促进抗氧化效果^[24]。此外，具有抗氧化活性的益生菌可降低膳食摄入过程中活性氧（ROS）积累的风险，并有助于预防各种疾病^[25]。因此，具有抗氧化活性的益生菌有着较高的应用潜力。本研究通过检测21株乳酸菌发酵上清液（CFCS）对超氧阴离子自由基、DPPH自由基和羟自由基的清除率来评估其抗氧化能力，结果见图4。所有菌株均显示出抗氧化能力，且不同乳酸菌菌株的抗氧化能力存在明显差异，这可能与菌株分泌的抗氧化活性物质的种类及浓度有关^[26]。

图4显示，所有乳酸菌中，除发酵粘液乳杆菌TBK1-3和TBK1-5外，其余19株乳酸菌对超氧阴离子自由基均表现出较高的清除能力，清除率均高于52%，其中发酵粘液乳杆菌TXJ2-4清除率最高，达到81.22%，其次为2株植物乳植杆菌THB1-1、HLB2-3和短乳杆菌MTB1-5，清除率分别为69.80%、69.12%和69.39%。张佳佳等^[27]研究报道内蒙古奶酪源乳酸菌对超氧阴离子自由基清除率在18.05%~36.01%之间，远低于本研究的实验结果。

21株菌株对DPPH自由基清除率在2.42%~51.82%之间，高于Łepecka等^[20]报道的酸肉源乳酸菌试验结果（1.19%~36.05%）。由图4可得，发酵粘液乳杆菌TBK1-5对DPPH自由基清除率最高，为51.82%，其次为发酵粘液乳杆菌TXJ2-4、嗜酸乳杆菌HZK2-4和植物乳植杆菌THB1-1，清除率分别为49.19%、41.61%和39.68%，类消化伴生乳杆菌HLB2-4对DPPH自由基清除率最低，为2.42%。

羟基自由基是ROS中最具反应性和破坏性的分子之一，它可引起脂质过氧化、DNA损伤和生物分子的氧化损伤^[28]。本研究中21株乳酸菌菌株对羟自由基清除率在18.72%~52.67%之间，有13株表现出比标准益生菌L. rhamnosus GG（30.5%）更强的羟基自由基清除能力^[19]。其中3株副干酪乳酪杆菌YTJ1-4、TXJ2-1和TKJ1-0对羟自由基清除能力均较强，清除率分别为40.05%、52.67%和41.27%，此外3株发酵粘液乳杆菌TXJ2-4、TBK1-3及YTJ1-2和嗜酸乳杆菌HZK2-4也表现出较强的羟自由基清除能力，清除率值均高于45%。

2.3　乳酸菌抑菌活性分析

21株乳酸菌对8种致病菌的抑菌活性如图5所示。所有菌株对致病菌Escherichia coli ATCC 25922均表现出一定的抑制能力，除类消化伴生乳杆菌HLB2-4外，其余菌株至少对6种致病菌具有抑菌活性，且对Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 25923表现出最强的抑制能力，此发现与Wang等^[29]山西谷物酸粥源乳酸菌研究结果相似。21株乳酸菌中有14株表现出较强的抗真菌活性，可有效抑制Candida albicans ATCC 14053的生长，Poon等^[30]研究发现乳酸菌可通过分泌的代谢产物抑制Candida albicans、Candida tropicalis等生物被膜及菌丝形成，从而抑制其生长。此外，3株发酵粘液乳杆菌YTJ1-2、YTJ1-5和TXJ2-4以及1株短乳杆菌MTB1-5，1株植物乳植杆菌THB1-1，1株嗜酸乳杆菌HZK2-4和2株副干酪乳酪杆菌YTJ1-4、TXJ2-1共8株乳酸菌对试验所有指示菌均具有抑菌活性，抑菌谱广，其中，副干酪乳酪杆菌YTJ1-4对Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC 15442和Listeria monocytogenes ATCC 19115的抑菌能力均强于其他7株菌，嗜酸乳杆菌HZK2-4和植物乳植杆菌THB1-1对Escherichia coli ATCC 25922、Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 25923、Bacillus subtilis ATCC 6633和Bacillus cereus ATCC 11778均具有较强的抑菌活性。与Adesulu-dahunsi等^[31]研究结果相比，本研究中乳酸菌对Listeria monocytogenes抑菌活性相对较低，但对Escherichia coli、Staphylococcus aureus和Bacillus cereus具有较高的抑菌活性。乳酸菌体外抗菌活性已被广泛研究，大部分研究表明，乳酸菌抑菌活性物质主要包括有机酸、脂肪酸、蛋白肽等，这些物质具有作为食品抗菌剂的应用潜力^[32]。

2.4　乳酸菌对人工模拟胃肠液的耐受性

益生菌需耐受胃液强酸环境（pH1.5~3.5，3 h）和胃蛋白酶的消化作用，保持活性并顺利抵达肠道^[33]，同时，肠道中的胆盐和胰蛋白酶对外源性细菌具有抑制作用^[34]，益生菌也必须对胆盐和胰蛋白酶具有高度耐受性，以维持足够数量的活菌，才能有效发挥其益生作用。因此，微生物对胃肠道环境的耐受能力评估是判断其是否具备益生潜力的关键性指标^[35]。本研究基于人体胃肠生理特征如pH、胆盐水平及食物在胃肠滞留时间等，体外模拟胃肠道环境测试分离乳酸菌菌株的胃肠耐受性能。

21株乳酸菌在模拟胃肠液中的存活率如表1所示。所有菌株经模拟胃液处理3 h后存活率有所下降，整体存活率在0.68%~94.84%之间，不同菌株对胃液耐受性存在较大差异，其中短乳杆菌TBK1-4存活率最低，发酵粘液乳杆菌YTJ1-2、TXJ2-4和植物乳植杆菌HLB2-3在模拟胃液中存活率较高，达到90%以上，此结果远高于大多数从母乳喂养婴儿肠道中分离的乳酸菌（最高存活率为70.81%）^[36]。继而经模拟肠液连续处理4 h后，所有菌株存活率明显下降，其中发酵粘液乳杆菌TXJ2-4表现出最高的存活率为52.51%，部分菌株存活率低于0.001%，如发酵粘液乳杆菌YTJ1-2和植物乳植杆菌HLB2-3等均不能耐受肠液，这可能是胆盐破坏了活细胞的膜完整性，导致了细胞死亡^[37]。经模拟肠液连续处理8 h后，所有菌株存活率达到最低，其中植物乳植杆菌THB1-1、嗜酸乳杆菌HZK2-4、短乳杆菌MTB1-5和发酵粘液乳杆菌TXJ2-4以及3株副干酪乳酪杆菌YTJ1-4、TXJ2-1和TKJ1-0共7株菌表现出较高的存活率，存活率最高达38.15%，此结果远高于李建军等^[38]对新疆和田地区人源肠道潜在益生乳酸菌的报道结果（最高存活率为8%），与Sui等^[39]报道的植物乳植杆菌NF4在模拟肠液处理4 h下存活率为36.98%结果相似。虽然低于Wang等^[29]对山西酸粥源潜在益生乳酸菌L10的报道结果（78%），但本研究中的7株乳酸菌经模拟胃肠液连续处理后活菌数均大于10⁶ CFU/mL。此外，乳酸菌对模拟胃肠液耐受性结果发现，同一个种不同菌株对胃肠耐受性存在显著差异（P<0.05），说明乳酸菌对酸或胆盐的耐受性取决于特定菌株^[40]。

2.5　乳酸菌的疏水性和自聚性分析

疏水性反映了菌株对碳氢化合物的吸附能力，可作为评估菌株在胃肠道内黏附上皮细胞潜力的重要指标^[41]。菌株疏水性与其胃肠道黏附能力呈正相关，疏水性越强，菌株越易黏附于胃肠道表面，进而发挥其益生作用^[42]。本研究不同菌株间疏水性存在明显差异。如图6（a）所示，21株乳酸菌的疏水率在7.36%~76.46%之间，其中发酵粘液乳杆菌TPK2-0、嗜酸乳杆菌HZK2-4及类消化伴生乳杆菌HLB2-4疏水率在70%以上，疏水能力较强。el Rahmane等^[35]报道了驼乳源乳酸菌对二甲苯的疏水性在0.91%~56.40%之间，低于本研究的试验结果，这可能是不同乳酸菌菌株细胞壁中疏水或亲水性成分和含量存在差异导致^[43]。

菌株自聚集性与其在胃肠道的黏附和定植能力有关^[44]。自聚集率越大，黏附性越强。由图6（b）可知，21株乳酸菌4 h的自聚率在4.62%~67.09%之间，其中类消化伴生乳杆菌HLB2-4和嗜酸乳杆菌HZK2-4的自聚集能力最强，自聚率分别为67.09%和66.67%。本研究试验结果高于Fan等^[15]报道的中国传统白酒谷物发酵酒糟源乳酸菌的自凝聚能力（2.11%~27.77%），与Wang等^[45]婴儿肠道源乳酸菌自聚集率（5%~60%）及Angmo等^[23]报道的拉达克发酵食品源乳酸菌的自聚集率（5.04%~64.78%）结果相似。

2.6　潜在益生乳酸菌筛选

Fan等^[15]采用主成分分析（PCA）方法从29株传统白酒酒糟源乳酸菌中筛选出5株益生特性较强的菌株；Sakou等^[44]通过主成分分析结合层次聚类分析方法从7株蝙蝠粪便源乳酸菌中筛选出5株潜在益生乳酸菌。本研究以抗氧化活性、抑菌特性、模拟胃肠耐受性、自聚性和疏水性共16项变量为指标，采用PCA分析方法结合层次聚类从21株乳酸菌中筛选潜在益生菌。层次聚类将21株乳酸菌菌株分为5组，如图7所示。PCA结果（表2）显示前4个主成分累计贡献率为74.828%，其中PC1、PC2、PC3和PC4的方差贡献率分别为36.658%、18.113%、11.858%和8.199%。由表2所示，肠液耐受性以及抑制6种细菌如大肠杆菌ATCC 25922、金黄色葡萄球菌ATCC 25923、枯草芽孢杆菌ATCC 6633等特性与PC1显著相关，自聚性、超氧阴离子自由基清除率、胃液耐受性及抑制单核增生李斯特菌ATCC 19115特性与PC2显著相关，抑真菌白色念珠球菌ATCC 14053特性与PC3显著相关，疏水性与PC4显著相关。PC1、PC2、PC3和PC4包含了样本的绝大部分信息，可用于后续进一步分析。根据综合评价得分函数F=0.367F1+0.181F2+0.119F3+0.082F4可计算出不同乳酸菌体外益生特性的综合得分及其排序，其中F值越大，表明乳酸菌的体外益生特性越高，结果如表3所示，所有菌株中，植物乳植杆菌THB1-1综合得分最高，表明其具有最高的体外益生特性。结合层次聚类结果综合来看，21株乳酸菌中2株副干酪乳酪杆菌YTJ1-4、TXJ2-1，1株发酵粘液乳杆菌TXJ2-4和1株嗜酸乳杆菌HZK2-4，1株植物乳植杆菌THB1-1及1株短乳杆菌MTB1-5共6株乳酸菌聚为一组，表明它们具有相似的益生特性，且6株菌F值均较大，排名位于1~6之间，与其他乳酸菌相比显示出较高的益生特性，可作为潜在益生菌候选菌株。

3　结论

收起

大量研究表明，传统谷物发酵食品富集了以乳酸菌为主的功能性微生物，是益生菌的天然载体。本研究从12份新疆传统谷物发酵饮料中分离鉴定出21株乳酸菌，并对其进行益生特性（抗氧化活性、抑菌特性、模拟胃肠耐受性、疏水性和自聚性）试验，最终通过主成分分析（PCA）结合层次聚类分析方法，筛选出副干酪乳酪杆菌YTJ1-4、TXJ2-1，发酵粘液乳杆菌TXJ2-4，嗜酸乳杆菌HZK2-4，植物乳植杆菌THB1-1和短乳杆菌MTB1-5共6株益生潜力较强的菌株，为新疆传统发酵饮料中益生菌资源的开发应用奠定前期基础，但以上候选益生菌株是否能用于后期实际生产尚需进一步的体内试验以确定其安全性和特异性。

参考文献

收起

文献

收起

参考文献引证文献

排序方式：

WANG Panpan, WU Jiaqi, WANG Tao, et al. Fermentation process optimization, chemical analysis, and storage stability evaluation of a probiotic barley malt kvass[J]. Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering, 2022, 45(7): 1175−1188.

RASHEED H A, TUOHETI T, ZHANG Y Z, et al. Purification and partial characterization of a novel bacteriocin produced by bacteriocinogenic Lactobacillus fermentum BZ532 isolated from Chinese fermented cereal beverage (Bozai)[J]. LWT, 2020, 124: 109113.

刘亚男, 高雁, 杨奕凡, 等. 新疆不同民族传统谷物发酵饮料中乳酸菌分离鉴定及发酵性能比较[J]. 中国酿造, 2024, 43(10): 109−117. [LIU Yanan, GAO Yan, YANG Yifan, et al. Isolation, identification and fermentation performance comparison of lactic acid bacteria in traditional fermented grain beverage from different ethnic groups in Xinjiang[J]. China Brewing, 2024, 43(10): 109−117.]

LIU Yanan, GAO Yan, YANG Yifan, et al. Isolation, identification and fermentation performance comparison of lactic acid bacteria in traditional fermented grain beverage from different ethnic groups in Xinjiang[J]. China Brewing, 2024, 43（10）: 109−117.

AILA R, SABURJIANG A, ALIM A, et al. Screening and fermentation characteristics of excellent boza strain[J]. Journal of Food and Nutrition Research, 2020, 8: 160−167.

阿特尔古丽·沙布尔江. 新疆波杂中优良发酵菌种选育及其发酵工艺的优化[D]. 乌鲁木齐: 新疆农业大学, 2017. [ATEERGULI S. Selection of excellent fermentation strains and optimization of fermentation process of Boza in Xinjiang[D]. Urumqi: Xinjiang Agricultural University, 2017.]

ATEERGULI S. Selection of excellent fermentation strains and optimization of fermentation process of Boza in Xinjiang[D]. Urumqi: Xinjiang Agricultural University, 2017.

ASHAOLU T J, KHALIFA I, MESAK M A, et al. A comprehensive review of the role of microorganisms on texture change, flavor and biogenic amines formation in fermented meat with their action mechanisms and safety[J]. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 2023, 63(19): 3538−3555.

PETROVA P, PETROV K. Lactic acid fermentation of cereals and pseudocereals: Ancient nutritional biotechnologies with modern applications[J]. Nutrients, 2020, 12(4): 1118.

FAO/WHO. Evaluation of health and nutritional properties of powder milk and live lactic acid bacteria[J]. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and World Health Organization Expert Consultation Report, 2001: 1-34.

HAKIM B N A, XUAN N J, OSLAN S N H. A comprehensive review of bioactive compounds from lactic acid bacteria: Potential functions as functional food in dietetics and the food industry[J]. Foods, 2023, 12(15): 2850.

LAU L Y J, QUEK S Y. Probiotics: Health benefits, food application, and colonization in the human gastrointestinal tract[J]. Food Bioengineering, 2024, 3(1): 41−64.

SHUMYE G T, ADMASSU E S, OKOMO A S, et al. Unveiling the potential of African fermented cereal-based beverages: Probiotics, functional drinks, health benefits and bioactive components[J]. Food Research International, 2024, 191: 114656.

MEENA K K, TANEJA N K, JAIN D, et al. In vitro assessment of probiotic and technological properties of lactic acid bacteria isolated from indigenously fermented cereal-based food products[J]. Fermentation, 2022, 8(10): 529.

XU Yihan, ZHOU Tao, TANG Huiqin, et al. Probiotic potential and amylolytic properties of lactic acid bacteria isolated from Chinese fermented cereal foods[J]. Food Control, 2020, 111: 107057.

AKWEYA B A, MGHALU J M, YUSUF R U M, et al. Isolation, biochemical characterization and safety screening of potential probiotic lactic acid bacteria from spontaneously fermented cereal products from Western Kenya[J]. African Journal of Microbiology Research, 2022, 16(4): 160−166.

FAN S, XUE T, BAI B, et al. Probiotic properties including the antioxidant and hypoglycemic ability of lactic acid bacteria from fermented grains of Chinese Baijiu[J]. Foods, 2022, 11(21): 3476.

MEROTH C B, WALTER J, HERTEL C, et al. Monitoring the bacterial population dynamics in sourdough fermentation processes by using PCR-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis[J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2003, 69(1): 475−482.

VERSALOVIC J, SCHNEIDER M, de BRUIJN F J, et al. Genomic fingerprinting of bacteria using repetitive sequence-based polymerase chain reaction[J]. Methods in Molecular and Cellular Biology, 1994, 5: 25−40.

PINO A, RUSSO N, SOLIERI L, et al. Microbial consortia involved in traditional Sicilian sourdough: Characterization of lactic acid bacteria and yeast populations[J]. Microorganisms, 2022, 10(2): 283.

SHI Yunjia, CUI Xingyang, GU Shanshan, et al. Antioxidative and probiotic activities of lactic acid bacteria isolated from traditional artisanal milk cheese from Northeast China[J]. Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins, 2019, 11(4): 1086−1099.

ŁEPECKA A, SZYMAŃSKI P, OKOŃ A, et al. Antioxidant activity of environmental lactic acid bacteria strains isolated from organic raw fermented meat products[J]. LWT, 2023, 174: 114440.

GAO D, GAO Z R, ZHU G H. Antioxidant effects of Lactobacillus plantarum via activation of transcription factor Nrf2[J]. Food & Function, 2013, 4(6): 982−989.

RASHMI B S, GAYATHRI D. Molecular characterization of gluten hydrolysing Bacillus sp. and their efficacy and biotherapeutic potential as probiotics using Caco-2 cell line[J]. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 2017, 123(3): 759−772.

ANGMO K, KUMARI A, SAVITRI, et al. Probiotic characterization of lactic acid bacteria isolated from fermented foods and beverage of Ladakh[J]. LWT-Food Science and Technology, 2016, 66: 428−435.

WANG Y, WU Y P, WANG Y Y, et al. Antioxidant properties of probiotic bacteria[J]. Nutrients, 2017, 9(5): 521.

ZHANG Shuwen. Antioxidative activity of lactic acid bacteria in yogurt[J]. African Journal of Microbiology Research, 2011, 5(29): 5194−5201.

王曦, 罗霞, 许晓燕, 等. 不同乳酸菌菌株抗氧化能力的比较研究[J]. 食品科学, 2010, 31(9): 197−201. [WANG Xi, LUO Xia, XU Xiaoyan, et al. Comparative studies on antioxidant activities of different lactic acid bacterial strains[J]. Food Science, 2010, 31(9): 197−201.]

WANG Xi, LUO Xia, XU Xiaoyan, et al. Comparative studies on antioxidant activities of different lactic acid bacterial strains[J]. Food Science, 2010, 31（9）: 197−201.

张佳佳, 李丽亚, 任清, 等. 内蒙古奶酪中乳酸菌的益生特性及抗氧化活性研究[J]. 中国调味品, 2025, 50(4): 36−43. [ZHANG Jiajia, LI Liya, REN Qing, et al. Study on probiotic properties and antioxidant activity of lactic acid bacteria in Inner Mongolia cheese[J]. China Condiment, 2025, 50(4): 36−43.]

ZHANG Jiajia, LI Liya, REN Qing, et al. Study on probiotic properties and antioxidant activity of lactic acid bacteria in Inner Mongolia cheese[J]. China Condiment, 2025, 50（4）: 36−43.

HALLIWELL B, CHIRICO S. Lipid peroxidation: Its mechanism, measurement, and significance[J]. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1993, 57(5): 715S−725S.

WANG Qi, LIU Jiaqin, CAI Jin, et al. Functional characteristics of lactic acid bacteria in vitro isolated from spontaneously fermented sour porridge with broomcorn millet in northwestern Shanxi Province of China[J]. Foods, 2022, 11(15): 2353.

POON Y, HUI M M. Inhibitory effect of lactobacilli supernatants on biofilm and filamentation of Candida albicans, Candida tropicalis, and Candida parapsilosis[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2023, 14: 1105949.

ADESULU-DAHUNSI A T, JEYARAM K, SANNI A I. Probiotic and technological properties of exopolysaccharide producing lactic acid bacteria isolated from cereal-based Nigerian fermented food products[J]. Food Control, 2018, 92: 225−231.

BENSID A, EL ABED N, HOUICHER A, et al. Antioxidant and antimicrobial preservatives: Properties, mechanism of action and applications in food–a review[J]. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 2022, 62(11): 2985−3001.

HUANG Yang, ADAMS M C. In vitro assessment of the upper gastrointestinal tolerance of potential probiotic dairy propionibacteria[J]. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 2004, 91(3): 253−260.

YANG Zhenzhu, NI Ling, TIAN Wei, et al. Screening and identification of goat-milk-derived lactic acid bacteria with bacteriocin-like activity and probiotic potentials[J]. Microorganisms, 2023, 11(4): 849.

el RAHMANE M H A, HASSAINE O, ÇETİN B, et al. Probiotic potential, safety assessment, and functional properties of lactic acid bacteria from camel milk[J]. Enzyme and Microbial Technology, 2025, 189: 110676.

SINGH T P, KAUR G, MALIK R K, et al. Characterization of intestinal Lactobacillus reuteri strains as potential probiotics[J]. Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins, 2012, 4(1): 47−58.

BAO Yan, ZHANG Yanchao, ZHANG Yong, et al. Screening of potential probiotic properties of Lactobacillus fermentum isolated from traditional dairy products[J]. Food Control, 2010, 21(5): 695−701.

李建军, 古丽拜克热木·艾比卜拉, 倪永清, 等. 新疆和田地区人源肠道乳酸菌的筛选及其体外益生特性分析[J]. 食品工业科技, 2024, 45(5): 134−143. [LI J J, GULIBAIKEREMU A, NI Y Q, et al. Probiotic characteristics of lactic acid bacteria isolated from the intestinal tract of mothers and infants in Hotan, Xinjiang[J]. Science and Technology of Food Industry, 2024, 45(5): 134−143.]

LI J J, GULIBAIKEREMU A, NI Y Q, et al. Probiotic characteristics of lactic acid bacteria isolated from the intestinal tract of mothers and infants in Hotan, Xinjiang[J]. Science and Technology of Food Industry, 2024, 45（5）: 134−143.

SUI Yue, LIU Jiantao, LIU Yixin, et al. In vitro probiotic characterization of Lactobacillus strains from fermented tangerine vinegar and their cholesterol degradation activity[J]. Food Bioscience, 2021, 39: 100843.

ARENA M P, RUSSO P, CAPOZZI V, et al. Effect of abiotic stress conditions on expression of the Lactobacillus brevis IOEB 9809 tyrosine decarboxylase and agmatine deiminase genes[J]. Annals of Microbiology, 2011, 61(1): 179−183.

VASUDEVAN L, JAYANTHI V, SRINIVAS M, et al. Mucosa-adherent Pediococcus Pentosaceus I44 isolated from healthy human and effect of oleic acid on its probiotic properties[J]. Current Research in Microbial Sciences, 2021, 2: 100058.

REUBEN R C, ROY P C, SARKAR S L, et al. Characterization and evaluation of lactic acid bacteria from indigenous raw milk for potential probiotic properties[J]. Journal of Dairy Science, 2020, 103(2): 1223−1237.

LAKHLIFI T, el OIRDI S, MAROUI I, et al. Probiotic properties and safety aspect of three antifungal lactic acid bacteria strains isolated from wheat and camel milk[J]. Biologia, 2023, 78(4): 1129−1139.

SAKOUI S, DERDAK R, ADDOUM B, et al. The first study of probiotic properties and biological activities of lactic acid bacteria isolated from Bat guano from Er-rachidia, Morocco[J]. LWT, 2022, 159: 113224.

WANG Xing, WANG Weidong, LÜ Haoxin, et al. Probiotic potential and wide-spectrum antimicrobial activity of lactic acid bacteria isolated from infant feces[J]. Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins, 2021, 13(1): 90−101.

2026年第47卷第11期

PDF下载

149

引用本文

BibTeX

文章信息

doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2025060194

接收时间：2025-06-18
首发时间：2026-10-22
出版时间：2026-06-01

补充材料

相关文章

文章信息

作者

出版历史

收稿日期：2025-06-18

基金

作者信息

新疆维吾尔自治区农业科学院农产品加工研究所，新疆农副产品精深加工工程技术研究中心，新疆乌鲁木齐 830091

通讯作者:

张婷（1980−），女，博士，研究员，研究方向：农产品加工，E-mail：zhangtingkikie@163.com。

康峰（1974−），男，本科，农艺师，研究方向：谷物加工，E-mail：3454372224@qq.com。

参考文献

分享链接

https://castjournals.cast.org.cn/joweb/spgykj/CN/10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2025060194

分享至

全文二维码

扫描看全文

引用本文

BibTeX

本文的引用情况

2种不同金属材料的力学参数

科 Family	属数 Number of genus	种数 Number of species	占总种数比例 Percentage of total species (%)	属 Genus	种数 Number of species	占总种数比例 Percentage of total species (%)
鹅膏菌科Amanitaceae	2	11	5.26	鹅膏菌属 Amanita	10	4.78
小菇科 Mycenaceae	2	12	5.74	丝盖伞属 Inocybe	5	2.39
多孔菌科 Polyporaceae	8	14	6.70	蜡蘑属 Laccaria	5	2.39
红菇科 Russulaceae	3	23	11.00	小皮伞属 Marasmius	6	2.87
				小菇属 Mycena	11	5.26
				光柄菇属 Pluteus	5	2.39
				红菇属 Russula	17	8.13
				栓菌属 Trametes	5	2.39

关闭全屏

BibTeX
EndNote
RefWorks
TxT

种类	菌株编号	模拟胃液处理存活率（%）		模拟肠液处理存活率（%）
发酵粘液乳杆菌（Limosilactobacillus fermentum）	YTJ1-2	94.84±0.01^a		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
YTM1-2	77.90±0.24^abc		11.18±0.19^c	0.16±0.00^e
TXK2-3	50.36±0.06^bcde		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
TXJ2-5	61.51±0.14^abcdef		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
TBK1-3	37.75±0.03^efg		0.03±0.00^c	<0.001^e
TPK2-0	43.78±0.06^cdefg		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
YTJ1-5	76.71±0.28^abcd		0.09±0.00^c	0.06±0.00^e
TXJ2-6	80.23±0.11^ab		38.31±0.03^ab	<0.001^e
TKJ1-1	71.59±0.29^abcde		35.14±0.03^ab	0.94±0.00^e
TBK1-5	34.78±0.02^fg		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
TXJ2-4	90.72±0.06^a		52.51±0.16^a	30.85±0.02^a
类消化伴生乳杆菌（Companilactobacillus paralimentarius）	HLB2-4	74.66±0.10^abcd		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
短乳杆菌（Levilactobacillus brevis）	TBK1-4	0.68±0.00^h		0.06±0.00^c	<0.001^e
MTB1-5	87.37±0.18^a		41.75±0.07^ab	31.07±0.04^a
植物乳植杆菌（Lactiplantibacillus plantarum）	THB1-1	63.19±0.05^abcdef		48.75±0.05^a	38.15±0.03^a
HLB2-3	93.30±0.06^a		<0.001^c	<0.001^e
类布氏迟缓乳杆菌（Lentilactobacillus parabuchneri）	TXK2-2	32.47±0.05^fgh		7.07±0.04^c	0.17±0.00^e
嗜酸乳杆菌（Lactobacillus acidophilus）	HZK2-4	76.08±0.11^abcd		35.51±0.01^ab	32.61±0.00^a
副干酪乳酪杆菌（Lacticaseibacillus paracasei）	YTJ1-4	45.70±0.10^bcdefg		45.15±0.09^a	20.07±0.04^b
TXJ2-1	63.99±0.21^abcdef		30.03±0.16^b	12.67±0.02^c
TKJ1-0	41.45±0.06^defg		5.29±0.05^c	5.05±0.03^d

种类

菌株编号

模拟胃液处理存活率（%）

模拟肠液处理存活率（%）

3 h

4 h

8 h

发酵粘液乳杆菌
（Limosilactobacillus fermentum）

YTJ1-2

94.84±0.01^a

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

YTM1-2

77.90±0.24^abc

11.18±0.19^c

0.16±0.00^e

TXK2-3

50.36±0.06^bcde

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

TXJ2-5

61.51±0.14^abcdef

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

TBK1-3

37.75±0.03^efg

0.03±0.00^c

<0.001^e

TPK2-0

43.78±0.06^cdefg

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

YTJ1-5

76.71±0.28^abcd

0.09±0.00^c

0.06±0.00^e

TXJ2-6

80.23±0.11^ab

38.31±0.03^ab

<0.001^e

TKJ1-1

71.59±0.29^abcde

35.14±0.03^ab

0.94±0.00^e

TBK1-5

34.78±0.02^fg

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

TXJ2-4

90.72±0.06^a

52.51±0.16^a

30.85±0.02^a

类消化伴生乳杆菌
（Companilactobacillus paralimentarius）

HLB2-4

74.66±0.10^abcd

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

短乳杆菌
（Levilactobacillus brevis）

TBK1-4

0.68±0.00^h

0.06±0.00^c

<0.001^e

MTB1-5

87.37±0.18^a

41.75±0.07^ab

31.07±0.04^a

植物乳植杆菌
（Lactiplantibacillus plantarum）

THB1-1

63.19±0.05^abcdef

48.75±0.05^a

38.15±0.03^a

HLB2-3

93.30±0.06^a

<0.001^c

<0.001^e

类布氏迟缓乳杆菌
（Lentilactobacillus parabuchneri）

TXK2-2

32.47±0.05^fgh

7.07±0.04^c

0.17±0.00^e

嗜酸乳杆菌
（Lactobacillus acidophilus）

HZK2-4

76.08±0.11^abcd

35.51±0.01^ab

32.61±0.00^a

副干酪乳酪杆菌
（Lacticaseibacillus paracasei）

YTJ1-4

45.70±0.10^bcdefg

45.15±0.09^a

20.07±0.04^b

TXJ2-1

63.99±0.21^abcdef

30.03±0.16^b

12.67±0.02^c

TKJ1-0

41.45±0.06^defg

5.29±0.05^c

5.05±0.03^d

指标	成分
超氧阴离子自由基清除率	0.301	0.681	0.128	−0.323
DPPH自由基清除率	0.666	−0.042	−0.305	0.197
羟自由基清除率	0.713	0.102	0.128	0.305
3 h胃液处理	0.17	0.582	0.542	0.24
4 h肠液处理	0.751	0.38	0.197	−0.094
8 h肠液处理	0.793	0.448	−0.12	−0.039
大肠杆菌ATCC 25922	0.792	0.166	−0.467	−0.051
金黄色葡萄球菌ATCC 25923	0.836	−0.373	0.122	−0.019
枯草芽孢杆菌ATCC 6633	0.603	−0.325	0.032	0.304
白色念珠球菌ATCC 14053	0.355	0.111	0.754	0.348
蜡样芽孢杆菌ATCC 11778	0.799	−0.433	0.186	−0.029
铜绿假单胞菌ATCC 15442	0.722	−0.338	0.035	−0.18
鼠伤寒沙门氏菌ATCC 14028	0.668	−0.352	−0.437	0.035
单核增生李斯特菌ATCC 19115	0.306	0.66	0.033	−0.432
自聚性	0.092	0.692	−0.578	0.222
疏水性	−0.277	0.336	−0.246	0.721
特征值	5.865	2.898	1.897	1.312
方差贡献率（%）	36.658	18.113	11.858	8.199
累计贡献率（%）	36.658	54.771	66.629	74.828

指标

成分

超氧阴离子自由基清除率

0.301

0.681

0.128

−0.323

DPPH自由基清除率

0.666

−0.042

−0.305

0.197

羟自由基清除率

0.713

0.102

0.128

0.305

3 h胃液处理

0.17

0.582

0.542

0.24

4 h肠液处理

0.751

0.38

0.197

−0.094

8 h肠液处理

0.793

0.448

−0.12

−0.039

大肠杆菌ATCC 25922

0.792

0.166

−0.467

−0.051

金黄色葡萄球菌ATCC 25923

0.836

−0.373

0.122

−0.019

枯草芽孢杆菌ATCC 6633

0.603

−0.325

0.032

0.304

白色念珠球菌ATCC 14053

0.355

0.111

0.754

0.348

蜡样芽孢杆菌ATCC 11778

0.799

−0.433

0.186

−0.029

铜绿假单胞菌ATCC 15442

0.722

−0.338

0.035

−0.18

鼠伤寒沙门氏菌ATCC 14028

0.668

−0.352

−0.437

0.035

单核增生李斯特菌ATCC 19115

0.306

0.66

0.033

−0.432

自聚性

0.092

0.692

−0.578

0.222

疏水性

−0.277

0.336

−0.246

0.721

特征值

5.865

2.898

1.897

1.312

方差贡献率（%）

36.658

18.113

11.858

8.199

累计贡献率（%）

36.658

54.771

66.629

74.828

菌株编号	F1	F2	F3	F4	F	排名
THB1-1	17.27088671	−6.632896227	3.553937669	1.505148994	5.684202007	1
YTJ1-4	16.15881967	−5.309639193	2.641468846	0.122771031	5.293644143	2
HZK2-4	15.92708305	−5.856978841	1.943309524	2.401729006	5.213321922	3
TXJ2-4	16.19348615	−6.216680912	1.57167889	1.717313463	5.145639662	4
TXJ2-1	15.98975121	−7.027928206	2.504383058	1.898386	5.049872925	5
MTB1-5	13.33816756	−4.812729715	4.040425852	1.139557573	4.598257815	6
HLB2-3	10.68823086	−3.533196703	8.008441177	3.213253987	4.499563451	7
TKJ1-1	11.29057689	−3.85627063	7.409119417	1.162898229	4.422699602	8
YTJ1-5	12.55915515	−5.088474895	2.992692305	1.992957847	4.207748911	9
TXJ2-5	12.36142089	−8.376576361	4.322148119	6.037065112	4.029856112	10
YTJ1-2	11.91350162	−4.768901117	2.349699726	2.369208695	3.982973371	11
TPK2-0	12.5711146	−8.698995594	3.590482859	6.011172045	3.959264423	12
TXJ2-6	12.01155854	−8.274659124	4.614867594	5.97405379	3.949570336	13
TXK2-2	9.448186406	−2.11126432	3.484556244	4.081910449	3.834724419	14
TBK1-3	12.18011409	−8.029976488	2.572617436	5.800100856	3.798425873	15
YTM1-2	11.9310453	−3.790809979	1.964247248	−2.705967835	3.704413078	16
TXK2-3	12.54853665	−5.87899292	−2.632314777	−2.485985549	3.024118958	17
TKJ1-0	14.02866522	−9.901472286	−4.683845529	1.755136937	2.942897264	18
TBK1-5	11.76733676	−9.058136578	−2.545725935	2.259336633	2.561414089	19
TBK1-4	11.16235263	−4.826504952	−3.223479867	−3.571798435	2.546504444	20
HLB2-4	2.105597791	3.808212677	−2.142442888	−4.360923176	0.84949448	21

菌株编号

排名

THB1-1

17.27088671

−6.632896227

3.553937669

1.505148994

5.684202007

YTJ1-4

16.15881967

−5.309639193

2.641468846

0.122771031

5.293644143

HZK2-4

15.92708305

−5.856978841

1.943309524

2.401729006

5.213321922

TXJ2-4

16.19348615

−6.216680912

1.57167889

1.717313463

5.145639662

TXJ2-1

15.98975121

−7.027928206

2.504383058

1.898386

5.049872925

MTB1-5

13.33816756

−4.812729715

4.040425852

1.139557573

4.598257815

HLB2-3

10.68823086

−3.533196703

8.008441177

3.213253987

4.499563451

TKJ1-1

11.29057689

−3.85627063

7.409119417

1.162898229

4.422699602

YTJ1-5

12.55915515

−5.088474895

2.992692305

1.992957847

4.207748911

TXJ2-5

12.36142089

−8.376576361

4.322148119

6.037065112

4.029856112

YTJ1-2

11.91350162

−4.768901117

2.349699726

2.369208695

3.982973371

TPK2-0

12.5711146

−8.698995594

3.590482859

6.011172045

3.959264423

TXJ2-6

12.01155854

−8.274659124

4.614867594

5.97405379

3.949570336

TXK2-2

9.448186406

−2.11126432

3.484556244

4.081910449

3.834724419

TBK1-3

12.18011409

−8.029976488

2.572617436

5.800100856

3.798425873

YTM1-2

11.9310453

−3.790809979

1.964247248

−2.705967835

3.704413078

TXK2-3

12.54853665

−5.87899292

−2.632314777

−2.485985549

3.024118958

TKJ1-0

14.02866522

−9.901472286

−4.683845529

1.755136937

2.942897264

TBK1-5

11.76733676

−9.058136578

−2.545725935

2.259336633

2.561414089

TBK1-4

11.16235263

−4.826504952

−3.223479867

−3.571798435

2.546504444

HLB2-4

2.105597791

3.808212677

−2.142442888

−4.360923176

0.84949448