Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jun 19;17(1):168.
doi: 10.1186/s13104-024-06836-2.

FBS-based cryoprotective compositions for effective cryopreservation of gut microbiota and key intestinal microorganisms

Affiliations

FBS-based cryoprotective compositions for effective cryopreservation of gut microbiota and key intestinal microorganisms

Lyubov V Zalomova et al. BMC Res Notes. .

Abstract

Objective: The need for innovative techniques to preserve microbiota for extended periods, while maintaining the species composition and quantitative balance of the bacterial community, is becoming increasingly important. To address this need, we propose an efficient approach to cryopreserve human gut microbiota using a two-component cryoprotective composition comprising fetal bovine serum (FBS) and 5% dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO). Fetal serum is a commonly utilized component in the freezing media for eukaryotic cells, however, its effects on prokaryotic cells have not been extensively researched.

Results: In our study, we demonstrated the high efficiency of using a two-component cryoprotective medium, FBS + 5% DMSO, for cryopreservation of human gut microbiota using three different methods. According to the obtained results, the intact donor microbiota was preserved at a level of 85 ± 4% of the initial composition based on fluorescent analysis using the LIVE/DEAD test. No differences in survival were observed when comparing with pure DMSO and FBS media. The photometric measurement method for growth of aerobic bacteria (A. johnsoni), facultative anaerobes (E. coli, E. faecalis), microaerophilic (L. plantarum), and obligate anaerobic bacterial cultures (E. barkeri, B. breve) also demonstrated high viability rates of 94-98% in the two-component protective medium, reaching intact control levels. However, for anaerobic microflora representatives, serum proved to be a more suitable cryoprotectant. Also, we demonstrated that using cryoprotective media with 50-75% FBS content is enough to preserve a significant level of bacterial cell viability, from an economic standpoint.

Keywords: Bacterial cultures; Cryopreservation; Fetal bovine serum; Gut microbiota.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Viability of Escherichia coli after cryopreservation (4 days at − 196 °C) in the media 5% DMSO, 100% FBS, and a combination of 5% DMSO and 95%FBS by three different methods: microtiter plate-based cultivation (A), (B), (n = 3); fluorescent LIVE/DEAD assay (C) (n = 10), conventional microbiological cultivation (D), (n = 10). Abs—optical density (600 nm). Columns marked with the same letter are not significantly different at p < 0.05, according to the Mann–Whitney nonparametric criterion
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Viability of five bacterial cultures (microtiter plate-based cultivation, n = 3) and whole human gut microbiota (LIVE/DEAD assay, n = 15) after cryopreservation (4 days at − 196 °C, 24 h of growth) in the media 5% DMSO, 100% FBS, and a combination of 5% DMSO and 95% FBS. Abs – optical density (600 nm). A Eubacterium barkeri, B Bifidobacterium breve, C Lactobacillus plantarum, D Enterococcus faecalis, E Acinetobacter johnsoni, F whole microbiota. Columns marked with the same letter are not significantly different at p < 0.05, according to the Mann–Whitney nonparametric criterion
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
The impact of FBS concentrations on the survival of six bacterial cultures after cryopreservation (4 days at − 196 °C) (n = 3) in pure FBS and FBS + 5% DMSO mixtures. Values are normalized to intact control level (100%). A Eubacterium barkeri BBifidobacterium breve, C Lactobacillus plantarum, D Enterococcus faecalis, E Acinetobacter johnsoni, F Escherichia coli. Points marked with the same letter are not significantly different at p < 0.05, according to the Mann–Whitney nonparametric criterion

Similar articles

References

    1. Kamada N, Seo S-U, Chen GY, Núñez G. Role of the gut microbiota in immunity and inflammatory disease. Nat Rev Immunol. 2013;13:321–335. doi: 10.1038/nri3430. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Matsuki T, Tanaka R. Function of the human gut microbiota. THuman Microbiota Microbiome. 2014;90:26–33. doi: 10.1079/9781780640495.0090. - DOI
    1. Sekirov I, Russell SL, Antunes LCM, Finlay BB. Gut microbiota in health and disease. Physiol Rev. 2010;90:859–904. doi: 10.1152/physrev.00045.2009. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ermolenko EI, Suvorov AN, Simanenkov VI, Sundukova ZR, Tsapieva AN, Solovyov OI. Method for producing autoprobiotic of Enterocuccus faecium being representative of indigenic host intestinal microflora. Patent 2460778 C1. 2010. RU.
    1. Alexander MT, Simione FP. Factors affecting the recovery of freeze-dried Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Abstr. of the Annual Meeting of the American Society for Microbiology. 1980; pp. 86.

LinkOut - more resources