Background: The gastrointestinal tract is one of the most microbiologically active ecosystems that plays a crucial role in the working of the mucosal immune system (MIS). In this ecosystem, the consumed probiotics stimulate the immune system and induce a network of signals mediated by the whole bacteria or their cell wall structure. This review is aimed at describing the immunological mechanisms of probiotics and their beneficial effects on the host. Summary: Once administered, oral probiotic bacteria interact with the intestinal epithelial cells (IECs) or immune cells associated with the lamina propria, through Toll-like receptors, and induce the production of different cytokines or chemokines. Macrophage chemoattractant protein 1, produced by the IECs, sends signals to other immune cells leading to the activation of the MIS, characterized by an increase in immunoglobulin A⁺ cells of the intestine, bronchus and mammary glands, and the activation of T cells. Specifically, probiotics activate regulatory T cells that release IL-10. Interestingly, probiotics reinforce the intestinal barrier by an increase of the mucins, the tight junction proteins and the Goblet and Paneth cells. Another proposed mechanism of probiotics is the modulation of intestinal microbiota by maintaining the balance and suppressing the growth of potential pathogenic bacteria in the gut. Furthermore, it has been demonstrated that long-term probiotics consumption does not affect the intestinal homeostasis. The viability of probiotics is crucial in the interaction with IECs and macrophages favoring, mainly, the innate immune response. Macrophages and Dendritic cells (DCs) play an important role in this immune response without inducing an inflammatory pattern, just a slight increase in the cellularity of the lamina propria. Besides, as part of the machinery that probiotics activate to protect against different pathogens, an increase in the microbicidal activity of peritoneal and spleen macrophages has been reported. In malnutrition models, such as undernourishment and obesity, probiotic was able to increase the intestinal and systemic immune response. Furthermore, probiotics contribute to recover the histology of both the intestine and the thymus damaged in these conditions. Probiotic bacteria are emerging as a safe and natural strategy for allergy prevention and treatment. Different mechanisms such as the generation of cytokines from activated pro-T-helper type 1, which favor the production of IgG instead of IgE, have been proposed. Key Messages: Probiotic bacteria, their cell walls or probiotic fermented milk have significant effects on the functionality of the mucosal and systemic immune systems through the activation of multiple immune mechanisms.

Aims: To determine how probiotic bacteria contact with intestinal epithelial and immune cells and the conditions to induce a good mucosal immune stimulation. Methods and Results: Lactobacillus casei was studied by transmission electron microscopy (TEM) to determine its interaction with the gut. We compared the influence of viable and nonviable lactic acid bacteria on the intestinal mucosal immune system (IMIS) and their persistence in the gut of mice. TEM showed whole Lact. casei adhered to the villi; the bacterial antigen was found in the cytoplasm of the enterocytes. Viable bacteria stimulated the IMIS to a greater extent than nonviable bacteria with the exception of Lact. delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus. For all the strains assayed at 72 h no antigenic particles were found in the intestine. Conclusion: Antigenic particles but not the whole bacteria can enter to epithelial cells and contact with the immune cells. Bacterial viability is a condition for a better stimulation of the IMIS. Significance and Impact of the Study: We demonstrated that only antigenic particle interact with the immune cells and their fast clearance from the gut agrees with those described for the particulate antigens. The regular consumption of probiotics should not adversely affect the host.

Background: Diarrheal infections caused bySalmonella, are one of the major causes of childhood morbidity and mortality in developing countries.Salmonellacauses various diseases that range from mild gastroenteritis to enteric fever, depending on the serovar involved, infective dose, species, age and immune status of the host. Probiotics are proposed as an attractive alternative possibility in the prevention against this pathogen infection. Previously we demonstrated that continuousLactobacillus caseiCRL 431 administration to BALB/c mice before and after challenge withSalmonella entericaserovar Typhimurium (S. Typhimurium) decreased the severity ofSalmonellainfection. The aim of the present work was to deep into the knowledge about how this probiotic bacterium exerts its effect, by assessing its impact on the expression and secretion of pro-inflammatory (TNFα, IFNγ) and anti-inflammatory (IL-10) cytokines in the inductor and effector sites of the gut immune response, and analyzing toll-like receptor (TLR2, TLR4, TLR5 and TLR9) expressions in both healthy and infected mice.Results: Probiotic administration to healthy mice increased the expression of TLR2, TLR4 and TLR9 and improved the production and secretion of TNFα, IFNγ and IL-10 in the inductor sites of the gut immune response (Peyer's patches). Post infection, the continuous probiotic administration, before and afterSalmonellachallenge, protected the host by modulating the inflammatory response, mainly in the immune effector site of the gut, decreasing TNFα and increasing IFNγ, IL-6 and IL-10 production in the lamina propria of the small intestine.Conclusions: The oral administration ofL. caseiCRL 431 induces variations in the cytokine profile and in the TLRs expression previous and also after the challenge withS. Typhimurium. These changes show some of the immune mechanisms implicated in the protective effect of this probiotic strain againstS. Typhimurium, providing an alternative way to reduce the severity of the infection.

Aims: To investigate whether there is a relationship between interaction sites in the gut, hydrophobicity, mucosal immunomodulating capacities and cell wall protein profiles in lactobacilli, bifidobacteria and enterococci. Methods and Results: Hydrophobicity, cell wall protein profiles and sites of interaction in the gut (by using fluorescein isothiocyanate‐labelled bacteria) were determined for Lactobacillus casei, L. acidophilus, L. fermentum, Bifidobacterium bifidum, B. animalis and Enterococcus faecalis. We also determined the number of immunoglobulin (Ig)A⁺, tumour necrosis factor (TNF)α⁺, interleukin (IL)‐6⁺ and IL‐10⁺ cells after oral administration of the above bacteria to BALB/c mice. All strains assessed were found to interact with the sites of induction of the immune response in the gut. No correlation with hydrophobicity was observed. When some strains at certain doses were administered to mice, bacterial translocation to liver was observed. The oral administration of indigenous (10⁴ cells day⁻¹) and exogenous (10⁷ cells day⁻¹) bifidobacteria and lactobacilli for 5 consecutive days activated the systemic and intestinal mucosal immune response in a strain‐specific way, independently whether the strain was indigenous or exogenous in relation to the host. The differences in the immunopotentiating capacity of the various strains might be related to the differences in their cell wall protein profiles. Conclusions: Indigenous bacteria activated the mucosal immune response at a dose significantly smaller than the one required for probiotic exogenous bacteria. However, probiotic exogenous bacteria can be used at high concentrations in fermented dairy products with a great impact on the immune system, favouring its immunomodulation. Significance and Impact of the Study: The immunomodulation capacity of probiotic bacteria is strain specific and independent of the specificity of the host. The ability of certain strains to down‐regulate the production and release of IL‐6 by IL‐10 may have potential implications in their use in cases in which cytokine deregulation or excessive production at the mucosal level can be the cause of tissue damage.

The mechanisms by which probiotic bacteria exert their effects on the immune system are not completely understood, but the epithelium may be a crucial player in the orchestration of the effects induced. In a previous work, we observed that some orally administered strains of lactic acid bacteria (LAB) increased the number of immunoglobulin A (IgA)-producing cells in the small intestine without a concomitant increase in the CD4 ⁺ T-cell population, indicating that some LAB strains induce clonal expansion only of B cells triggered to produce IgA. The present work aimed to study the cytokines induced by the interaction of probiotic LAB with murine intestinal epithelial cells (IEC) in healthy animals. We focused our investigation mainly on the secretion of interleukin 6 (IL-6) necessary for the clonal expansion of B cells previously observed with probiotic bacteria. The role of Toll-like receptors (TLRs) in such interaction was also addressed. The cytokines released by primary cultures of IEC in animals fed with Lactobacillus casei CRL 431 or Lactobacillus helveticus R389 were determined. Cytokines were also determined in the supernatants of primary cultures of IEC of unfed animals challenged with different concentrations of viable or nonviable lactobacilli and Escherichia coli , previously blocked or not with anti-TLR2 and anti-TLR4. We concluded that the small intestine is the place where a major distinction would occur between probiotic LAB and pathogens. This distinction comprises the type of cytokines released and the magnitude of the response, cutting across the line that separates IL-6 necessary for B-cell differentiation, which was the case with probiotic lactobacilli, from inflammatory levels of IL-6 for pathogens.