Biological approach to modeling of Staphylococcus aureus high-hydrostatic-pressure inactivation kinetics.
Graphs for survival under high hydrostatic pressure (450 MPa; 25°C; citrate-phosphate buffer, pH 7.0) of stationary-growth-phase cells of eight Staphylococcus aureus strains were found to be nonlinear. The strains could be classified into two groups on the basis of the shoulder length. Some of them showed long shoulders of up to 20 min at 450 MPa, while others had shoulders of <3.5 min. All strains showed tails. No significant differences in the inactivation rate were found during the log-linear death phase among the eight strains. The entry into stationary growth phase resulted both in an increase in shoulder length and in a decrease in the inactivation rate. However, whereas shoulder length proved to depend on sigma B factor activity, the inactivation rate did not. Recovery in anaerobiosis decreased the inactivation rate but did not affect the shoulder length. Addition of the minimum noninhibitory concentration of sodium chloride to the recovery medium resulted in a decrease in shoulder length and in an increase in the inactivation rate for stationary-growth-phase cells. In the tail region, up to 90% of the population remained sensitive to sodium chloride.
Cebrián
Guillermo
G
Tecnología de los Alimentos, Facultad de Veterinaria de Zaragoza, Universidad de Zaragoza, C/ Miguel Servet 177, 50013 Zaragoza, Spain.
Michiels
Chris W
CW
Mañas
Pilar
P
Condón
Santiago
S
D001431:Bacteriological Techniques; D002462:Cell Membrane / Q000502:physiology; D005516:Food Microbiology; D005519:Food Preservation / Q000379:methods; D006874:Hydrostatic Pressure; D007700:Kinetics; D008954:Models, Biological; D013211:Staphylococcus aureus / Q000502:physiology*
Int J Food Microbiol. 1991 Feb;12(2-3):207-15
2049285
Appl Environ Microbiol. 1996 Mar;62(3):1029-35
16535254
Int J Food Microbiol. 2006 May 25;109(1-2):25-33
16499985
Gene. 2004 Jan 21;325:137-43
14697518
Int J Food Microbiol. 2007 Sep 30;118(3):304-11
17804103
J Bacteriol. 2000 Dec;182(24):6983-91
11092859
J Appl Microbiol. 1999 Jul;87(1):1-7
10432582
J Food Prot. 1995 May;58(5):524-529
31137263
Int J Food Microbiol. 1994 Nov;23(3-4):277-94
7873331
Microbiology (Reading). 1999 Feb;145 ( Pt 2):419-425
10075424
J Bacteriol. 2004 Jul;186(13):4085-99
15205410
Int J Food Microbiol. 2002 Aug 25;77(3):205-12
12160080
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2000 Jul;66(7):2829-34
10877775
Cell Mol Life Sci. 1999 Oct 30;56(5-6):378-83
11212292
J Biol Chem. 2005 Sep 16;280(37):32493-8
16020541
J Appl Microbiol. 2006 May;100(5):1054-62
16630006
Appl Environ Microbiol. 1999 Sep;65(9):4248-51
10473446
Br Med Bull. 2000;56(1):84-96
10885107
Int J Med Microbiol. 2006 Aug;296(4-5):237-58
16644280
J Appl Microbiol. 2005;98(6):1400-9
15916652
Int J Food Microbiol. 2000 Jun 1;56(2-3):199-210
10857546
Braz J Med Biol Res. 2005 Aug;38(8):1253-7
16082467
J Bacteriol. 1994 Mar;176(5):1297-302
8113168
Int J Food Microbiol. 2007 May 10;116(2):275-82
17363099
FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2004 Sep 1;238(1):29-36
15336399
Curr Opin Biotechnol. 1999 Oct;10(5):485-91
10508640
Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2003;43(3):265-85
12822673
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2004 Mar;70(3):1545-54
15006777
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007 Apr;73(8):2468-78
17293511
Appl Environ Microbiol. 1998 Apr;64(4):1323-7
9546168
J Bacteriol. 1998 Sep;180(18):4814-20
9733682
J Bacteriol. 2001 Mar;183(6):1843-52
11222581
J Appl Microbiol. 2005;98(6):1387-99
15916651
J Appl Microbiol. 2009 Jul;107(1):187-96
19302328
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2000 Nov;66(11):4890-6
11055940
Int J Food Microbiol. 2003 Feb 15;80(3):261-4
12423928
J Appl Microbiol. 2008 Jun;104(6):1764-73
18298540
J Food Prot. 2007 Oct;70(10):2281-9
17969609
Int J Food Microbiol. 2000 Sep 15;60(1):33-42
11014520
Food Microbiol. 2007 May;24(3):197-204
17188197
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2005 May;71(5):2226-31
15870304
Int J Food Microbiol. 2006 May 25;109(1-2):103-8
16503069
J Food Prot. 1999 Sep;62(9):1038-40
10492479