| Literature DB >> 28781404 |
Ali R Mulakhudair1,2, Mahmood Al-Mashhadani3, James Hanotu1, William Zimmerman1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Inactivation processes can be classified into non-thermal inactivation methods such as ethylene oxide and γ-radiation, and thermal methods such as autoclaving. The ability of carbon dioxide enriched microbubbles to inactivate Pseudomonas putida suspended in physiological saline, as a non-thermal sterilisation method, was investigated in this study with many operational advantages over both traditional thermal and non-thermal sterilisation methods.Entities:
Keywords: CO2; Pseudomonas; cell lysis; inactivation; microbubbles
Year: 2017 PMID: 28781404 PMCID: PMC5518213 DOI: 10.1002/jctb.5299
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Chem Technol Biotechnol ISSN: 0268-2575 Impact factor: 3.174
Figure 1Schematic representation of the experimental set‐up. Pure CO2 gas (100%) is fed into the microbubbles diffuser.
Chemical reactions with their corresponding reaction rate constants used to integrate the CO2 concentration equations in the current study
| Chemical reaction | Reaction rate constant | Unit | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| 1/ |
|
|
|
| 1/ | |
|
|
| 1/ |
|
|
|
| 1/ | |
|
| |||
|
|
| ||
|
|
| 1/ | |
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
Figure 2Survivor ratio of Pseudomonas putida after treatment with: (A) CO2 microbubbles; (B) CO2 microbubbles plus 2% (v/v) ethanol; (C) CO2 microbubbles plus 5% (v/v) ethanol; (D) CO2 microbubbles plus 10% (v/v) ethanol. Error bars depict standard deviation.
Figure 3Temperature profile during CO2 enriched microbubbles inactivation process. Error bars depict standard deviation.
Figure 4CO2 concentrations with different pHs observed during sparging. (A) CO2 microbubbles. (B) CO2 microbubbles plus 2% ethanol. (C) CO2 microbubbles plus 5% ethanol. (D) CO2 microbubbles plus 10% ethanol. Points are representative of triplicate results.
Figure 5Numerical changes after treatment with CO2 microbubbles on 1000×. (A) Bacterial smears before sparging CO2. (B) Bacterial smear after treating with CO2‐enriched microbubbles for 90 min.
Figure 6Morphological changes on (A) Pseudomonas cells before the inactivation process with CO2 microbubble plus 2% ethanol. (B) Pseudomonas cells after the inactivation process with CO2 microbubble plus 2% ethanol. (C) Pseudomonas cells before the inactivation process with CO2 microbubble plus 5% ethanol. (D) Pseudomonas cells after the inactivation process with CO2 microbubble plus 5% ethanol. (E) Pseudomonas cells before the inactivation process with CO2 microbubble plus 10% ethanol. (D) Pseudomonas cells after the inactivation process with CO2 microbubble plus 10% ethanol.