Advertisement

Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology

, Volume 41, Issue 1, pp 90–94 | Cite as

Mechanism of dehydration inactivation of Lactobacillus plantarum

  • Lou C. Lievense
  • Moniek A. M. Verbreek
  • Ad Noomen
  • Klaas van't Riet
Applied Microbial and Cell Physiology

Abstract

The mechanism of dehydration inactivation of Lactobacillus plantarum cells after vacuum-drying above saturated salt solutions was studied. The method used is based on the hypothesis that DNase diffuses into cells with damaged cell membranes/walls and hydrolyses the intracellular DNA. Intact, undamaged cells and cells inactivated by either dehydration or heat treatent were incubated in the presence of DNase. The release of DNA hydrolysis products into the incubation medium was measured. It was shown that dehydration inactivation of L. plantarum, but not thermal inactivation, was associated with clear evidence of membrane damage. The residual glucose-fermenting activity of the dehydrated cells related to the release of hydrolysed DNA in the medium, but there was no such relationship with heat-treated cells. Addition of sorbitol to cells before dehydration increased the residual glucose-fermenting activity after drying and this was associated with a reduced rate of DNA hydrolysis. It is concluded that cell wall and/or cell membrane damage is an important mechanism of dehydration inactivation, but that thermal inactivation (up to 60°C) occurs by a different mechanism.

Keywords

Hydrolysis Dehydration Lactobacillus Salt Solution Sorbitol 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bradford MM (1976) A rapid and sensitive method for the quantification of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem 72:248–254Google Scholar
  2. Brennan M, Wanismail B, Johnson MC, Ray B (1986) Cellular damage in dried Lactobacillus acidophilus. J Food Prot 49:47–53Google Scholar
  3. Burton K (1956) A study of the conditions and mechanism of the diphenylamine reaction for the colometric estimation of deoxyribonucleic acid. Biochem J 62:315–323Google Scholar
  4. Herbert D, Phipps PJ, Strange RE (1971) Chemical analysis of microbial cells. Methods Microbiol 5B:317–320Google Scholar
  5. Hutchison WC, Munro HN (1961) The determination of nucleic acids in biological materials. The Analyst 86:768–813Google Scholar
  6. Jenness R, Koops J (1962) Preparation and properties of a salt solution which simulates milk ultrafiltrate. Neth Milk Dairy J 16:153–164Google Scholar
  7. Lammers WL, Noomen A (1990) Release of DNA as an indicator for lysis of Lactococcus lactis ssp. cremoris. FEMS Microbiol Rev 87:P114Google Scholar
  8. Lievense LC, Van't Riet K (1994) Convective drying of bacteria. II. Factors influencing the survival. Adv Biochem Biotechnol 51:in pressGoogle Scholar
  9. Lievense LC, Van't Riet K, Noomen A (1990a) Measuring and modelling the glucose-fermenting activity of Lactobacillus plantarum. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 32:669–673Google Scholar
  10. Lievense LC, Verbeek MAM, Meerdink G, Van't Riet K (1990b) The inactivation of Lactobacillus plantarum during drying II. Measurement and modelling of the thermal inactivation. Bioseparation 1:171–180Google Scholar
  11. Lievense LC, Verbeek MAM, Taekema T, Meerdink G, Van't Riet K (1992) Modelling the inactivation of Lactobacillus plantarum during a drying process. Chem Eng Sci 47:87–97Google Scholar
  12. Morichi T, Irie R, Yano N, Kembo H (1967) Death of freeze-dried Lactobacillus bulgaricus during rehydration. Agric Biol Chem 31:137–141Google Scholar
  13. Neidhardt FC, Ingraham JL, Schaechter M (1990) Physiology of the bacterial cell: a molecular approach. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Mass., pp 3–4Google Scholar
  14. Price PA (1975) The essential role of Ca2+ in activity of bovine pancreatic deoxyribonuclease. J Biol Chem 244:917–923Google Scholar
  15. Schlegel HG (1986) General microbiology, 6th edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, p 3Google Scholar
  16. Vassault A (1983) Lactate dehydrogenase analysis. In: Bergmeyer HU (ed) Methods of enzymatic analysis, vol 3. Verlag Chemie, Weinheim, pp 118–126Google Scholar
  17. Wagman J (1960) Evidence of cytoplasmic membrane injury in the drying of bacteria. J Bacteriology 80:558–564Google Scholar
  18. Webb SJ (1961) Factors affecting the viability of air-borne bacteria. Can J Microbiol 7:621–632Google Scholar
  19. Young JF (1967) Humidity control in the laboratory using salt solutions — a review. J Appl Chem 17:241–245Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lou C. Lievense
    • 1
  • Moniek A. M. Verbreek
    • 2
  • Ad Noomen
    • 3
  • Klaas van't Riet
    • 2
  1. 1.Unilever Research LaboratoriumVlaardingenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Food- and Bioprocess Engineering Group, Department of Food ScienceWageningen Agricultural UniversityWageningenThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Laboratory of Dairying and Food Physics, Department of Food ScienceWageningen Agricultural UniversityWageningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations