Advertisement

Frontiers of Chemistry in China

, Volume 2, Issue 2, pp 209–212 | Cite as

Comparison of antibacterial ability of copper and stainless steel

  • Geng Ping 
  • Zhang Wen 
  • Tang Hui 
  • Zhang Xinai 
  • Jin Litong 
  • Feng Zhen 
  • Wu Zirong 
Research Article

Abstract

In this paper, the electro-analysis and spectrophotometric analysis methods were used to study the antibacterial ability of copper and stainless steel materials. When Escherichia coli (E. coli) and photo-bacteria were used as samples, the antibacterial effect of stainless steel was very weak, while the percentage of bacteria dying from exposure to metallic copper for 30 min was over 90%. The antibacterial ability of copper has a potential application in the field of disinfection, food packaging and piping of drinking water.

Keywords

electro-analysis photometric analysis copper stainless steel Escherichia coli photo-bacteria 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Prescott L M, Harley J P, Klein D A. Microbiology. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, 2002, 128–130Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Buzby J C, Frenzen P D, Rasco B. US Department of Agriculture. Washington D.C., 2001Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hatteberger M, Mascher F, Kalcher K, Marth E. Improved method for the fluorimetric detection of β-D-galactosidase in water. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, 2001, 203(3): 281–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Richard M S. High-pressure sterilization of foods. Food Technology, 2000, 54(11): 67–72Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Len S V, Huang Y C, Erichson M. Ultraviolet spectrophotometric characterization and bactericidal properties of electrolyzed oxidizing water as influenced by amperage and pH. Food Prot, 2000, 63(11): 1534Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sierra G. Ultrasonic synergistic effects in liquid-phase chemical sterilization. Applied Microbiology, 1997, 22(2): 160Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Macgregor S J, Farisho, Fouracrer. IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science, 2000, 28(1): 144–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Andreas T P, Thomas D L, Terence L M, Ole N. Effects of copper amendment on the bacterial community in agricultural soil analyzed by the T-RFLP technique. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 2003, 46: 53–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gao Y L, Liu X, Wang Z X, Yang X M. Antibacterial effects nano-structural metal oxide’s on bacterium contaminatied food. Food Science, 2005, 26(4): 45Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ai S Y, Zhang W, Gao M N, Gu F L, Wang Q J, Jin L T. Determination of reactive intermediates during anodic oxygen-transfer reactions at lead dioxide. Chem Res Chinese U, 2004, 20(3): 289–293Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yasushi H, Kazuhiro Y, Koji F, Takashi K, Shunichi U. Highly sensitive electrochemical determination of Escherichia coli density using tyrosinase-based chemically amplified biosensor. Analytica Chimica Acta, 1997, 357: 51–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhang W, Tang H, Gu J, Geng P, Jin L T. Study on preparation of nano-SnO2 electrode and its application to the fast counting of E. coli in water. Acta Chimica Sinica, 2005, 63(14): 1313–1317Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nakajima A. Electron spin resonance study of copper biosorption by bacteria. Water Research, 2002, 36: 2091–2097CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Geng Ping 
    • 1
  • Zhang Wen 
    • 1
  • Tang Hui 
    • 1
  • Zhang Xinai 
    • 1
  • Jin Litong 
    • 1
  • Feng Zhen 
    • 2
  • Wu Zirong 
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of ChemistryEast China Normal UniversityShanghaiChina
  2. 2.Faculty of Life SciencesEast China Normal UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations