It has also been reported that LPS deficiency negatively affects biofilm formation. However, our results demonstrate that the O-antigen-deficient mutant enhances biofilm formation, presumably through a significant increase in hydrophobicity. It is notable that the hydrophobicity of cell LXH254 supplier walls might be a key regulator in controlling biofilm development in B. japonicum.”
“Aims:
To evaluate the suitability of commercially available Petrifilm (TM) EC plates for enumeration of Escherichia coli from soil.
Methods and Results:
A confirmed E. coli strain isolated from liquid swine manure was inoculated into sterilized sandy clay loam
and loam soils at the concentrations of 102, 103, 105 CFU g-1 of soil. The efficiency of recovery on Petrifilm (TM) EC plates for soils spiked with E. coli was compared with standard membrane filtration techniques on m-FC basal medium supplemented with 3-bromo-4-chloro-5-indoyl-beta-d-glucopyranoside (BCIG) and most probable numbers (MPN) techniques in E.
coli medium with 4-methylumbelliferyl-beta-d-glucuronide (EC-MUG) broth. Petrifilm (TM) EC and m-FC (BCIG) methods were then assessed for the ability to recover E. coli from field soils applied with swine manure. No significant differences (P > 0 center dot 05) were observed between Petrifilm (TM) EC, m-FC (BCIG) and MPN methods for the recovery of E. coli from spiked samples, irrespective of soil type. However, recovery of E. coli from manure-applied field soil samples showed a
significant difference (P < 0 center dot 05) between the Petrifilm (TM) EC method and the m-FC method in enumerating BAY 63-2521 cell line E. coli possibly as a result of false positives on m-FC.
Conclusion:
The Petrifilm (TM) EC method is suitable for the enumeration of E. coli from soil with a detection limit of 10 CFU g-1 soil.
Significance and Impact of the Study:
The commercially available Petrifilm (TM) EC method is comparatively low cost, easy to use method for the enumeration of E. coli from soil without the need for further confirmation tests.”
“Aims:
The purpose of this work was to verify whether E. coli is a good indicator of viral contamination in mussels and Adenovirus could represent a better alternative as indicator organism of viral presence to guarantee consumer health protection.
Methods www.selleck.cn/products/sbi-0206965.html and Results:
Eighty samples of mussels from La Spezia Gulf were analysed for E. coli, Salmonella, Adenovirus, Norovirus and hepatitis A virus with cultural and biomolecular tests. The results of bacterial parameters showed E. coli within the law’s limits and the absence of Salmonella. Twelve samples were positive for Adenovirus presence, one for Norovirus genogroup II and two for hepatitis A virus. None of these positive mussels was found to be contaminated with more than one virus at the same time.
Conclusion:
This study showed that there was not a direct correlation between the presence of human pathogenic viruses and bacterial indicators.