1999
DOI: 10.1016/s0168-1605(99)00159-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effects of the surface charge and hydrophobicity of Escherichia coli on its adhesion to beef muscle

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

16
100
1

Year Published

2003
2003
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 159 publications
(117 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
16
100
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The poorly-adhered beef strain increased 10-fold when calcium chloride levels were similarly increased. This is contradictory to the results of [25], who reported that increasing ionic strength of the monovalent sodium-based phosphate buffer from 1.5 to 150 mM decreased the number of E. coli cells strongly adhering to beef muscle by about 10-fold. Other researchers found ionic strength had little impact on adhesion of Salmonella to poultry tissue [33].…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…The poorly-adhered beef strain increased 10-fold when calcium chloride levels were similarly increased. This is contradictory to the results of [25], who reported that increasing ionic strength of the monovalent sodium-based phosphate buffer from 1.5 to 150 mM decreased the number of E. coli cells strongly adhering to beef muscle by about 10-fold. Other researchers found ionic strength had little impact on adhesion of Salmonella to poultry tissue [33].…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…Research has found that increased cells in the initial suspension resulted in more cells adhering to beef muscle [25]. Although we were comparing adhesion to kaolinite, similar results were found for only the goose strain, but not the beef strain.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 77%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The absence of electrostatic attractive interactions between the E. coli cell walls and the hydrogels might also contribute to the lower degree of attachment. In addition, as the net charge of the cell walls of E. coli at physiological pH is negative (Li and McLandsborough 1999), a repulsive electrostatic interaction between E.coli and the anionic polySPMA can also explain the lower degree of attachment of E.coli on the anionic polySPMA. The relatively high bacterial attachment found for the polyDMAEMA-coated PP spacer probably results from attractive electrostatic interactions.…”
Section: Bacterial Attachment Testmentioning
confidence: 99%