Advertisement

Optimization on Antimicrobial Effects of Natural Compound Preservative Against B. cereus and E. coli by RSM

  • Xianqing Huang
  • Miaoyun Li
  • Gaiming Zhao
  • Xiaoping Gao
  • Qiuhui Zhang
  • Lingxia Sun
  • Yanxia Liu
  • Wenshui Xia
Article

Abstract

In this paper, the sensitivity of food spoilage organisms (Bacillus cereus; Escherichia coli) to natural antimicrobial peptides (surfactin; polylysine; nisin) from microorganism was observed, and the optimization of antimicrobial effect in meat evaluated by a RSM was studied. Results showed that these strains were sensitive to them. MICs of surfactin and polylysine and nisin were 31.25 and 312.5 and 312.5 μg/mL respectively against B. cereus, and MIC were 15.625 and 156.25 and 2,500 μg/mL respectively against E. coli. The optimization result indicated that B. cereus and E. coli could be sterilized by six log cycles when the temperature was 14.05 °C, the action time was 10.95 h, and the concentration (surfactin/polylysine/nisin weight ratio 0.1:1:2) was 379.53 μg/mL.

Keywords

Food spoilage organisms Bacillus cereus Escherichia coli Surfactin Polylysine (ε-poly-l-lysine) Nisin Antimicrobial effect 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the financial support and Henan Key Laboratory of Meat Processing and Quality Safety Control, PR China. This work was supported by National Public Welfare (Agriculture) Industry Science and Technology Special (No. 200903012).

References

  1. Atkinson AC, Donev AN (1992) Optimum experimental designs. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 132–189Google Scholar
  2. Box GEP, Behnken DW (1960) Some new three level designs for the study of quantitative variables. Technometrics: J Stat Phys Chem Eng Sci 2:455–475Google Scholar
  3. Box GEP, Wilson KB (1951) On the experimental attainment of optimum conditions. J Royal Stat Soc Ser A (Gen) 13:1–45Google Scholar
  4. Boziaris IS, Adams MR (1999) Effect of chelators and nisin in situ on inhibition and inactivation of Gram-negatives. Int J Food Microbiol 53:105–113PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Castro IA, Tirapegui J, Silva RSSF (2000) Protein mixtures and their nutritional properties optimized by response surface methodology. Nutr Res 20:1341–1353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cui F, Li Y, Xu Z, Xu H, Sun K, Tao W (2006) Optimization of the medium composition for production of mycelial biomass and exo-polymer by Grifola frondosa GF9801 using response surface methodology. Bioresour Technol 97:1209–1216PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Delves-Broughton J, Blackburn JP, Evans RJ, Hugenholtz J (1996) Applications of the bacteriocin, nisin. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 69:193–202PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dillon VM, Board RG (1994) Future prospects for natural antimicrobial food preservation systems. In: Dillon VM, Board RG (eds) In natural antimicrobial systems and food preservation. Cab International, Oxon, pp 297–305Google Scholar
  9. Gould GW (1996) Industry perspectives on the use of natural antimicrobials and inhibitors for food applications. J Food Prot 59(3 suppl.):82–86Google Scholar
  10. Kunamneni A, Singh S (2005) Response surface optimization of enzymatic hydrolysis of maize starch for higher glucose production. Biochem Eng J 27:179–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Liu BL, Tzeng YM (1998) Optimization of growth medium for the production of spores from Bacillus thuringiensis using response surface methodology. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng 18:413–418Google Scholar
  12. Lu CH, Engelmann NJ, Lila MA, Erdman JW Jr (2008) Optimization of lycopene extraction from tomato cell suspension culture by response surface methodology. J Agric Food Chem 56(17):7710–7714PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Nilsang S, Lertsiri S, Suphantharika M, Assavanig A (2005) Optimization of enzymatic hydrolysis of fish soluble concentrate by commercial proteases. J Food Eng 70:571–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ozer EA, Herken EN, Guzel S, Ainsworth P, Ibanoglu S (2006) Effect of extrusion process on the antioxidant activity and total phenolics in a nutritious snack food. Int J Food Sci Technol 41:289–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Periago PM, Moezelaar R (2001) Combined effect of nisin and carvacrol at different pH and temperature levels on the viability of different strains of Bacillus cereus. Int J Food Microbiol 68:141–148PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Prihardi K, Toshiharu I, Jun H (2001) Enhancement of ε-PL production Streptomycin albulus strain 410 using pH control. J Biosci Bioeng 91(2):190–194Google Scholar
  17. Reddy PRM, Mrudula S, Ramesh B, Reddy G, Seenayya G (2000) Production of thermostable pullulanase by clostridium thermosulfurogenes SV2 in solid-state fermentation: optimization of enzyme leaching conditions using response surface methodology. Bioprocess Eng 23:107–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Shieh CJ, Lai YF (2000) Application of response surface methodology to the study of methyl glucoside polyester synthesis parameters in a solvent-free system. J Agric Food Chem 48:1124–1128PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Terebiznik M, Jagus RJ, Cerrutti RP, DeHuergo MS, Pilosof MR (2002) Inactivation of Escherichia coli by a combination of nisin, pulsed electric fields, and water activity reduction by sodium chloride. J Food Prot 65:1253–1258PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Vorland LH, Ulvatne H, Andersen J, Haukland H, Rekdal O, Svendsen JS, Gutteberg TJ (1998) Lactoferricin of bovine origin is more active than lactoferricins of human, murine and caprine origin. Scand J Infect Dis 30(5):513–517PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Xianqing H, Zhaoxin L, Xiaomei B, FengXia L, Haizhen Z, Shujing Y (2007) Optimization of inactivation of endospores of Bacillus cereus by antimicrobial lipopeptides from Bacillus subtilis fmbj strains using a response surface method. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 74:454–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Zhang X, Li Y, Zhuge J (2006) Optimization of 1,3-propanediol production by novel recombinant Escherichia coli using response surface methodology. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 81:1075–1078CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xianqing Huang
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Miaoyun Li
    • 1
  • Gaiming Zhao
    • 1
  • Xiaoping Gao
    • 1
  • Qiuhui Zhang
    • 1
  • Lingxia Sun
    • 1
  • Yanxia Liu
    • 1
  • Wenshui Xia
    • 3
  1. 1.College of Food Science and TechnologyHenan Agricultural UniversityZhengzhouPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Technology Center of Shineway GroupLuohePeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.College of FoodJiangnan UniversityWuxiPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations