↓ Skip to main content

Mechanisms of pressure-mediated cell death and injury in Escherichia coli: from fundamentals to food applications

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
100 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Mechanisms of pressure-mediated cell death and injury in Escherichia coli: from fundamentals to food applications
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, June 2015
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2015.00599
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Gänzle, Yang Liu

Abstract

High hydrostatic pressure is commercially applied to extend the shelf life of foods, and to improve food safety. Current applications operate at ambient temperature and 600 MPa or less. However, bacteria that may resist this pressure level include the pathogens Staphylococcus aureus and strains of Escherichia coli, including shiga-toxin producing E. coli. The resistance of E. coli to pressure is variable between strains and highly dependent on the food matrix. The targeted design of processes for the safe elimination of E. coli thus necessitates deeper insights into mechanisms of interaction and matrix-strain interactions. Cellular targets of high pressure treatment in E. coli include the barrier properties of the outer membrane, the integrity of the cytoplasmic membrane as well as the activity of membrane-bound enzymes, and the integrity of ribosomes. The pressure-induced denaturation of membrane bound enzymes results in generation of reactive oxygen species and subsequent cell death caused by oxidative stress. Remarkably, pressure resistance at the single cell level relates to the disposition of misfolded proteins in inclusion bodies. While the pressure resistance E. coli can be manipulated by over-expression or deletion of (stress) proteins, the mechanisms of pressure resistance in wild type strains is multi-factorial and not fully understood. This review aims to provide an overview on mechanisms of pressure-mediated cell death in E. coli, and the use of this information for optimization of high pressure processing of foods.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 97 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 17%
Researcher 14 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 23 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 41 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 7%
Chemistry 3 3%
Engineering 3 3%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 28 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 July 2015.
All research outputs
#18,411,569
of 22,807,037 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#19,284
of 24,760 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,646
of 264,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#262
of 382 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,807,037 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,760 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,075 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 382 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.