4.3 Article

Comparable Effects of Low-intensity Electromagnetic Irradiation at the Frequency of 51.8 and 53 GHz and Antibiotic Ceftazidime on Lactobacillus acidophilus Growth and Survival

Journal

CELL BIOCHEMISTRY AND BIOPHYSICS
Volume 67, Issue 3, Pages 829-835

Publisher

HUMANA PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1007/s12013-013-9571-2

Keywords

Electromagnetic irradiation; Ceftazidime; Bacterial growth and survival; Proton transport; Food producing and safety technology; Lactobacillus

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The effects of low-intensity electromagnetic irradiation (EMI) with the frequencies of 51.8 and 53 GHz on Lactobacillus acidophilus growth and survival were revealed. These effects were compared with antibacterial effects of antibiotic ceftazidime. Decrease in bacterial growth rate by EMI was comparable with the inhibitory effect of ceftazidime (minimal inhibitory concentration-16 mu M) and no enhanced action was observed with combined effects of EMI and the antibiotic. However, EMI-enhanced antibiotic inhibitory effect on bacterial survival. The kinetics of the bacterial suspension oxidation-reduction potential up to 24 h of the growth was changed by EMI and ceftazidime. The changes were more strongly expressed by combined effects of EMI and antibiotic especially up to 12 h. Moreover, EMI did not change overall energy (glucose)-dependent H+ efflux across the membrane but it increased N,N'-dicyclohexylcarbodiimide (DCCD)-inhibited H+ efflux. In contrast, this EMI in combination with ceftazidime decreased DCCD-sensitive H+ efflux. Low-intensity EMI had inhibitory effect on L. acidophilus bacterial growth and survival. The effect on bacterial survival was more significant in the combination with ceftazidime. The H+-translocating F (0) F (1)-ATPase, for which DCCD is specific inhibitor, might be a target for EMI and ceftazidime. The revealed bactericide effects on L. acidophilus can be applied in biotechnology, food producing and safety technology.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available