| Title |
Degradation and inactivation of Shiga toxins by nitrogen gas plasma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
AMB Express, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13568-017-0380-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Akikazu Sakudo, Yuichiro Imanishi |
| Abstract |
Shiga toxin (Stx)-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) leads to food poisoning by causing hemorrhagic colitis and hemolytic uremic syndrome. Some STEC produce Shiga toxin 1 (Stx1) and/or Shiga toxin 2 (Stx2), a relatively stable protein toxin, necessitating the development of an efficient inactivation method. Here we applied a nitrogen gas plasma apparatus to the inactivation of Stx. Samples of Stx1 and Stx2 were treated with a nitrogen gas plasma generated by a plasma device using a short high-voltage pulse applied by a static induction thyristor power supply at 1.5 kpps (kilo pulse per second). The recovered Stx samples were then analyzed for immunological and biological activities. Immunochromatography demonstrated that Stx1 and Stx2 were degraded by the gas plasma. Quantification by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) showed that both toxins were efficiently degraded to less than 1/10th of their original concentration within 5 min of treatment. Western blotting further showed the gas plasma treatment degraded the A subunit, which mediates the toxicity of Stx. Moreover, an assay using HEp-2 cells as an index of cytotoxicity showed that gas plasma treatment reduced the toxic activity of Stx. Therefore, nitrogen gas plasma might be an efficient method for the inactivation of Stx. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 31% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 23% |
| Researcher | 3 | 23% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 15% |
| Engineering | 2 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 5 | 38% |
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 07 April 2017.
All research outputs
#15,452,475
of 22,962,258 outputs
Outputs from AMB Express
#445
of 1,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,451
of 309,929 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AMB Express
#26
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,962,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,237 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 309,929 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.