Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-8wtlm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-14T22:03:19.888Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

640. Some bacteriological aspects of commercially sterilized milk: II. Type of sporeforming bacteria isolated

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

M. R. Candy  and
Agnes A. Nichols
M. R. Candy
Affiliation:
National Agricultural Advisory Service, Woodthorne, Wolverhampton
Agnes A. Nichols
Affiliation:
National Agricultural Advisory Service, Woodthorne, Wolverhampton
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Cultures of sporeforming bacteria isolated from commercially sterilized milk were examined and seasonal variations in the incidence of B. subtilis/ B. licheniformis strains were apparent which may account for the increased rate of spoilage at 30° C. during the winter.

B. subtilis was the most common mesophilic sporeformer isolated, and under favourable conditions it produces rapid digestion of milk.

Thermophilic sporeformers are frequently present, and usually produce a firm acid clot in milk held at temperatures favourable for their growth. The classification of the thermophiles isolated is uncertain and a review of the classification of the aerobic thermophilic sporeformers in general is required.

Cl. thermosaccharolyticum, a gas-producing thermophile, was isolated from sterilized milk.

Information

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 23 , Issue 3 , October 1956 , pp. 329 - 335
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1956

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

(1)Ridgway, J. D. (1955). J. appl. Bact. 18, 374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2)Smith, N. R., Gordon, R. E. & Clark, F. E. (1952). U.S. Dep. Agric., Wash. D.C., Agric. Monograph, no. 16.Google Scholar
(3)Grinsted, E. & Clegg, L. F. L. (1955). J. Dairy Res. 22, 178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(4)Franklin, J. G., Williams, D. J. & Clegg, L. F. L. (1955). J. appl. Bact. 18, no. 3, ix.Google Scholar
(5)Hussong, R. V. & Hammer, B. W. (1928). J. Bact. 15, 179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(6)Nichols, A. A. & Candy, M. R. (1956). J. Dairy Res. 23, 319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(7)Gibson, T. & Abd-el-Malek, Y. (1945). J. Dairy Res. 14, 35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(8)McGaughey, C. A. & Chu, H. P. (1948). J. gen. Microbiol. 2, 334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(9)Ridgway, J. D. (1954). J. appl. Bact. 17, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(10)Gibson, T. (1944). J. Dairy Res. 13, 248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(11)Clegg, L. F. L. (1950). J. Soc. Dairy Tech. 3, 238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(12)Burton, H., Akam, D. N., Thiel, C. C., Grinsted, E. & Clegg, L. F. L. (1953). J. Soc. Dairy Tech. 6, 98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(13)McClung, L. S. (1935). J. Bact. 29, 189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(14)Cameron, E. J. (1930). J. Bact. 19, 52.Google Scholar
(15)Marsh, C. L. & Larsen, D. H. (1953). J. Bact. 65, 193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(16)Cuttell, J. R. (1954). Dairy Ind. 19, 917.Google Scholar