Biotechnology Bulletin ›› 2023, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (4): 296-303.doi: 10.13560/j.cnki.biotech.bull.1985.2022-0954
Previous Articles Next Articles
YAN Tao(), CHEN Ke-ke, YANG Heng-fei, ZHU Jian-guo, XIA Jiu-xue, FANG Shu-guang()
Received:
2022-07-31
Online:
2023-04-26
Published:
2023-05-16
YAN Tao, CHEN Ke-ke, YANG Heng-fei, ZHU Jian-guo, XIA Jiu-xue, FANG Shu-guang. Study on Factors Affecting the Storage Survival Rates of Probiotic Bacteria Powder[J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2023, 39(4): 296-303.
菌株Strain | 批次1 Batch 1 | 批次2 Batch 2 | 批次3 Batch 3 | 批次4 Batch 4 | 批次5 Batch 5 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
水分Moisture/% | 水分活度Water activity(Aw) | 水分Moisture/% | 水分活度Water activity(Aw) | 水分Moisture/% | 水分活度Water activity(Aw) | 水分Moisture/% | 水分活度Water activity(Aw) | 水分 Moisture/% | 水分活度Water activity(Aw) | ||
乳杆菌类Lactobacillus | LA85 | 2.70±0.21 | 0.061±0.004 | 3.57±0.22 | 0.093±0.005 | 5.18±0.23 | 0.123±0.006 | 5.68±0.25 | 0.228±0.007 | 6.78±0.26 | 0.292±0.008 |
Lp90 | 2.97±0.11 | 0.059±0.001 | 3.60±0.12 | 0.078±0.002 | 5.20±0.13 | 0.128±0.003 | 5.80±0.14 | 0.152±0.004 | 6.61±0.15 | 0.180±0.005 | |
LRa05 | 2.78±0.09 | 0.064±0.003 | 3.86±0.11 | 0.099±0.004 | 5.58±0.13 | 0.131±0.005 | 6.78±0.15 | 0.151±0.006 | 7.04±0.16 | 0.251±0.007 | |
LC89 | 3.08±0.10 | 0.060±0.004 | 3.44±0.12 | 0.068±0.005 | 5.16±0.13 | 0.126±0.006 | 5.51±0.15 | 0.154±0.007 | 6.56±0.17 | 0.175±0.008 | |
双歧杆菌类Bifidobacterium | BLa80 | 3.26±0.13 | 0.057±0.012 | 4.86±0.15 | 0.079±0.013 | 5.00±0.16 | 0.120±0.014 | 5.58±0.17 | 0.140±0.015 | 6.27±0.18 | 0.160±0.016 |
BL21 | 3.08±0.11 | 0.064±0.008 | 4.65±0.12 | 0.089±0.009 | 5.01±0.13 | 0.121±0.010 | 5.58±0.14 | 0.138±0.011 | 6.86±0.15 | 0.148±0.012 | |
BBr60 | 3.04±0.16 | 0.067±0.017 | 4.31±0.18 | 0.091±0.018 | 5.08±0.19 | 0.125±0.019 | 5.59±0.20 | 0.130±0.020 | 6.79±0.22 | 0.145±0.022 | |
BI45 | 3.12±0.17 | 0.070±0.003 | 4.31±0.19 | 0.098±0.005 | 5.07±0.20 | 0.128±0.005 | 5.55±0.21 | 0.131±0.006 | 6.89±0.25 | 0.149±0.007 | |
球菌类Cocci | ST81 | 2.52±0.08 | 0.051±0.004 | 3.07±0.09 | 0.085±0.005 | 5.15±0.10 | 0.127±0.006 | 5.55±0.11 | 0.134±0.007 | 6.48±0.13 | 0.143±0.008 |
PA53 | 2.90±0.09 | 0.058±0.011 | 3.65±0.10 | 0.088±0.012 | 5.18±0.11 | 0.127±0.013 | 5.56±0.12 | 0.138±0.014 | 6.79±0.14 | 0.141±0.015 | |
PP06 | 2.95±0.18 | 0.070±0.002 | 3.78±0.19 | 0.090±0.003 | 5.38±0.20 | 0.128±0.004 | 5.66±0.21 | 0.130±0.005 | 6.81±0.23 | 0.136±0.006 | |
LLa61 | 2.62±0.16 | 0.063±0.003 | 3.08±0.18 | 0.089±0.004 | 5.20±0.19 | 0.129±0.005 | 5.79±0.21 | 0.134±0.006 | 6.30±0.23 | 0.139±0.007 |
Table 1 Probiotic bacteria powder with different moisture and water activity
菌株Strain | 批次1 Batch 1 | 批次2 Batch 2 | 批次3 Batch 3 | 批次4 Batch 4 | 批次5 Batch 5 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
水分Moisture/% | 水分活度Water activity(Aw) | 水分Moisture/% | 水分活度Water activity(Aw) | 水分Moisture/% | 水分活度Water activity(Aw) | 水分Moisture/% | 水分活度Water activity(Aw) | 水分 Moisture/% | 水分活度Water activity(Aw) | ||
乳杆菌类Lactobacillus | LA85 | 2.70±0.21 | 0.061±0.004 | 3.57±0.22 | 0.093±0.005 | 5.18±0.23 | 0.123±0.006 | 5.68±0.25 | 0.228±0.007 | 6.78±0.26 | 0.292±0.008 |
Lp90 | 2.97±0.11 | 0.059±0.001 | 3.60±0.12 | 0.078±0.002 | 5.20±0.13 | 0.128±0.003 | 5.80±0.14 | 0.152±0.004 | 6.61±0.15 | 0.180±0.005 | |
LRa05 | 2.78±0.09 | 0.064±0.003 | 3.86±0.11 | 0.099±0.004 | 5.58±0.13 | 0.131±0.005 | 6.78±0.15 | 0.151±0.006 | 7.04±0.16 | 0.251±0.007 | |
LC89 | 3.08±0.10 | 0.060±0.004 | 3.44±0.12 | 0.068±0.005 | 5.16±0.13 | 0.126±0.006 | 5.51±0.15 | 0.154±0.007 | 6.56±0.17 | 0.175±0.008 | |
双歧杆菌类Bifidobacterium | BLa80 | 3.26±0.13 | 0.057±0.012 | 4.86±0.15 | 0.079±0.013 | 5.00±0.16 | 0.120±0.014 | 5.58±0.17 | 0.140±0.015 | 6.27±0.18 | 0.160±0.016 |
BL21 | 3.08±0.11 | 0.064±0.008 | 4.65±0.12 | 0.089±0.009 | 5.01±0.13 | 0.121±0.010 | 5.58±0.14 | 0.138±0.011 | 6.86±0.15 | 0.148±0.012 | |
BBr60 | 3.04±0.16 | 0.067±0.017 | 4.31±0.18 | 0.091±0.018 | 5.08±0.19 | 0.125±0.019 | 5.59±0.20 | 0.130±0.020 | 6.79±0.22 | 0.145±0.022 | |
BI45 | 3.12±0.17 | 0.070±0.003 | 4.31±0.19 | 0.098±0.005 | 5.07±0.20 | 0.128±0.005 | 5.55±0.21 | 0.131±0.006 | 6.89±0.25 | 0.149±0.007 | |
球菌类Cocci | ST81 | 2.52±0.08 | 0.051±0.004 | 3.07±0.09 | 0.085±0.005 | 5.15±0.10 | 0.127±0.006 | 5.55±0.11 | 0.134±0.007 | 6.48±0.13 | 0.143±0.008 |
PA53 | 2.90±0.09 | 0.058±0.011 | 3.65±0.10 | 0.088±0.012 | 5.18±0.11 | 0.127±0.013 | 5.56±0.12 | 0.138±0.014 | 6.79±0.14 | 0.141±0.015 | |
PP06 | 2.95±0.18 | 0.070±0.002 | 3.78±0.19 | 0.090±0.003 | 5.38±0.20 | 0.128±0.004 | 5.66±0.21 | 0.130±0.005 | 6.81±0.23 | 0.136±0.006 | |
LLa61 | 2.62±0.16 | 0.063±0.003 | 3.08±0.18 | 0.089±0.004 | 5.20±0.19 | 0.129±0.005 | 5.79±0.21 | 0.134±0.006 | 6.30±0.23 | 0.139±0.007 |
分类Classification | 菌株Strain | 存活率Survival rate/% | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
批次1 Batch 1 | 批次2 Batch 2 | 批次3 Batch 3 | 批次4 Batch 4 | 批次5 Batch 5 | |||
乳杆菌Lactobacillus | LA85 | 93.43±1.43 | 92.23±2.11 | 91.54±1.91 | 85.23±1.31* | 80.43±1.67** | |
Lp90 | 96.32±1.67 | 95.89±2.01 | 94.43±1.54 | 88.32±1.54* | 83.32±1.34** | ||
LRa05 | 95.67±1.21 | 94.65±1.81 | 93.87±1.44 | 86.32±1.67* | 81.43±2.34** | ||
LC89 | 92.54±1.67 | 92.34±1.56 | 91.67±1.89 | 83.44±1.32* | 77.34±1.43** | ||
双歧杆菌Bifidobacterium | BLa80 | 97.45±1.35 | 96.41±1.55 | 95.32±1.68 | 90.43±1.11* | 84.32±1.11** | |
BL21 | 96.65±1.22 | 95.12±1.67 | 95.31±1.44 | 90.32±1.56* | 83.21±1.51** | ||
BBr60 | 95.44±1.57 | 94.11±1.35 | 93.32±1.68 | 88.32±1.56* | 82.77±1.88** | ||
BI45 | 93.14±1.01 | 92.35±1.45 | 92.88±1.54 | 86.32±1.58* | 80.55±1.22** | ||
球菌 Cocci | ST81 | 92.55±1.65 | 91.78±1.23 | 91.11±1.63 | 85.34±1.51* | 80.69±1.51** | |
PA53 | 92.67±1.64 | 91.77±1.88 | 90.88±1.13 | 85.99±1.99* | 80.01±1.67** | ||
PP06 | 92.33±1.54 | 92.11±1.33 | 91.76±2.13 | 86.11±1.78* | 81.35±1.32** | ||
LLa61 | 88.18±1.48 | 87.44±1.54 | 86.89±1.56 | 80.23±1.65* | 74.67±1.78** |
Table 2 Storage survival rate of probiotic bacteria powder with different moisture and water activity
分类Classification | 菌株Strain | 存活率Survival rate/% | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
批次1 Batch 1 | 批次2 Batch 2 | 批次3 Batch 3 | 批次4 Batch 4 | 批次5 Batch 5 | |||
乳杆菌Lactobacillus | LA85 | 93.43±1.43 | 92.23±2.11 | 91.54±1.91 | 85.23±1.31* | 80.43±1.67** | |
Lp90 | 96.32±1.67 | 95.89±2.01 | 94.43±1.54 | 88.32±1.54* | 83.32±1.34** | ||
LRa05 | 95.67±1.21 | 94.65±1.81 | 93.87±1.44 | 86.32±1.67* | 81.43±2.34** | ||
LC89 | 92.54±1.67 | 92.34±1.56 | 91.67±1.89 | 83.44±1.32* | 77.34±1.43** | ||
双歧杆菌Bifidobacterium | BLa80 | 97.45±1.35 | 96.41±1.55 | 95.32±1.68 | 90.43±1.11* | 84.32±1.11** | |
BL21 | 96.65±1.22 | 95.12±1.67 | 95.31±1.44 | 90.32±1.56* | 83.21±1.51** | ||
BBr60 | 95.44±1.57 | 94.11±1.35 | 93.32±1.68 | 88.32±1.56* | 82.77±1.88** | ||
BI45 | 93.14±1.01 | 92.35±1.45 | 92.88±1.54 | 86.32±1.58* | 80.55±1.22** | ||
球菌 Cocci | ST81 | 92.55±1.65 | 91.78±1.23 | 91.11±1.63 | 85.34±1.51* | 80.69±1.51** | |
PA53 | 92.67±1.64 | 91.77±1.88 | 90.88±1.13 | 85.99±1.99* | 80.01±1.67** | ||
PP06 | 92.33±1.54 | 92.11±1.33 | 91.76±2.13 | 86.11±1.78* | 81.35±1.32** | ||
LLa61 | 88.18±1.48 | 87.44±1.54 | 86.89±1.56 | 80.23±1.65* | 74.67±1.78** |
分类Classification | 菌株Strain | 存活率Survival rate/% | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
贮存-18℃Storage at -18℃ | 贮存4℃Storage at 4℃ | 贮存25℃Storage at 25℃ | |||
乳杆菌 Lactobacillus | LA85 | 92.23±2.11 | 79.34±1.91** | 48.56±2.67** | |
Lp90 | 95.12±1.81 | 84.34±1.22** | 44.31±1.79** | ||
LRa05 | 93.33±1.22 | 83.23±1.87** | 40.36±1.64** | ||
LC89 | 90.01±1.12 | 82.15±1.85** | 43.43±1.57** | ||
双歧杆菌 Bifidobacterium | BLa80 | 94.45±1.32 | 84.54±1.67** | 49.33±1.67** | |
BL21 | 92.65±1.32 | 78.24±1.86** | 31.35±1.65** | ||
BBr60 | 92.67±1.33 | 82.34±1.66** | 36.34±2.66** | ||
BI45 | 94.54±1.45 | 79.11±1.89** | 26.24±1.76** | ||
球菌 Cocci | ST81 | 90.45±1.55 | 72.11±2.89** | 43.33±1.67** | |
PA53 | 91.20±1.01 | 72.45±1.55** | 33.34±1.66** | ||
PP06 | 90.03±1.06 | 78.13±1.97** | 45.33±1.67** | ||
LLa61 | 86.78±1.22 | 71.43±1.57** | 43.53±2.47** |
Table 3 Effects of different storage temperatures on the storage survival rates of probiotic bacteria powder
分类Classification | 菌株Strain | 存活率Survival rate/% | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
贮存-18℃Storage at -18℃ | 贮存4℃Storage at 4℃ | 贮存25℃Storage at 25℃ | |||
乳杆菌 Lactobacillus | LA85 | 92.23±2.11 | 79.34±1.91** | 48.56±2.67** | |
Lp90 | 95.12±1.81 | 84.34±1.22** | 44.31±1.79** | ||
LRa05 | 93.33±1.22 | 83.23±1.87** | 40.36±1.64** | ||
LC89 | 90.01±1.12 | 82.15±1.85** | 43.43±1.57** | ||
双歧杆菌 Bifidobacterium | BLa80 | 94.45±1.32 | 84.54±1.67** | 49.33±1.67** | |
BL21 | 92.65±1.32 | 78.24±1.86** | 31.35±1.65** | ||
BBr60 | 92.67±1.33 | 82.34±1.66** | 36.34±2.66** | ||
BI45 | 94.54±1.45 | 79.11±1.89** | 26.24±1.76** | ||
球菌 Cocci | ST81 | 90.45±1.55 | 72.11±2.89** | 43.33±1.67** | |
PA53 | 91.20±1.01 | 72.45±1.55** | 33.34±1.66** | ||
PP06 | 90.03±1.06 | 78.13±1.97** | 45.33±1.67** | ||
LLa61 | 86.78±1.22 | 71.43±1.57** | 43.53±2.47** |
分类Classification | 菌株Strain | 存活率Survival rate/% | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
普通封装Ordinary encapsulation | 真空封装Vacuum encapsulation | 氮气封装Nitrogen encapsulation | |||
乳杆菌 Lactobacillus | LA85 | 91.35±1.81 | 95.01±1.01* | 94.56±1.44* | |
Lp90 | 93.22±1.81 | 97.12±1.22* | 96.65±1.78* | ||
LRa05 | 91.11±1.81 | 96.13±1.55* | 96.01±1.32* | ||
LC89 | 89.78±2.11 | 94.32±1.32* | 93.68±1.33* | ||
双歧杆菌Bifidobacterium | BLa80 | 91.67±1.33 | 96.23±1.22* | 96.15±1.22* | |
BL21 | 90.78±1.22 | 95.32±1.68* | 95.32±1.45* | ||
BBr60 | 91.67±1.34 | 95.89±1.01* | 95.22±1.11* | ||
BI45 | 92.32±1.68 | 96.55±1.32* | 95.82±1.22* | ||
球菌 Cocci | ST81 | 88.67±1.31 | 93.89±1.11* | 93.43±1.42* | |
PA53 | 89.89±1.11 | 94.89±1.56* | 94.32±1.66* | ||
PP06 | 88.11±1.89 | 93.65±1.34* | 93.01±1.32* | ||
LLa61 | 84.89±1.14 | 89.43±1.32* | 89.21±1.21* |
Table 4 Effects of different packaging methods on the storage survival rates of probiotic bacteria powder
分类Classification | 菌株Strain | 存活率Survival rate/% | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
普通封装Ordinary encapsulation | 真空封装Vacuum encapsulation | 氮气封装Nitrogen encapsulation | |||
乳杆菌 Lactobacillus | LA85 | 91.35±1.81 | 95.01±1.01* | 94.56±1.44* | |
Lp90 | 93.22±1.81 | 97.12±1.22* | 96.65±1.78* | ||
LRa05 | 91.11±1.81 | 96.13±1.55* | 96.01±1.32* | ||
LC89 | 89.78±2.11 | 94.32±1.32* | 93.68±1.33* | ||
双歧杆菌Bifidobacterium | BLa80 | 91.67±1.33 | 96.23±1.22* | 96.15±1.22* | |
BL21 | 90.78±1.22 | 95.32±1.68* | 95.32±1.45* | ||
BBr60 | 91.67±1.34 | 95.89±1.01* | 95.22±1.11* | ||
BI45 | 92.32±1.68 | 96.55±1.32* | 95.82±1.22* | ||
球菌 Cocci | ST81 | 88.67±1.31 | 93.89±1.11* | 93.43±1.42* | |
PA53 | 89.89±1.11 | 94.89±1.56* | 94.32±1.66* | ||
PP06 | 88.11±1.89 | 93.65±1.34* | 93.01±1.32* | ||
LLa61 | 84.89±1.14 | 89.43±1.32* | 89.21±1.21* |
[1] | 李晴, 唐文倩, 谢柳佳, 等. 不同壁材包埋对益生菌性能的影响[J]. 食品与发酵科技, 2020, 56(6): 92-99. |
Li Q, Tang WQ, Xie LJ, et al. Effects of different wall materials on characteristics of microencapsulated probiotics[J]. Food Ferment Sci & Technol, 2020, 56(6): 92-99. | |
[2] | 王似锦, 江志杰, 牛振东, 等. 保健食品双歧杆菌和乳酸菌计数方法的优化[J]. 中国微生态学杂志, 2015, 27(2): 227-229, 232. |
Wang SJ, Jiang ZJ, Niu ZD, et al. Optimization of enumeration method on Bifidobacteria and lactic bacteria in health food[J]. Chin J Microecol, 2015, 27(2): 227-229, 232. | |
[3] |
Syngai GG, Gopi R, Bharali R, et al. Probiotics - the versatile functional food ingredients[J]. J Food Sci Technol, 2016, 53(2): 921-933.
doi: 10.1007/s13197-015-2011-0 pmid: 27162372 |
[4] | 贾宇, 董晨阳, 周绪宝, 等. 品质因子和益生菌对草莓品质和贮藏的影响[J]. 农产品加工, 2019(13): 12-15. |
Jia Y, Dong CY, Zhou XB, et al. Effects of quality factors and probiotics on strawberry quality and storage[J]. Farm Prod Process, 2019(13): 12-15. | |
[5] |
Morovic W, Budinoff CR. Epigenetics: a new frontier in probiotic research[J]. Trends Microbiol, 2021, 29(2): 117-126.
doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2020.04.008 pmid: 32409146 |
[6] | 张金丽. 低水分活度食品的微生物安全研究进展[J]. 生物化工, 2017, 3(6): 89-90. |
Zhang JL. Research progress on microbial safety of low water activity foods[J]. Biol Chem Eng, 2017, 3(6): 89-90. | |
[7] |
Sablani SS, Kasapis S, Rahman MS. Evaluating water activity and glass transition concepts for food stability[J]. J Food Eng, 2007, 78(1): 266-271.
doi: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2005.09.025 URL |
[8] |
Rothrock MJ, Zhuang H, Lawrence KC, et al. In-package inactivation of pathogenic and spoilage bacteria associated with poultry using dielectric barrier discharge-cold plasma treatments[J]. Curr Microbiol, 2017, 74(2): 149-158.
doi: 10.1007/s00284-016-1158-x pmid: 27885385 |
[9] | 黄晓燕, 刘铖珺, 李长城, 等. 低水分活度食品微生物控制技术研究现状[J]. 食品与发酵工业, 2020, 46(23): 286-292. |
Huang XY, Liu CJ, Li CC, et al. Research progress in microbiological control of food with low water activity[J]. Food Ferment Ind, 2020, 46(23): 286-292. | |
[10] | 杨红, 王锁民. 豌豆种子萌发时的含水量对子叶中蛋白酶和淀粉酶活性的影响[J]. 西北植物学报, 2002, 22(5): 1136-1142. |
Yang H, Wang SM. The effect of water content in germinating pea seeds on activities of protease and amylase in the cotyledons[J]. Acta Bot Boreali Occidentalia Sin, 2002, 22(5): 1136-1142. | |
[11] | 黄晓辰, 蔡友华, 马金魁, 等. 发酵食品源功能活性肽及其应用研究进展[J]. 现代食品科技, 2021(8): 364-374. |
Huang XC, Cai YH, Ma JK, et al. Research progress on functional active peptides in fermented foods and their application[J]. Mod Food Sci Technol, 2021(8): 364-374. | |
[12] | 贾宏信. 充氮包装对乳粉贮存过程中水分、水分活度及益生菌活菌数变化的影响[J]. 中国乳品工业, 2019, 47(1): 27-30. |
Jia HX. Effect of Nitrogen-filled packaging on the moisture content, water activity and viable count of probiotic milk powder during storage[J]. China Dairy Ind, 2019, 47(1): 27-30. | |
[13] | Remón D, Bandera YN, López FD. Preliminary analysis of the efect of water activity on viability and stability of probiotics formulations[J]. Centro Azucar, 2016, 43(1):24-30. |
[14] | 何光华, 姜慧萍, 黄焘, 等. 益生菌配方奶粉中水分活度的控制[J]. 中国乳品工业, 2012, 40(2): 30-32. |
He GH, Jiang HP, Huang T, et al. Controlling water activity of probiotics formula powder[J]. China Dairy Ind, 2012, 40(2): 30-32. | |
[15] |
Akkermans S, Noriega Fernandez E, Logist F, et al. Introducing a novel interaction model structure for the combined effect of temperature and pH on the microbial growth rate[J]. Int J Food Microbiol, 2017, 240: 85-96.
doi: S0168-1605(16)30304-X pmid: 27393390 |
[16] |
陈琳, 周光宏, 徐幸莲, 等. 高氧气调包装对宰后猪肉蛋白质氧化、钙蛋白酶活性及蛋白质降解的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(18): 3628-3638.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.18.017 |
Chen L, Zhou GH, Xu XL, et al. Effects of high oxygen modified atmosphere packaging on protein oxidation, calpain activity and protein proteolysis of pork during postmortem refrigerated storage[J]. Sci Agric Sin, 2016, 49(18): 3628-3638.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.18.017 |
|
[17] | 宋士良. 微包埋技术及其在益生菌中应用现状综述[J]. 中国饲料添加剂, 2021(8): 12-19. |
Song SL. Review of microencapsulation technology and its application in probiotics[J]. China Feed Addit, 2021(8): 12-19. | |
[18] |
Cook MT, Tzortzis G, Charalampopoulos D, et al. Microencapsulation of probiotics for gastrointestinal delivery[J]. J Control Release, 2012, 162(1): 56-67.
doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2012.06.003 URL |
[19] | 满丽莉, 向殿军, 布日额, 等. 乳酸菌的热胁迫研究进展[J]. 现代食品科技, 2019, 35(1): 281-287. |
Man LL, Xiang DJ, Bu RE, et al. Research progress on heat stress of lactic acid bacteria[J]. Mod Food Sci Technol, 2019, 35(1): 281-287. | |
[20] |
Talwalkar A, Kailasapathy K, Peiris P, et al. Application of RBGR—a simple way for screening of oxygen tolerance in probiotic bacteria[J]. Int J Food Microbiol, 2001, 71(2/3): 245-248.
doi: 10.1016/S0168-1605(01)00563-3 URL |
[21] |
Hoover R, Manuel H. Effect of heat—moisture treatment on the structure and physicochemical properties of legume starches[J]. Food Res Int, 1996, 29(8): 731-750.
doi: 10.1016/S0963-9969(97)86873-1 URL |
[1] | SONG Hai-na, WU Xin-tong, YANG Lu-yu, GENG Xi-ning, ZHANG Hua-min, SONG Xiao-long. Selection and Validation of Reference Genes for RT-qPCR in Allium tuberosum Infected by Botrytis squamosa [J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2023, 39(3): 101-115. |
[2] | ZHU Ying-xuan, LI Ke-jing, HE Min, ZHENG Dao-qiong. Research Progress in the Exploring Genomic Variations Driven by Stress Factors Using the Yeast Model [J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2023, 39(11): 191-204. |
[3] | YANG Jun-zhao, ZHANG Xin-rui, SUN Qing-yang, ZHENG Fei. Affecting Mechanism of Loop B3 on the Function of GH7 Endoglucanase [J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2023, 39(10): 281-291. |
[4] | LI Sheng-yan, LI Xiang-yin, LI Peng-cheng, ZHANG Ming-jun, ZHANG Jie, LANG Zhi-hong. Identification of Target Traits and Genetic Stability of Transgenic Maize 2HVB5 [J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2023, 39(1): 21-30. |
[5] | ZHAO Lin-yan, GUAN Hui-lin, WANG Ke-shu, LU Yan-lei, XIANG Ping, WEI Fu-gang, YANG Shao-zhou, XU Wu-mei. Effects of Soil Moisture on the Microbial Community Under Continuous Cropping of Panax notoginseng [J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2022, 38(7): 215-223. |
[6] | WANG Zi-yan, WANG Jian, ZHANG Lun, GUI Shui-qing, LU Xue-mei. Study on Antibacterial Stability of Musca domestica Cecropin-MDC Against Salmonella typhimurium [J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2022, 38(3): 149-156. |
[7] | LIANG Xing-xing, WANG Jia, XU Wen-tao. Research Progress in Phosphorylation Modification of Antiviral Nucleotide Analogs [J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2022, 38(2): 218-226. |
[8] | ZHANG Chen, ZHANG Tong-tong, LIU Hai-ping. Screening and Identification of Ethylene-forming Enzymes with High Activity and Thermostability [J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2022, 38(11): 269-276. |
[9] | JIANG Di, XU Chun-cheng. Research Progress in the Succession of Microbial Communities in Total Mixed Ration Silage [J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2021, 37(9): 31-38. |
[10] | GAO Zhen-feng, ZHAO Jia. Study on Antifungal Properties of Fermentation Broth from Streptomyces albidoflavus G-1 and Optimization of Its Fermentation Condition [J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2021, 37(3): 53-64. |
[11] | CHEN Chun, SU Ling-qia, XIA Wei, WU Jing. Improved the Thermostability of MTHase from Arthrobacter ramosus by Directed Evolution [J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2021, 37(3): 84-91. |
[12] | ZHENG Ye-zi, WANG Dan, PAN Mi, WANG Yan-ling, AN Li-jun. Isolation and Characterization of Two New GLABROUS1 Alleles in Arabidopsis [J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2021, 37(2): 15-23. |
[13] | YU Qin, MA Xian-yong, DENG Dun, WANG Yong-fei. Optimization of Indole-degrading Conditions in Pig Manure Waste Water by Enteroccus hirae IDO5 and Analysis of Its Corresponding Degradation Pathway [J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2021, 37(12): 113-123. |
[14] | TIAN Geng, GAO Wei-qiang, CHEN Xiao-bo, ZHANG Chun-xiao. Directed Mutagenesis of β-mannanase Gene from Bacillus licheniformis KD-1 for Improving Enzyme Activity and Stability [J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2021, 37(10): 100-109. |
[15] | WU Jiao, YU Gui-zhen, YUAN Hang, LIU Xian, GAO Yan-xiu, GONG Ming, ZOU Zhu-rong. Improvement on the Thermostability of Target Proteins by Fusing Rubredoxin from Hyperthermophile Pyrococcus furiosus [J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2021, 37(10): 110-119. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||