| pubmed-article:10735991 | rdf:type | pubmed:Citation | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0521009 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0039593 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0022885 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0681841 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C1382107 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C2827666 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:issue | 2 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:dateCreated | 2000-4-27 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:abstractText | Disinfection kinetic studies of sodium dodecyl sulphate, benzalkonium chloride and sodium hypochlorite against Staphylococcus aureus revealed that when a higher inoculum level of Staph. aureus than normal was used (approximately 1 log higher), the efficacy of disinfection was severely attenuated. Kinetic analysis using the Hom model for experiments carried out on tests using 3 x 108 organisms ml-1 were unable to account for the large increase in disinfection power observed when smaller inoculum levels were used. Since the inoculum was the same in every way except for the numbers used, the large variations in the log reduction/time curves could not be explained by a variation in the resistance of the population to the biocide, as identical log reduction-time curves should have resulted. The level of disinfection achieved for a given concentration of biocide was found to be approximately linearly related to the cell number ml-1 of test solution and not to the log number. The variation observed is believed to occur due to intrinsic self-quenching of the biocide by the microbes during the course of the disinfection test. As the level of free biocide decreases, the rate of reaction decreases, giving the tails of the log reduction/time curves. Such intrinsic self-quenching could explain the large variations known to occur in the legally required disinfection suspension tests. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:language | eng | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:journal | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:citationSubset | IM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:chemical | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:chemical | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:chemical | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:chemical | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:chemical | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:status | MEDLINE | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:month | Feb | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:issn | 1364-5072 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:JohnstonM DMD | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:LambertR JRJ | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:SimonsE AEA | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:issnType | Print | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:volume | 88 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:owner | NLM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:authorsComplete | Y | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:pagination | 237-42 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:dateRevised | 2000-12-18 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10735991... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10735991... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10735991... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10735991... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10735991... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10735991... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10735991... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10735991... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10735991... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10735991... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10735991... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:year | 2000 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:articleTitle | One explanation for the variability of the bacterial suspension test. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:affiliation | Microbiology, Unilever Research Colworth, Sharnbrook, Bedford, UK. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10735991 | pubmed:publicationType | Journal Article | lld:pubmed |
