BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

100 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27889173)

  • 1. Variability in the adaptive acid tolerance response phenotype of Salmonella enterica strains.
    Lianou A; Nychas GE; Koutsoumanis KP
    Food Microbiol; 2017 Apr; 62():99-105. PubMed ID: 27889173
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of the strain variability of Salmonella enterica acid and heat resistance.
    Lianou A; Koutsoumanis KP
    Food Microbiol; 2013 Jun; 34(2):259-67. PubMed ID: 23541192
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Cross-protective effect of acid-adapted Salmonella enterica on resistance to lethal acid and cold stress conditions.
    Xu H; Lee HY; Ahn J
    Lett Appl Microbiol; 2008 Oct; 47(4):290-7. PubMed ID: 19241522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparative analysis of acid resistance between susceptible and multi-antimicrobial-resistant Salmonella strains cultured under stationary-phase acid tolerance-inducing and noninducing conditions.
    Bacon RT; Sofos JN; Kendall PA; Belk KE; Smith GC
    J Food Prot; 2003 May; 66(5):732-40. PubMed ID: 12747678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Adaptive acid tolerance response in Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium and Salmonella enterica serovar Typhi.
    Tiwari RP; Sachdeva N; Hoondal GS; Grewal JS
    J Basic Microbiol; 2004; 44(2):137-46. PubMed ID: 15069673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Tolerance to stress and ability of acid-adapted and non-acid-adapted Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium DT104 to invade and survive in mammalian cells in vitro.
    Fratamico PM
    J Food Prot; 2003 Jul; 66(7):1115-25. PubMed ID: 12870742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparative analysis of acid resistance in Listeria monocytogenes and Salmonella enterica strains before and after exposure to poultry decontaminants. Role of the glutamate decarboxylase (GAD) system.
    Alonso-Hernando A; Alonso-Calleja C; Capita R
    Food Microbiol; 2009 Dec; 26(8):905-9. PubMed ID: 19835779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of genetic and physiological properties of Salmonella enterica isolates from chickens reveals one major difference between serovar Kentucky and other serovars: response to acid.
    Joerger RD; Sartori CA; Kniel KE
    Foodborne Pathog Dis; 2009 May; 6(4):503-12. PubMed ID: 19415975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A comparative study of thermal and acid inactivation kinetics in fruit juices of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium and Salmonella enterica serovar Senftenberg grown at acidic conditions.
    Alvarez-Ordóñez A; Fernández A; Bernardo A; López M
    Foodborne Pathog Dis; 2009 Nov; 6(9):1147-55. PubMed ID: 19694554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A stochastic approach for integrating strain variability in modeling Salmonella enterica growth as a function of pH and water activity.
    Lianou A; Koutsoumanis KP
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2011 Oct; 149(3):254-61. PubMed ID: 21794942
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effects of repeated cycles of acid challenge and growth on the phenotype and virulence of Salmonella enterica.
    Karatzas KA; Hocking PM; Jørgensen F; Mattick K; Leach S; Humphrey TJ
    J Appl Microbiol; 2008 Nov; 105(5):1640-8. PubMed ID: 19146498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effect of the growth environment on the strain variability of Salmonella enterica kinetic behavior.
    Lianou A; Koutsoumanis KP
    Food Microbiol; 2011 Jun; 28(4):828-37. PubMed ID: 21511146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Strain variability of the biofilm-forming ability of Salmonella enterica under various environmental conditions.
    Lianou A; Koutsoumanis KP
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2012 Nov; 160(2):171-8. PubMed ID: 23177057
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The acid tolerance responses of the Salmonella strains isolated from beef processing plants.
    Liu Y; Zhang Y; Zhu L; Niu L; Luo X; Dong P
    Food Microbiol; 2022 Jun; 104():103977. PubMed ID: 35287806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Strain Variability in Growth and Thermal Inactivation Characteristics of Listeria monocytogenes Strains after Acid Adaptation.
    Wang X; Tian S; Wu Y; Li H; Bai LI; Liu H; Zhang X; Dong Q
    J Food Prot; 2021 Dec; 84(12):2229-2236. PubMed ID: 34197590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Absence of association of autoinducer-2-based quorum sensing with heat and acid resistance of Salmonella.
    Yoon Y; Sofos JN
    J Food Sci; 2010 Sep; 75(7):M444-8. PubMed ID: 21535554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Modelling the effect of osmotic adaptation and temperature on the non-thermal inactivation of Salmonella spp. on brioche-type products.
    Kapetanakou AE; Makariti IP; Nazou EΝ; Manios SG; Karavasilis K; Skandamis PN
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2019 May; 296():48-57. PubMed ID: 30849706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Contribution of the hdeB-like gene (SEN1493) to survival of Salmonella enterica enteritidis Nal(R) at pH 2.
    Joerger RD; Choi S
    Foodborne Pathog Dis; 2015 Apr; 12(4):353-9. PubMed ID: 25659065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Homologous stress adaptation, antibiotic resistance, and biofilm forming ability of Salmonella enterica serovar Heidelberg ATCC8326 on different food-contact surfaces following exposure to sublethal chlorine concentrations1.
    Obe T; Nannapaneni R; Sharma CS; Kiess A
    Poult Sci; 2018 Mar; 97(3):951-961. PubMed ID: 29346603
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Adaptive acid tolerance response of Vibrio parahaemolyticus as affected by acid adaptation conditions, growth phase, and bacterial strains.
    Chiang ML; Chou CC; Chen HC; Tseng YT; Chen MJ
    Foodborne Pathog Dis; 2012 Aug; 9(8):734-40. PubMed ID: 22827515
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.