Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8bljj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-28T17:30:04.510Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

50. Studies in the Metabolism of the Lactic Acid Bacteria. I. Nitrogen Metabolism. J. G. Davis and A. T. R. Mattick

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

John Gilbert Davis
Affiliation:
The National Institute for Research in Dairying, University of Reading.
Alexander Torovil Robert Mattick
Affiliation:
The National Institute for Research in Dairying, University of Reading.

Extract

1. The true lactic acid bacteria cannot grow in a medium in which the sole source of nitrogen is an amino acid mixture or an ammonium salt.

2. The presence of growth factors (yeast extract, marmite and peptones) does not permit the utilisation of this “simple” nitrogen.

3. The streptococci grow fastest with those peptones containing the greatest amount of the higher fractions, Bactoproteose being superior to the other peptones tested; the lactobacilli, however, show a considerably greater fermentation rate with those peptones containing most amino nitrogen, Fairchild's being the best. Similarly, the streptococci thrive best upon a peptic casein digest which is about 15 days old, further digestion impoverishing the growth; the lactobacilli, however, grow better the longer the digestion. The significance of these observations is discussed from the aspects of bacterial metabolism, the sequence of flora in ripening cheese, and the preparation of casein digest media.

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1932

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.)

References

REFERENCES

(1) Orla-Jensen, (1919). The Lactic Acid Bacteria. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
(2) Birkinshaw, , Charles, and Clutterbuck, (1931). Biochem. J. 25, 1522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(3) Berman, and Rettger, (1918). J. Boot. 3, 367.Google Scholar
(4) Hucker, (1925). Zbl.f. Bakt. II, 65, 118.Google Scholar
(5) Rettger, , Berman, and Sturges, (1916). J. Bact. 1, 15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(6) Peskett, (1933). Biol. Rev. 8 (in press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(7) Quastel, and Stephenson, (1926). Biochem. J. 20, 1125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(8) Freedman, and Funk, (1922). J. Metab. Res. 1, 457.Google Scholar
(9) Davis, and Mattick, (1930). J. Dairy Res. 1, 136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(10) Wright, (1929). J. Path, and Bact. 32, 203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(11) Gordon, and McLeod, (1926). J. Path, and Bact. 29, 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(12) Kermack, and Slater, (1927). Biochem. J. 21, 1065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(13) Rose, W. C. et al. (19241931). J. Biol. Chem. 61, 64, 68, 76, 80, 82, 85, 94.Google Scholar
(14) McAlpine, and Brigham, (1928). J. Bact. 16, 251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(15) Clark, W. M. et al. (1920). J. Ind. and Eng. Chem. 12, 1163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(16) Stockholm, and Koch, (1923). J. Amer. Chem. Soc. 45, 1953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(17) Svedberg, (1931). Nature, 128, 999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar