Cited by 35Yeasts and Rust Fungi StudiesEssential Oils and Antimicrobial ActivityProbiotics and Fermented Foods

In vitro antimycotic activity of a Williopsis saturnus killer protein against food spoilage yeasts

Goretti, Marta, Turchetti, Benedetta, Buratta, Morena, Branda, Eva, Corazzi, Lanfranco, Vaughan-Martini, Ann, Buzzini, Pietro·2009·International Journal of Food Microbiology

Abstract

The in vitro antimycotic activity of a purified killer protein (KT4561) secreted by a strain of Williopsis saturnus was tested against 310 yeast strains belonging to 21 food spoilage species of 14 genera (Candida, Debaryomyces, Dekkera, Hanseniaspora, Issatchenkia, Kazachstania, Kluyveromyces, Pichia, Rhodotorula, Saccharomyces, Schizosaccharomyces, Torulaspora, Yarrowia and Zygosaccharomyces). Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) determinations showed that over 65% of the target strains were susceptible to concentrations < or = 32 microg/ml of KT4561. Three conventional food-grade antimicrobial agents were used as controls: 41, 33 and 40% of the target strains were sensitive to < or = 512 mg/ml of ethyl 3-hydroxybenzoate (E214), potassium sorbate (E202) or potassium metabisulphite (E224), respectively. The susceptibility of food spoilage yeasts towards KT4561, E214, E202 and E224 was species- and strain-dependent. In most cases KT4561 exhibited MIC values several orders of magnitude lower (100 to 100,000 times) than those observed for E214, E202 and E224. With only a few exceptions, the activity of KT4561 was pH-, ethanol-, glucose- and NaCl-independent. The present study demonstrates the potential of this yeast killer protein as a novel and natural control agent against food spoilage yeasts.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2009.02.013

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Goretti, M., Turchetti, B., Buratta, M., Branda, E., Corazzi, L., Vaughan-Martini, A., & Buzzini, P.
Affiliations
University of Perugia (IT)
Corresponding author
Buzzini, Pietro
Venue
International Journal of Food Microbiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-05
Volume
131
Issue
2-3
Pages
178-182
ISSN
0168-1605 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2048228063
Cited by
35
References
2
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Food Microbiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Yeasts and Rust Fungi Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Essential Oils and Antimicrobial Activity
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
Keywords
spoilage yeasts, antifungal activity, minimum inhibitory concentration, natural antimicrobials, potassium sorbate, potassium metabisulphite, Candida, Debaryomyces, Dekkera, Hanseniaspora, Issatchenkia, Kazachstania, Kluyveromyces, Pichia, Rhodotorula, Saccharomyces, Schizosaccharomyces, Torulaspora, Yarrowia, Zygosaccharomyces, food preservation
MeSH terms
Antifungal Agents, Food Microbiology, Fungal Proteins, Microbial Sensitivity Tests, Mycotoxins, Yeasts, Williopsis, Killer Factors, Yeast

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review