The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Gram positive and Gram negative bacteria differ in their sensitivity to cold plasma
Open accessAbstract
Cold atmospheric-pressure plasma (CAP) is a relatively new method being investigated for antimicrobial activity. However, the exact mode of action is still being explored. Here we report that CAP efficacy is directly correlated to bacterial cell wall thickness in several species. Biofilms of Gram positive Bacillus subtilis, possessing a 55.4 nm cell wall, showed the highest resistance to CAP, with less than one log 10 reduction after 10 min treatment. In contrast, biofilms of Gram negative Pseudomonas aeruginosa, possessing only a 2.4 nm cell wall, were almost completely eradicated using the same treatment conditions. Planktonic cultures of Gram negative Pseudomonas libanensis also had a higher log 10 reduction than Gram positive Staphylococcus epidermidis.Mixed species biofilms of P. aeruginosa and S. epidermidis showed a similar trend of Gram positive bacteria being more resistant to CAP treatment. However, when grown in co-culture, Gram negative P. aeruginosa was more resistant to CAP overall than as a mono-species biofilm. Emission spectra indicated OH and O, capable of structural cell wall bond breakage, were present in the plasma. This study indicates that cell wall thickness correlates with CAP inactivation times of bacteria, but cell membranes and biofilm matrix are also likely to play a role.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Bacterial Biofilms: A Common Cause of Persistent Infections
Costerton, J. W., Stewart, P. S., & Greenberg, E. P. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.284.5418.1318 · Cited by 12,167
Cited by
Antibiotic resistance in microbes: History, mechanisms, therapeutic strategies and future prospects
Uddin, T. M., Chakraborty, A. J., Khusro, A., Zidan, B. R. M., Mitra, S., Emran, T. B., Dhama, K., Ripon, M. K. H., Gajdács, M., Sahibzada, M. U. K., et al. (2021) · Journal of Infection and Public Health · doi:10.1016/j.jiph.2021.10.020 · Cited by 1,311
Reuter, S., von Woedtke, T., & Weltmann, K.-D. (2018) · Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics · doi:10.1088/1361-6463/aab3ad · Cited by 522
Antimicrobial Activities of Natural Bioactive Polyphenols
Mandal, M. K., & Domb, A. J. (2024) · Pharmaceutics · doi:10.3390/pharmaceutics16060718 · Cited by 141
Mahnot, N. K., Mahanta, C. L., Farkas, B. E., Keener, K. M., & Misra, N. N. (2019) · Food Control · doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2019.06.004 · Cited by 63
Wang, Y., Liu, Y., Zhao, Y., Sun, Y., Duan, M., Wang, H., Dai, R., Liu, Y., Li, X., & Jia, F. (2023) · Food Research International · doi:10.1016/j.foodres.2023.113204 · Cited by 38
Metadata
- Authors
- Mai-Prochnow, A., Clauson, M., Hong, J., & Murphy, A. B.
- Venue
- Scientific Reports
- Published
- 2016-12-09
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 38610-38610
- ISSN
- 2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2560211500
- Cited by
- 736
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 23.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Gram positive and Gram negative bacteria differ in their sensitivity to cold plasma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/srep38610
- The paper
- Mai-Prochnow, A., Clauson, M., Hong, J., & Murphy, A. B. (2016). Gram positive and Gram negative bacteria differ in their sensitivity to cold plasma. Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep38610
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.