Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 311

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Water Relations of Staphylococcus Aureus At 30°C

Open access
Scott, WJ·1953·Australian Journal of Biological Sciences

Abstract

Fourteen food-poisoning strains of Staphylococcus aureus have been grown in various media of known water activity at 30°C. Aerobic growth was observed atwater activities between 0.999 and 0.86. The rate of growth and the yield of cells were both reduced substantially when the water activity was less than c. 0.94. The lower limits for growth in dried meat, dried milk, and dried soup were similar to those in liquid media. Aerobic growth proceeded at slightly lower water activities than anaerobic growth. All cells were capable of forming colonies on agar media with water activities as low as 0.92. The 14 strains proved to be a homogeneous group with similar water equirements.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1071/bi9530549

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 311

Metadata

Authors
Scott, W.
Venue
Australian Journal of Biological Sciences
Published
1953-12-01
Volume
6
Issue
4
Pages
549-564
ISSN
0004-9417 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2178682063
Cited by
311
References
0
FWCI
8.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Water Relations of Staphylococcus Aureus At 30°C. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1071/bi9530549
The paper
Scott, W. (1953). Water Relations of Staphylococcus Aureus At 30°C. Australian Journal of Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1071/bi9530549

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.