This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions Copyright Information Books from ASM Press MicrobeWorld Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Vadehra, D. V. Articles by Harmon, L. G. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Vadehra, D. V. Articles by Harmon, L. G. Agricola Articles by Vadehra, D. V. Articles by Harmon, L. G.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Appl Environ Microbiol. 1965 November; 13(6): 1010-1013
Copyright © 1965 American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Comparison of Methods of Extracting Intracellular Proteases from Bacteria¹

Department of Food Science, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan

ABSTRACT

Five commonly used methods of disintegrating bacterial cells were compared by use of Bacillus subtilis, Pseudomonas putrefaciens, and Streptococcus durans as the test organisms. These methods were: (i) sonic treatment, (ii) grinding, (iii) freezing and thawing, (iv) acetone-powder, and (v) toluene. Sonic treatment and grinding yielded more protein in the cell-free extracts than did the other methods. Likewise, the protease activities (micrograms of tyrosine liberated per milliliter of extract) of sonically disrupted and ground cell extracts on casein substrates were far greater than those in extracts from cells disintegrated by the other methods. When the specific activity was based on the amount of tyrosine liberated per milligram of protein in the extract, the acetone-powder method yielded the most active protease extract, whereas the extract obtained by sonic treatment was least active. Other methods yielded extracts with intermediate specific activity.

¹ Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station Journal Article No. 3678.