Comparative analysis of yeast cell viability at exponential and stationary growth phases
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper describes a comparative analysis of yeast cell viability at exponential and stationary growth phases using multiple conventional techniques and statistical tools. Overall, cellular responses to various viability assays were asynchronous. Results of optical density measurement and direct cell counting were asynchronous both at exponential and stationary phases. Proliferative capacity measurement using SP-SDS indicated that cells at the end of the stationary phase were proliferative as much as exponentially growing cells. Metabolic activity assays using two different dyes concluded that the inside of cells at stationary phase is slightly less reducing compared to that of exponentially growing cells, implying that the metabolic activity imperceptibly declined as cells were aged. These results will be helpful to understand the details of yeast cell viability at exponential and stationary growth phases.
Abstract
This paper describes a comparative analysis of yeast cell viability at exponential and stationary growth phases using multiple conventional techniques and statistical tools. Overall, cellular responses to various viability assays were asynchronous. Results of optical density measurement and direct cell counting were asynchronous both at exponential and stationary phases. Proliferative capacity measurement using SP-SDS indicated that cells at the end of the stationary phase were proliferative as much as exponentially growing cells. Metabolic activity assays using two different dyes concluded that the inside of cells at stationary phase is slightly less reducing compared to that of exponentially growing cells, implying that the metabolic activity imperceptibly declined as cells were aged. These results will be helpful to understand the details of yeast cell viability at exponential and stationary growth phases.
참고문헌 (23)
- A. -C. Gavin, , Nature, 440(7084), pp.631~636 (2006)
- J. Förster, , Genome Research, 13(2), pp.244~253 (2003)
- G. Cazzanelli, , Cells, 7(2), pp.14~ (2018)
- N. Nagaraj, , Molecular &Cellular Proteomics, 111, pp.M111.01372~ (2012)
- S. Ostergaard, , Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews, 64(1), pp.34~50 (2000)
- M. Kaeberlein, , Science, 310(5751), pp.1193~1196 (2005)
- Valter D. Longo, , Cell Metabolism, 16(1), pp.18~31 (2012)
- M. Kwolek-Mirek, , FEMS Yeast Research, 14(7), pp.1068~1079 (2014)
- G. H. Markx, , Journal of General Microbiology, 137(4), pp.735~743 (1991)
- P. J. Costello, , Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 49(4), pp.863~866 (1985)
- J. W. Messer, , ~ (1999)
- D. M. Kuhn, , J Clin Microbiol, 41(1), pp.506~508 (2003)
- R. López-Amorós, , Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 61(7), pp.2521~2526 (1995)
- K. Painting, , World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 6(3), pp.346~347 (1990)
- J. R. Broach, , Genetics, 192(1), pp.73~105 (2012)
- R. Loewith, , Genetics, 189(4), pp.1177~1201 (2011)
- M. Eigenfeld, , Frontiers in Fungal Biology, 2 (2021)
- Y. Sun, , GeroScience, 43(5), pp.2573~2593 (2021)
- M. Hotz, , Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(15), pp.e2119593119~ (2022)
- P. Thomas, , Biotechnology Reports, 8, pp.45~55 (2015)
- K. Chamchoy, , BMC Biochemistry, 20(1), pp.4~ (2019)
- R. Margesin, , Extremophiles, 13(2), pp.257~262 (2009)
- J. Park, , Biochemistry, 52(52), pp.9413~9425 (2013)