Fletcher Louise A, Gaunt Lindsey F, Beggs Clive B, Shepherd Simon J, Sleigh P Andrew, Noakes Catherine J, Kerr Kevin G
School of Civil Engineering, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
BMC Microbiol. 2007 Apr 17;7:32. doi: 10.1186/1471-2180-7-32.
In recent years there has been renewed interest in the use of air ionisers to control of the spread of airborne infection. One characteristic of air ions which has been widely reported is their apparent biocidal action. However, whilst the body of evidence suggests a biocidal effect in the presence of air ions the physical and biological mechanisms involved remain unclear. In particular, it is not clear which of several possible mechanisms of electrical origin (i.e. the action of the ions, the production of ozone, or the action of the electric field) are responsible for cell death. A study was therefore undertaken to clarify this issue and to determine the physical mechanisms associated with microbial cell death.
In the study seven bacterial species (Staphylococcus aureus, Mycobacterium parafortuitum, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter baumanii, Burkholderia cenocepacia, Bacillus subtilis and Serratia marcescens) were exposed to both positive and negative ions in the presence of air. In order to distinguish between effects arising from: (i) the action of the air ions; (ii) the action of the electric field, and (iii) the action of ozone, two interventions were made. The first intervention involved placing a thin mica sheet between the ionisation source and the bacteria, directly over the agar plates. This intervention, while leaving the electric field unaltered, prevented the air ions from reaching the microbial samples. In addition, the mica plate prevented ozone produced from reaching the bacteria. The second intervention involved placing an earthed wire mesh directly above the agar plates. This prevented both the electric field and the air ions from impacting on the bacteria, while allowing any ozone present to reach the agar plate. With the exception of Mycobacterium parafortuitum, the principal cause of cell death amongst the bacteria studied was exposure to ozone, with electroporation playing a secondary role. However in the case of Mycobacterium parafortuitum, electroporation resulting from exposure to the electric field appears to have been the principal cause of cell inactivation.
The results of the study suggest that the bactericidal action attributed to negative air ions by previous researchers may have been overestimated.
近年来,人们对使用空气离子发生器来控制空气传播感染的扩散重新产生了兴趣。空气离子的一个被广泛报道的特性是其明显的杀菌作用。然而,尽管有证据表明在空气离子存在的情况下有杀菌效果,但其中涉及的物理和生物学机制仍不清楚。特别是,尚不清楚几种可能的电起源机制(即离子的作用、臭氧的产生或电场的作用)中哪一种是细胞死亡的原因。因此开展了一项研究以阐明这个问题并确定与微生物细胞死亡相关的物理机制。
在该研究中,七种细菌(金黄色葡萄球菌、偶发分枝杆菌、铜绿假单胞菌、鲍曼不动杆菌、洋葱伯克霍尔德菌、枯草芽孢杆菌和粘质沙雷氏菌)在有空气的情况下暴露于正离子和负离子中。为了区分以下因素产生的影响:(i)空气离子的作用;(ii)电场的作用;以及(iii)臭氧的作用,进行了两项干预措施。第一项干预措施是在电离源和细菌之间,直接在琼脂平板上方放置一张薄云母片。这种干预措施在不改变电场的情况下,阻止了空气离子到达微生物样本。此外,云母片还阻止了产生的臭氧到达细菌。第二项干预措施是在琼脂平板正上方放置一个接地的金属丝网。这阻止了电场和空气离子对细菌的影响,同时允许任何存在的臭氧到达琼脂平板。除偶发分枝杆菌外,所研究细菌中细胞死亡的主要原因是暴露于臭氧,电穿孔起次要作用。然而在偶发分枝杆菌的情况下,暴露于电场导致的电穿孔似乎是细胞失活的主要原因。
该研究结果表明,先前研究人员归因于负空气离子的杀菌作用可能被高估了。