Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Latest Articles
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • Topics
    • Applied and Environmental Science
    • Clinical Science and Epidemiology
    • Ecological and Evolutionary Science
    • Host-Microbe Biology
    • Molecular Biology and Physiology
    • Therapeutics and Prevention
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About mBio
    • Editor in Chief
    • Board of Editors
    • AAM Fellows
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
mBio
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Latest Articles
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • Topics
    • Applied and Environmental Science
    • Clinical Science and Epidemiology
    • Ecological and Evolutionary Science
    • Host-Microbe Biology
    • Molecular Biology and Physiology
    • Therapeutics and Prevention
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About mBio
    • Editor in Chief
    • Board of Editors
    • AAM Fellows
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
Observation

Acetic Acid, the Active Component of Vinegar, Is an Effective Tuberculocidal Disinfectant

Claudia Cortesia, Catherine Vilchèze, Audrey Bernut, Whendy Contreras, Keyla Gómez, Jacobus de Waard, William R. Jacobs Jr., Laurent Kremer, Howard Takiff
Louis M. Weiss, Editor
Claudia Cortesia
aLaboratorio de Genética Molecular, CMBC, IVIC, Caracas, Venezuela
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Catherine Vilchèze
bHoward Hughes Medical Institute, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Audrey Bernut
cLaboratoire de Dynamique des Interactions Membranaires Normales et Pathologiques, CNRS UMR5235, Université de Montpellier 2, Montpellier, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Whendy Contreras
aLaboratorio de Genética Molecular, CMBC, IVIC, Caracas, Venezuela
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Keyla Gómez
dLaboratorio de Tuberculosis, Instituto de Biomedicina, Universidad Central de Venezuela, Caracas, Venezuela
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jacobus de Waard
dLaboratorio de Tuberculosis, Instituto de Biomedicina, Universidad Central de Venezuela, Caracas, Venezuela
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
William R. Jacobs Jr.
bHoward Hughes Medical Institute, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Laurent Kremer
cLaboratoire de Dynamique des Interactions Membranaires Normales et Pathologiques, CNRS UMR5235, Université de Montpellier 2, Montpellier, France
eINSERM, DIMNP, Montpellier, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Howard Takiff
aLaboratorio de Genética Molecular, CMBC, IVIC, Caracas, Venezuela
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Louis M. Weiss
Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Roles: Editor
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/mBio.00013-14
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Effective and economical mycobactericidal disinfectants are needed to kill both Mycobacterium tuberculosis and non-M. tuberculosis mycobacteria. We found that acetic acid (vinegar) efficiently kills M. tuberculosis after 30 min of exposure to a 6% acetic acid solution. The activity is not due to pH alone, and propionic acid also appears to be bactericidal. M. bolletii and M. massiliense nontuberculous mycobacteria were more resistant, although a 30-min exposure to 10% acetic acid resulted in at least a 6-log10 reduction of viable bacteria. Acetic acid (vinegar) is an effective mycobactericidal disinfectant that should also be active against most other bacteria. These findings are consistent with and extend the results of studies performed in the early and mid-20th century on the disinfectant capacity of organic acids.

IMPORTANCE Mycobacteria are best known for causing tuberculosis and leprosy, but infections with nontuberculous mycobacteria are an increasing problem after surgical or cosmetic procedures or in the lungs of cystic fibrosis and immunosuppressed patients. Killing mycobacteria is important because Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains can be multidrug resistant and therefore potentially fatal biohazards, and environmental mycobacteria must be thoroughly eliminated from surgical implements and respiratory equipment. Currently used mycobactericidal disinfectants can be toxic, unstable, and expensive. We fortuitously found that acetic acid kills mycobacteria and then showed that it is an effective mycobactericidal agent, even against the very resistant, clinically important Mycobacterium abscessus complex. Vinegar has been used for thousands of years as a common disinfectant, and if it can kill mycobacteria, the most disinfectant-resistant bacteria, it may prove to be a broadly effective, economical biocide with potential usefulness in health care settings and laboratories, especially in resource-poor countries.

Observation

Mycobacteria are important agents of human infections. While the most well-known infections are tuberculosis and leprosy, infections with nontuberculous mycobacteria are an increasing problem in soft tissues after surgical or cosmetic procedures (1) or in the lungs of cystic fibrosis and immunosuppressed patients (2). Killing mycobacteria in health care settings is important because Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains in clinical specimens or cultures may contain drug-resistant organisms that are difficult or impossible to eradicate (3), and environmental mycobacteria must be thoroughly eliminated from surgical implements and respiratory equipment.

Disinfection of mycobacteria can be a problem, as mycobacteria are the most disinfectant-resistant bacteria (4). Quaternary ammonium compound (QAC) disinfectants are regarded as only mycobacteriostatic (4), and QAC tolerance is a problem with mycobacteria of the Mycobacterium abscessus complex (5). Some of the more effective disinfectants (6), such as chlorine bleach and peracetic acid, can be relatively toxic, unstable, or expensive (4), and the emergence of glutaraldehyde-resistant strains has caused extensive outbreaks of nontuberculosis infections (7).

While using acetic acid as a solvent, we fortuitously found that it had significant mycobactericidal activity. Vinegar has been used as a disinfectant for thousands of years (8, 9) and is today commonly used for, among other things, eliminating bacteria from fresh produce (10, 11) or curing acute otitis externa (12, 13). There is a description of its use in the Middle Ages for treating infected wounds and scrofula, which generally means tuberculosis of the lymph nodes in the neck (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_medicine_of_Western_Europe). In this study, we quantitated the significant mycobactericidal activity of acetic acid and suggest that it may be a useful, low-cost, and effective disinfectant.

Acetic acid or vinegar was added to aliquots of bacterial cultures in proportions to create the concentrations shown in Table 1. Commercial white vinegar was used whenever possible. The cultures were then inverted several times and incubated at room temperature without agitation for the specified periods (20 to 30 min). They were then centrifuged, and the pellet was resuspended in Middlebrook 7H9 medium supplemented with oleic acid-albumin-dextrose-catalase (OADC). Aliquots of serial dilutions were plated on LB agar plates for Escherichia coli and Middlebrook 7H10 plates for mycobacteria, except for Mycobacterium smegmatis, which was plated on either medium with the same results. All experiments were performed at least twice, and the results were the same whether the bacterial pellets were resuspended in Middlebrook 7H9 medium-OADC or in a sodium hydroxide solution to neutralize the acetic acid. Negative controls with sterile water were included to determine the original number of viable bacteria.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1

Bactericidal effect of increasing exposure times and acid concentrations

Exposure to acetic acid at a concentration of 5% for 20 min reduced viable Escherichia coli DH5α and M. smegmatis mc2155 bacteria by at least 7 log10 (Table 1). In some experiments in which the initial culture had ~9 log10 of bacteria/ml, there were rare surviving colonies of E. coli and M. smegmatis. When these colonies were grown in broth media and tested again, they showed no evidence of resistance or tolerance to acetic acid, and their exposure to 5% for 20 min again produced 7 log10 of killing.

To test whether the low pH of acetic acid was responsible for the bactericidal effect, we exposed M. smegmatis and E. coli for 20 min to a dilute solution of HCl in water with pH 2.5, corresponding approximately to the pH of 5% acetic acid. No bactericidal effect was seen (data not shown). Other studies have looked at the effect of pH on mycobacterial growth by reducing the pH in the culture media to as low as pH 3 with HCl or pH 5 with citric acid and found that after a couple of days, the number of viable bacteria was reduced by only approximately 1 log10 (14, 15).

Next, to determine whether the effect was specific for acetic acid, a two-carbon acid, we also tested solutions of the three-carbon propionic acid that had been diluted to have approximately the same molarity as 6% acetic acid. Propionic acid had bactericidal activity against both E. coli (Table 1) and M. abscessus. A 13.7% solution of sodium acetate, with about the same molarity as 10% acetic acid, produced less than a 1-log(10) killing of M. smegmatis (data not shown), indicating that the bactericidal effect of acetic acid was caused by its carboxylic acid function.

We then tested for activity against M. tuberculosis. While exposure to 5% acetic acid for 20 min obtained only a 3- to 4-log10 reduction of viable bacteria, exposure to a 6% solution for 30 min resulted in at least an 8-log10 reduction. The same levels of mycobactericidal activity were seen with virulent (H37Rv) and avirulent auxotrophic (mc27000 [H37Rv ΔRD1 ΔpanCD]) (16) M. tuberculosis laboratory strains, as well as with multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) M. tuberculosis clinical isolates.

We also tested acetic acid on the notoriously resistant Mycobacterium abscessus complex bacteria (17). Although M. abscessus sensu stricto was efficiently killed by exposure to 6% acetic acid for 30 min, Mycobacterium bolletii and Mycobacterium massiliense were more resistant. The levels of reduction in viable bacteria differed somewhat in different experiments, but exposure to 10% acetic acid for 30 min achieved a minimum of a 6-log10 reduction in the colony counts of these two species, with M. massiliense appearing to be slightly more resistant than M. bolletii.

Finally, we demonstrated that the mycobactericidal activity remained even under “dirty” conditions that were meant to simulate contamination with organic material in clinical samples, with the acetic acid solution containing 2 to 3.5% bovine serum albumin and 2 to 3.5% red blood cells (Table 1).

The results described above suggest that acetic acid can be an effective, economical bactericidal agent for M. tuberculosis and nontuberculous mycobacteria, although the 20- to 30-min exposure time required to obtain optimal killing is longer than the 5 min recommended for some commercial bactericides. Exposure to 6% acetic acid for 30 min resulted in an 8-log10 reduction of viable M. tuberculosis bacteria, including XDR and MDR strains. In tests with the M. abscessus complex, which are emerging as the most pathogenic of the nontuberculous mycobacteria (17), the same conditions produced 8 log10 of killing only with M. abscessus sensu stricto, while M. massiliense and M. bolletii were more resistant in some assays. However, the generally accepted definition of an effective mycobactericide is one that has the ability to reduce viable bacteria by 4 to 5 log10 (18), while the 6-log10 reduction of both these bacteria achieved with 10% acetic acid for 30 min would be classified as high-level mycobactericidal activity (19). In some assays in which 109 M. smegmatis bacteria were exposed to 6% acetic acid for 20 min and 3 × 109 M. massiliense bacteria were exposed to 10% acetic acid for 30 min, there were no survivors. Although we did not attempt carrier tests, the effective mycobactericidal activity was maintained even under “dirty” conditions that simulate contamination with organic material. While this level of killing may not be adequate for all critical uses, such as sterilizing surgical instruments, it is likely that higher levels of killing of these highly resistant strains could be achieved with higher concentrations of acetic acid and/or longer exposure times than the ones tested here. Preliminary studies, however, suggest that 10% acetic acid for 30 min does not kill Bacillus subtilis spores (data not shown), so it cannot be classified as a high-level general disinfectant (20). We have not assessed the activity of acetic acid against viruses and fungi.

Although the disinfectant properties of organic acids such as acetic acid, propionic acid, and butyric acid—a component of sweat (21)—are well known, they are not usually included in reviews of bactericides (4). However, in the early part of the 20th century, they were fairly extensively studied for disinfectant properties, as reviewed by Reid in 1932 (22), and their tuberculocidal activity was evaluated by Barker in 1964 (23). It was found that they had broad bactericidal activity that increased with increasing carbon chain length through caprylic acid (C = 8), although the longer-chain acids were less soluble. Bactericidal activity was also found to increase with decreasing surface tension of the organic acid solutions and appeared to be due to the undissociated acid rather than the hydrogen ion concentration. It was therefore suggested that the bactericidal effect might be related to the ability of the acids to pass through the bacterial membrane (23).

Acetic acid is not very toxic, although prolonged exposure will produce corrosive effects, both on skin and metals. In reports from nearly 100 years ago, it was found that the topical application of a 1% acetic acid solution in saline cured Pseudomonas aeruginosa (Bacillus pyocyaneus) wound infections (24, 25). It might be worthwhile testing its effectiveness as a topical agent on mycobacterial ulcers (26, 27).

Acetic acid is relatively inexpensive—2.5 liters of 99% acetic acid costs less than US$100 and could effectively disinfect up to 20 liters of M. tuberculosis cultures or sputa. Commercial vinegar bought in supermarkets was used wherever possible in the experiments described here, but the concentrations vary from country to country. Commercial vinegar could be used at effective concentrations for M. smegmatis or M. tuberculosis in France, where it is sold as 8% acetic acid, but not in the United States or Venezuela, where vinegar is sold as 5% acetic acid. While longer-chain organic acids may have better bactericidal activity, acetic acid (vinegar) is relatively nontoxic, inexpensive, and available, which could make it an effective, economical biocide for disinfecting M. tuberculosis from clinical specimens, cultures, and laboratory surfaces, and it would be particularly useful in low-income countries. The high-level capacity of acetic acid in killing mycobacteria, regarded as the most disinfectant-resistant bacteria due to the structure of their lipid-rich cell walls (4), suggests that perhaps it should be revived as a broadly effective bactericide that can be used as a general sanitizer.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was funded by FONACIT project G2005000393 to H.T., LOCTI project “Nuevos fármacos contra la tuberculosis” to H.T., “Vaincre La Mucroviscidose” grant RF2011 06000446 to A.B., the visiting investigator program of the Université Montpellier 2 to H.T., and NIH AI26170 and Center for AIDS Research award A151519 to W.R.J., Jr.

We declare no conflicts of interest.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 8 January 2014
    • Accepted 21 January 2014
    • Published 25 February 2014
  • Copyright © 2014 Cortesia et al.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license, which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Esteban J,
    2. García-Pedrazuela M,
    3. Muñoz-Egea MC,
    4. Alcaide F
    . 2012. Current treatment of nontuberculous mycobacteriosis: an update. Expert Opin. Pharmacother. 13:967–986. doi:10.1517/14656566.2012.677824.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Chan ED,
    2. Bai X,
    3. Kartalija M,
    4. Orme IM,
    5. Ordway DJ
    . 2010. Host immune response to rapidly growing mycobacteria, an emerging cause of chronic lung disease. Am. J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol. 43:387–393. doi:10.1165/rcmb.2009-0276TR.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  3. 3.↵
    1. Daley CL,
    2. Caminero JA
    . 2013. Management of multidrug resistant tuberculosis. Semin. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 34:44–59. doi:10.1055/s-0032-1333546.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. McDonnell G,
    2. Russell AD
    . 1999. Antiseptics and disinfectants: activity, action, and resistance. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 12:147–179.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    1. Cortesia C,
    2. Lopez GJ,
    3. de Waard JH,
    4. Takiff HE
    . 2010. The use of quaternary ammonium disinfectants selects for persisters at high frequency from some species of non-tuberculous mycobacteria and may be associated with outbreaks of soft tissue infections. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 65:2574–2581. doi:10.1093/jac/dkq366.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  6. 6.↵
    1. Mazzola PG,
    2. Penna TC,
    3. Martins AM
    . 2003. Determination of decimal reduction time (D value) of chemical agents used in hospitals for disinfection purposes. BMC Infect. Dis. 3:24. doi:10.1186/1471-2334-3-24.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Shang S,
    2. Gibbs S,
    3. Henao-Tamayo M,
    4. Shanley CA,
    5. McDonnell G,
    6. Duarte RS,
    7. Ordway DJ,
    8. Jackson M
    . 2011. Increased virulence of an epidemic strain of Mycobacterium massiliense in mice. PLoS One 6:e24726. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0024726.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Blancou J
    . 1995. History of disinfection from early times until the end of the 18th century. Rev. Sci. Tech. 14:21–39.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Johnston CS,
    2. Gaas CA
    . 2006. Vinegar: medicinal uses and antiglycemic effect. MedGenMed 8:61.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Entani E,
    2. Asai M,
    3. Tsujihata S,
    4. Tsukamoto Y,
    5. Ohta M
    . 1998. Antibacterial action of vinegar against food-borne pathogenic bacteria including Escherichia coli O157:H7. J. Food Prot. 61:953–959.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Vijayakumar C,
    2. Wolf-Hall CE
    . 2002. Evaluation of household sanitizers for reducing levels of Escherichia coli on iceberg lettuce. J. Food Prot. 65:1646–1650.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Kaushik V,
    2. Malik T,
    3. Saeed SR
    . 2010. Interventions for acute otitis externa. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 1:CD004740. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004740.pub2.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Benassati HE,
    2. Marfil LM,
    3. Occhionero M
    . 1994. Acido Acético. Su capacidad disinfectante. Acta Bioquímica Clín. Latinoam. XXVII:411–419.
    OpenUrl
  14. 14.↵
    1. Gumbo T,
    2. Dona CS,
    3. Meek C,
    4. Leff R
    . 2009. Pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics of pyrazinamide in a novel in vitro model of tuberculosis for sterilizing effect: a paradigm for faster assessment of new antituberculosis drugs. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 53:3197–3204. doi:10.1128/AAC.01681-08.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    1. Sung N,
    2. Collins MT
    . 2003. Variation in resistance of Mycobacterium paratuberculosis to acid environments as a function of culture medium. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 69:6833–6840. doi:10.1128/AEM.69.11.6833-6840.2003.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. 16.↵
    1. Sambandamurthy VK,
    2. Derrick SC,
    3. Hsu T,
    4. Chen B,
    5. Larsen MH,
    6. Jalapathy KV,
    7. Chen M,
    8. Kim J,
    9. Porcelli SA,
    10. Chan J,
    11. Morris SL,
    12. Jacobs WR Jr..
    . 2006. Mycobacterium tuberculosis DeltaRD1 DeltapanCD: a safe and limited replicating mutant strain that protects immunocompetent and immunocompromised mice against experimental tuberculosis. Vaccine 24:6309–6320. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2006.05.097.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  17. 17.↵
    1. Nessar R,
    2. Cambau E,
    3. Reyrat JM,
    4. Murray A,
    5. Gicquel B
    . 2012. Mycobacterium abscessus: a new antibiotic nightmare. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 67:810–818. doi:10.1093/jac/dkr578.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  18. 18.↵
    1. Anonymous
    . 1997. Chemical disinfectants and antiseptics—basic bactericidal activity—test method and requirement (phase 1). EN-1040. Nederlands Normalistatie-Instituut, Delft, The Netherlands.
  19. 19.↵
    1. Health Canada
    . 27 April 2010. Release of frequently asked questions related to Health Canada’s Guidance Document: disinfectant drugs. Health Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
  20. 20.↵
    1. Rutala WA,
    2. Weber DJ,
    3. Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee
    . 2008. Guideline for disinfection and sterilization in health care facilities, 2008. CDC, Atlanta, GA.
  21. 21.↵
    1. Harvey CJ,
    2. LeBouf RF,
    3. Stefaniak AB
    . 2010. Formulation and stability of a novel artificial human sweat under conditions of storage and use. Toxicol. In Vitro 24:1790–1796. doi:10.1016/j.tiv.2010.06.016.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  22. 22.↵
    1. Reid JD
    . 1932. The disinfectant action of certain organic acids. Am. J. Hyg. 16:540–556.
    OpenUrl
  23. 23.↵
    1. Barker RM
    . 1964. The bactericidal action of low molecular weight compounds. J. Appl. Bacteriol. 27:213–220. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2672.1964.tb04905.x.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  24. 24.↵
    1. Taylor K
    . 1916. Treatment of Bacillus pyocyaneus infection. JAMA 67:1598–1599.
    OpenUrl
  25. 25.↵
    1. Taylor K
    . 1917. Specificity in antiseptics. Lancet 189:294–297. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(01)48011-1.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  26. 26.↵
    1. Walsh DS,
    2. Portaels F,
    3. Meyers WM
    . 2010. Recent advances in leprosy and Buruli ulcer (Mycobacterium ulcerans infection). Curr. Opin. Infect. Dis. 23:445–455. doi:10.1097/QCO.0b013e32833c2209.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    1. Nagoba BS,
    2. Deshmukh SR,
    3. Wadher BJ,
    4. Mahabaleshwar L,
    5. Gandhi RC,
    6. Kulkarni PB,
    7. Mane VA,
    8. Deshmukh JS
    . 1998. Treatment of superficial pseudomonal infections with citric acid: an effective and economical approach. J. Hosp. Infect. 40:155–157. doi:10.1016/S0195-6701(98)90188-8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Acetic Acid, the Active Component of Vinegar, Is an Effective Tuberculocidal Disinfectant
Claudia Cortesia, Catherine Vilchèze, Audrey Bernut, Whendy Contreras, Keyla Gómez, Jacobus de Waard, William R. Jacobs Jr., Laurent Kremer, Howard Takiff
mBio Feb 2014, 5 (2) e00013-14; DOI: 10.1128/mBio.00013-14

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this mBio article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Acetic Acid, the Active Component of Vinegar, Is an Effective Tuberculocidal Disinfectant
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from mBio
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in mBio.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Acetic Acid, the Active Component of Vinegar, Is an Effective Tuberculocidal Disinfectant
Claudia Cortesia, Catherine Vilchèze, Audrey Bernut, Whendy Contreras, Keyla Gómez, Jacobus de Waard, William R. Jacobs Jr., Laurent Kremer, Howard Takiff
mBio Feb 2014, 5 (2) e00013-14; DOI: 10.1128/mBio.00013-14
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • Observation
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About mBio
  • Editor in Chief
  • Board of Editors
  • AAM Fellows
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Author Warranty
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #mBio

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Online ISSN: 2150-7511