Mar., 1921
I
T H E JOURLVAL O F I X D U S T R I A L A N D ELVGIATEERING C H E M I S T R Y
265
NOTES AND CORRESPONDENCE THE ACTION OF ULTRAVIOLET RAYS ON THE SACCHAROMYCETES
the unit volume will contain no living cells. Our unit was the platinum loop, while Fazi’s was a much larger one. Unfortunately we have not had access to Fazi’s original papers Editor of the Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry: in the A n n u l i dz Chimica Applicata, but having seen abstracts I n THISJOURNAL, 12 (1920). 740, Messrs. Feuer and Tanner of them in the abstract journals of three languages, we feel that state that when ordinary brewers’ yeast as well as other we have sufficiently accurate information upon which to base species of the Saccharomycetes, were exposed to the action of this discussjon. Fazi’s method consisted in exposing the yeast ultraviolet light they did not survive the exposure for more cells in dextrose solution and water to the action of ultraviolet than 1 min. rays emitted from a lamp of 1200 candle power operating a t I t is very difficult to understand this result, since it is entirely 110 volts and 4 amperes. The distance was 20 cm. After opposed, not only t o the results of my own experiments, but t o exposure, the fermenting activity of the cells was determined those of a good many other observers. Among the latter I may by measuring the amount of carbon dioxide formed, Burgel mention: found that the ultraviolet rays would not destroy the endoenzyme Menri and Stodel, Compt. rend., 148 (19091, 582 of bacteria, for there was little difference between the amount Henri and P. Cernovodeanu, I b i d . , 150 (1910), 5 2 of gelatin liquefied by the sterile filtrate secured from crushed Gabriel Vallet, Ibid., 160 (1910), 632 cells which had been exposed to ultraviolet rays, and cells which Maurice Lombard, Ibid., 150 (1910), 227 Van Aubel, I b i d . , 149 (1909), 983 were in the active growing stage. Stassano and Lematte2 found this to be true for endoenzymes and also for those other 1:might also mention articles in the bodies so much like enzymes, the agglutinins, toxins, etc. It DezLtsche Essig Industvie, 1910, 214 is not, therefore, to be expected that the enzymes in yeasts would Bvswing Trade Review, 1915, 67 be destroyed; when the exposed material such as Fazi used’to Chem. Zentr., 1918 [II],51. During the years 1915 to 1917, I carried out a long series of test the viability of yeasts is added to a fermentable substrate, observations on the differential effect of the ultraviolet rays on the formation of carbon dioxide would be expected, since the the bacieria and the Saccharomycetes, and my results are pub- endoenzymes responsible for fermentation would not be delished in detail in the A n n u l i d i Chzmica Applicata, Ig15, 301; stroyed. There is no reason to assume that the enzymes in yeast cells are less resistant to ultraviolet rays. 1916, 221; and 1917, 93. The most interesting part of Fazi’s discussion to us is the In my experiments I exposed brewers’ yeast for 12 hrs. to the imposing list of references which he cites. “Among others” ultraviolet rays from a 1200-candle power lamp a t a distance of he mentions the following: 20 cm. Not only was the yeast not injured by this treatment, M. Lombard, “Sur les effets chimique et biologique des rayons ultrabut its fermentative activity was actually increased. All violets.” the bacteria present in the yeast were destroyed after a brief E. van Aubel, “Sur la production d’ozone sous l’influence de l a lumisre exposure. In addition to this laboratory result, I may point ultraviolette.” G. Vallet, “Penetration et action bactericide des rayons ultraviolets out that, since 1918, the Peroni Brewery in Rome (which is a la constitution chimique des mileux.” perhaps the most important brewery in Italy) has installed a par rapport P. Cernovodeanu and V. Henri, “Etude de l’action des rayons ultraplant for the Freeing of yeast from bacteria by submitting it to violets sur les microbes.” the action of ultraviolet rays, and the results obtained on this V. Henri and G. Stodel, “Sterilization du lait par les rayons ultraviolets.” large industrial scale fully confirm my own experiments. From the context of Fazi’s polernic, the reader is led to believe ROMOLO DE FAZI VIA SICILIA 43 that all OF these papers support Fazi by statements or data ROME(25), ITALY indicating that the Saccharomycetes are very resistant to ultraNovember 3, 1920 .......... violet rays. A careful reading of these papers did not reveal even the word yeast or Saccharomycete, or any reference to the Editor of the Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry: budding fungi. I n one or two of the papers there are references We wish to point out that Fazi has indicated the subject for to bacteria, B. coli in particular, but none with regard to the discussion by selecting as the topic for his polemic “The Action yeasts. of‘Ultraviolet Rays on the Saccharomycetes.” Fazi also mentions articles in the Deutsche Essig Industrie, Fazi states that we found the brewers’ yeast, as well as other the Brewing Trade Review, and the Chemisches Zentralblatt. species of Saccharomycetes, unable to endure the action of ultra- The last reference in this group is a four- or five-line abstract violet rays for more than 1 min. Such is not the case, for of one of the papers by Fazi himself. We have made no serious Fig. 1 of our paper shows that Saccharomyces of Binot lived effort to look up the first two papers, since they are not availFor 4 min., one strain of Saccharomyces ellipsoideus for 7 min., able in the University of Illinois Library, and more on account and Saccharomyces marxianus for 7 min. under the conditions of the nature of the other paper to which Fazi refers, Fazi’s imposing array of references to support his claim of the great maintained in our experiment. To anyone having any knowledge of microorganisms, it is enduring power of Saccharomycetes to ultraviolet rays dwindle evident that no two strains of the same organism react in the down to practically nothing, since every paper to which he resame manner to any unfavorable condition. The conditions fers, with the exception of his own work, has no relation to the under which the endurance of microorganisms to various types topic under discussion. of disinfectants is tested determine the results. Our suspensions It is strange that Fazi overlooks the excellent paper by Buchta a in which he states: were not heavy, merely a loop of growth in 9 cc. of water spread out in a very thin layer and exposed to the action of the ultraThe ultraviolet rays check the growth even with the minimum exposure of 10 sec.; by an exposure longer than 3 min., violet rays a t a distance of 25 cm. with nothing intervening. Scharffl has shown that disinfection by ultraviolet rays is an the cells are killed. 1 Am. J . Physiol , 43 (1917), 429. orderly time process and that, consequently, if the initial num2 Compt. r e n d , 162 (1911), 623. ber of cells is small, the point will be reached more quickly where 8 “Uber den Einfluss des Lichtes auf die Sprossung der Hefe,” Cenl. 1
J . rnf. D ~ s . io , ( i g i z ) , 30s.
Bakl. A b t . , 41, 1111 (1914), 340.
266
T H E J O U R N A L OF I N D U S T R I A L A N D E N G I N E E R I N G C H E M I S T R Y
The data by Buchta are in absolute accord with our own. He found that the cells of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Saccharomyces ludwigii could not withstand more than a 3-min. exposure t o ultraviolet rays. Lastly in this connection, it came to our attention that one of our colleagues in studying a case of spoilage in a carbonated beverage, isolated two yeasts which would reproduce this spoilage. Exposure to ultraviolet light destroyed them both in less than 1 min. They are apparently Saccharomycetes. Anyone who has had any experience whatever with ultraviolet rays, or who has studied the data of others, cannot help but be impressed that this form of energy is one of the most toxic known. Chamberlain and Vedder’ found that amebae, whether motile or encysted, were quickly killed by ultraviolet rays. Fairhall and Bates2 state: The abiotic power of ultraviolet rays is not restricted to vegetative bacterial cells alone but extends to the spores, as well as to certain molds, such as Penicillium, Aspergillus, and
Mucor. To maintain in the light of all the work done on various micro1 Philififiine
J , Sd.,lS11, 2B, 383.
* J . B a d . , 6 (1920),
I
65.
V O ~13, . NO. 3
organisms, that the yeasts, the Saccharomycetaceae, are able to endure direct continuous exposure, a t a distance of 20 cm., to the ultraviolet rays emitted from a 1200-candlepower lamp, for from 12 to 14 hrs , is out of the question. BERTRAM FEUER AND F. W. TANNER STATEWATERSURVEYDIVISION URBANA, ILLINOIS December 23, 1920
LOW-TEMPERATURE CARBONIZATION AND ITS APPLICATION TO HIGH OXYGEN COALS-CORRECTION Owing to a mistake in this office the stenographer’s report of my discussion on Professor Parr’s paper [THISJOURNAL, 13 (1921), 161 was submitted for publication instead of the revised discussion. The following corrections should be made: On line 4 substitute “evolved” for “involved;” on line 6 substitute “decomposition” for “combustion.” In the remainder of the paragraph, substitute “carbonization” for “combustion.” BUREAUOF MINES ALFREDR. POWELL PITTSBURGH, PA.
I
SCIENTIFIC SOCIFTIES
ADVISORY COMMITTEE RESOLUTION ON THE CHEMICAL WARFARE SERVICE Following the passage of the Army Appropriation Bill by the House of Representatives on February 8, 1921, wherein General Fries’ estimate of $4,457,000 as a minimum for the needs of the Chemical Warfare Service was cut to $1,500,000, the following resolution was adopted by the Advisory Committee of the AMERICANCHEMICAL SOCIETYby telegraph and forwarded to members of Congress: While in complete accord with the spirit prompting the restrictions of appropriations by the present Congress, nevertheless the AMERICANCHEMICAL SOCIETY’SCommittee on National Policies would urge upon the Congress more favorable provision for the Chemical Warfare Service than is contemplated in the amount set by the House of Representatives-$l,500,000. The carefully prepared estimates of the officers of that Service, slightly less than $4,500,000, represent less than one and a half per cent of the total appropriation for the Army carried in the House bill. This amount is to care for the valuable property of the Government a t Edgewood Arsenal, to enable the continuation of research on new lines of defense and offense, and to provide for the training of special troops and for the instruction of the entire Army in all features of gas warfare. In view of the tremendous increase in the use of gases during the last year of the war, and of the fact that approximately thirty per cent of the casualties of our Army in the war were due to gas wounds, we feel that the proposed reduction to onethird of the appropriation asked would so seriously cripple the development of the Chemical Warfare Service as to constitute a matter of grave national concern. We therefore urge that the Congress appropriate the original amount asked for the Service in the estimates submitted. ROCHESTER MEETING, AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY The following schedule of meetings by which Tuesday is devoted entirely to General Meetings, and Friday to excursions, lengthens the time devoted to Sectional Meetings by a t least one-half day, and in many cases it may be lengthened by another half day. This plan also provides that excursions shall not interfere with Sectional Meetings. Moreover, excursions are so arranged that the nature of the plants visited are such that members may not all desire to visit the same plant; thus people desiring t o go t o Bausch and Lomb, which deals largely with physical apparatus, would not necessarily be interested in
seeing Pfaudler Company’s apparatus, which deals with chemical tanks, etc., for large-scale plant manufacture. SUMMARY OF DAYSOF DIVISIONAL AND SECTIONAL MEETINGS Extra Wednesday Thursday Time A.M.P.M. A.M.P.M. Dav Physical and Inorganic.. X X x X X x 0.i Industrial and Engineering.. X X 0.5 Biological. X X x 0.5 Medicinal. X X x 0.5 X X 1 Organic.. x x X X Dye 0.5 Leather Section. X X 0.5 x Fertilizer, ................. X X X X 0.5 Agricultural. X X X X 1 Rubber. X X X X 0.5 Cellulose Section. x x x x 0.5 Water, Sewage, Etc.. x x X X 1 Sugar. X X 0.5 x x
.... ................ ................ ................. ...................... ........... .............. .................. .......... ....... ....................
.. ..
..
PROGRAM COMMITTEE EDGARF. SMITH,President, AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
CHARLES L. PARSONS, Secretary, AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY CHAIRMEN OF MEETINGS Physical and Inorganic Chemistry: H. N. HOLMES Industrial and Engineering Chemistry: H. D. BATCHELOR Biological Chemistry: A. W. D o x Chemistry of Medicinal Products: CHARLES E. CASPARI Organic Chemistry: ROGERADAMS Dye Chemistry: A. B . DAVIS Leather Chemistry: E. E. MARBAKBR Fertiliser Chemistry: F. B. CARPENTER Agriculfufal and Food Chemistry: C. E. COATES Rubber Chemistry: W. W. EVANS, Sewage, and Sanitation Chemistry: W. P. MASON Water, Sugar Chemistry: C. A. BROWNE CHAIRMEN OF LOCAL COMMITTEES Executive: FRANKW. LOVEJOY,Honoravy Chairman J. ERNEST WOODLAND Finance: HERBERTEISENHARDT Entertainment: CHARLES F. HUTCHISON Registration and Information: HARRY A. CARPENTER Program: ERLEM. BILLINGS Transfiortation: CHARLES MARKUS Hotels: HARRYLEB. GRAY Excursions: WILLIAMEARLE Relation lo Other Scientifrc Societies: DONALDB. HOWE College and Fraternity Dinners: IVARN. HULTMAN Assisted by: H. T. Clarke, V. J. Chambers, F. Baxter, J. Howe, B. V. Bush, 0. I. Chorman, Wilbur Miller, A. J. HetteI, F. Elliott, J. I. Crabtree, R . Salter, F. W. Lovejoy, L. Burrows, W. Line, 0. Cook, Mrs. R. Kruger, Miss G.Reissman, E. Pickard, C. Hallauer.
