Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 9, Number 6—June 2003

Inactivation of Bacillus anthracis Spores

Article Metrics
citations of this article
EID Journal Metrics on Scopus
Ellen A. Spotts Whitney*, Mark E. Beatty*, Thomas H. Taylor*, Robbin Weyant*, Jeremy Sobel*, Matthew J. Arduino*, and David A. Ashford*Comments to Author 
Author affiliations: *Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA

Cite This Article


After the intentional release of Bacillus anthracis through the U.S. Postal Service in the fall of 2001, many environments were contaminated with B. anthracis spores, and frequent inquiries were made regarding the science of destroying these spores. We conducted a survey of the literature that had potential application to the inactivation of B. anthracis spores. This article provides a tabular summary of the results.

In October 2001, several letters containing Bacillus anthracis spores were sent through the U.S. Postal Service to recipients in government and private-sector buildings. Consequently, 23 human inhalational or cutaneous anthrax infections occurred. Five of the 11 inhalational anthrax infections were fatal (1,2). As a result of this intentional release of B. anthracis, several post offices, mailrooms in government buildings, and private office buildings were contaminated with B. anthracis spores. During the initial response, frequent requests were made for published materials about inactivating Bacillus spores. However, no adequate single source of literature on this subject was available. Because of the risk to humans, remediation of anthrax-contaminated buildings and their contents has been the focus both of scientific discussion and commercial product marketing. A number of manufacturers have developed equipment or materials that reportedly kill B. anthracis spores. However, these manufacturers have tested their products with laboratory tests that use Bacillus species other than B. anthracis, and the efficacy of some of these technologies relies on published literature. An obvious concern is whether postremediation levels of spores are safe; the summarized studies make no claim about whether a safe level exists and what it might be.

We provide a summary of much of the available literature on the inactivation of Bacillus spores that is relevant to the inactivation of B. anthracis. We reviewed publications from 1930 to 2002, and we have created a tabular summary of those articles. Treatments or agents commonly cited include heat, formaldehyde, hypochlorite solutions, chlorine dioxide, and radiation. Methods regarding inoculum size, concentration, and other variables are not consistent between experiments, but each experiment provides some specific information of value. Early studies that lack quantitative data are not included. A number of the cited studies address Bacillus species other than B. anthracis. We include these for information, with the caveat that surrogates do not always predict the behavior of the target species. Furthermore, the results from laboratory experiments do not specifically address questions regarding the best methods for inactivating spores on different materials such as mail, carpet, other porous objects, food, or water. Transfer of these sporicidal methods from the laboratory to a building has not yet been tested; however, the known laboratory results are a logical place to start when considering the decontamination of a building.

Decontamination is defined as the irreversible inactivation of infectious agents so that an area is rendered safe. However, decontamination may not eliminate bacterial spores. Sterilization is the complete destruction or elimination of microbial viability, including spores (3).

The experiments described provide a logical starting point for future experiments and decontamination strategies in the event of anthrax bioterrorism. Our intent is not to provide a comparative evaluation or recommendations for decontamination but rather to summarize the quantitative published results and provide a useful reference.


Variations in time, temperature, concentration, pH, and relative humidity may affect the sporicidal activity of various agents. Accordingly, and especially for real-world situations, attention must be paid simultaneously to more than one controllable or uncontrollable factor. In Tables 1 and 2 and in the discussion, we address some of the key ancillary factors.

Boiling water for >10 minutes, for example, can reduce B. anthracis spore counts by at least 106 (Table 1). Variations in time and temperature conditions required to reduce spore counts listed in Table 1 can be attributed to differences in experimental conditions, strains of B. anthracis tested, or inoculum size.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency indicates that use of sodium hypochlorite as a sporicide is applicable under an emergency exemption (Section 18: Crisis Exemption; Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act); as such, sodium hypochlorite may be used under the conditions specified (32). Given these conditions, the sporicidal effectiveness of hypochlorite solutions depends on the concentration of free available chlorine and pH. Common household bleach (sodium hypochlorite) has a pH of 12 to prolong its shelf life. To achieve effective sporicidal activity, bleach must be diluted with water to increase the free available chlorine and acetic acid to change the pH of the solution to 7 (11). Organic matter may decrease the sporicidal efficiency of sodium hypochlorite (33).

Concentration, humidity, temperature, and carrier material affect gaseous sterilization of spores. Ethylene oxide penetrates into porous material (absorbed strongly by rubber and many plastics); thus vapors are not readily eliminated by brief aeration. Ethylene oxide is also flammable (34). Residual spores were not completely killed after a 30-minute exposure to chlorine dioxide at a relative humidity of 20% to 40%, whereas all spores were killed after a 15-minute exposure to chlorine dioxide with the addition of prehumidification at a relative humidity of 70% to 75% (21). Peracetic acid vapor does not penetrate well into porous surfaces and is flammable. The amount of contamination, level of cleanliness of surfaces, and relative humidity will contribute to peracetic acid vapor’s effectiveness as a sporicide (24). Organic matter may absorb and chemically react with propylene oxide, reducing its effectiveness. Organic matter may also provide physical protection from the oxide (25). The sporicidal property of ozone is affected by relative humidity: as relative humidity decreases, the time required for killing organisms increases (27).


Decontamination of buildings from intentional release of B. anthracis is a new problem, and no accumulated scientific knowledge exists on the subject. Two areas of prior scientific research may be relevant: food processing and laboratory decontamination. With modification based on further study, the technologies used in laboratories and food processing plants may be applied to buildings.

Direct information on killing B. anthracis spores in foods by cooking is scarce, and the complexity of food matrices precludes easy extrapolation of the laboratory data into nonfood matrices. However, information on inactivating spores of bacterial species more resistant to environmental conditions than B. anthracis can provide guidance. The spores of Clostridium botulinum are more resistant to heat inactivation than are B. anthracis spores (4). The commercial retort process of canning achieves a 12-log reduction of C. botulinum spores, and by extension, should achieve a similar killing rate for B. anthracis spores. Further research in this area is needed.

Historically, formaldehyde solution or gas has been used both as a disinfectant and chemical sterilant. Formaldehyde was used to disinfect as early as the late 1880s and is still used to reprocess hemodialyzers for reuse on the same patient and to decontaminate biologic safety cabinets and laboratories (3537). Formaldehyde gas has been used for fumigation in the poultry industry and for disinfection of biologic safety cabinets and laboratories (38,39). Data from controlled experiments with B. globigii NCTC 10073 spores have demonstrated the effect of humidity on formaldehyde concentration (mg/m3) to obtain a >8-log reduction in viable spores (15).

Fumigation with formaldehyde vapor (18 mg/L–21 mg/L) has also been used to treat a textile mill contaminated with ­B. anthracis spores (40). In this instance, contamination was greatly reduced immediately after treatment and was undetectable 6 months later. However, the possible role of formaldehyde as a carcinogen has limited its use. Formaldehyde can be neutralized with ammonium bicarbonate after fumigation, reducing its carcinogenic properties.

Gamma radiation was used in the 1960s and 1970s to disinfect B. anthracis–contaminated imported bailed goat hair. A study by Horne et al. suggested that a dose of 1.5 megarads from a 200,000-rad/hour cobalt source was sufficient to kill most resistant spores when mixed with goat hair; 2 megarads was recommended to include a margin of safety (31). After the intentional release of B. anthracis through the postal system in 2001, pursuing a decontamination method for the undelivered mail was essential. Gamma radiation was used to decontaminate all mail from contaminated facilities on the basis of these data.


Multiple technologies may be needed to decontaminate buildings and their contents. As in a laboratory, where some items are wiped, some items are autoclaved, and some spaces are treated with gas, more than one method may be required for decontamination. Also, for certain decontamination tasks, e.g., cleaning small heat-proof and water-proof objects, more than one option will be available. Further, even within the context of one type of application (e.g., walls; ducts for heating, ventilating, air conditioning, and refrigeration; carpet; and small objects), potentially conflicting priorities exist between bioefficacy, logistics, and safety.

Our review suggests two conclusions. First, additional scientific research is needed. Although transferring the methods used to decontaminate or sterilize laboratory or food industry settings to decontaminating buildings may be useful, this transfer of methods has not been scientifically tested. Also, much of the data available is based on other Bacillus species; more testing with or correlation to B. anthracis contamination is suggested. Second, choosing between technologies is a complex issue, and a formal decision process would be useful. Various parties in the public and private sector have suggested numerous, sometimes disparate, methods for the inactivation of B. anthracis spores in contaminated environments. Further research is needed regarding improved methods for remediation of environments contaminated with B. anthracis spores, and the literature summarized here provides a basis for that effort.

Ms. Whitney is an epidemiologist in the Meningitis and Special Pathogens Branch, Division of Bacterial and Mycotic Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Her interests include the epidemiology of anthrax, atypical mycobacterial disease, and bioterrorism preparedness



  1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Update: investigation of bioterrorism-related inhalational anthrax—Connecticut, 2001. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2001;50:1049.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Suspected cutaneous anthrax in a laboratory worker—Texas, 2002. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2002;51:27980.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Dorland  WAN. Dorland’s illustrated medical dictionary (standard version). In: Dorland WE, editor. 29th ed. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders & Co; 2000. p. 2088.
  4. Stein  CD, Rodgers  H. Observations on the resistance of anthrax spores to heat. Vet Med. 1945;40:40610.
  5. Murray  TJ. Thermal death point. J Infect Dis. 1931;48:45767.
  6. Schneiter  R, Kolb  RW. Heat resistance studies with spores of Bacillus anthracis and related aerobic bacilli in hair and bristles. Public Health Rep. 1945;suppl 207:124.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Francis  A. Observations on time and temperature in the killing of spores by dry heat. Proceedings of the Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. 1956;71:3512.
  8. Charlton  D, Levine  M. Germicidal properties of chlorine compounds. Vol. 35. Ames (IA): Iowa State College; 1937. p. 1–60.
  9. Rudolph  A, Levine  M. Factors affecting the germicidal efficiency of hypochlorite solutions. The Iowa State College Bulletin. 1941;XL:148.
  10. Brazis  A, Leslie  J, Kabler  P, Woodward  R. The inactivation of spores of Bacillus globigii and Bacillus anthracis by free available chlorine. Appl Microbiol. 1958;6:33842.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Sagripanti  J, Bonifacino  A. Comparative sporicidal effects of liquid chemical agents. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1996;62:54551.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Toledo  R, Escher  F, Ayres  J. Sporicidal properties of hydrogen peroxide against food spoilage organisms. Appl Microbiol. 1973;26:5927.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Baldry  M. The bactericidal, fungicidal, and sporicidal properties of hydrogen peroxide and peracetic acid. J Appl Bacteriol. 1983;54:41723.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Rubbo  S, Gardner  J, Webb  R. Biocidal activities of gluteraldehyde and related compounds. J Appl Bacteriol. 1967;30:7887.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Cross  GLC, Lach  V. The effects of controlled exposure to formaldehyde vapor on spores of Bacillus globigii NCTC 10073. J Appl Bacteriol. 1990;68:4619.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Whitehouse  R, Clegg  L. Destruction of Bacillus subtilis spores with solutions of sodium hydroxide. J Dairy Res. 1963;30:31522. DOIGoogle Scholar
  17. Friedl  J, Ortenzio  L, Stuart  L. The sporicidal activity of ethylene oxide as measured by the AOAC sporicide test. Journal of the Association of Official Agricultural Chemist. 1956;39:4803.
  18. Kereluk  K, Gammon  R. The microbicidal activity of ethylene oxide. In: Developments in industrial microbiology. Symposium: recent approaches to sterilization and achievement of sterility 1973;14:28–41.
  19. Knapp  J, Rosenblatt  D, Rosenblatt  A. Chlorine dioxide as a gaseous sterilant. Sterilization Science. 1986;8:4851.
  20. Jeng  D, Woodworth  A. Chlorine dioxide gas sterilization of oxygenators in an industrial scale sterilizer: a successful model. Artif Organs. 1990;14:3618. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Jeng  D, Woodworth  A. Chlorine dioxide gas sterilization under square-wave conditions. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1990;56:5149.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Jacobs  P, Lin  S. Hydrogen peroxide plasma sterilization system. Arlington (TX): Surgikos, Inc.; 1987. p. 13.
  23. Kolb  R, Schneiter  R. The germicidal and sporicidal efficacy of methyl bromide for Bacillus anthracis. J Bacteriol. 1950;59:40112.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Portner  D, Hoffman  R. Sporicidal effect of peracetic acid vapor. Appl Microbiol. 1968;16:17825.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Bruch  C, Koesterer  M. The microbicidal activity of gaseous propylene oxide and its application to powdered or flaked foods. Food Res. 1960;25:42835.
  26. Foegeding  P, Fulp  M. Comparison of coats and surface-dependent properties of Bacillus cereus T prepared in two sporulation environments. J Appl Bacteriol. 1988;65:24959.
  27. Ishizaki  K, Shinriki  N, Matsuyama  H. Inactivation of Bacillus spores by gaseous ozone. J Appl Bacteriol. 1986;60:6772.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Currier  R, Torraco  D, Cross  J, Wagner  G, Gladden  P, Vanderberg  L. Deactivation of clumped and dirty spores of Bacillus globigii. Ozone Sci Eng. 2001;23:28594. DOIGoogle Scholar
  29. Sharp  D. The lethal action of short ultraviolet rays on several common pathogenic bacteria. J Bacteriol. 1939;37:44760.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Dietz  P, Bohm  R, Strauch  D. Investigation on disinfection and sterilization of surfaces by ultraviolet radiation. Zbl Bakt Hyg. 1980;171:15867.
  31. Horne  T, Turner  G, Willis  A. Inactivation of spores of Bacillus anthracis by G-radiation. Nature. 1959;4659:4756. DOIGoogle Scholar
  32. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Pesticides: topical and chemical fact sheets. 2003, Feb 19 [cited 2003 March 31]. Available from: URL:
  33. Dychdala  G. Chlorine and chlorine compounds. In: Block SS, editor. Disinfection and sterilization and preservation. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger; 1983. p. 157–82.
  34. Bruch  C. Gaseous sterilization. In: Clifton CE, Raffel S, Starr MP, editors. Annu Rev Microbiol 1961:16;245–63.
  35. Tokars  J, Miller  E, Alter  M, Arduino  M. National surveillance of dialysis-associated diseases in the United States, 1997. Semin Dial. 2001;3:7585.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Everall  PH. Problems in the disinfection of class 1 microbiology safety cabinets. J Clin Pathol. 1982;35:698705. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Munro  K. A comparative study of methods to validate formaldehyde decontamination of biological safety cabinets. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1999;65:8736.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Hundemann  A, Holbrook  A. A practical method for the decontamination of laboratories by use of formaldehyde gas. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1959;135:54953.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Lach  VH. A study of conventional formaldehyde fumigation methods. J Appl Bacteriol. 1990;68:4717.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Young  LS. Vaporized formaldehyde treatment of a textile mill contaminated with Bacillus anthracis. J Appl Bacteriol. 1990;68:4619.PubMedGoogle Scholar




Cite This Article

DOI: 10.3201/eid0906.020377

Table of Contents – Volume 9, Number 6—June 2003

EID Search Options
presentation_01 Advanced Article Search – Search articles by author and/or keyword.
presentation_01 Articles by Country Search – Search articles by the topic country.
presentation_01 Article Type Search – Search articles by article type and issue.



Please use the form below to submit correspondence to the authors or contact them at the following address:

David A. Ashford, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Rd., Mailstop C09, Atlanta, GA 30333, USA; fax: 404-639-3059

Send To

10000 character(s) remaining.


Page created: December 21, 2010
Page updated: December 21, 2010
Page reviewed: December 21, 2010
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.