- Page 1: LINIVERSITÉ DU QUÉBEC INSTITUT NA
- Page 5: REMERCIEMENTS C'est avec un réel p
- Page 8 and 9: 2. Yu K.D., Adjallé K.D., R.D. Tya
- Page 11 and 12: DÉDICACE TABLE DES MATIERES PUBUCA
- Page 13 and 14: 2.5. EFFECT oF VTRULENCE FAcroRs oN
- Page 15 and 16: 2.2. PRE-TREATMENT, FERMENTATToN AN
- Page 17: LISTE DES TABLEAIIX CHAPITRE 1 TABL
- Page 20 and 21: FtG. 38. REspoNsE suRFAcE oF vtABLE
- Page 22 and 23: procédure consiste à optimiser le
- Page 25 and 26: ABSTRACT The principal objective of
- Page 27: For the anti-UV formulation, the re
- Page 30 and 31: SBU SIW SS TH TMP TS USEPA Vips VS
- Page 33: INrRooucrroN L'agriculture et la fo
- Page 37 and 38: déchets, I'idée de mise en valeur
- Page 39 and 40: 2. RBvUB DE LITTERATURE 2.I. Bacill
- Page 41 and 42: de son environnement; Il s'agit de
- Page 43 and 44: 2.1.4. Entomotoxicité L'entomotoxi
- Page 45 and 46: milieu de culture altematif pour I'
- Page 47 and 48: formulation afin d'avoir un bon syn
- Page 49 and 50: mais aussi les bactéries et les vi
- Page 51 and 52: (contaminations pendant le stockage
- Page 53 and 54: des feuilles non ombragées (Beckwi
- Page 55 and 56: le produit formulé est appliqué.
- Page 57 and 58: 2. 4. 2. 5. Différents types de fo
- Page 59 and 60: 3. HvpoTHESES - Onrecrms - OnrcnrAl
- Page 61: s'agit d'une étude qualitalive et
- Page 65 and 66: 5. Rssurrers 5. 1. Fermentation et
- Page 67 and 68: même condition optimale peut être
- Page 69 and 70: 5.4. Formulations antimicrobiennes
- Page 71 and 72: REFERENCES Adikane H.V., Singh R.K.
- Page 73 and 74: Brar S.K., Verma M., Tyagi R.D., Va
- Page 75 and 76: Griego V.M, Spence K.D. (1978). Ina
- Page 77 and 78: Lûthy P., Cordier J.L. and Fischer
- Page 79 and 80: Pardo-Lopez L., Munoz-Garay C., Por
- Page 81 and 82: Tirado-Montiel M.T.L., R. D. Tyagi
- Page 83: CHAPITRE 2. UITRAFILTRATION
- Page 87:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors are si
- Page 91:
ABSTRACT The study investigates the
- Page 95 and 96:
1. INrnooucrroN In order to fulfrll
- Page 97 and 98:
2. Marpruet.s AND Mprnoos 2.L.Bacte
- Page 99 and 100:
2.4.2. Ultrafiltration 2. 4. 2. I .
- Page 101 and 102:
2.4.2.4. Comparative study offour c
- Page 103 and 104:
2.6.2. Biological parameters 2.6.2.
- Page 105 and 106:
3. Rpsuns AND DrscussroN 3.1. Selec
- Page 107 and 108:
induced foam formation) through the
- Page 109 and 110:
ultrafiltration efficacy for supern
- Page 111 and 112:
3. 3. 2. 3. Syner gt of virulence f
- Page 113:
the following order: NH > TH > SIW
- Page 117 and 118:
tll I2l t3l t4l t5l t6l 17l t8l tel
- Page 119:
l27l Aronson AI, Tyrell DJ, Fitz-Ja
- Page 122 and 123:
Table 2. Screening of different mol
- Page 124 and 125:
Optimal Q""6 (900l.htp-z; Feed pump
- Page 126 and 127:
Ë o .Ct*, oc ttG sY ôg CL= 9g O5
- Page 128 and 129:
Soya srw hTII TII ioya irw NH TII F
- Page 131:
ACKNO\ryLEDGEMENTS The authors are
- Page 135:
ABSTRACT This study reports results
- Page 138 and 139:
components (viable spores and solub
- Page 140 and 141:
2.2.Permeability and resistance of
- Page 143 and 144:
3. Mnrnruar-s AND Mprnoos 3.1. Feed
- Page 145 and 146:
4. Rpsurrs AND DrscussroN 4.1. Opti
- Page 147 and 148:
The total resistance of the membran
- Page 149:
acid) with a viscosity higher than
- Page 153 and 154:
REFERENCES tl] Z.F. Cui, S.R. Bella
- Page 155 and 156:
Table 1. Characteristics of the mem
- Page 157 and 158:
I 5LL o *' E.E 0 g. a o 3i (5 8E+06
- Page 159 and 160:
o -ct J E E c(U 0g a E -o .= '>6 oc
- Page 161:
CHAPITRE 3. FORMULATION
- Page 165:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors are si
- Page 169:
ABSTRACT Photoprotection (against U
- Page 173 and 174:
1. INrnooucrloN The potential adver
- Page 175 and 176:
2. Marsruars AND METHoDS 2.L.Bacter
- Page 177 and 178:
Variar/Cary WinUV 50 ConC UV-visibl
- Page 179:
entomotoxicity measurements. About
- Page 182 and 183:
components of Bt, as well as the in
- Page 184 and 185:
3.3.1. Natural protection of cultur
- Page 186 and 187:
absorbance followed the Beer-Lamber
- Page 189:
CoNcrusroNs The study on photoprote
- Page 192 and 193:
Chen, D., Ye, G., Yang, C., Chen, Y
- Page 195 and 196:
Table 1. Characteristics of seconda
- Page 197 and 198:
Table 3. Statistics analvsis of ent
- Page 199 and 200:
300 310 +Soya 320 330 340 350 wavel
- Page 201:
$ e F È $g E È 8 6 4 2 o I 6 4 2
- Page 205:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors are si
- Page 209:
ABSTRACT Three anti-microbial addit
- Page 212 and 213:
Thus, in this study, various anti-m
- Page 214 and 215:
2.3 . Anti-microbial Formulation Th
- Page 217 and 218:
3. Rnsurrs 3.1 . Tests of contamina
- Page 219:
4. CoNcrusroN Propionic acid and so
- Page 222 and 223:
Knowles B., Ellar D.J. (1987). Coll
- Page 224 and 225:
Table 2. Microorganisms and identif
- Page 227:
PnnrIr III (Résultats de I'objecti
- Page 231:
Résumé La méthode de réponse en
- Page 235 and 236:
1. hlrnooucrroN Biopesticides deriv
- Page 237 and 238:
2. MerBruers AND Mprnoos 2.I.Bacter
- Page 239 and 240:
2.3.2. Method of ascending slope Th
- Page 241 and 242:
3. Rpsulrs AND DrscussroN 3.1. Comp
- Page 243 and 244:
determination, ,l?' of the model re
- Page 245 and 246:
7.31x t08 SnU/g in their respective
- Page 247:
solids concentration. In liquid for
- Page 251 and 252:
REFERENCES Adjallé, K.D., Brar, S.
- Page 253:
Xueyong, 2., Jiamping, D., Jianbao,
- Page 256 and 257:
Table 2. Results of the steepest as
- Page 258 and 259:
Table 4. Results of experimental pl
- Page 260 and 261:
Table 6. Volume of fermented broth
- Page 262 and 263:
g.8, #t #n 0 ÊÉÛ ,ÈÉû "&fi *f
- Page 264 and 265:
u'fr ...': " .tÊE I i v eÊ,e &*94
- Page 267:
CHAPITRE 4. CONCLUSIONS x RECOMMAND
- Page 270 and 271:
4.2.Formulation anti - UV et antimi
- Page 272 and 273:
4.4.2. Formulation Vu la revue de l
- Page 275:
LTS ANINEXES
- Page 279:
Figure 2. Variation of turbidity, c
- Page 283 and 284:
Figure 1. Concentration of viable s
- Page 285:
ANNE)G III PHOToSTABILIZATION oT Be
- Page 288 and 289:
Figure 2. AV- Absorbance (in distil