P J Taormina1, L R Beuchat. 1. Center for Food Safety and Department of Food Science and Technology, University of Georgia, Griffin, GA 30223-1797, USA.
Abstract
AIMS: To determine the ability of Listeria monocytogenes to survive exposure to commercial food-processing equipment cleaning solutions and subsequent treatment with sanitizers or heat. METHODS AND RESULTS: Cells of five strains of L. monocytogenes were suspended in 1% solutions of eight commercial cleaners (pH 7.1-12.5) or in water (control) and incubated at 4 degrees C for 30 min or 48 h before populations were determined by plating on tryptose phosphate agar. After exposure of cells to cleaning solutions for 30 min, populations of the most resistant strain of L. monocytogenes were reduced by < or = 1.63 log10 cfu ml(-1). In only three highly alkaline cleaning solutions (pH 11.6-12.4) were populations reduced significantly (P < or = 0.05) compared with reductions in water. After 48 h, populations were significantly higher in one cleaning solution (pH 10.4) than in water, while populations in six of the other seven cleaning solutions were reduced by > or = 4.72 log10 cfu ml(-1). Cells exposed to cleaning solutions for 30 min became sensitive to 4.0 or 6.0 mg l(-1) free chlorine and to 50 or 100 mg l(-1) benzalkonium chloride and cetylpyridinium chloride, common components of quaternary ammonium sanitizers. Cells exposed to four of the five test cleaners had D56 degrees C values less than or equal to those of the control cells. CONCLUSIONS: Listeria monocytogenes tolerates exposure to a high concentration of alkaline cleaning solutions but consequently becomes sensitized to sanitizers. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: The elimination of L. monocytogenes surviving exposure to alkaline cleaning solutions widely used for food-processing equipment is essential and the appropriate use of sanitizers for subsequent application to equipment is important in achieving this goal.
AIMS: To determine the ability of Listeria monocytogenes to survive exposure to commercial food-processing equipment cleaning solutions and subsequent treatment with sanitizers or heat. METHODS AND RESULTS: Cells of five strains of L. monocytogenes were suspended in 1% solutions of eight commercial cleaners (pH 7.1-12.5) or in water (control) and incubated at 4 degrees C for 30 min or 48 h before populations were determined by plating on tryptose phosphateagar. After exposure of cells to cleaning solutions for 30 min, populations of the most resistant strain of L. monocytogenes were reduced by < or = 1.63 log10 cfu ml(-1). In only three highly alkaline cleaning solutions (pH 11.6-12.4) were populations reduced significantly (P < or = 0.05) compared with reductions in water. After 48 h, populations were significantly higher in one cleaning solution (pH 10.4) than in water, while populations in six of the other seven cleaning solutions were reduced by > or = 4.72 log10 cfu ml(-1). Cells exposed to cleaning solutions for 30 min became sensitive to 4.0 or 6.0 mg l(-1) free chlorine and to 50 or 100 mg l(-1) benzalkonium chloride and cetylpyridinium chloride, common components of quaternary ammonium sanitizers. Cells exposed to four of the five test cleaners had D56 degrees C values less than or equal to those of the control cells. CONCLUSIONS:Listeria monocytogenes tolerates exposure to a high concentration of alkaline cleaning solutions but consequently becomes sensitized to sanitizers. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: The elimination of L. monocytogenes surviving exposure to alkaline cleaning solutions widely used for food-processing equipment is essential and the appropriate use of sanitizers for subsequent application to equipment is important in achieving this goal.
Authors: Efstathios S Giotis; Arunachalam Muthaiyan; Senthil Natesan; Brian J Wilkinson; Ian S Blair; David A McDowell Journal: Foodborne Pathog Dis Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 3.171
Authors: Laura N Frisón; Carolina A Chiericatti; Elena E Aríngoli; Juan C Basílico; María Z Basílico Journal: J Food Sci Technol Date: 2014-07-16 Impact factor: 2.701
Authors: Eva Harter; Eva Maria Wagner; Andreas Zaiser; Sabrina Halecker; Martin Wagner; Kathrin Rychli Journal: Appl Environ Microbiol Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 4.792
Authors: Efstathios S Giotis; Arunachalam Muthaiyan; Ian S Blair; Brian J Wilkinson; David A McDowell Journal: BMC Microbiol Date: 2008-06-24 Impact factor: 3.605