| Literature DB >> 26213954 |
Eva Petri1, Mariola Rodríguez2, Silvia García3.
Abstract
Most current disinfection strategies for fresh-cut industry are focused on the use of different chemical agents; however, very little has been reported on the effectiveness of the hurdle technology. The effect of combined decontamination methods based on the use of different sanitizers (peroxyacetic acid and chlorine dioxide) and the application of pressure (vacuum/positive pressure) on the inactivation of the foodborne pathogen E. coli O157:H7 on fresh-cut lettuce (Lactuca sativa) and carrots (Daucus carota) was studied. Fresh produce, inoculated with E. coli O157:H7, was immersed (4 °C, 2 min) in tap water (W), chlorine water (CW), chlorine dioxide (ClO2: 2 mg/L) and peroxyacetic acid (PAA: 100 mg/L) in combination with: (a) vacuum (V: 10 mbar) or (b) positive pressure application (P: 3 bar). The product quality and antimicrobial effects of the treatment on bacterial counts were determined both in process washing water and on fresh-cut produce. Evidence obtained in this study, suggests that the use of combined methods (P/V + sanitizers) results in a reduction on the microorganism population on produce similar to that found at atmospheric pressure. Moreover, the application of physical methods led to a significant detrimental effect on the visual quality of lettuce regardless of the solution used. Concerning the process water, PAA proved to be an effective alternative to chlorine for the avoidance of cross-contamination.Entities:
Keywords: Escherichia coli; chlorine dioxide; decontamination; food sanitizers; fresh-cut vegetables; hurdle technology; microbiological quality; peroxyacetic acid; process water
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26213954 PMCID: PMC4555241 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph120808678
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1(a) E. coli reduction (log CFU/g before treatment - log CFU/g after treatment) in fresh-cut lettuce and (b) E. coli reduction in shredded carrots; after physical treatment (Patm: atmospheric pressure; P: positive pressure; V: negative pressure) in combination with PAA: peroxyacetic acid, ClO2: chlorine dioxide, W: tap water and CW: chlorinated water for 2 min.W and CW were used as controls. Bars indicate standard error of means (Within the same chemical agent, means sharing the same letter are not statistically different (p > 0.05); Within the same physical method, means sharing the same number are not statistically different (p > 0.05); Bars labeled with different capital letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.05.
E. coli O157:H7 (log CFU/mL) in processing water after washing fresh-cut lettuce and shredded carrots. ND: not detected (below the limit of detection of 1.0 CFU/mL).
| Washing Water of LETTUCE Processing | Washing Water of CARROT Processing | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patm | P: 3 bar | V: 10 mbar | Patm | P: 3 bar | V: 10 mbar | |
| N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | |
| 1.53 ± 1.1 | 1.19 ± 0.7 | 1.79 ± 0.1 | 2.19 ± 1.9 | 2.81 ± 0.1 | 2.10 ± 0.6 | |
| 5.34 ± 0.7 | 5.17 ± 0.2 | 5.54 ± 0.2 | 4.98 ± 0.6 | 4.88 ± 0.1 | 4.92 ± 0.1 | |
| N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | |
International Commission on Illumination (CIE) (L*a*b*) colour space (CIELAB) of fresh-cut lettuce, evaluated in two different areas of lettuce leaves (white and green part) and influenced by the physical treatment. Within the same column and type of leaf (white or green leaves), the asterisk indicates significant differences in the colorimetric parameters (p < 0.05).
|
|
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before treat. | 67.2 ± 18.3* | −1.5 ± 0.4 | 4.8 ± 1.7* | 5.0 ± 1.8* | 107.7 ± 28.9* | |
| After treat. | 42.3 ± 2.5 | −1.5 ± 0.3 | 2.1 ± 1.2 | 2.5 ± 1.1 | 128.0 ± 15.0 | |
| Before treat. | 60.1 ± 1.8* | −8.5 ± 0.6* | 27.1 ± 1.9* | 28.4 ± 2.0* | 107.3 ± 0.7* | |
| After treat. | 41.6 ± 3.3 | −7.0 ± 0.6 | 20.1 ± 3.1 | 21.3 ± 3.1 | 109.3 ± 1.8 |
Figure 2(a) Appearance of fresh-cut lettuce after combined processing (V + PAA) and detail of the lettuce tissue structure (b) Appearance of fresh-cut lettuce after combined processing (P + CW) and detail of the lettuce tissue structure.
Figure 3(a) Appearance of shredded carrot after combined processing (V + CW) (b) Appearance of shredded carrot after combined processing (P + PAA).
pH of tested solutions in processing wash water and in product (mean of all experiments ± standard deviation).
| pH_Lettuce Production Process | pH_Carrot Production Process | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Washing Water | Product | Washing Water | Product | ||
| Patm | 6.72 ± 0.1 | 6.45 ± 0.2 | 6.68 ± 0.0 | 6.41 ± 0.0 | |
| P: +3 bar | 6.65 ± 0.1 | 6.37 ± 0.1 | 6.55 ± 0.1 | 6.49 ± 0.3 | |
| V: 10 mbar | 6.90 ± 0.1 | 6.24 ± 0.2 | 6.89 ± 0.1 | 6.52 ± 0.2 | |
| Patm | 7.81 ± 0.1 | 6.69 ± 0.0 | 7.70 ± 0.1 | 6.69 ± 0.2 | |
| P: +3 bar | 8.07 ± 0.2 | 6.71 ± 0.0 | 7.68 ± 0.2 | 6.99 ± 0.2 | |
| V: 10 mbar | 7.97 ± 0.1 | 6.59 ± 0.1 | 7.76 ± 0.0 | 6.82 ± 0.2 | |
Chemical oxygen demand (COD) (mg O2/L) of process wash water in tested solutions at atmospheric conditions (mean of all experiments ± standard deviation). Within the same column, different letters indicate significant differences between sanitizing agents.
| Sanitizers | COD (mg O2/L) in Process Wash Water | |
|---|---|---|
| Lettuce | Carrot | |
| 483 ± 23.6a | 1150 ± 28.3a | |
| 262 ± 4.2b | 969 ± 72.8a | |
| 254 ± 18.1b | 947 ± 4.95a | |
| 446 ± 74.6a | 1125 ± 120.0a | |