| Literature DB >> 35885251 |
Yingying Zhang1, Shuo Wang1, Du Guo1, Zhiyuan Liu1, Jianxue Gao1, Xiangjun Zhan1, Yutang Wang1, Chao Shi1, Xiaodong Xia1,2.
Abstract
Vibrio parahaemolyticus is a widely distributed pathogen, which is frequently the lead cause of infections related to seafood consumption. The objective of the present study was to investigate the antimicrobial effect of the combination of 405 nm light-emitting diode (LED) and citral on V. parahaemolyticus. The antimicrobial effect of LED illumination and citral was evaluated on V. parahaemolyticus not only in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) but also on shrimp. Quality changes of shrimp were determined by sensory evaluation. Changes in bacteria cell membrane morphology, cell membrane permeability, cell lipid oxidation level, and DNA degradation were examined to provide insights into the antimicrobial mechanism. The combination of LED treatments and citral had better antimicrobial effects than either treatment alone. LED combined with 0.1 mg/mL of citral effectively reduced V. parahaemolyticus from 6.5 log CFU/mL to below the detection limit in PBS. Combined treatment caused a 3.5 log reduction of the pathogen on shrimp within 20 min and a 6 log reduction within 2 h without significant changes in the sensory score. Furthermore, combined LED and citral treatment affected V. parahaemolyticus cellular morphology and outer membrane integrity. The profile of the comet assay and DNA fragmentation analysis revealed that combination treatment did not cause a breakdown of bacterial genomic DNA. In conclusion, LED may act synergistically with citral. They have the potential to be developed as novel microbial intervention strategies.Entities:
Keywords: 405 nm LED; Vibrio parahaemolyticus; cell membrane; citral; shrimp
Year: 2022 PMID: 35885251 PMCID: PMC9324625 DOI: 10.3390/foods11142008
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Inactivation of Vibrio parahaemolyticus by combination of 405 nm LED illumination and citral in PBS.
| Time (min) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | LED | Citral | LED + Citral | |
| 0 | 6.56 ± 0.08 a | 6.56 ± 0.08 a | 6.56 ± 0.08 a | 6.56 ± 0.08 a |
| 2 | 6.61 ± 0.10 a | 5.54 ± 0.12 a | 6.71 ± 0.10 a | 2.70 ± 0.01 a |
| 5 | 6.49 ± 0.23 a | 4.51 ± 0.19 b | 6.15 ± 0.33 a | ND c |
| 10 | 6.28 ± 0.27 a | ND c | 6.03 ± 0.25 b | ND c |
| 20 | 6.37 ± 0.12 a | ND c | 5.58 ± 0.22 b | ND c |
| 30 | 6.52 ± 0.41 a | ND b | 5.54 ± 0.27 a | ND b |
| 60 | 6.26 ± 0.22 a | ND c | 5.03 ± 0.30 b | ND c |
ND: Not detected. Different letters indicate significant (p < 0.05) differences.
Inactivation of Vibrio parahaemolyticus by combination of 405 nm LED illumination and citral on shrimp.
| Time (min) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | LED | Citral | LED + Citral | |
| 0 | 6.02 ± 0.18 a | 6.02 ± 0.18 a | 6.02 ± 0.18 a | 6.02 ± 0.18 a |
| 5 | 6.02 ± 0.18 a | 4.63 ± 0.25 ab | 5.83 ± 0.23 b | 4.65 ± 0.38 b |
| 10 | 5.84 ± 0.26 a | 4.43 ± 0.19 a | 5.76 ± 0.22 b | 4.30 ± 0.15 b |
| 20 | 5.81 ± 0.19 a | 3.12 ± 0.09 a | 5.60 ± 0.24 b | 2.45 ± 0.10 b |
| 60 | 6.07 ± 0.10 a | 2.75 ± 0.09 a | 5.28 ± 0.07 b | 1.78 ± 0.33 c |
| 120 | 5.90 ± 0.18 a | 2.53 ± 0.02 b | 4.35 ± 0.21 c | ND d |
ND: Not detected. Different letters indicate significant (p < 0.05) differences.
Figure 1Effect of combination of 405 nm LED and 0.1 mg/mL of citral on sensory evaluation of shrimp. (A) Untreated, (B) treated with 405 nm LED irradiation for 120 min, (C) treated with 0.1 mg/mL of citral for 120 min, and (D) LED treatment combined with 0.1 mg/mL of citral for 120 min.
Sensory evaluation of fresh shrimp with LED illumination, 0.1 mg/mL of citral, and LED plus 0.1 mg/mL of citral treatment for 120 min.
| Treatments | Odor | Appearance | Texture | Overall Acceptance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 5.3 ± 0.6 a | 5.3 ± 0.5 a | 5.3 ± 0.8 a | 15.9 ± 1.3 a |
| LED | 5.5 ± 0.5 a | 5.3 ± 0.6 a | 5.2 ± 0.7 a | 16.0 ± 1.3 a |
| Citral | 5.6 ± 0.5 a | 5.0 ± 0.8 a | 5.2 ± 0.6 a | 15.8 ± 1.4 a |
| LED + Citral | 5.0 ± 0.4 a | 5.3 ± 0.6 a | 5.6 ± 0.5 a | 15.9 ± 1.0 a |
Mean ± standard deviation (n = 10). Same letters indicate no significant differences (p > 0.05).
Figure 2Scanning electron micrographs of Vibrio parahaemolyticus. (A) Untreated, (B) treated with 405 nm LED irradiation for 10 min, (C) treated with 0.1 mg/mL of citral for 10 min, and (D) LED treatment combined with 0.1 mg/mL of citral for 10 min.
Figure 3Effect of 405 nm LED illumination and 0.1 mg/mL of citral on outer membrane integrity of Vibrio parahaemolyticus for 30 min. Means marked with different lower-case letters are statistically different (p < 0.05).
Figure 4Comet assay of DNA extracted from V. parahaemolyticus ATCC 17802 from different treatments. (A) Untreated, (B) treated with 0.1 mg/mL of citral for 30 min, (C) treated with LED irradiation for 30 min, and (D) LED treatment combined with 0.1 mg/mL of citral for 30 min.
Figure 5DNA fragmentation profiles of DNA extracted from Vibrio parahaemolyticus. Lane: M, λ/HindIII DNA marker; 1, untreated; 2, treated with 405 nm LED irradiation for 30 min; 3, treated with 0.1 mg/mL of citral for 30 min; 4, LED treatment combined with 0.1 mg/mL of citral for 30 min.