This study compared the effects of chlorine dioxide and a commercial chlorine sanitizer for inhibiting foodborne pathogens, including Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium, Listeria monocytogenes, and Escherichia coli O157 : H7, on lettuce leaves. The lettuce samples were inoculated with each cock...
This study compared the effects of chlorine dioxide and a commercial chlorine sanitizer for inhibiting foodborne pathogens, including Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium, Listeria monocytogenes, and Escherichia coli O157 : H7, on lettuce leaves. The lettuce samples were inoculated with each cocktail of the three strains, and were then treated with chemical sanitizers [distilled water, 100 ppm commercial chlorine and 50 ppm, 100 ppm, 200 ppm chlorine dioxide ($ClO_2$)] for 1 min, 5 min, and 10 min at room temperature($22{\pm}2^{\circ}C$). Following inoculation of the leaves, initial populations of E. coli O157:H7, L. monocytogenes, and S. Typhimurium were approximately 5.54, 4.47, and 5.12 log CFU/g, respectively these levels were not significantly reduced by the treatment with water,whereas the 100 ppm commercial chlorine sanitizer treatment and $ClO_2$ (at all tested concentrations) were effective at reducing levels of all three pathogens. The treatment of 200 ppm $ClO_2$ for 10 min was most effective at inhibiting the three pathogens, and reduction levels of E. coli O157 : H7, L. monocytogenes, and S. Typhimurium were 2.28, 1.95, 1.76 log, respectively. The inhibitory effect of $ClO_2$ increased with increasing treatment concentration of $ClO_2$, but there was no significant difference by the treatment times. When chemically injured cells of E. coli O157 : H7 and L. monocytogenes and S. Typhimurium were examined by SPRAB and selective overlay methods, respectively, it was observed that the commercial chlorine sanitizer generated greater numbers of injured L. monocytogenes than the $ClO_2$ treatment. From the overall results, $ClO_2$ was more effective at inhibiting pathogenic bacteria compared to the commercial chlorine sanitizer therefore, it has potential to be utilized as an alternative sanitizer to increase the microbial safety of fresh produce.
This study compared the effects of chlorine dioxide and a commercial chlorine sanitizer for inhibiting foodborne pathogens, including Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium, Listeria monocytogenes, and Escherichia coli O157 : H7, on lettuce leaves. The lettuce samples were inoculated with each cocktail of the three strains, and were then treated with chemical sanitizers [distilled water, 100 ppm commercial chlorine and 50 ppm, 100 ppm, 200 ppm chlorine dioxide ($ClO_2$)] for 1 min, 5 min, and 10 min at room temperature($22{\pm}2^{\circ}C$). Following inoculation of the leaves, initial populations of E. coli O157:H7, L. monocytogenes, and S. Typhimurium were approximately 5.54, 4.47, and 5.12 log CFU/g, respectively these levels were not significantly reduced by the treatment with water,whereas the 100 ppm commercial chlorine sanitizer treatment and $ClO_2$ (at all tested concentrations) were effective at reducing levels of all three pathogens. The treatment of 200 ppm $ClO_2$ for 10 min was most effective at inhibiting the three pathogens, and reduction levels of E. coli O157 : H7, L. monocytogenes, and S. Typhimurium were 2.28, 1.95, 1.76 log, respectively. The inhibitory effect of $ClO_2$ increased with increasing treatment concentration of $ClO_2$, but there was no significant difference by the treatment times. When chemically injured cells of E. coli O157 : H7 and L. monocytogenes and S. Typhimurium were examined by SPRAB and selective overlay methods, respectively, it was observed that the commercial chlorine sanitizer generated greater numbers of injured L. monocytogenes than the $ClO_2$ treatment. From the overall results, $ClO_2$ was more effective at inhibiting pathogenic bacteria compared to the commercial chlorine sanitizer therefore, it has potential to be utilized as an alternative sanitizer to increase the microbial safety of fresh produce.
주제어
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.