Thomas Brauge, Eglantine Chalivat, Guylaine Leleu, Anthony Colas, Graziella Midelet
{"title":"Impact of disinfectant-neutralizing buffers used for sampling methods on the viability of adherent Listeria monocytogenes cells on surfaces.","authors":"Thomas Brauge, Eglantine Chalivat, Guylaine Leleu, Anthony Colas, Graziella Midelet","doi":"10.1093/femsle/fnaf048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study assessed the impact of six disinfectant-neutralizing buffers on Listeria monocytogenes adhering to stainless steel surfaces treated with quaternary ammonium or hydrogen peroxide-based disinfectants. The goal was to evaluate potential stressors induced by these buffers during sampling, minimizing false negatives in food industry surface monitoring. Neutralizing buffers are essential in preserving bacterial viability during sample transport by counteracting residual disinfectants. L. monocytogenes populations were quantified immediately after sampling and after 24-hour incubation at 8°C, simulating transport conditions. While neutralizing buffers had minimal impact on untreated adherent cells, they significantly reduced mortality in disinfectant-treated cells. However, most buffers failed to preserve viable culturable (VC) populations after disinfection, instead promoting viable but non-culturable (VBNC) states. Notably, prolonged incubation in the Sponge neutralizer facilitated VC population recovery, likely through VBNC resuscitation or VC growth. In contrast, other buffers inhibited recovery, suggesting detrimental effects on stressed cells due to their chemical composition. These findings underscore the importance of selecting appropriate neutralizing buffers in L. monocytogenes detection, influencing food safety surveillance and risk assessment protocols.</p>","PeriodicalId":12214,"journal":{"name":"Fems Microbiology Letters","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fems Microbiology Letters","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/femsle/fnaf048","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study assessed the impact of six disinfectant-neutralizing buffers on Listeria monocytogenes adhering to stainless steel surfaces treated with quaternary ammonium or hydrogen peroxide-based disinfectants. The goal was to evaluate potential stressors induced by these buffers during sampling, minimizing false negatives in food industry surface monitoring. Neutralizing buffers are essential in preserving bacterial viability during sample transport by counteracting residual disinfectants. L. monocytogenes populations were quantified immediately after sampling and after 24-hour incubation at 8°C, simulating transport conditions. While neutralizing buffers had minimal impact on untreated adherent cells, they significantly reduced mortality in disinfectant-treated cells. However, most buffers failed to preserve viable culturable (VC) populations after disinfection, instead promoting viable but non-culturable (VBNC) states. Notably, prolonged incubation in the Sponge neutralizer facilitated VC population recovery, likely through VBNC resuscitation or VC growth. In contrast, other buffers inhibited recovery, suggesting detrimental effects on stressed cells due to their chemical composition. These findings underscore the importance of selecting appropriate neutralizing buffers in L. monocytogenes detection, influencing food safety surveillance and risk assessment protocols.
期刊介绍:
FEMS Microbiology Letters gives priority to concise papers that merit rapid publication by virtue of their originality, general interest and contribution to new developments in microbiology. All aspects of microbiology, including virology, are covered.
2019 Impact Factor: 1.987, Journal Citation Reports (Source Clarivate, 2020)
Ranking: 98/135 (Microbiology)
The journal is divided into eight Sections:
Physiology and Biochemistry (including genetics, molecular biology and ‘omic’ studies)
Food Microbiology (from food production and biotechnology to spoilage and food borne pathogens)
Biotechnology and Synthetic Biology
Pathogens and Pathogenicity (including medical, veterinary, plant and insect pathogens – particularly those relating to food security – with the exception of viruses)
Environmental Microbiology (including ecophysiology, ecogenomics and meta-omic studies)
Virology (viruses infecting any organism, including Bacteria and Archaea)
Taxonomy and Systematics (for publication of novel taxa, taxonomic reclassifications and reviews of a taxonomic nature)
Professional Development (including education, training, CPD, research assessment frameworks, research and publication metrics, best-practice, careers and history of microbiology)
If you are unsure which Section is most appropriate for your manuscript, for example in the case of transdisciplinary studies, we recommend that you contact the Editor-In-Chief by email prior to submission. Our scope includes any type of microorganism - all members of the Bacteria and the Archaea and microbial members of the Eukarya (yeasts, filamentous fungi, microbial algae, protozoa, oomycetes, myxomycetes, etc.) as well as all viruses.