{"title":"猪肉经乳酸和过氧乙酸处理后沙门氏菌血清反应的差异。","authors":"Mariana Fernandez, Alexandra Calle","doi":"10.1016/j.jfp.2024.100403","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Pathogen control in the meat industry relies on the effectiveness of postharvest interventions in reducing microbial populations. This study investigated differences in the survival of <em>Salmonella</em> serovars when exposed to organic acids used as antimicrobials on raw pork meat. Seven serovars were included in this study (<em>S</em>. Newport, <em>S</em>. Kentucky, <em>S</em>. Typhimurium, <em>S</em>. Dublin, <em>S</em>. Heidelberg, <em>S</em>. Infantis, and <em>S</em>. Enteritidis). Multistrain serovar cocktails were prepared and tested against lactic acid (LA) and peracetic acid PAA at two concentrations, LA 2 and 4% and PAA 200 and 400 ppm. Pork samples were assigned to each serovar, inoculated with 6.0 Log CFU/cm<sup>2</sup> <em>Salmonella</em> (one serovar at a time), and treated with the corresponding antimicrobials. A two-way analysis of variance was conducted to examine the effects of serovar and antimicrobial concentrations on <em>Salmonella</em> survival. A significant main effect of serovar was identified, indicating that <em>Salmonella</em> concentration and reduction rate were significantly affected by serovar. Similarly, a significant main effect of antimicrobials was observed, suggesting that the treatment types impacted <em>Salmonella</em> concentration and reduction rate. However, the interaction effect between serovar and antimicrobial was not significant. Posthoc comparisons indicate that PAA 400 ppm is more effective at reducing <em>Salmonella</em> concentrations and that <em>S.</em> Dublin may be more susceptible than <em>S</em>. Newport to antimicrobial sprays. Additionally, under PAA exposure, only <em>S.</em> Dublin, <em>S.</em> Kentucky, and <em>S</em>. Heidelberg showed statistically significant differences (<em>P</em> < 0.05) compared with the control, indicating that these three serovars are more susceptible to PAA treatments than the rest. The behavior of different <em>Salmonella</em> serovars under stress conditions can give us an insight into how these pathogens survive processing.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15903,"journal":{"name":"Journal of food protection","volume":"88 1","pages":"Article 100403"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differences in Salmonella Serovars Response to Lactic Acid and Peracetic Acid Treatment Applied to Pork\",\"authors\":\"Mariana Fernandez, Alexandra Calle\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jfp.2024.100403\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Pathogen control in the meat industry relies on the effectiveness of postharvest interventions in reducing microbial populations. This study investigated differences in the survival of <em>Salmonella</em> serovars when exposed to organic acids used as antimicrobials on raw pork meat. Seven serovars were included in this study (<em>S</em>. Newport, <em>S</em>. Kentucky, <em>S</em>. Typhimurium, <em>S</em>. Dublin, <em>S</em>. Heidelberg, <em>S</em>. Infantis, and <em>S</em>. Enteritidis). Multistrain serovar cocktails were prepared and tested against lactic acid (LA) and peracetic acid PAA at two concentrations, LA 2 and 4% and PAA 200 and 400 ppm. Pork samples were assigned to each serovar, inoculated with 6.0 Log CFU/cm<sup>2</sup> <em>Salmonella</em> (one serovar at a time), and treated with the corresponding antimicrobials. A two-way analysis of variance was conducted to examine the effects of serovar and antimicrobial concentrations on <em>Salmonella</em> survival. A significant main effect of serovar was identified, indicating that <em>Salmonella</em> concentration and reduction rate were significantly affected by serovar. Similarly, a significant main effect of antimicrobials was observed, suggesting that the treatment types impacted <em>Salmonella</em> concentration and reduction rate. However, the interaction effect between serovar and antimicrobial was not significant. Posthoc comparisons indicate that PAA 400 ppm is more effective at reducing <em>Salmonella</em> concentrations and that <em>S.</em> Dublin may be more susceptible than <em>S</em>. Newport to antimicrobial sprays. Additionally, under PAA exposure, only <em>S.</em> Dublin, <em>S.</em> Kentucky, and <em>S</em>. Heidelberg showed statistically significant differences (<em>P</em> < 0.05) compared with the control, indicating that these three serovars are more susceptible to PAA treatments than the rest. The behavior of different <em>Salmonella</em> serovars under stress conditions can give us an insight into how these pathogens survive processing.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15903,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of food protection\",\"volume\":\"88 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 100403\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of food protection\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0362028X2400187X\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of food protection","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0362028X2400187X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Differences in Salmonella Serovars Response to Lactic Acid and Peracetic Acid Treatment Applied to Pork
Pathogen control in the meat industry relies on the effectiveness of postharvest interventions in reducing microbial populations. This study investigated differences in the survival of Salmonella serovars when exposed to organic acids used as antimicrobials on raw pork meat. Seven serovars were included in this study (S. Newport, S. Kentucky, S. Typhimurium, S. Dublin, S. Heidelberg, S. Infantis, and S. Enteritidis). Multistrain serovar cocktails were prepared and tested against lactic acid (LA) and peracetic acid PAA at two concentrations, LA 2 and 4% and PAA 200 and 400 ppm. Pork samples were assigned to each serovar, inoculated with 6.0 Log CFU/cm2Salmonella (one serovar at a time), and treated with the corresponding antimicrobials. A two-way analysis of variance was conducted to examine the effects of serovar and antimicrobial concentrations on Salmonella survival. A significant main effect of serovar was identified, indicating that Salmonella concentration and reduction rate were significantly affected by serovar. Similarly, a significant main effect of antimicrobials was observed, suggesting that the treatment types impacted Salmonella concentration and reduction rate. However, the interaction effect between serovar and antimicrobial was not significant. Posthoc comparisons indicate that PAA 400 ppm is more effective at reducing Salmonella concentrations and that S. Dublin may be more susceptible than S. Newport to antimicrobial sprays. Additionally, under PAA exposure, only S. Dublin, S. Kentucky, and S. Heidelberg showed statistically significant differences (P < 0.05) compared with the control, indicating that these three serovars are more susceptible to PAA treatments than the rest. The behavior of different Salmonella serovars under stress conditions can give us an insight into how these pathogens survive processing.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Food Protection® (JFP) is an international, monthly scientific journal in the English language published by the International Association for Food Protection (IAFP). JFP publishes research and review articles on all aspects of food protection and safety. Major emphases of JFP are placed on studies dealing with:
Tracking, detecting (including traditional, molecular, and real-time), inactivating, and controlling food-related hazards, including microorganisms (including antibiotic resistance), microbial (mycotoxins, seafood toxins) and non-microbial toxins (heavy metals, pesticides, veterinary drug residues, migrants from food packaging, and processing contaminants), allergens and pests (insects, rodents) in human food, pet food and animal feed throughout the food chain;
Microbiological food quality and traditional/novel methods to assay microbiological food quality;
Prevention of food-related hazards and food spoilage through food preservatives and thermal/non-thermal processes, including process validation;
Food fermentations and food-related probiotics;
Safe food handling practices during pre-harvest, harvest, post-harvest, distribution and consumption, including food safety education for retailers, foodservice, and consumers;
Risk assessments for food-related hazards;
Economic impact of food-related hazards, foodborne illness, food loss, food spoilage, and adulterated foods;
Food fraud, food authentication, food defense, and foodborne disease outbreak investigations.