Bacterial fouling in dairy processing

Flint, Steve; Bremer, Phil; Brooks, J.; Palmer, John W.; Sadiq, Faizan Ahmed; Seale, Brent; Teh, Koon Hoong; Wu, Shuyan; Zain, Siti Norbaizura Md

doi:10.1016/j.idairyj.2019.104593

Cited by 42 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 193 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Post-harvest processing by various industries (meat, dairy, vegetable) are known to have specific microbiota-associated biofilms. The dairy industry has bacteria associated with drains, where nutritious spilled milk or whey results in a good growth environment in drains, and problems have long been associated with tubing systems for pasteurization that have dead-end zones or difficult to clean by clean-in-place systems [35]. The vegetable and fruit juice industries often have acetic and citric acid acidified products, which could lead to acid-tolerant organisms contributing to biofilm formation [36].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of Commercial Sanitizers Used in Food Processing Facilities for Inactivation of Listeria monocytogenes, E. Coli O157:H7, and Salmonella Biofilms

Aryal

Muriana

2019

Foods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bacteria entrapped in biofilms are a source of recurring problems in food processing environments. We recently developed a robust, 7-day biofilm microplate protocol for creating biofilms with strongly adherent strains of Listeria monocytogenes, Escherichia coli O157:H7, and Salmonella serovars that could be used to examine the effectiveness of various commercial sanitizers. Listeria monocytogenes 99-38, E.coli O157:H7 F4546, and Salmonella Montevideo FSIS 051 were determined from prior studies to be good biofilm formers and could be recovered and enumerated from biofilms following treatment with trypsin. Extended biofilms were generated by cycles of growth and washing daily, for 7 days, to remove planktonic cells. We examined five different sanitizers (three used at two different concentrations) for efficacy against the three pathogenic biofilms. Quaternary ammonium chloride (QAC) and chlorine-based sanitizers were the least effective, showing partial inhibition of the various biofilms within 2 h (1–2 log reduction). The best performing sanitizer across all three pathogens was a combination of modified QAC, hydrogen peroxide, and diacetin which resulted in ~6–7 log reduction, reaching levels below our limit of detection (LOD) within 1–2.5 min. All treatments were performed in triplicate replication and analyzed by one way repeated measures analysis of variance (RM-ANOVA) to determine significant differences (p < 0.05) in the response to sanitizer treatment over time. Analysis of 7-day biofilms by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) suggests the involvement of extracellular polysaccharides with Salmonella and E. coli, which may make their biofilms more impervious to sanitizers than L. monocytogenes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of Commercial Sanitizers Used in Food Processing Facilities for Inactivation of Listeria monocytogenes, E. Coli O157:H7, and Salmonella Biofilms

Aryal

Muriana

2019

Foods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…C . sakazakii finds its way into product through its persistence in the processing environment, where moisture and organic matter favor its survival ( Flint et al, 2020 ). Because of this, along with detection in intermediates and finished product, manufacturers are interested in controlling for C .…”

Section: Dairy Industry Need For Rapid Methods Organisms Of Interestmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is especially useful to monitor for E . coli and other Enterobacteriaceae in post-pasteurization contexts, given that these do not survive the process and so their presence must be down to fecal contamination through one or more routes ( Flint et al, 2020 ). As an aside, the use of PCR to detect STEC has brought dramatic improvements, with dramatic increases in sensitivity and specificity over the plate-based method was one of the first “killer apps” of PCR in dairy microbiology ( Willis et al, 2018 ).…”

Section: Dairy Industry Need For Rapid Methods Organisms Of Interestmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With the ability to cause severe illness in the elderly, infirm and immunocompromised, as well as abortions, in 2017 there were 2480 cases of invasive listeriosis in the EU, a figure which has seen an increase over the past 5 years of available reports ( EFSA & ECDC, 2018 ). Found in raw milk, and, in spite of being removed by pasteurization, it is capable of finding its way into downstream products through its ability to form biofilms and withstand desiccation ( Flint et al, 2020 ). Strict limits are in place concerning allowable levels in final products.…”

Section: Dairy Industry Need For Rapid Methods Organisms Of Interestmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Staphylococcus spp. are important components of dairy plant biofilms ( Flint et al, 2020 ) and as such should be a target organism of plant hygiene monitoring programs. The ability of assays to detect all members of the CPS should be verified.…”

Section: Dairy Industry Need For Rapid Methods Organisms Of Interestmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Gaps in the assortment of rapid assays for microorganisms of interest to the dairy industry

O’Grady

Cronin

Tierney

et al. 2020

Advances in Applied Microbiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review presents the results of a study into the offering of rapid microbial detection assays to the Irish dairy industry. At the outset, a consultation process was undertaken whereby key stakeholders were asked to compile a list of the key microorganisms of interest to the sector. The resultant list comprises 19 organisms/groups of organisms divided into five categories: single pathogenic species ( Cronobacter sakazakii , Escherichia coli and Listeria monocytogenes ); genera containing pathogenic species ( Bacillus , Clostridium , Listeria , Salmonella ; Staphylococcus ); broad taxonomic groupings (Coliforms, Enterobacteriaceae, fecal Streptococci, sulfite reducing bacteria/sulfite reducing Clostridia [SRBs/SRCs], yeasts and molds); organisms displaying certain growth preferences or resistance as regards temperature (endospores, psychrotrophs, thermodurics, thermophiles); indicators of quality (total plate count, Pseudomonas spp.). A survey of the rapid assays commercially available for the 19 organisms/groups of organisms was conducted. A wide disparity between the number of rapid tests available was found. Four categories were used to summarize the availability of rapid assays per organism/group of organisms: high coverage (> 15 assays available); medium coverage (5–15 assays available); low coverage (< 5 assays available); no coverage (0 assays available). Generally, species or genera containing pathogens, whose presence is regulated-for, tend to have a good selection of commercially available rapid assays for their detection, whereas groups composed of heterogenous or even undefined genera of mainly spoilage organisms tend to be “low coverage” or “no coverage.” Organisms/groups of organisms with “low coverage” by rapid assays include: Clostridium spp.; fecal Streptococci; and Pseudomonas spp. Those with “no coverage” by rapid assays include: endospores; psychrotrophs; SRB/SRCs; thermodurics; and thermophiles. An important question is: why have manufacturers of rapid microbiological assays failed to respond to the necessity for rapid methods for these organisms/groups of organisms? The review offers explanations, ranging from the technical difficulty involved in detecting as broad a group as the thermodurics, which covers the spores of multiple sporeforming genera as well at least six genera of mesophilic nonsporeformers, to the taxonomically controversial issue as to what constitutes a fecal Streptococcus or SRBs/SRCs. We review two problematic areas for assay developers: validation/certification and the nature of dairy food matrices. Development and implementation of rapid alternative test methods for the dairy industry is influenced by regulations relating to both the microbiological quality standards and the criteria alterna...

show abstract

Thermophiles and Their Diverse Function in Agricultural and Biotechnological Applications

Aggarwal,

Chaudhary,

Tyagi

et al. 2024

Extremophiles for Sustainable Agriculture and Soil Health Improvement

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bacterial fouling in dairy processing

Cited by 42 publications

References 193 publications

Efficacy of Commercial Sanitizers Used in Food Processing Facilities for Inactivation of Listeria monocytogenes, E. Coli O157:H7, and Salmonella Biofilms

Efficacy of Commercial Sanitizers Used in Food Processing Facilities for Inactivation of Listeria monocytogenes, E. Coli O157:H7, and Salmonella Biofilms

Gaps in the assortment of rapid assays for microorganisms of interest to the dairy industry

Thermophiles and Their Diverse Function in Agricultural and Biotechnological Applications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About