Basic Food Microbiology 1989
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4684-6453-5_4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Factors That Affect Microbial Growth in Food

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2000
2000
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 182 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The influence on the cell surface charge and cellular fatty acids was minimum. This organism tolerated a wide range of pH from 5.0 to 9.0 and this is within the range reported in the literature (Banwart, 1989). This strain failed to grow in NB, TSB and TSBY when the pH dropped below pH 5.0.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…The influence on the cell surface charge and cellular fatty acids was minimum. This organism tolerated a wide range of pH from 5.0 to 9.0 and this is within the range reported in the literature (Banwart, 1989). This strain failed to grow in NB, TSB and TSBY when the pH dropped below pH 5.0.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…The microbiological quality of animal feed, including pet foods, is often compromised by unhygienic conditions during preparation, distribution, and storage, posing health risks to both humans and pets (29). Factors influencing microorganism multiplication during storage include pH, water, light, time, nutrients, inhibitors, and oxygen (30,31). It is imperative to translate these findings into actionable regulatory measures for the industry, including comprehensive labeling requirements for pet food, adherence to Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) standards set by the Association of American Feed Controls Officials (AAFCO) or approved food additives, and strict adherence to good manufacturing practices (GMP), ideally with AAFCO affiliation (32).…”
Section: Total Aerobic Microbial Countmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…8 and 1.6, respectively. This could be due to expansion in bacterial growth resulting in the decrement of nutrients, reduction of oxygen and accumulation of toxic waste [48,49]. Figure 5 O 2 are required to be released from TP/ LLDPE nanocomposites to inactivate the MDR pathogens in 6 h. Generally, the inactivation of Gram-positive was reported to be more challenging than Gram-negative because of the presence of a thick layer of peptidoglycan.…”
Section: Growth Curvementioning
confidence: 99%