Microbiological quality and safety of fresh produce in West Virginia and Kentucky farmers’ markets and validation of a post-harvest washing practice with antimicrobials to inactivate Salmonella and Listeria monocytogenes

Li, KaWang; Weidhaas, Jennifer; Lemonakis, Lacey; Khouryieh, Hanna; Stone, Martin; Jones, Lisa; Shen, Cangliang

doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2017.03.031

Cited by 41 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Increased consumption of fresh produce is likely due to global government efforts to promote healthy eating, the associated health-promoting benefits of consuming fresh produce and ease of access to fresh local produce (Pollack, 2001;Regmi, 2001;Berger et al, 2010;Painter, 2013). Since fresh produce is mostly eaten raw or after minimal processing, pathogen contamination constitutes a potential health risk (Callej on et al, 2015;Li et al, 2017). There are numerous factors capable of compromising the microbiological integrity of produce along the farm to fork continuum, all of which have potentially fatal outcomes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sources and contamination routes of microbial pathogens to fresh produce during field cultivation: A review

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Foodborne illness resulting from the consumption of contaminated fresh produce is a common phenomenon and has severe effects on human health together with severe economic and social impacts. The implications of foodborne diseases associated with fresh produce have urged research into the numerous ways and mechanisms through which pathogens may gain access to produce, thereby compromising microbiological safety. This review provides a background on the various sources and pathways through which pathogenic bacteria contaminate fresh produce; the survival and proliferation of pathogens on fresh produce while growing and potential methods to reduce microbial contamination before harvest. Some of the established bacterial contamination sources include contaminated manure, irrigation water, soil, livestock/ wildlife, and numerous factors influence the incidence, fate, transport, survival and proliferation of pathogens in the wide variety of sources where they are found. Once pathogenic bacteria have been introduced into the growing environment, they can colonize and persist on fresh produce using a variety of mechanisms. Overall, microbiological hazards are significant; therefore, ways to reduce sources of contamination and a deeper understanding of pathogen survival and growth on fresh produce in the field are required to reduce risk to human health and the associated economic consequences.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sources and contamination routes of microbial pathogens to fresh produce during field cultivation: A review

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Salmonella Typhimurium ATCC 14028, Salmonella Tennessee ATCC 10722, L. monocytogenes strains L2624 and L2625 (cantaloupe outbreak serotype 1/2b, donated by Dr. Joshua Gurtler, USDA-ARS, Wyndmoor, PA), and surrogate E. faecium ATCC 8459 were used in this study. Both Salmonella and L. monocytogenes strains were used in the previously reported farmers market produce safety projects (Li et al, 2017(Li et al, , 2018, and this strain of E. faecium has also been studied in WVU poultry meat projects (Lemonakis et al, 2017;Boltz et al, 2019). Salmonella, L. monocytogenes, and E. faecium retrieved from frozen stock cultures were streak-plated onto xylose lysine tergitol-4 agar (XLT-4, Hardy Diagnostics, Santa Maria, CA, USA), Modified Oxford agar (MOX, Hardy Diagnostics, Santa Maria, CA, USA), and BEA (Hardy Diagnostics, Santa Maria, CA, USA), respectively, and then incubated at 35 • C for 48 h to generate single colonies.…”

Section: Preparation Of Inoculummentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Iran, the prevalence of L. monocytogenes in sampled cucumbers was reported to be 18% (Hossein et al, 2013). Depending on the area, the prevalence of L. monocytogenes ranged from 3.8% (Li et al, 2017) to 17.5% (Strawn et al, 2013) on cucumbers sampled from a farmers market. Although outbreaks caused by L. monocytogenes on tomatoes are uncommon, tomatoes were recognized as a common food crop susceptible to foodborne pathogens (Honjoh et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a recent study in West Virginia and Kentucky farmers markets, 18.6% of spinach, 10.9% of tomatoes, 18.5% of peppers, and 56.3% of cantaloupes tested positive for Salmonella, and 3.8% of the produce samples were positive for Listeria spp. (Li et al, 2017). Fresh produce may be eaten without further processing; therefore, cross-contamination during transportation, or handling becomes a serious issue to ensure produce safety.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparing the Efficacy of Two Triple-Wash Procedures With Sodium Hypochlorite, a Lactic–Citric Acid Blend, and a Mix of Peroxyacetic Acid and Hydrogen Peroxide to Inactivate Salmonella, Listeria monocytogenes, and Surrogate Enterococcus faecium on Cucumbers and Tomatoes

Chiu

Jiang

et al. 2020

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was designed to evaluate two triple-wash procedures with commercial antimicrobials to inactivate foodborne pathogens and surrogate bacteria on cucumbers and tomatoes. Fresh, West Virginia locally grown cucumbers and tomatoes were dip-inoculated with Salmonella Typhimurium and Tennessee, Listeria monocytogenes (3-strain), and Enterococcus faecium. Produce was washed through two triple-wash steps (10 s each) including water dip, antimicrobial dip, and water dip (WAW), or water dip, water dip, and antimicrobial dip (WWA), followed by draining (2 min) on aluminum foil. A triple-water (WWW) process was also included as a water-only control. Tested treatments were (1) water; (2) sodium hypochlorite (SH, 100 ppm, pH 8.2); (3) acidified sodium hypochlorite (ASH, 100 ppm, pH 6.8 adjusted by citric acid); (4) lactic and citric acid blend (LCA, 2.5%); and (5) a H 2 O 2-peroxyacetic acid mix [SaniDate-5.0 (SD) 0.0064, 0.25, and 0.50%]. Surviving bacteria were recovered on xylose lysine tergitol-4 (XLT-4, Salmonella), Modified Oxford (MOX, L. monocytogenes), and bile esculin agar (E. faecium). Data (two replicates, four samples/replicate) were analyzed using the mixed model procedure of SAS (P = 0.05). Counts of Salmonella, L. monocytogenes, and E. faecium on unwashed cucumbers and tomatoes were 5.42-6.23, 6.31-6.92, and 6.05 log colony-forming units (CFU)/produce, respectively. Triple-wash with water only reduced all three tested bacteria by 0.45-1.36 log CFU/fruit. Triple-wash by WWA with antimicrobials achieved additional reductions [least squares means (LsMeans)] of 0.38 log CFU/cucumber (Salmonella), 0.56 log CFU/cucumber (E. faecium), 1.48 log CFU/tomato (Salmonella), 1.09 log CFU/tomato (L. monocytogenes), and 0.71 log CFU/tomato more than the WAW procedure. Applying SD-0.25 and SD-0.50% solutions Li et al. Triple-Wash on Cucumbers and Tomatoes in triple-washing cucumbers and tomatoes resulted in reductions (P > 0.05) similar to ASH and greater reductions (P < 0.05) than SH and LCA. E. faecium was less susceptible (P < 0.05) or there was no difference (P > 0.05) in comparison with Salmonella in most cases, except for tomatoes treated with WWA. The results of this study indicate that SD could be used as an alternative antimicrobial agent for chlorine water in triple-wash processing at local small produce plants. Future pilot plant validation studies and cost-effectiveness analyses are needed for applying SD solutions in triple-wash by WV local small produce growers.

show abstract

“…These spaces are essential for the implementation of public policies that aim to promote access to and consumption of fruits and vegetables so that the population may develop healthier eating habits [8,9]. A series of U.S.-funded state public health actions and food assistance programs related to farmers' markets in the United States have been documented in recent years, focusing on the cultural barriers to food access among marginalized groups [10], the challenges associated with implementing food assistance programs in farmers' markets [11], and food safety issues [12][13][14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Farmers’ Market Actors, Dynamics, and Attributes: A Bibliometric Study

Figueroa-Rodríguez,

Álvarez-Ávila,

Hernández Castillo

et al. 2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Farmers’ markets aim to bring producers and consumers together under direct marketing schemes, also known as alternative food networks, for local and sustainable production and consumption of food. A number of studies concerning this subject have been published, however, as yet no updated reviews exist that might allow us to understand the trends in research on farmers’ markets. The objective of this study was to examine the farmers’ market literature using bibliometric tools. A total of 438 peer-reviewed publications, indexed in the abstract and citation meta-database Scopus (Elsevier®), for the period of 1979 to September 24, 2018, were considered. In the second phase, publications in the area of medicine were excluded, resulting in 295 publications being analyzed for the same period. The results showed that these publications focused on three main areas: markets, health programs, and food safety. Upon exclusion of the medical publications, the remaining works focused on farmers’ market actors, dynamics, and attributes: vendors (producers and others), consumers, the community, and supporting actors and institutions (government, NGOs, individuals). Therefore, it is concluded that there is no single type of farmers’ market, nor of farmers’ market vendors or consumers. This makes the reproduction of such spaces difficult, especially when the goals are to benefit local production systems or the nutrition of the local community.

show abstract

Microbiological quality and safety of fresh produce in West Virginia and Kentucky farmers’ markets and validation of a post-harvest washing practice with antimicrobials to inactivate Salmonella and Listeria monocytogenes

Cited by 41 publications

References 19 publications

Sources and contamination routes of microbial pathogens to fresh produce during field cultivation: A review

Sources and contamination routes of microbial pathogens to fresh produce during field cultivation: A review

Comparing the Efficacy of Two Triple-Wash Procedures With Sodium Hypochlorite, a Lactic–Citric Acid Blend, and a Mix of Peroxyacetic Acid and Hydrogen Peroxide to Inactivate Salmonella, Listeria monocytogenes, and Surrogate Enterococcus faecium on Cucumbers and Tomatoes

Farmers’ Market Actors, Dynamics, and Attributes: A Bibliometric Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About