Comparison of Sample Preparation Methods for Recovering Salmonella from Raw Fruits, Vegetables, and Herbs
Abstract:Methods for preparing raw fruits, vegetables, and herbs for enrichment or direct plating to determine the presence and populations of pathogenic bacteria vary greatly. A study was done to compare three sample processing methods (washing in 0.1% peptone, stomaching, and homogenizing) for their influence on recovery of Salmonella inoculated onto 26 types of raw produce. The mean numbers of Salmonella recovered from 10 fruits, 11 vegetables, and 5 herbs using all three processing methods were 7.17, 7.40, and 7.27 log10 CFU/sample, respectively. Considering all 26 types of produce and all processing methods, the number of Salmonella recovered ranged from 7.24 to 7.29 log10 CFU/sample, with no significant differences attributable to a particular sample processing method. Mean percent recoveries of Salmonella from washed, stomached, and homogenized produce were 39.4, 44.7, and 42.4%, respectively. Mean percent recoveries from fruits, vegetables, and herbs, regardless of sample preparation method, were 41.7, 50.1, and 25.9%, respectively. The number of Salmonella recovered from stomached and homogenized produce, but not washed produce, with pH ≤ 4.53 was significantly less than the number recovered from produce with pH from 5.53 to 5.99, suggesting that the acidic environment in stomachates and homogenates was lethal to a portion of Salmonella. Reduced percent recoveries from herbs (pH 5.94 to 6.34) is attributed, in part, to antimicrobials released from plant cells during sample preparation. Overall, the type of processing method did not substantially affect the number of Salmonella recovered from the 26 types of raw produce representing a wide range of structural and morphological characteristics, composition, and pH. The influence of sample size, diluent composition, and processing time on efficiency of recovery of Salmonella and other pathogens needs to be evaluated before a method(s) for processing samples of raw produce can be recommended.
Document Type: Research Article
Affiliations: Center for Food Safety and Department of Food Science and Technology, University of Georgia, 1109 Experiment Street, Griffin, Georgia 30223-1797, USA
Publication date: October 1, 2001
More about this publication?
- IAFP Members with personal subscriptions to JFP Online: To access full-text JFP or JMFT articles, you must sign-in in the upper-right corner using your Ingenta sign-in details (your IAFP Member Login does not apply to this website). The Journal of Food Protection (JFP) is a refereed monthly publication. Each issue contains scientific research and authoritative review articles reporting on a variety of topics in food science pertaining to food safety and quality. The Journal is internationally recognized as the leading publication in the field of food microbiology with a readership exceeding 11,000 scientists from 70 countries. The Journal of Food Protection is indexed in Index Medicus, Current Contents, BIOSIS, PubMed, Medline, and many others.
Print and online subscriptions are available to IAFP Members and institutional subscribers. IAFP Members with a subscription to JFP Online will have access to all available JFP and JMFT content. Online visitors who are not IAFP Members or journal subscribers will be charged on a pay-per-view basis. Membership and subscription information is available at www.foodprotection.org.
- Information for Authors
- Submit a Paper
- Subscribe to this Title
- Membership Information
- Information for Advertisers
- ingentaconnect is not responsible for the content or availability of external websites