A Comparison of Different Chemical Sanitizers for Inactivating Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Listeria monocytogenes in Solution and on Apples, Lettuce, Strawberries, and Cantaloupe
Ozone (3 ppm), chlorine dioxide (3 and 5 ppm), chlorinated trisodium phosphate (100- and 200-ppm chlorine), and peroxyacetic acid (80 ppm) were assessed for reduction of Escherichia coli O157:H7
and Listeria monocytogenes in an aqueous model system and on inoculated produce. Initially, sanitizer solutions were inoculated to contain approximately 106 CFU/ml of either pathogen,
after which aliquots were removed at 15-s intervals over a period of 5 min and appropriately plated to determine log reduction times. Produce was dip inoculated to contain ~106
O157:H7 or L. monocytogenes CFU/g, held overnight, submerged in each sanitizer solution for up to 5 min, and then examined for survivors. In the model system study, both pathogens decreased >5
log following 2 to 5 min of exposure, with ozone being most effective (15 s), followed by chlorine dioxide (19 to 21 s), chlorinated trisodium phosphate (25 to 27 s), and peroxyacetic acid (70 to 75 s).
On produce, ozone and chlorine dioxide (5 ppm) were most effective, reducing populations ~5.6 log, with chlorine dioxide (3 ppm) and chlorinated trisodium phosphate (200 ppm chlorine) resulting in maximum
reductions of ~4.9 log. Peroxyacetic acid was the least effective sanitizer (~4.4-log reductions). After treatment, produce samples were stored at 4°C for 9 days and quantitatively examined for E.
coli O157:H7, L. monocytogenes, mesophilic aerobic bacteria, yeasts, and molds. Populations of both pathogens remained relatively unchanged, whereas numbers of mesophilic bacteria increased 2
to 3 log during storage. Final mold and yeast populations were significantly higher than initial counts for chlorine dioxide- and ozone-treated produce. Using the nonextended triangle test, whole apples
exposed to chlorinated trisodium phosphate (200 ppm chlorine) and shredded lettuce exposed to peroxyacetic acid were statistically different from the other treated samples.
Document Type: Research Article
Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition, 2108 South Anthony Hall, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824-1225; and
Abbott Laboratories, Ross Products Division, 625 Cleveland Avenue, Columbus, Ohio 43215-1724, USA
Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition, 2108 South Anthony Hall, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824-1225, USA
Publication date: April 1, 2004
More about this publication?
IAFP members must first sign in on the right to access full text articles of JFP
First published in 1937, the Journal of Food Protection®
, 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 Members and Institutional subscribers. Online visitors who are not IAFP Members or journal subscribers will be charged on a pay-per-view basis. Information can be obtained by calling +1 800.369.6337; +1 515.276.3344; fax: +1 515.276.8655, E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
or Web site: 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