Cargando…

Comparison of pulsed light inactivation kinetics and modeling of Escherichia coli (ATCC-29055), Clostridium sporogenes (ATCC-7955) and Geobacillus stearothermophilus (ATCC-10149)

Pulsed light (PL) inactivation kinetics of Escherichia coli K-12, Clostridium sporogenes and Geobacillus stearothermophilus were evaluated under different treatment conditions. The PL system was factory set to operate at three pulses per second with a pulse width of 360 μs exposing samples placed on...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: John, Dalia, Ramaswamy, Hosahalli S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7473348/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32914124
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.crfs.2020.03.005
_version_ 1783579167584944128
author John, Dalia
Ramaswamy, Hosahalli S.
author_facet John, Dalia
Ramaswamy, Hosahalli S.
author_sort John, Dalia
collection PubMed
description Pulsed light (PL) inactivation kinetics of Escherichia coli K-12, Clostridium sporogenes and Geobacillus stearothermophilus were evaluated under different treatment conditions. The PL system was factory set to operate at three pulses per second with a pulse width of 360 μs exposing samples placed on one of the 9 trays on a rack. Two PL parameters were evaluated in the study: number of pulses (a time factor) and the tray position (a spatial distance factor) both influencing the amount of light energy absorbed. As expected, the level of microbial inactivation increased with an increase in the number of pulses (from 1 to 15) and decreased with an increase in the Spatial distance (Tray # 1 to 9) away from the light source. Both the number of pulses and spatial distance as well as their interactions were found to have a significant effect (P < 0.05) on the extent of microbial inactivation. Vegetative cells of E. coli were most sensitive to PL treatment with a maximum 5 logarithmic reductions on Tray 1 after a 12-pulse treatment (4 s). G. stearothermophilus was more resistant to PL than C. sporogenes. Overall, the PL treatments (12–15 pulses) achieved a minimum four logarithmic reductions in the populations of all three microorganisms on the top tray at doses still below 12 J/cm(2), the FDA-approved limit.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7473348
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74733482020-09-09 Comparison of pulsed light inactivation kinetics and modeling of Escherichia coli (ATCC-29055), Clostridium sporogenes (ATCC-7955) and Geobacillus stearothermophilus (ATCC-10149) John, Dalia Ramaswamy, Hosahalli S. Curr Res Food Sci Research Article Pulsed light (PL) inactivation kinetics of Escherichia coli K-12, Clostridium sporogenes and Geobacillus stearothermophilus were evaluated under different treatment conditions. The PL system was factory set to operate at three pulses per second with a pulse width of 360 μs exposing samples placed on one of the 9 trays on a rack. Two PL parameters were evaluated in the study: number of pulses (a time factor) and the tray position (a spatial distance factor) both influencing the amount of light energy absorbed. As expected, the level of microbial inactivation increased with an increase in the number of pulses (from 1 to 15) and decreased with an increase in the Spatial distance (Tray # 1 to 9) away from the light source. Both the number of pulses and spatial distance as well as their interactions were found to have a significant effect (P < 0.05) on the extent of microbial inactivation. Vegetative cells of E. coli were most sensitive to PL treatment with a maximum 5 logarithmic reductions on Tray 1 after a 12-pulse treatment (4 s). G. stearothermophilus was more resistant to PL than C. sporogenes. Overall, the PL treatments (12–15 pulses) achieved a minimum four logarithmic reductions in the populations of all three microorganisms on the top tray at doses still below 12 J/cm(2), the FDA-approved limit. Elsevier 2020-03-25 /pmc/articles/PMC7473348/ /pubmed/32914124 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.crfs.2020.03.005 Text en © 2020 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Research Article
John, Dalia
Ramaswamy, Hosahalli S.
Comparison of pulsed light inactivation kinetics and modeling of Escherichia coli (ATCC-29055), Clostridium sporogenes (ATCC-7955) and Geobacillus stearothermophilus (ATCC-10149)
title Comparison of pulsed light inactivation kinetics and modeling of Escherichia coli (ATCC-29055), Clostridium sporogenes (ATCC-7955) and Geobacillus stearothermophilus (ATCC-10149)
title_full Comparison of pulsed light inactivation kinetics and modeling of Escherichia coli (ATCC-29055), Clostridium sporogenes (ATCC-7955) and Geobacillus stearothermophilus (ATCC-10149)
title_fullStr Comparison of pulsed light inactivation kinetics and modeling of Escherichia coli (ATCC-29055), Clostridium sporogenes (ATCC-7955) and Geobacillus stearothermophilus (ATCC-10149)
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of pulsed light inactivation kinetics and modeling of Escherichia coli (ATCC-29055), Clostridium sporogenes (ATCC-7955) and Geobacillus stearothermophilus (ATCC-10149)
title_short Comparison of pulsed light inactivation kinetics and modeling of Escherichia coli (ATCC-29055), Clostridium sporogenes (ATCC-7955) and Geobacillus stearothermophilus (ATCC-10149)
title_sort comparison of pulsed light inactivation kinetics and modeling of escherichia coli (atcc-29055), clostridium sporogenes (atcc-7955) and geobacillus stearothermophilus (atcc-10149)
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7473348/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32914124
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.crfs.2020.03.005
work_keys_str_mv AT johndalia comparisonofpulsedlightinactivationkineticsandmodelingofescherichiacoliatcc29055clostridiumsporogenesatcc7955andgeobacillusstearothermophilusatcc10149
AT ramaswamyhosahallis comparisonofpulsedlightinactivationkineticsandmodelingofescherichiacoliatcc29055clostridiumsporogenesatcc7955andgeobacillusstearothermophilusatcc10149