Harris K, Miller M F, Loneragan G H, Brashears M M
Texas Tech University, 201 Animal and Food Sciences Building, Lubbock, Texas 79409, USA.
J Food Prot. 2006 Aug;69(8):1802-7. doi: 10.4315/0362-028x-69.8.1802.
A study was conducted to determine if acidified sodium chlorite (1,200 ppm) and acetic and lactic acids (2 and 4%) were effective in reducing foodborne pathogens in beef trim prior to grinding in a simulated processing environment. The reduction of Salmonella Typhimurium and Escherichia coli O157:H7 at high (4.0 log CFU/g) and low (1.0 log CFU/g) inoculation doses was evaluated at various processing steps, including the following: (i) in trim just after treatment application, (ii) in ground beef just after grinding, (iii) in ground beef 24 h after refrigerated storage, (iv) in ground beef 5 days after refrigerated storage, and (v) in ground beef 30 days after frozen storage. All antimicrobial treatments reduced the pathogens on the trim inoculated with the lower inoculation dose to nondetectable numbers in the trim and in the ground beef. There were significant reductions of both pathogens in the trim and in the ground beef inoculated with the high inoculation doses. On the trim itself, E. coli O157:H7 and Salmonella Typhimurium were reduced by 1.5 to 2.0 log cycles, with no differences among all treatments. In the ground beef, the organic acids were more effective in reducing both pathogens than the acidified sodium chlorite immediately after grinding, but after 1 day of storage, there were no differences among treatments. Overall, in the ground beef, there was a 2.5-log reduction of E. coli O157:H7 and a 1.5-log reduction of Salmonella Typhimurium that was sustained over time in refrigerated and frozen storage. Very few sensory differences between the control samples and the treated samples were detected by a consumer panel. Thus, antimicrobial treatments did not cause serious adverse sensory changes. Use of these antimicrobial treatments can be a promising intervention available to ground beef processors who currently have few interventions in their process.
进行了一项研究，以确定在模拟加工环境中研磨牛肉碎之前，酸化亚氯酸钠（1200 ppm）以及乙酸和乳酸（2%和4%）是否能有效减少食源性病原体。在不同加工步骤中，评估了高接种剂量（4.0 log CFU/g）和低接种剂量（1.0 log CFU/g）下鼠伤寒沙门氏菌和大肠杆菌O157:H7的减少情况，包括以下步骤：（i）处理剂施用后立即在碎肉中，（ii）研磨后立即在绞碎牛肉中，（iii）冷藏储存24小时后的绞碎牛肉中，（iv）冷藏储存5天后的绞碎牛肉中，以及（v）冷冻储存30天后的绞碎牛肉中。所有抗菌处理都将低接种剂量接种的碎肉中的病原体数量减少到碎肉和绞碎牛肉中检测不到的水平。高接种剂量接种的碎肉和绞碎牛肉中的两种病原体都有显著减少。在碎肉本身中，大肠杆菌O157:H7和鼠伤寒沙门氏菌减少了1.5至2.0个对数周期，所有处理之间没有差异。在绞碎牛肉中，有机酸在研磨后立即比酸化亚氯酸钠更有效地减少两种病原体，但储存1天后，各处理之间没有差异。总体而言，在绞碎牛肉中，大肠杆菌O157:H7减少了2.5个对数，鼠伤寒沙门氏菌减少了一个对数，在冷藏和冷冻储存期间这种减少持续存在。消费者小组检测到对照样品和处理样品之间几乎没有感官差异。因此，抗菌处理不会引起严重的不良感官变化。对于目前加工过程中干预措施很少的绞碎牛肉加工商来说，使用这些抗菌处理可能是一种有前景的干预措施。
