4.7 Article

Biofilm formation risk assessment for psychrotrophic Pseudomonas in raw milk by MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry

Journal

LWT-FOOD SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 176, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.lwt.2023.114508

Keywords

Psychrotrophs; Biofilm; MALDI-TOF; Milk spoilage; Mass spectrometry

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We developed an efficient strategy to assess the risk of biofilm formation by psychrotrophic Pseudomonas in raw milk using MALDI-TOF MS. By collecting molecular mass fingerprints of whole cells and combining multivariate statistical analysis with machine learning, we established a classification model for the biofilm-forming ability of psychrotrophs. The results showed that different biofilm-forming capabilities of Pseudomonas can be well distinguished by the MALDI-TOF MS molecular mass fingerprints. The established classification model demonstrated 100% accuracy in identifying biofilm-forming risk.
Psychrotrophic Pseudomonas is often found as the predominant bacteria causing the spoilage of raw milk during product processing and storage. The spoilage can be aggravated if the strains have biofilm-forming ability. Risk assessment of biofilm formation by psychrotrophic Pseudomonas is highly important to prevent product spoilage at early stage. Herein, we develop an efficient strategy to identify the biofilm-forming risk by psychrotrophic Pseudomonas in raw milk based on MALDI-TOF MS. Molecular mass fingerprinting of whole cells was collected by MALDI-TOF MS, followed by multivariate statistical analysis combined with machine learning to establish a classification model of biofilm-forming ability by psychrotrophs. The results showed that Pseudomonas with different biofilm-forming capabilities can be well discriminated by the MALDI-TOF MS molecular mass fingerprinting. A classification model was established, showing 100% accuracy in biofilm-forming risk identification.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available