4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Modelling and predicting the simultaneous growth of Listeria monocytogenes and spoilage micro-organisms in cold-smoked salmon

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY
卷 96, 期 1, 页码 96-109

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2672.2003.02137.x

关键词

cold-smoked salmon; Jameson effect; lactic acid bacteria; Listeria monocytogenes; modelling microbial interaction

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims: To evaluate and model the simultaneous growth of Listeria monocytogenes and spoilage micro-organisms in cold-smoked salmon. Methods and Results: Growth kinetics of L. monocytogenes, lactic acid bacteria (LAB), Enterobacteriaceae, enterococci and Photobacterium phosphoreum were determined in two series of challenge tests with sliced and vacuum-packed cold-smoked salmon (SVP-CSS). The product contained a high level of smoke components and at 2degreesC levels of L. monocytogenes increased <100-fold in 193 days. Without the addition of spoilage micro-organisms, L. monocytogenes reached ca 10(8) CFU g(-1) at 5, 10, 17.5 and 25degreesC. Inoculation with spoilage micro-organisms reduced this level to 10(2)-10(4) CFU g(-1). LAB dominated the spoilage microfora of SVP-CSS and competition between LAB and L. monocytogenes in SVP-CSS was appropriately described by a simple expansion of the Logistic model. This interaction model aided in predicting the growth of L. monocytogenes in naturally contaminated SVP-CSS when it was used in combination with expanded versions of existing secondary models for L. monocytogenes and LAB. Conclusions: Temperature, water activity/NaCl, simultaneous growth of LAB, smoke components and to a lesser extent lactate and pH control growth of L. monocytogenes in SVP-CSS. These factors must be included in mathematical models to predict growth of the pathogen in this product. Significance and Impact of the Study: The suggested predictive model can be used to support assessment and management of the human health risk due to L. monocytogenes in SVP-CSS.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据