4.4 Article

Evidence of Salmonella internalization into fresh mangos during simulated postharvest insect disinfestation procedures

期刊

JOURNAL OF FOOD PROTECTION
卷 67, 期 1, 页码 181-184

出版社

INT ASSOC FOOD PROTECTION
DOI: 10.4315/0362-028X-67.1.181

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A recent U.S. salmonellosis outbreak was epidemiologically associated with consumption of imported fresh mangos. Studies were conducted to simulate the commercial heat disinfestation method used to eliminate tephritid fly larvae from mangos, as well as subsequent product cooling procedures, to assess whether this process promotes internalization of Salmonella into mangos. The experimental parameters were chosen to mimic the disinfestation method used by the South American producer/packer implicated in the recent outbreak. Untreated domestically grown immature and ripened Tommy Atkins variety mangos were immersed in water at 47degreesC for 90 min and then immersed in 21degreesC water containing brilliant blue FD&C no. 1 dye for 10 min. After dye internalization potential was established (67%), the same experiment was performed using 21degreesC water containing 10(7) CFU/ml Salmonella Enteritidis expressing constitutive green fluorescent protein. Fruit was then stored at 10, 20, or 30degreesC for up to 1 week. Immature and ripened mangos were positive for Salmonella internalization at a frequency of 80 and 87%, respectively. Internalization frequency into the stem-end segment (83%) was significantly higher (P < 0.05) than internalization into the middle-side (19%) or blossom-end (9%) segments of the fruit. Salmonella was detected in the mango pulp after 1 week of incubation. The degree of fruit ripeness, posttreatment holding temperature, or duration of storage had no significant effect (P > 0.05) on internalization frequency or survival of Salmonella inside mangos. This study illustrates the high potential for pathogen internalization if heat-disinfested mangos are cooled using contaminated water.

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

4.4
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