15.01.2015 Views

Arkansas - Agricultural Communication Services - University of ...

Arkansas - Agricultural Communication Services - University of ...

Arkansas - Agricultural Communication Services - University of ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

The Use <strong>of</strong> Hurdle Technology to Reduce Microorganisms in Ground Beef<br />

F. W. Pohlman, 1 M. R. Stivarius, 2 K. S. McElyea, 1 Z. B. Johnson, 1<br />

and M. G. Johnson 3<br />

Story in Brief<br />

The effectiveness <strong>of</strong> multiple antimicrobial interventions (hurdle technology) on ground beef microbial characteristics<br />

through simulated retail display was studied. Beef trimmings were inoculated with Escherichia coli (EC) and<br />

Salmonella typhimurium (ST) then treated with either 1) 5% acetic acid followed by 0.5% cetylpyridinium chloride<br />

(AC), 2) 200 ppm chlorine dioxide followed by 0.5% cetylpyridinium chloride (CC), 3) 0.5% cetylpyridinium chloride<br />

followed by 10% trisodium phosphate (CT) or 4) control (C). Trimmings were ground, packaged and sampled on days<br />

0, 1, 2, 3 and 7 <strong>of</strong> display for EC, ST, coliforms (CO) and aerobic plate count (APC). All treatments reduced (P < 0.05)<br />

all bacterial types monitored. In addition, ST was reduced (P < 0.05) through 7 days <strong>of</strong> display and APC was held in<br />

check as display progressed. Therefore, the use <strong>of</strong> hurdle technology was effective for reducing microbial pathogens in<br />

ground beef and would subsequently improve the safety <strong>of</strong> this product.<br />

Introduction<br />

The meat industry continues to face concerns regarding<br />

the safety <strong>of</strong> its products. It has been reviewed that the use <strong>of</strong><br />

single decontamination interventions are effective for reducing<br />

pathogens on carcass surfaces (Dickson and Anderson<br />

1992; Siragusa, 1995). However, since most carcass decontamination<br />

treatments do not sterilize the carcass, microorganisms<br />

remaining on carcass surfaces can easily become inoculated<br />

onto freshly cut surfaces during carcass fabrication, and<br />

subsequently carried through grinding operations.<br />

Multiple intervention technology utilizes different barriers<br />

or hurdles such as pH changes, oxidizing environments,<br />

or other environmental changes to cause disruption <strong>of</strong> microbial<br />

cells or cellular metabolism, to either destroy bacterial<br />

cells or retard their growth. Hurdle technology has been more<br />

effective than single interventions for beef carcass decontamination<br />

(Phebus et al., 1997; Graves-Delmore et al., 1998). In<br />

addition, Ellebracht et al. (1999) used 203°F hot water and<br />

2% lactic acid multiple interventions in the production <strong>of</strong><br />

ground beef to reduce E. coli, Salmonella typhimurium, and<br />

aerobic plate counts 1.1, 1.8, and 1.5 log colony forming units<br />

(CFU)/g, respectively. Therefore, the objective <strong>of</strong> this<br />

research was to determine the effects <strong>of</strong> an organic acid and<br />

other novel decontamination compounds, used in combination,<br />

on the microbial stability <strong>of</strong> ground beef.<br />

Experimental Procedures<br />

Bacterial preparation and inoculation. Inoculums were<br />

prepared from frozen (-112°F) stock cultures <strong>of</strong> Escherichia<br />

coli (ATCC #11775; EC) and a nalidixic acid resistant strain<br />

<strong>of</strong> Salmonella typhimurium (ATTC 1769NR; ST). E. coli was<br />

maintained by brain heart infusion (BHI)(Difco Laboratories,<br />

Detroit, MI) broth with glycerol (20%) and Salmonella<br />

typhimurium was maintained by BHI broth containing<br />

nalidixic acid (Fisher Scientific, Fairlawn, NJ) with glycerol<br />

(20%). Frozen cultures <strong>of</strong> E. coli and Salmonella typhimurium<br />

were thawed, and 0.1 ml <strong>of</strong> E. coli suspension was inoculated<br />

into separate 40 ml aliquots <strong>of</strong> BHI, and 0.1 ml <strong>of</strong><br />

Salmonella typhimurium suspension was inoculated into separate<br />

40 ml aliquots <strong>of</strong> BHI with nalidixic acid. After 18<br />

hours <strong>of</strong> incubation at 98.6°F, bacteria were harvested by centrifugation<br />

(3649 x g for 20 min @ 98.6°F)(Beckman GS-6<br />

series, Fullerton, CA), re-suspended in the same volume <strong>of</strong><br />

0.1% buffered peptone water (BPW) (Difco Laboratories,<br />

Detroit, MI and then pooled together (1600 ml <strong>of</strong> E. coli and<br />

1600 ml <strong>of</strong> Salmonella typhimurium) to make a bacterial<br />

cocktail. The cocktail (3200 ml; log 10 7 colony forming units<br />

(CFU)/ml E. coli and log 107 CFU/ml Salmonella typhimurium)<br />

was cooled to 39.2°F and combined with boneless beef<br />

trimmings (28.2 lb) and allowed to attach for 1 hour. The<br />

meat was then drained and separated into 7.9 lb batches and<br />

placed in a 39.2°F cooler for 12 to14 hours to allow further<br />

microbial attachment.<br />

1 Department <strong>of</strong> Animal Science, Fayetteville.<br />

2 Griffith Laboratories, Griffith Center, Alsip, IL 60658.<br />

3 Department <strong>of</strong> Food Science, Fayetteville.<br />

168

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!