DOCSLIB.ORG

Safe Use of Genetically Modified Lactic Acid Bacteria in Food. Bridging the Gap Between Consumers, Green Groups, and Industry

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Safe Use of Genetically Modified Lactic Acid Bacteria in Food. Bridging the Gap Between Consumers, Green Groups, and Industry Electronic Journal of Biotechnology ISSN: 0717-3458 Vol.9 No.4, Issue of July 15, 2006 © 2006 by Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso -- Chile DOI: 10.2225/vol9-issue4-fulltext-12 REVIEW ARTICLE Safe use of genetically modified lactic acid bacteria in food. Bridging the gap between consumers, green groups, and industry Wilbert Sybesma Wageningen Centre for Food Sciences Diedenweg 20, 6703 GW Wageningen The Netherlands Tel: 31 317 485 383 Fax: 31 317 485 384 E-mail: [email protected] Jeroen Hugenholtz NIZO Food Research Kernhemseweg 2 PO Box 20, 6710 BA, Ede The Netherlands Tel: 31 318 659511 Fax: 31 318 650400 E-mail: [email protected] Willem M. de Vos Wageningen University Department of Microbiology Hesselink van Suchtelenweg 4, 6703 CT Wageningen The Netherlands Tel: 31 317 482105 Fax: 31 317 483829 E-mail: [email protected] Eddy J. Smid* NIZO Food Research Kernhemseweg 2, PO Box 20, 6710 BA, Ede The Netherlands Tel: 31 318 659511 Fax: 31 318 650400 E-mail: [email protected] Financial support: Commission of the European Union through contract QLK1-CT-2000-01376 “Nutra Cells”. Keywords: lactic acid bacteria, genetic modification, legislation, novel foods, safety assessment. Abbreviations: DRI: daily recommended intake EFFCA: European Food and Feed Culture Association GRAS: Generally Recognized As Safe LAB: lactic acid bacteria NICE: nisin induced controlled expression system PMS: post-market surveillance QPS: Qualified Presumption of Safety Within the European Union (EU), the use of genetically assessment of genetically modified microorganisms. modified organisms (GMOs) in food production is not Since these procedures are not yet implemented, the widely applied and accepted. In contrast to the United current risk assessment procedure is shared for GMOs States of America, the current EU legislation limits the derived from micro organisms, plants, or animals. At introduction of functional foods derived from GMOs present, the use of organisms in food production that that may bring a clear benefit to the consumer. have uncontrolled genetic alterations made through Genetically modified lactic acid bacteria (GM-LAB) can random mutagenesis, is permitted, while similar be considered as a different class of GMOs, and the applications with organisms that have controlled genetic European Union is preparing regulations for the risk alterations are not allowed. The current paper reviews *Corresponding author This paper is available on line at http://www.ejbiotechnology.info/content/vol9/issue4/full/12/ Sybesma, W. et al. the opportunities that genetically modified lactic acid Consequently, organisms in which the genetic material has bacteria may offer the food industry and the consumer. been altered by recombinant DNA techniques in a way that An objective risk profile is described for the use of GM- does occur naturally, for instance by point mutations or LAB in food production. To enhance the introduction of small deletions, are considered to be GMOs. Secondly, functional foods with proven health claims it is foods with a new structure which date from before 1997 are proposed to adapt the current safety assessment not considered as novel foods. Thirdly, self cloning (Box 2) procedures for (GM)-LAB and suggestions are made for of non-pathogenic micro-organisms is not considered to the related cost accountability. A qualified presumption lead to a GMO as long as containment of the organism is of safety as proposed by SANCO (EU SANCO 2003), guaranteed (directive 90/219/EC). However, the same self- based on taxonomy and on the history of safe use of cloned micro-organism when used in products (deliberate LAB applied in food, could in the near future be applied release) is considered to be a GMO (directive 2001/18/EC). to any kind of LAB or GM-LAB provided that a series Moreover, the market introduction of foods with organisms of modern profiling methods are used to verify the that have been improved via classical breeding or random absence of unintended effects of altered LAB that may mutagenesis is currently acceptable without profound safety cause harm to the health of the consumer. analysis[1], but it could be questioned whether these foods are more safe than GMO-derived novel foods. The new Ever since human domestication took place approximately regulation 1829/2003 (amending 258/97) regulates the 10,000 years ago, parts of our food supply have been approval and the labelling, and distinguishes between cultured in order to support survival of the human products from GMO, and products which are produced with population. In our current times, the main objectives of help of GMO. Foods, ingredients, additives, flavours as agriculture are still the same, the assurance of efficient food well as feedstuffs, which contained or are GMO, or which supply in the first place, and the increase of quality of the were produced from GMO are in the scope of the supplied foods for the consumer in the second place. regulations. The labelling of these products is also process- Modern biotechnology, using recombinant DNA oriented. Products produced with help of GMO are not in technology, offers ample opportunities to further improve the scope of the regulations. It is still unclear if the food production in the expanding world of today. regulations can be applied on the use of GMO (micro- organisms) within fermentation (Jany and Schuh, 2005). Within the United States of America there is not much public resistance towards the use of genetically modified The rationale for food safety regulations is the assurance to organisms, GMOs (Box 1), in food. However, in other prevent any adverse effects on human health or on the areas of the world, for instance Oceania and Europe, the environment. The starting point for a food safety approach production of novel foods using GMOs is subject to strong is the comparison between the new foods and the debate. For example, within the European Union the conventional counterparts that have a history of safe use, scientific community states that there is sufficient both for the food produced and for the micro-organism that legislation to guarantee that such novel foods are safe for is modified. This approach leads to identification of new or the consumer and the environment, but green groups in altered hazards relative to the conventional counterpart many cases state an opposite opinion. The support for the (substantial equivalence, Box 3) is essential (OECD, 1993). use of GM crops and foods among the European population has recently increased in some countries. Yet at the same This document will analyse the current situation within time a majority of Europeans do not support agri-food Europe with regard to the safe use of novel foods derived biotechnology (Gaskell et al. 2003). In the current debate from genetically modified lactic acid bacteria (GM-LAB). about the application and safety of GMOs in the food The application and safety assessment of genetically industry no clear distinction is made between GMOs modified yeast and fungi are not discussed; neither is the derived from animal, plant, or microbial origin. Moreover, use of GMOs derived from plants (Kuiper et al. 2001) or ethical aspects could play a role in the debate about GMOs animals. Genetically modified microbial inoculants for use from animal or plant origins, but these are considered less in agriculture, such as biological control agents, relevant in the discussion about genetically modified micro- biofertilisers, or phytostimulators is reviewed elsewhere organisms. Apart from this, the current European (Amarge, 2002; Morrissey et al. 2002). An overview will legislation on novel foods and the use of GMOs in food be given of the specific genetic techniques that generate production processes, as laid down in the regulation EC No GM-LAB and the advantages that the novel foods 258/97, amended in regulation 1829/2003, directive fermented with GM-LAB may bring to the consumer or the 2001/18/EC (revised directive 90/220/EC), directive producer. Moreover, the current safety assessment 90/219/EC, and Commission Recommendation 97/618/EC, procedures are considered and further suggestions are made generates a framework for what should and what should not for an adequate risk analysis when GM-LAB are applied in be permitted by law. The legislation, however, is not yet food production. Careful analysis of the properties of GM- completely clear on a number of important scientific LAB combined with a profound safety assessment matters. First of all, the legislation predominantly focuses procedure for foods that are produced through the actions on the methodology rather than on the end product and of GM-LAB, are essential for comparing the safety of such hence, holds too strongly to the definition of GMOs. products with traditional foods. Finally, based upon the 425 Safe use of GM-LAB in food Table 1. Types of DNA modification methods and the acceptability to be used in food production. Acceptance of Acceptance of Directed genetic Un-controlled Modification of DNA contained use, deliberate release, alteration genetic alteration 90/219/EC 2001/18/EC Spontaneous mutations - + + non-GMO + non-GMO Induced mutations - + + non-GMO + non-GMO Mutations via insertion - + + non-GMO + non-GMO elements Conjugation + - + non-GMO + non-GMO Transduction + - + non-GMO + non-GMO Self-cloning + - + non-GMO - GMO Non-self-cloning + - - GMO - GMO principle of assuring food safety for the consumer, it could and medicine and many health claims assigned to probiotics be argued to make no distinction between foods produced are not yet scientifically proven. Another application - the by LAB that have been altered in an uncontrolled way, for use of LAB in the production of proteins for application in instance by random mutagenesis, or a more directed way, health care or for development of new vaccines (Mercenier such as GM-LAB. This could imply that all foods et al.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Food Science and Technology (FDST) 1
    Food Science and Technology (FDST) 1 FDST 812 Cereal Technology FOOD SCIENCE AND Crosslisted with: FDST 412 Prerequisites: FDST 205. TECHNOLOGY (FDST) Description: Chemistry and technology of the cereal grains. Post-harvest processing and utilization for food and feed. Current industrial processes FDST 801 Teaching Applications of Food Science and practices, and the theoretical basis for these operations. Crosslisted with: FDST 401 Credit Hours: 3 Prerequisites: BIOS 101 and CHEM 109 Max credits per semester: 3 Notes: Will not count toward a FDST major or minor. Max credits per degree: 3 Description: Overview of the science of food and how food can be used in Format: LEC the classroom to enhance science education. FDST 815 Molds and Mycotoxins in Food, Feed, and the Human Credit Hours: 3 Environment Max credits per semester: 3 Crosslisted with: FDST 415 Max credits per degree: 3 Prerequisites: FDST 405/805/BIOS 445/845 and FDST 406/806/ Format: LEC BIOS 446/846. FDST 803 Food Quality Assurance Description: Occurrence, growth, and mycotoxin production of molds Crosslisted with: FDST 403 in human foods, animal feeds, and the human environment. Spoilage, Prerequisites: FDST 205; STAT 218. mycotoxin production conditions, toxicity, and pathological effects. Description: Quality related issues as they pertain to manufacturing, Culture media, methods and techniques for enumerating and identifying processing, and/or testing of foods, with a major emphasis on food molds, analytical methods for mycotoxins, and effects of food and feed regulations, statistical process control and Hazard Analysis of Critical processing on mycotoxin stability. Control Points (HACCP). Credit Hours: 3 Credit Hours: 3 Max credits per semester: 3 Max credits per semester: 3 Max credits per degree: 3 Max credits per degree: 3 Format: LEC Format: LEC FDST 819 Meat Investigations FDST 805 Food Microbiology Crosslisted with: ASCI 419, ASCI 819, FDST 419 Crosslisted with: BIOS 445, BIOS 845, FDST 405 Prerequisites: ASCI 210 Prerequisites: BIOS 312; CHEM 251; BIOC 321.
    [Show full text]
  • Food Microbiology 101
    November 2018 Food Microbiology 101 Nina G. Parkinson NGP Consulting November 6, 2018 Food Safety and Sanitation Conference Summary • Microbiological contamination of food • Routes of contamination by pathogens • Overview on emerging risks • Solutions 1 November 2018 Basics of Food Microbiology • Not all microorganisms are ‘bad’ • Used to ferment products • Necessary for composting organic materials • Some cause spoilage • Decomposition of foods economic losses • Some cause illnesses and diseases • Pathogens Types of foodborne illnesses • Infections • Caused by swallowing living pathogens, which grow within the body and cause illness • Intoxications • Caused by swallowing toxin (poison) that has been formed in food as pathogens grow • Reactions usually occur within hours or days of consumption • Secondary conditions attributed to some of these illnesses 2 November 2018 Historical perspective 1900‐1950’s • Clostridium botulinum • Salmonella spp. • Staphylococcus aureus Worked hard to figure out how they grew, how they caused illnesses, etc. Growth needs Survival skills • Food • Sporeformers • Acid • High temperatures • Temperature • Unpleasant conditions • Time • Sanitizer chemicals • Oxygen • Low pH • Moisture • Vegetative pathogens • Low water activity • Low pH Some produce toxins • Low temperatures 3 November 2018 1950’s to 2000’s and beyond • E. coli (many strains and serotypes) • E. coli O157:H7 Enterohemorrhagic (EHEC) • Enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC) • Shiga (or Shiga‐like) Toxin E. coli (STEC) • Shigella spp. • Cronobacter sakazakii
    [Show full text]
  • Food Science Curriculum
    FOOD SCIENCE University of Florida - College of Agricultural and Life Sciences To remain on track, first year students must complete the appropriate critical-tracking courses, which appear in bold, with a 2.5 GPA or better. Students are required to complete a Quest 1course in semester 1 or 2. Fall Credits Spring Credits CHM 2045 & 2045L General Chemistry I (3) and 4 CHM 2046 & 2046L General Chemistry II 4 Laboratory (1) (GE-P) (3) and Laboratory (1) (GE-P) MAC 2311 Analytic Geometry & Calculus I (GE-M) 4 Quest 1 (GE-H) 3 Composition (GE-C) (WR) 3 Economics: ECO 2013, ECO 2023, or AEB 2014 3-4 Humanities w/Diversity Designation (GE-H/D) 3 Elective 4 Elective 1 Total 15 Total 14-15 Fall Credits Spring Credits BSC 2010 & 2010L Integrated Principles of Biology I 4 BSC 2011 & 2011L Integrated Principles 4 (3) and Laboratory (1) (GE-B) of Biology II (3) and Laboratory (1) (GE-B) PHY2053 & PHY2053L Physics and Lab (GE-P) 5 + CHM2210 Organic Chemistry I 3 FOS3042 Intro to Food Science 3 STA 2023 Introduction to Statistics (GE-M) 3 Composition (GE-C) (WR) 3 AEB3114L Intro AG Computer Applications 1 Quest 2 w/International Designation (GE-S/N) 3 Elective 1 Total 15 Total 15 Fall Credits Spring Credits FOS4722C Quality Control in Food Systems 3 HUN2201 Fundamentals of Human Nutrition 3 CHM 2211 Organic Chemistry II (3) and 5 MCB2000 (3) & MCB2000L(1) Microbiology and Lab 4 CHM2211 Lab (2) AEC3030C Effective Oral Communication or 3 FOS4311 (3) & FOS4311L (1) Food Chemistry and 4 SPC2608 Intro to Public Speaking Lab FOS3060 (Life After Graduation) 1 FOS4731 Govt.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the Microbiology of Food Processing.Pdf
    United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service Introduction TO THE Microbiology OF Food Processing August 2012 Small Plant News Guidebook Series Small Plant News is a four-page, four-color newsletter published by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS). It is targeted to small and very small Federal- and State-inspected establishment owners and operators who produce meat, poultry, and processed egg products. Small Plant News’s mission is to support the “FSIS’ Strategic Implementation Plan for Strengthening Small and Very Small Plant Outreach” by providing pertinent information for plant owners and operators so they can produce safe food and, ultimately, ensure the success of their livelihoods. The newsletter strives to do this through: ✔ Informing and educating small and very small plant owners and operators on FSIS news with current and meaningful information in an easy-to-read format. ✔ Assisting plant owners and operators in incorporating FSIS rules and regulations into their daily operational practices with “plain language” information. ✔ Fostering small and very small plants’ ability to stay in business and produce the safest food by providing essential tips that will encourage the highest sanitation standards, paperwork compliance, and cost-saving measures. ✔ Honoring FSIS’ obligations to small and very small plants by providing a mechanism that increases two-way dialogue between plants and the Agency. Back issues of Small Plant News are available on FSIS’ Web site at www.fsis.usda.gov. Or you may call the Small Plant Help Desk at (877) 374-7435 to order back copies.
    [Show full text]
  • 7. Genetically Modified Microorganisms and Their Potential Effects on Human Health and Nutrition
    Trends in Food Science & Technology 14 (2003) 264–276 7. Genetically modified inactivated or viable. When genetically modified (GM) micoorganisms (GMMs) are used, these alternatives, microorganisms naturally, have rather different safety implications. Owing to the plasticity of microbial genomes and exist- ing gene exchange mechanisms, genetic containment, and their potential especially, is fundamentally different for GMMs than for other genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The effects on human following is an attempt to analyse the impacts of GMMs on human health and nutrition taking into health and nutrition account their various actual or potential uses. 7.2. Contribution of transgenic technologies to food microorganisms a, Atte von Wright * and 7.2.1. Background to the use of microorganisms in A˚ ke Bruceb traditional fermented foods Food fermentations represent an age-old technology to improve the keeping quality, safety and nutritional value of perishable foodstuffs; the types of fermented aInstitute of Applied Biotechnology, University of foods differ greatly in different parts of the world and Kuopio, P.O. Box 1627, FIN-70211 Kuopio, Finland among different food traditions (Cooke, Twiddy & (tel.: +358-17-162087; fax: +358-17-163322; Reilly, 1987; Nout, 2001). While many processes in the e-mail: atte.vonwright@uku.fi) developed world are nowadays carried out using defined bNational Food Administration, Uppsala, Sweden starter strains with known and predictable properties, spontaneous fermentation, back slopping (inoculation of the fresh
    [Show full text]
  • Food Microbiology - Radomir Lasztity
    FOOD QUALITY AND STANDARDS – Vol. III - Food Microbiology - Radomir Lasztity FOOD MICROBIOLOGY Radomir Lasztity Department of Biochemistry and Food Technology, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary Keywords: aerobic, anaerobic, antibiotic, ascus, ascomycetes, ascospora, bacteria, botulism, budding, coccus, colony, facultative aerobic, filament, filamentous fungi, film yeasts, food-borne diseses, food-borne pathogens, food microbiology, fungi imperfecti, HACCP, heterofermentative, homofermentative, hypha, industrial use of microorganisms (molds, yeasts, bacteria), lactic acid bacteria, mesophilic, methods in food microbiology, microaerobic, microorganism, molds, morphological characteristics, mycelium, pasteurization, preservation of foods, psychrophilic, single cell protein, spoilage of foods, spore, sterilization, thermophilic, true yeast, water activity, yeasts. Contents 1. Introduction 2. Microorganisms Important in Food 2.1. Molds 2.1.1. General 2.1.2. Molds Occurring in Foods 2.2. Yeasts 2.2.1. General 2.2.2. Classification,Important Genera of Yeasts and Their Industrial Use. 2.3. Bacteria 2.3.1. General 2.3.2. Classification. Bacteria Important in Food Microbiology. 2.3.3. Industrial Use of Bacteria. 2.3.4. Food-borne Pathogens 3. Microbiology of Spoilage and Preservation of Food 3.1. General 3.2. Spoilage of Foods. 3.3. Preservation of Foods 3.3.1. Reduction of Moisture Content 3.3.2. Preservation by Use of High Temperatures. 3.3.3.PresevationUNESCO at low temperatures – EOLSS 3.3.4. Preservation of Foods by Preservatives. 3.3.5. Other MethodsSAMPLE of Food Preservation CHAPTERS 4. Food-borne Diseases 4.1. General 4.2. Microorganisms Causing Food Infection and Food Poisoning. 4.2.1. Botulism 4.2.2. Staphylococcal Food Poisoning 4.2.3.
    [Show full text]
  • Food Microbiology and Food Safety
    Food Microbiology and Food Safety Series Editor Michael P. Doyle Center of Food Safety, University of Georgia, Griffin, GA, USA For other titles published in this series, go to http://www.springer.com/series/7131 FOOD MICROBIOLOGY AND FOOD SAFETY SERIES Food Microbiology and Food Safety publishes valuable, practical, and timely resources for professionals and researchers working on microbiological topics associated with foods, as well as food safety issues and problems. Series Editor Michael P. Doyle, Regents Professor and Director of the Center for Food Safety, University of Georgia, Griffith, GA, USA Editorial Board Francis F. Busta, Director, National Center for Food Protection and Defense, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA Bruce R. Cords, Vice President, Environment, Food Safety & Public Health, Ecolab Inc., St. Paul, MN, USA Catherine W. Donnelly, Professor of Nutrition and Food Science, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, USA Paul A. Hall, President, AIV Microbiology and Food Safety Consultants, LLC, Hawthorn Woods, IL, USA Ailsa D. Hocking, Chief Research Scientist, CSIRO—Food Science Australia, North Ryde, Australia Thomas J. Montville, Professor of Food Microbiology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA R. Bruce Tompkin, Formerly Vice President-Product Safety, ConAgra Refrigerated Prepared Foods, Downers Grove, IL, USA Titles Compendium of the Microbiological Spoilage of Foods and Beverages, William Sperber and Michael Doyle (Eds.) (2009) Effective Risk Communication, Timothy Sellnow, Robert Ulmer, et al. (2009) Food Safety Culture, Frank Yiannas (2008) Molecular Techniques in the Microbial Ecology of Fermented Foods, Luca Cocolin and Danilo Ercolini (Eds.) (2008) Viruses in Foods, Sagar M. Goyal (Ed.) (2006) Foodborne Parasites, Ynes R.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of a Rapid Detection Method of Salmonella in Comparison with the Culture Method and Microbiological Quality in Fish F
    a ISSN 0101-2061 (Print) Food Science and Technology ISSN 1678-457X (Online) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/fst.38719 Evaluation of a rapid detection method of Salmonella in comparison with the culture method and microbiological quality in fish from the Brazilian Amazon Paula Hellayne Costa dos SANTOS1#, Hamilton M. FIGUEIREDO1#, Luiza Helena Meller da SILVA1#* , Rafaela Santos Oliveira da SILVA1#, Gabrielle Virginia Ferreira CARDOSO2#, Carina Martins MORAES2#, Antonio Manoel da Cruz RODRIGUES1# Abstract Microbiological safety of fish is a concern of consumers, industries and regulatory agencies worldwide. Among the pathogenic microorganisms, Salmonella spp. is one of the main agents of foodborne diseases and should be absent in animal products. Rapid and accurate identification of pathogens in the supply chain is important for both quality assurance and tracking infectious agents within the chain. In this context, this study aimed to evaluate the equivalence of two rapid detection tests, as alternative methods to the conventional Salmonella detection method, as well as to verify the microbiological quality parameters of two commercially important fish species in the Amazon biome. The plate count of aerobic bacteria ranged from 7.76 x 410 to 8.71 x 107 CFU.g-1 for mesophiles and 1.70 x 106 to 4.27 x 108 CFU.g-1 for psychrotrophic whereas the maximum for this group of microorganisms in fresh fish is 106 CFU.g-1. Regarding the Staphylococcus count, the two species presented variations between 1.35 x 104 to 1.51 x 105 CFU.g-1. This represents unsatisfactory conditions of handling, storage and conservation of fish species.
    [Show full text]
  • Distributions of Microorganisms in Foods and Their Impact on Food Safety
    Distributions of microorganisms in foods and their impact on food safety Ida Jongenburger Thesis committee Thesis supervisors Prof. dr. ir. M.H. Zwietering Professor of Food Microbiology Wageningen University Prof. dr. L.G.M. Gorris Professor of Food Microbiology Wageningen University Thesis co-supervisor Dr. ir. M.W. Reij Lecturer at the Laboratory of Food Microbiology Wageningen University Other members Prof. dr. H.C. Boshuizen, Wageningen University Prof. F. Butler, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland Prof. dr. ir. A.H. Havelaar, Utrecht University Dr. M.C. Spanjer, Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority, Utrecht This research was conducted under the auspices of the Graduate School of advanced studies in Food Technology, Agrobiotechnology, Nutrition and Health Sciences (VLAG) Distributions of microorganisms in foods and their impact on food safety Ida Jongenburger Thesis submittted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of doctor at Wageningen University by the authority of the Rector Magnificus Prof. dr. M.J. Kropff, in the presence of the Thesis Committee appointed by the Academic Board to be defended in public on Friday March 2 2012 at 4 p.m. in the Aula. Ida Jongenburger Distributions of microorganisms in foods and their impact on food safety 208 pages Thesis Wageningen University, Wageningen, NL (2012) With references, with summaries in Dutch and English ISBN 978-94-6173-207-1 This thesis is dedicated to my parents, who showed me the way, the truth, and the life (John 14: 6a). P. Jongenburger (1924-2006) C. M. Jongenburger-Bezemer Contents Abstract 9 Chapter 1 Introduction 11 Chapter 2 Impact of microbial distributions on food safety 21 I.
    [Show full text]
  • Detection of Viable Foodborne Pathogens & Spoilage
    Detection of Viable Foodborne Pathogens & Spoilage Microorganisms by Nucleic Acid Amplification Based Platforms Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Linlin Xiao, M.S. Graduate Program in Food Science & Nutrition The Ohio State University 2011 Dissertation Committee: Dr. Hua H. Wang, Advisor Dr. M. Monica Giusti, Co-advisor Dr. John Litchfield Dr. Zhongtang Yu Copyright by Linlin Xiao 2011 I Abstract Foodborne disease outbreaks and microbial spoilage threaten public health and cause major financial loss to the food industry and the society. Proper detection of concerned microorganisms in both raw materials and final food productes is a key to control the problems associated with microbial contamination. Several platforms were used to develop accurate, rapid, quantitative, specific and sensitive detection methods for targeted, viable cells, including RNA-based amplification platforms, such as nucleic acid sequence based amplification (NASBA) and reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR), as well as DNA amplification coupled with sample treatment with DNA-intercalating dye propidium monoazide (PMA). In this study, a NASBA-molecular beacon assay targeting 18S ribosomal RNA has been established to investigate its potential to detect viable spoilage yeasts in juice products. Using the developed platform, less than 100 yeast cells per reaction was detected rapidly and specifically. In addition, significant decrease of amplification signals after lethal heat treatments indicated that this platform has the potential for rapid detection of viable spoilage yeasts if combined with quantitative analysis. Listeria monocytogenes contamination is a serious public health issue. The second part of my project compared the suitability of using 16S rRNA, inlA mRNA and rplD ii mRNA as indictors to detect viable L.
    [Show full text]
  • Microbial Biofilms in the Food Industry—A Comprehensive Review
    International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health Review Microbial Biofilms in the Food Industry—A Comprehensive Review Conrado Carrascosa 1,*, Dele Raheem 2 , Fernando Ramos 3,4 , Ariana Saraiva 1 and António Raposo 5,* 1 Department of Animal Pathology and Production, Bromatology and Food Technology, Faculty of Veterinary, Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Trasmontaña s/n, 35413 Arucas, Spain; [email protected] 2 Northern Institute for Environmental and Minority Law (NIEM), Arctic Centre, University of Lapland, 96101 Rovaniemi, Finland; braheem@ulapland.fi 3 Pharmacy Faculty, University of Coimbra, Azinhaga de Santa Comba, 3000-548 Coimbra, Portugal; [email protected] 4 REQUIMTE/LAQV, R. D. Manuel II, Apartado 55142 Oporto, Portugal 5 CBIOS (Research Center for Biosciences and Health Technologies), Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e Tecnologias, Campo Grande 376, 1749-024 Lisboa, Portugal * Correspondence: [email protected] (C.C.); [email protected] (A.R.) Abstract: Biofilms, present as microorganisms and surviving on surfaces, can increase food cross- contamination, leading to changes in the food industry’s cleaning and disinfection dynamics. Biofilm is an association of microorganisms that is irreversibly linked with a surface, contained in an ex- tracellular polymeric substance matrix, which poses a formidable challenge for food industries. To avoid biofilms from forming, and to eliminate them from reversible attachment and irreversible stages, where attached microorganisms improve surface adhesion, a strong disinfectant is required to eliminate bacterial attachments. This review paper tackles biofilm problems from all perspec- tives, including biofilm-forming pathogens in the food industry, disinfectant resistance of biofilm, Citation: Carrascosa, C.; Raheem, D.; and identification methods.
    [Show full text]
  • Yoghurt Added with Lactobacillus Casei and Sweetened with Natural Sweeteners And/Or Prebiotics: Implications on Quality Parameters and Probiotic Survival
    International Dairy Journal 97 (2019) 139e148 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect International Dairy Journal journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/idairyj Yoghurt added with Lactobacillus casei and sweetened with natural sweeteners and/or prebiotics: Implications on quality parameters and probiotic survival Guilherme M. Costa a, Marlon M. Paula a, Carlos Eduardo Barao~ a, Suellen J. Klososki a, * Elton G. Bonafe b, Jesuí V. Visentainer b, Adriano G. Cruz c, Tatiana Colombo Pimentel a, d, a Instituto Federal do Parana (IFPR) e Campus Paranavaí, Rua Jose Felipe Tequinha, 1400, Jardim das Naçoes,~ Paranavaí, Parana, 87703-536, Brazil b Universidade Estadual de Maringa (UEM), Departamento de Química, Av. Colombo, 5790, Jardim Universitario, 87020-900, Brazil c Instituto Federal de Educaçao,~ Ci^encia e Tecnologia do Rio de Janeiro (IFRJ), Departamento de Alimentos, 20270-021, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil d Universidade Pitagoras Unopar, Programa de Mestrado em Ci^encia e Tecnologia de Leite e Derivados, Rua Marselha, 591 Parque Res. Joao~ Piza, Londrina, Parana, 86041-120, Brazil article info abstract Article history: The effect of addition of natural sugar substitutes (stevia, erythritol or xylitol) and prebiotics (oligo- Received 25 November 2018 fructose or polydextrose) on physicochemical characteristics, probiotic survival (Lactobacillus casei) and Received in revised form sensory acceptance of yoghurts during storage (7 C, 28 days) was evaluated. Yoghurts with sucrose or 22 May 2019 sucralose were also prepared. Xylitol and sucralose added yoghurts had physicochemical characteristics Accepted 22 May 2019 and sensory acceptance similar to those of the product with sucrose. Xylitol was more efficient in Available online 4 June 2019 maintenance of textural characteristics and probiotic survival in simulated gastrointestinal conditions (SGIC) than sucralose.
    [Show full text]