No abstract

Although some metallic nanoparticles (NPs) are commonly used in the food processing plants as nanomaterials for food packaging, or as coatings on the food handling equipment, little is known about antimicrobial properties of palladium (PdNPs) and platinum (PtNPs) nanoparticles and their potential use in the food industry. In this study, common food-borne pathogens Salmonella enterica Infantis, Escherichia coli, Listeria monocytogenes and Staphylococcus aureus were tested. Both NPs reduced viable cells with the log10 CFU reduction of 0.3–2.4 (PdNPs) and 0.8–2.0 (PtNPs), average inhibitory rates of 55.2–99% for PdNPs and of 83.8–99% for PtNPs. However, both NPs seemed to be less effective for biofilm formation and its reduction. The most effective concentrations were evaluated to be 22.25–44.5 mg/L for PdNPs and 50.5–101 mg/L for PtNPs. Furthermore, the interactions of tested NPs with bacterial cell were visualized by transmission electron microscopy (TEM). TEM visualization confirmed that NPs entered bacteria and caused direct damage of the cell walls, which resulted in bacterial disruption. The in vitro cytotoxicity of individual NPs was determined in primary human renal tubular epithelial cells (HRTECs), human keratinocytes (HaCat), human dermal fibroblasts (HDFs), human epithelial kidney cells (HEK 293), and primary human coronary artery endothelial cells (HCAECs). Due to their antimicrobial properties on bacterial cells and no acute cytotoxicity, both types of NPs could potentially fight food-borne pathogens.

In the food industry, the increasing antimicrobial resistance of food-borne pathogens to conventional sanitizers poses the risk of food contamination and a decrease in product quality and safety. Therefore, we explored alternative antimicrobials N-acetyl-L-cysteine (NAC), rhamnolipids (RLs), and usnic acid (UA) as a novel approach to prevent biofilm formation and reduce existing biofilms formed by important food-borne pathogens (three strains of Salmonella enterica and two strains of Escherichia coli, Listeria monocytogenes, Staphylococcus aureus). Their effectiveness was evaluated by determining minimum inhibitory concentrations needed for inhibition of bacterial growth, biofilm formation, metabolic activity, and biofilm reduction. Transmission electron microscopy and confocal scanning laser microscopy followed by image analysis were used to visualize and quantify the impact of tested substances on both planktonic and biofilm-associated cells. The in vitro cytotoxicity of the substances was determined as a half-maximal inhibitory concentration in five different cell lines. The results indicate relatively low cytotoxic effects of NAC in comparison to RLs and UA. In addition, NAC inhibited bacterial growth for all strains, while RLs showed overall lower inhibition and UA inhibited only the growth of Gram-positive bacteria. Even though tested substances did not remove the biofilms, NAC represents a promising tool in biofilm prevention.

No abstract

The Food and Drug Administration recommends against washing raw chicken due to the risk of transferring dangerous food-borne pathogens through splashed drops of water. Many cooks continue to wash raw chicken despite this warning, however, and there is a lack of scientific research assessing the extent of microbial transmission in splashed droplets. Here, we use large agar plates to confirm that bacteria can be transferred from the surface of raw chicken through splashing. We also identify and create a phylogenetic tree of the bacteria present on the chicken and the bacteria transferred during splashing. While no food-borne pathogens were identified, we note that organisms in the same genera as pathogens were transferred from the chicken surface through these droplets. Additionally, we show that faucet height, flow type, and surface stiffness play a role in splash height and distance. Using high-speed imaging to explore splashing causes, we find that increasing faucet height leads to a flow instability that can increase splashing. Furthermore, splashing from soft materials such as chicken can create a divot in the surface, leading to splashing under flow conditions that would not splash on a curved, hard surface. Thus, we conclude that washing raw chicken does risk pathogen transfer and cross-contamination through droplet ejection, and that changing washing conditions can increase or decrease the risk of splashing.