Professional Documents
Culture Documents
High-Pressure Processing Efects On Microbial Food Safety
High-Pressure Processing Efects On Microbial Food Safety
Pressure (MPa) resistance to HPP treatment, and indeed there can be vast
0.03 Everest HPP sensitivity among bacterial species and even strains
(Alpas et al., 1999; Benito et al., 1999; Pagán & Mackey,
Pressure range 2000). Alpas et al. (1999) reported viability losses of between
for the existence 0.5 and 8.5 logs among pathogenic bacterial strains. Prokar-
0.1
Sea Level of all Biological yotic cells tend to be more pressure resistant than eukaryotes
Life (Patterson, 1999). Endospores tend to be extremely HPP
resistant compared with vegetative cells, withstanding treat-
Marine Trench ments of more than 1000 MPa (Smelt, 1998). HPP can
100
induce germination of bacterial spores, the extent of which
Pressure varies according to the growth medium and test organism
treatment
of food (Smelt, 1998; Black et al., 2005b). Spores of Clostridium spp.
c 2008 Federation of European Microbiological Societies FEMS Microbiol Lett 281 (2008) 1–9
Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved
High-pressure processing 3
response to HPP is driven by a protein volume change innocua in simulated milk ultra filtrate with added calcium,
associated with conformational changes, aggregation and magnesium, citrate and phosphate. Magnesium is known to
protein folding–unfolding (Garcia et al., 2005). have a stabilizing effect on ribosome structure; however, loss
Information relating to the effect of HPP on the possibi- of essential ions like magnesium could trigger ribosome
lity of toxicity of HPP foods or associated allergens is rare, destabilization (Niven et al., 1999). Calcium stabilizes the
but warrants research; while the same observation can be outer membrane of cells as its concentration increases;
made for research on bacterial and algal toxins (Torres & therefore HPP would then have to inactivate bacterial cells
Velazquez, 2005; Rastogi et al., 2007), recent efforts have via less sensitive targets (Hauben et al., 1998). Sucrose
been made to address this, such as a study on the induction protects bacterial cells from the damaging effects of HPP
of Shiga toxin caused by HPP (Aertsen et al., 2005), and the inactivation by stabilizing membrane protein functionality
apparent complete inactivation of Staphylococcal enterotox- (Mañas & Pagán, 2005). Furthermore, recent evidence from
ins in cheese using ultrahigh pressure homogenization alone our laboratory has revealed that compatible solutes (such as
original pH value occurs. It is unknown whether the sudden dium iodide (Mackey et al., 1995; Ritz et al., 2001).
pH change has an effect on microbial survival as well as the Membrane permeabilization has been attributed to the
effect of pressure alone. Vegetative bacteria are relatively compression and reduction of the phospholipid bilayer
sensitive to pressure, heat and low pH (Smelt, 1998). (Hoover et al., 1989). Abe (2007) stated that ribosome
Temperature during HPP treatment can exert a signifi- dissociation has also been shown to limit cell viability at
cant impact on microbial survival and subsequent growth high pressures. The various morphological changes include
(Hogan et al., 2005). Increased inactivation is usually separation of the cell membrane from the cell wall, contrac-
observed at temperatures above or below ambient tempera- tion of the cell membrane, compression of gas vacuoles, cell
ture. Refrigeration temperatures can enhance inactivation; lengthening and release of intracellular material (Patterson,
for example, ewes’ milk pressurized at 2 or 10 1C results in 2005).
lower microbial numbers than in milk treated at 25 1C In recent times, research has focused on how HPP causes
(Gervilla et al., 1997). Increases in temperatures can trigger bacterial, viral and fungal inactivation. As a result, there has
c 2008 Federation of European Microbiological Societies FEMS Microbiol Lett 281 (2008) 1–9
Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved
High-pressure processing 5
from Listeria monocytogenes, which is highly specific for gas pockets from the surrounding food structure. Shape
betaine and does not transport other compatible solutes distortion and physical shrinkage can occur due to the
such as carnitine and proline (Sleator et al., 1999). Abee & collapse of air pockets, generally causing irreversible com-
Wouters (1999) have a comprehensive section on betaine pression of whole foods such as fruit (Hogan et al., 2005);
and its transport system for further reference. however, fruit fragments are much less sensitive to such HPP
treatment. Despite causing some undesirable textural
changes, HPP can also be used to induce beneficial changes
Effect of HPP on food quality in product texture and structure such as melting of Mozzarella
HPP has the potential to produce high-quality foods that cheese during processing (O’Reilly et al., 2002).
display characteristics of fresh products, are microbiologi- One of the main benefits of HPP of food is the extension
cally safe and have an extended shelf life (Hogan et al., 2005; of shelf life while retaining the sensory characteristics of
Patterson, 2005). HPP foods are currently considered novel fresh food products (Patterson, 2005). Palou et al. (2002)
has immense possibilities, which are outside the scope of pressure in Escherichia coli. Appl Environ Microbiol 71:
this article; however, comprehensive reviews discussing this 2226–2231.
have been published recently (Raso & Barbosa-Cánovas, Alpas H, Kalchayanand N, Bozoglu F, Sikes A, Dunne CP & Ray B
2003; Ross et al., 2003). Nonetheless, food processors still (1999) Variation in resistance to hydrostatic pressure among
face challenges in the form of extremely resistant bacterial strains of food-borne pathogens. Appl Environ Microbiol 65:
spores and the capital cost of HPP equipment; however, with 4248–4251.
continued research and increased availability and accessi- Alpas H, Kalchayanand N, Bozoglu F & Ray B (2000) Interactions
bility of HPP (thereby reducing equipment costs), these of high hydrostatic pressure, pressurization temperature and
problems will soon be overcome. For example, the large pH on death and injury of pressure-resistant and pressure-
capital investment can be offset by operating HPP plants at sensitive strains of food-borne pathogens. Int J Food Microbiol
full capacity and lowering processing costs by managing the 60: 33–42.
pressures and processing times used (Rogers, 1999). HPP Balasubramanian S & Balasubramaniam VM (2003)
c 2008 Federation of European Microbiological Societies FEMS Microbiol Lett 281 (2008) 1–9
Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved
High-pressure processing 7
Cheftel JC (1995) Review: high pressure, microbial inactivation Hogan E, Kelly AL & Sun D-W (2005) High pressure processing
and food preservation. Food Sci Technol Int 1: 75–90. of foods: an overview. Emerging Technologies for Food
Cheftel JC & Culioli J (1997) Effects of high pressure on meat: a Processing (Sun Da Wen, ed), pp. 3–31. Academic Press.
review. Meat Sci 46: 211–236. Hoover DG, Metrick C, Papineau AM, Farkas DF & Knorr D
Chilton P, Isaacs NS, Mackey B & Stenning R (1997) The effects of (1989) Biological effects of high hydrostatic pressure on food
high hydrostatic pressure on bacteria. High Pressure Research microorganisms. Food Technol 43: 99–107.
in the Biosciences and Biotechnology (Heremans K, ed), pp. Hugas M, Garriga M & Monfirt JM (2002) New mild
225–228. Leuven University Press, Belgium. technologies in meat processing: high pressure as a model
Dogan C & Erkmen O (2004) High-pressure inactivation kinetics technology. Meat Sci 62: 359–371.
of Listeria monocytogenes inactivation in broth, milk, peach Huppertz T, Smiddy MA, Upadhyay VK & Kelly AL (2006) High-
and orange juices. J Food Eng 62: 47–52. pressure-induced changes in bovine milk: a review. Int J Dairy
Donaghy JA, Linton M, Patterson MF & Rowe MT (2007) Effect Tech 59: 58–66.
AMP, eds), pp. 181–198. Nottingham University Press, Ross RP, Beresford T, Hill C & Morgan SM (2000) Combination
Nottingham. of hydrostatic pressure and lacticin 3147 causes increased
Murchie LW, Cruz-Romero M, Kerry JP, Linton M, Patterson MF, killing of Staphylococcus and Listeria. J Appl Microbiol 88:
Smiddy M & Kelly AL (2005) High pressure processing of 414–420.
shellfish: a review of microbiological and other quality aspects. Ross AIV, Griffiths MW, Mittal GS & Deeth HC (2003)
Inn Food Sci Emerg Technol 6: 257–270. Combining nonthermal technologies to control
Niven GW, Miles CA & Mackey BM (1999) The effects of foodborne microorganisms. Int J Food Microbiol 89:
hydrostatic pressure on ribosome conformation in Escherichia 125–138.
coli: an in vivo study using differential scanning calorimetry. Sheehan VM, Sleator RD, Fitzgerald GF & Hill C (2006)
Microbiol 145: 419–425. Heterologous expression of BetL, a betaine uptake system,
Ohlsson T (1994) Minimal processing-preservation methods of enhances the stress tolerance of Lactobacillus salivarius
the future: an overview. Trends Food Sci Technol 5: 341–344. UCC118. Appl Environ Microbiol 72: 2170–2177.
c 2008 Federation of European Microbiological Societies FEMS Microbiol Lett 281 (2008) 1–9
Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved
High-pressure processing 9
Van Opstal I, Bagamboula CF, Vanmuysen SCM, Wuytack EY & Wemekamp-Kamphuis HH, Wouters JA, de Leeuw PPLA, Hain
Michiels CW (2004) Inactivation of Bacillus cereus spores in T, Chakraborty T & Abee T (2004) Identification of sigma
milk by high pressure and heat treatments. Int J Food Microbiol factor sB-controlled genes and their impact on acid stress,
92: 227–234. high hydrostatic pressure, and freeze survival in Listeria
Vogel RF, Pavlovic M, Hörmann S & Ehrmann MA (2005) monocytogenes EGD-e. Appl Environ Microbiol 70: 3457–3466.
High pressure-sensitive gene expression in Wuytack EY, Boven S & Michiels CW (1998) Comparative study
Lactobacillus sanfranciscensis. Braz J Med Biol Res 38: of pressure-induced germination of Bacillus subtilis spores at
1247–1252. low and high pressures. Appl Environ Microbiol 64: 3220–3224.