66 Chapter 3
1994 ); Carnatol TM (composed of copper
sulfate petahydrate) and Timsen TM (com-
posed of alkyldimethylbenzylammonium
chloride) (Cutter et al. 1996 ); solutions (10%
or 1.5% of commercial preparation) of
sodium tripolyphosphate, monosodium phos-
phate, sodium acid pyrophosphate, or sodium
hexametaphosphate; and 0.05 – 1.6% NaOH
(Rathgeber and Waldroup 1995 ; Hwang and
Beuchat 1995 ; Bosilevac et al. 2005 ), 85
ppm of peracetic acid mixture (comprised
of peracetic acid and hydrogen peroxide;
Bauermeister et al. 2008 ), 0.1% ammonium
hydroxide, 1 – 4% SM and 0.005% acidic,
or basic oxidized water (Hsu et al. 2004 ;
Stopforth et al. 2005 )Multiple Decontamination
Interventions
Application of combinations of hurdles of
low intensity, or sublethal, may replace the
use of single hurdles of higher or lethal inten-
sity, thereby achieving the desired antimicro-
bial effect without compromising sensory
quality or other properties. Multiple hurdles
or interventions of sublethal intensity may be
applied sequentially or simultaneously (Sofos
and Smith 1998 ; Sofos 2005 ). Sequential
decontamination treatments, combining
physical and chemical methods, have been
proven more effective compared to single
treatments. Such a concept may improve the
effectiveness of some physical methods, such
as washing with cold water or knife - trim-
ming, while using lower concentrations of
chemicals in subsequent stages (Graves
Delmore et al. 1998 ). For instance, Reagan
et al. (1996) found that the combination of
knife - trimming and washing of beef car-
casses caused almost two - fold and six - fold
higher reductions of the incidence of Listeria
and Salmonella , respectively, compared
with washing or trimming alone. This study
formed the research hypothesis on sequential
decontamination interventions. Then, Graves
Delmore et al. (1998) validated the conceptpre - evisceration carcasses from 23% to 3%,
whereas APC and Enterobacteriaceae counts
on treated surfaces decreased by 1 log 10 CFU/
cm^2 (Bosilevac et al. 2004a ). In poultry
decontamination, studies have shown that
0.1% or 0.5% CPC for 30 seconds to 3
minutes at 15 – 60 ° C reduced S. Typhimurium
by 1.7 to 2.5 log 10 CFU/cm^2 , with reductions
increasing with temperature, duration, and
concentration of spraying solution (Kim and
Slavik 1995 ; Wang et al. 1997 ; Xiong et al.
1998 ). Moreover, reductions of 5 log 10 CFU/
cm^2 in S. Typhimurium were obtained either
by spraying 0.4% CPC for 3 minutes or 0.2%
CPC for 10 minutes (Breen et al. 1997 ).
A variety of other antimicrobial sub-
stances have been proposed and evaluated
with varying effectiveness for the decontami-
nation of meat and poultry. Cutter and
Siragusa (1994a) illustrated 1.79 to 3.54 log 10
CFU/cm^2 reductions of beef spoilage bacteria
and L. innocua by spraying with nisin solu-
tion of 5000 AU/ml. Bovine lactoferrin (LF)
is an iron - binding protein, commonly found
in milk, saliva, tears, seminal fl uids, and sec-
ondary granules of neutrophils. “ Activated
lactoferrin ” is an LF derivative through a pat-
ented process that has received a GRAS
status in the United States for use on fresh
beef (Naidu 2001, 2002 ). It is thought to
interfere with bacterial adhesion on surfaces,
causing detachment of microbial contamina-
tion (Naidu et al. 2003 ). Lactoferricin B is a
peptide, deriving from hydrolysis of LF that
binds to the outer membrane of Gram -
negative bacteria, reported to inhibit E. coli
O157:H7 at the minimum level of 8 μ g/ml
(Shin et al. 1998 ). USDA - FSIS has approved
the use of LF either as 2% water - based anti-
microbial spray, for decontamination of beef
carcasses and parts, or as a spray that would
deliver 1 g of LF per dressed carcass, fol-
lowed by washing with temperate water and
lactic acid rinse (USDA - FSIS 2008c ).
Other potential decontaminants tested,
with limited effectiveness, include gluconic
acid at 1.5% and 3% (Garcia Zepeda et al.