<%BANNER%>

UFIR



Growth, Reduction, and Survival of Bacteria on Tomatoes
http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ ( Publisher's URL )
CITATION PDF VIEWER
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/IR00000991/00001
 Material Information
Title: Growth, Reduction, and Survival of Bacteria on Tomatoes
Physical Description: Fact Sheet
Creator: Valadez, Angela M.
Schneider, Keith Ralph 1963-
Danyluk, Michelle D.
Publisher: University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agriculture Sciences, EDIS
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2012
 Notes
Abstract: Tomato producers are committed to taking proactive steps to ensure and enhance the safety of their fresh-market tomatoes, but even with better food safety controls, the risk for outbreaks of illness associated with tomato consumption still exists. This 32-page fact sheet highlights current tomato safety related studies on the growth, reduction, and survival of bacteria on fresh-market tomatoes. The authors evaluated bacterial studies on natural antimicrobials and detergents, as well as food processing, cross-contamination, and shelf-life studies.
Acquisition: Collected for University of Florida's Institutional Repository by the UFIR Self-Submittal tool. Submitted by Diana Hagan.
Publication Status: Published
General Note: "FSHN12-06."
General Note: "Published May 2012, June 2012."
General Note: "This review was supported by USDA NIFA Specialty Crops Research Initiative Grant 2009-51181-05783 and the Center for Produce Safety."
 Record Information
Source Institution: University of Florida Institutional Repository
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the submitter.
System ID: IR00000991:00001

Downloads

This item is only available as the following downloads:

Growth, Reduction, and Survival of Bacteria on Tomatoes ( PDF )


Full Text

PAGE 1

FSHN12-06 Growth, Reduction, and Survival of Bacteria on Tomatoes1Angela M. Valadez, Keith R. Schneider, and Michelle D. Danyluk2 1. This document is FSHN12-06, one of a series of the Food Science and Human Nutrition Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. Published May 2012. Visit the EDIS website at http://edis.ifas.u.edu 2. A ngela M. Valadez, graduate research assistant, CREC (Citrus Research and Education Center, Lake Alfred, FL); Keith R. Schneider, associate professor, FSHN (Food Science and Human Nutrition Department, UF Main Campus); Michelle D. Danyluk (contact author), assistant professor, CREC; Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences; University of Florida; Gainesville, FL 32611. This review was supported by USDA NIFA Specialty Crops Research Initiative Grant 2009-51181-05783 and the Center for Produce Safety.The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) is an Equal Opportunity Institution authorized to provide research, educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that function with non-discrimination with respect to race, creed, color, religion, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, political opinions or aliations. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Florida, IFAS, Florida A&M University Cooperative Extension Program, and Boards of County Commissioners Cooperating. Millie Ferrer-Chancy, Interim DeanFresh-market tomatoes are a popular commodity in homes and food service around the world. In the United States, fresh-market tomatoes are produced in every state, with commercial-scale production in about 20 states (USDAERS, 2009). In terms of consumption, the tomato is the nations fourth most popular fresh-market vegetable behind potatoes, lettuce, and onions (USAD-ERS, 2009). In total, approximately 5 billion pounds of fresh tomatoes are eaten annually in the United States (CDC, 2007). In 2010, Florida produced 45% of the total U.S. value of fresh-market tomatoes behind California, Georgia, Virginia, and Tennessee (FDACS, 2012; USDA-ERS, 2008). Tomato producers are committed to taking proactive steps to ensure and enhance the safety of the food they produce, in addition to providing consistency in product quality and wholesomeness. Still, the inherent risks of contamination by foodborne pathogens present a challenge to the produce industry and regulators. Since fresh-market tomatoes are intended to be consumed fresh, there is no kill-step in the processing that would eliminate pathogens in the event of contamination (Maitland et al., 2011). As such, the concern for tomato safety in the United States will continue to grow as tomato consumption increases. Even with the advancements in food processing and food safety controls employed by tomato growers and packers, the risk for foodborne pathogens, including Salmonella enterica to be linked to outbreaks of illness associated with tomato consumption still exists. Fresh-produce handlers and processors have developed hazard analysis and critical control point (HACCP) plans where the critical control points (CCPs) are set in place UF/IFAS Photo / Thomas Wright

PAGE 2

2 to help reduce contamination and aid in the prevention of cross-contamination (Hedberg et al., 1999). Currently, however, there exists no technology proven to eliminate bacterial hazards in any fresh-market fruit or vegetable once contamination occurs (Maitland et al., 2011). Many processing methods have been studied, a number of which warrant further examination of their ecacy as the search continues for fail-safe intervention strategies to ensure the safety of fresh-market tomatoes. is document, therefore, is intended to highlight current tomato safety related studies on the growth, reduction, and survival of bacteria on fresh-market tomatoes. Enclosed are evaluated bacterial studies on natural antimicrobials including carvacrol (oregano), eugenol, -resorcylic acid, trans -cinnamaldehyde (cinnamon), allyisothiocynail (mustard and horseradish), thymol, and thyme oil; detergents including chlorine dioxide (ClO2), chlorine, carbon dioxide (CO2), hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), sodium hypochlorite, ozone, sodium lauryl sulfate (SDS), tween80, acidied sodium chlorite (ASC), peroxyacetic acid (PAA), and calcinated calcium; and food processing studies including high pressure processing, irradiation, X-ray, and modied atmosphere packaging (MAP). Cross-contamination and shelf-life studies were also evaluated. e table focuses primarily on three categories: 1. B y tomato shape or variety, including Round, Roma, plum, cherry, grape, vine, unknown red, green mature, mixed green to red, and diced 2. B y tomato composition, including the tomato stem, pulp, seeds, cotyledons, hypocotyls, and leaves 3. B y bacteria, including acid-adapted and non-acid adapted Salmonella spp., Shigella spp., E. coli O157:H7, Listeria monocytogenes, Erwinia carotovora, and Staphylococcus aureus e intended audience for this document includes tomato processors, researchers, and government ocials interested in tomato safety: During evaluation of their current processing and sanitation facilities, tomato processors can use the table as a reference as they seek alternative or adaptable technologies. Researchers can use this table as a guide to innovate future experiments from current literature. Government ocials can reference this table as current policies and regulations are evaluated and updated. Limited studies in tomato sanitation, primarily focusing on salsa preparation and natural antimicrobial usage, are also featured here for home consumers. Overall, this tomato safety review serves as a reference for everyone concerned in the safety of fresh-market tomatoes.

PAGE 3

3 Table 1 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Round red Unknown S. Typhimurium S. Newport S. Javiana S. Braenderup (CDC) Dip inoculated for 30 s at ~25C and then dried overnight Unspecied time collection points Compared their labmodel (chicken replica), Pathogen Modeling Program, and ComBase 10 12.5 15 17.5 20 22.5 25 27.5 30 35 106 CFU/ml preinoculation 103 to 104 CFU/ whole tomatoes 102 CFU/g of cut tomato postinoculation Their lab model (chicken replica) was more favorable compared to the other models. pH 4.0.5Researchers developed a mathematical model to predict the growth rate of Salmonella (102 CFU/g to 108 CFU/g) on cut tomatoes as a function of incubation temp. Pan and Schaner, 2010 Roma Untreated (no washing or oiling) No S. Enteritidis ATCC 13076 S. Newport ATCC 6962 S. Typhimurium ATCC 14028 300 l spot inoculated (s) 2 4 6 10 ClO2 + sterile tap water (ppm) (High) 20 10 5 (Low) 0 1 3 5 10 237 log CFU/ml S. enterica Reduction: A full minute of contact with ClO2 at 20 and 10 ppm was required to achieve a 5 log reduction of S. enterica on freshly spot-inoculated tomatoes. Immersing wet-inoculated tomatoes in water (0 ppm ClO2) for 1 min alone reduced S. enterica by ~ 1.2 log CFU/cm2. On inoculated fruit surfaces, populations decreased >3 log CFU/cm2 during desiccation at 24C for 24 h. Populations of air-dried Salmonella were not signicantly reduced by ClO2 at ppm after 1 min. For each treatment, nine inoculated tomatoes were immersed in 2 liters of ClO2 or water for 20 to 60 s. Relative humidity 40 50% The study investigated the sanitizing eects of a ClO2 solution on S. enterica in water, on tomato surfaces, and between tomato loads. Pao et al., 2007 Roma Untreated (unwashed or oiled) No S. Enteritidis ATCC 13076 S. Newport ATCC 6962 S. Typhimurium ATCC 14028 30 ml of inoculum was distributed evenly over two synthetic polyethylene roller brushes rotating at 85 revolutions per minute. (s) 10 20 40 60 ClO2 ow rate 5.0 ml/s NACalculated brush contamination of 6.9 log CFU/cm3Reduction: Washing with ClO2 at 5 ppm for 10 to 60 s reduced the transfer of Salmonella from revolving brushes to fruit surfaces by 4.5 to 5.0 log cycles. The presence of ClO2 lowered the Salmonella transfer to runo by 5.2 to 6.4 log cycles in comparison to using water alone. The study tested the ability of ClO2 at 5 ppm during spray washing of tomatoes to prevent Salmonella transfer from inoculated revolving brushes to fruit and wash runo. Crosscontamination study. Pao et al., 2009

PAGE 4

4 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Roma Untreated (unwashed or oiled) No S. Enteritidis ATCC 13076 S. Newport ATCC 6962 S. Typhimurium ATCC 14028 Spot inoculated Up to 60 sec ClO2 or water spray washing for up to 60 s at either low or high ow rate (5.0 or 9.3 ml/s per fruit, respectively). For wet-inoculum trials, six fruits marked with circles were brushed on inoculated revolving brushes without spraying to obtain cross-contamination for 60 s to simulate newly introduced contaminants. NA5.7 log CFU/cm2 on fruit surfaces Reduction: Washing with ClO2 at a low ow rate for 10 to 60 s generated a 4.4 to 5.2 log CFU/cm2 reduction of air-dried Salmonella on fruit surfaces. The study tested the ability of ClO2 at 5 ppm during spray washing of tomatoes to prevent Salmonella transfer from fruit surface to uninoculated revolving brushes. Pao et al., 2009 Roma (Lycopersicon esculentum) No S. Montevideo S. Javiana S. Baildon (Purdue University Bacteria Collection) 100 l spot inoculated Air dry, 1 h (s) 0 10 30 60 120 180 ClO2 gas (mg/liter) 0 2 5 8 10 251.0 x 108 CFU/ml Reduction: Range of 1.16 to 5.53 log cfu/cm2. The greatest reduction at 10 mg/l of ClO2 and 180 s gave a post population 4.87 log cfu/cm2. Relative humidity 90% ClO2 parameters were then taken from this study that gave the optimal 3, 4, and 5 log reduction to select for optimal treatment conditions. The data 10 mg/l for 180 s gave a >5 log reduction. Trinetta et al., 2010 Ripe Roma (Lycopersicon esculentum cv Roma) Unknown S. Anatum F4317 S. Stanley H0558 S. Enteritidis PT30 Submerged for 1 min (h) 0 24 48 72 (kGy ) 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.0 1.5 48.0 log CFU/ml Reductions ranged from 3.3 to 4.2 log CFU/g (1.5 kGy). The irradiation sensitivity of Salmonella did not dier signicantly with increasing refrigerated storage time. A 5-log reduction in dose would be approximately 1.9 to 2.4 kGy. Cesium-137 at a dose rate of 4.89 kGy/h The study evaluated the inuence of refrigerated storage time on the ecacy of irradiation for removing Salmonella from sliced Roma tomatoes. Niemira 2011

PAGE 5

5 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Roma (Lycopersicon esculentum) Unknown A 3-serotype mixture of: S. Javiana S. Montevideo S. Typhimurium (ATCC or personal collection) Spot inoculated NA X-ray (# kGy/16 min) 0.1 0.5 0.75 1.0 1.5 22Three or two strains of each bacterium were mixed with an equal volume to give approximately 107 CFU/ml. Reduction: ~3.7 log CFU/tomato reduction S. enterica was achieved by treatment with 0.75 kGy X-ray, respectively. More than a 5 log CFU/tomato reduction was achieved at 1.0 or 1.5 kGy X-ray for all tested pathogens. Relative humidity 55% Inactivation of inoculated Salmonella enterica on whole Roma tomato surfaces. Mahmoud, 2010 Roma (Lycopersicon esculentum) Unknown A 2-strain mixture of S. exneri ATCC 9199 and ATCC 12022 Spot inoculated NA X-ray (#kGy/16 min) 0.1 0.5 0.75 1.0 1.5 22Three or two strains of each bacterium were mixed with an equal volume to give approximately 107 CFU/ml. Reduction: ~3.6 log CFU/tomato reduction of S. exneri was achieved by treatment with 0.75 kGy X-ray, respectively. More than a 5 log CFU/tomato reduction was achieved at 1.0 or 1.5 kGy X-ray for all tested pathogens. Relative humidity 55% Inactivation of inoculated Shigella exneri on whole Roma tomato surfaces. Mahmoud, 2010 Plum Wax was washed o with 70% ethanol followed by DI wash S. Montevideo S. Poona S. Newport v. Baildon S. Braenderup S. Saintpaul (University of Georgia L. Beuchat) 100 l spot inoculated, held to dry for 1 h at 23C 15 s 1 min 3 min DI (control) Chlorine (100 ppm) Carvacrol (0.25 and 0.75 %) Trans-cinnamaldehyde (0.5 and 0.75%) Eugenol (0.25 and 0.75%) b-resorcylic acid (0.75 and 1.0 %) 25C in water bath shaker 108 CFU/ml before inoculation and 107 CFU/ml post inoculation Reduction: ~2 log CFU/ml for DI ~4 log CFU/ml for Cl ~7 log CFU/ml for Carvacrol (0.25 and 0.75%) ~6 log CFU/ml for Trans-cinnamaldehyde (0.5 and 0.75%) 2.5 log CFU/ml for Eugenol (0.25%) >6 log CFU/ml (0.75%) 6 log CFU/ml for b-resorcylic acid (0.75 and 1.0 %) Mattson et al., 2010 Cherry (fresh and uncoated) Unknown S. Enteritidis PT4 E10 (Uludag University) 50 l spot inoculated for 1 h at 22C 50 l was injected into the stem scar with a sterile syringe 50 l was pipetted onto the stem scar Day at 7C: 10 Day at 22C: 20 Air storage 7 22 Before inoculation: 8.3 and 4.3 log CFU/ml Post inoculation: (high) 7.0 log CFU/tomato; (low) 3.0 log CFU/tomato Reduction: Spot inoculated: (High) ~4 log CFU/tomato reduction at 7C and 22C; (low) ~3 log CFU/tomato reduction Stem-scar syringe/pipetted: ~1 log CFU/tomato growth at 7 and 22C Das et al., 2006

PAGE 6

6 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Cherry (fresh and uncoated) Unknown S. Enteritidis PT4 E10 (Uludag University) 50 l spot inoculated for 1 h at 22C 50 l was injected into the stem scar with a sterile syringe 50 l was pipetted onto the stem scar Day at 7C: 10 Day at 22C: 20 Modied atmosphere packaging (LDPE lm) 7 22 Before inoculation: 8.3 and 4.3 log CFU/ml Post inoculation: (high) 7.0 log CFU/ tomato;(low) 3.0 log CFU/tomato Reduction: Spot inoculated: (High) ~5 log CFU/tomato reduction at 7C and 22C; (low) ~3 log CFU/tomato reduction Stem-scar syringe/pipetted: ~1 log CFU tomato growth at 7 and 22C 20% O280% CO2Das et al., 2006 Cherry (fresh and uncoated) Unknown S. Enteritidis PT4 E10 (Uludag University) 50 l spot inoculated for 1 h at 22C 50 l was injected into the stem scar with a sterile syringe 50 l was pipetted onto the stem scar Day at 7C: 10 Day at 22C: 20 5% CO27 22 Before inoculation: 8.3 and 4.3 log CFU/ml Post inoculation: (high) 7.0 log CFU/tomato; (low) 3.0 log CFU/tomato Reduction: Spot inoculated: (High) ~5 log CFU/tomato reduction at 7C and 22C; (low) ~3 log CFU/tomato reduction Stem-scar syringe/pipetted: ~1 log CFU/tomato growth at 7 and 22C Das et al., 2006 Cherry (fresh and uncoated) Unknown S. Enteritidis PT4 E10 (Uludag University) 50 l spot inoculated for 1 h at 22C 20 min 10 mg/l ozone NABefore inoculation: 8.3 and 4.3 log CFU/ml Post inoculation: (high) 7.0 log CFU/tomato (low) 3.0 log CFU/tomato Detection: High/4 h the cells died completely High/1 h the complete death time was 15 min Low/1 h and 4 h the complete death time was 5 min 1 h or 4 h attachment time of the cells on tomatoes after inoculation Das et al., 2006 Cherry (fresh and uncoated) Unknown S. Enteritidis PT4 E10 (Uludag University) 50 l spot inoculated for 1 h at 22C 20 min 5 and 20 mg/l ozone NABefore inoculation: 8.3 log CFU/tomato Post inoculation: 7.0 log CFU/tomato Reduction: High/5 mg/1 h there was a ~4 log CFU/tomato reduction High/5 mg/4 h there was a ~2.5 log CFU/tomato reduction High/20 mg/4h death at 15 min High/20 mg/1h death at 10 min 1 h or 4 h attachment time of the cells on tomatoes after inoculation Das et al., 2006 Cherry Unknown S. Typhimurium (ATCC 14028, KCTC 2421, KCTC 2057) 1 ml spot inoculated 10 day storage 10 mg/L chlorine dioxide (5 min) 5 kJ m-2 UV-C (254 nm) irradiation Chlorine dioxide + UV-C irradiation 45.90 log CFU/g Reduction: Chlorine dioxide + UV-C irradiation achieved the most eective among the three treatments, which eliminated detection. Chlorine dioxide achieved a 2.53 log CFU/g; UV-C irradiation achieved a 2.58 log CFU/g. Song et al., 2011

PAGE 7

7 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Cherry Unknown E. coli O157:H7 (NCTC 12079) 1 ml spot inoculated 10 day storage 10 mg/L chlorine dioxide (5 min) 5 kJ m-2 UV-C (254 nm) irradiation Chlorine dioxide + UV-C irradiation 46.21 log CFU/g Reduction: Chlorine dioxide + UV-C irradiation achieved the most eective among the three treatments, which eliminated detection. Chlorine dioxide achieved a 2.26 log CFU/g; UV-C irradiation achieved a 2.65 log CFU/g. Song et al., 2011 Grape Unknown S. Typhimurium S. Kentucky S. Senftenberg S. Enteritidis (University of Delaware Culture Collection) Inocula (25 ml) were deposited on intact surfaces to form a drop and allowed to air dry at 25C for about 2 h. 5 min 10 min Chlorine (200 ppm) thymol (0.2 and 0.4 mg/ml) thyme oil (2.0 mg/ml) carvacrol (0.4 mg/ml) washing solutions NA107 CFU/ml Reduction: Thymol was the most eective among the three natural antimicrobial agents, which achieved >4.1 log CFU/ml reductions of S. enterica serovars Typhimurium, Kentucky, Senftenberg, and Enteritidis on grape tomatoes after a 5-min washing and >4.3 log CFU/ml reductions after a 10-min washing. A >4.6 log CFU/ml reduction in the S. enterica populations in comparison to control was observed with the use of thymol solutions. Evaluated the antibacterial activities of thymol, carvacrol, and thyme oil compared to chlorine against Salmonella spp. on grape tomatoes during the washing procedure. Lu and Wu, 2010 Grape (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) Unknown S. Poona (Cantaloupe) S. Stanley H 1256 (Alfalfa sprouts) S. Baildon (Tomato) S. Typhimurium DT 104 (Resistant to multiple antibiotics) S. Montevideo (Tomato) (University of Georgia M. Harrison) Spot inoculated 100 l At 4C and 10C (d) 0 4 7 10 At 25C (h) 0 4 7 10 Allyl isothiocyanate (AIT, from mustard and horseradish) Carvacrol (from oregano) Cinnamaldehyde (from cinnamon) 5, 10, and 15 l (equivalent to 41.5, 83.3, and 125 l/liter of air, respectively) of % pure carvacrol or % pure cinnamaldehyde or 1, 2, and 4 l (equivalent to 8.3, 16.6, and 33.3 l/liter of air, respectively) of % pure AIT 4 10 25 Whole grape tomatoes 100 l 9.0 log CFU/ ml placed on 10 separate spots Reduction: AIT exhibited the highest antimicrobial activity followed by cinnamaldehyde. This level of AIT inactivated Salmonella on whole tomatoes to the detection limit of <2 log CFU/ tomato at 4 and 10C in 10 d and by 1.3 log CFU/tomato at 25C in 10 h. Overall, greater inactivation occurred at 10 than at 4C and on the tomato surface than between tomato slice study. The study elucidated the eect of these antimicrobial activity on pathogen inactivation on tomato skin (using whole tomatoes) and on tomato pulp (using sliced tomatoes). Obaidat and Frank, 2009

PAGE 8

8 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Vine-ripened (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill., cv Rutgers) No wax or oil S. Agona (Alfalfa sprouts) S. Baildon (Tomato) S. Gaminara (Orange juice) S. Michigan (Cantaloupe) S. Montevideo (Tomato) 50 l spot inoculated Dip inoculated in 5 liters for 1 min 50 l spray inoculated for 2 s with thin-layer chromatography reagent sprayer at 22C for 1 or 24 h Agitated at 150 rpm for 5 min Chlorine (200 mg/ml) solution NASpot and spray inocula to each tomato were 7.22 log CFU/ tomato. Dip count could not be determined. Reduction: Spot decreased by 0.80 and 2.20 log CFU/ml, respectively, within 1 and 24 h of drying. Spray-inoculated tomatoes decreased by 1.37 and 4.00 log CFU/ ml within the same respective drying times 24 and 1 h. Populations of Salmonella declined substantially between 1 and 24 h of drying; reductions were high on spray-inoculated tomatoes compared with spot-inoculated tomatoes. Lang et al., 2004 Vine-ripened Unknown Shigella exneri (ATCC 12023) Shigella sonnei (ATCC 25931) Shigella boydii (ATCC 9207) 2 min Sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) 0.1 % Tween 80 (polysorbate 80) 0.1% 22 40 6 log CFU/ml Reductions of 1.5 to 4 log CFU/ ml were achieved. The study evaluated the ecacies of these detergents in removing Shigella from the surfaces of vine tomatoes at dierent treatment temps. Raiden et al., 2003 Vine-ripened Unknown A ve-strain Salmonella cocktail: S. Typhimurium (ATCC 14028) S. Agona (Alfalfa sprouts) S. Baildon (Lettuce/tomato) S. Michigan (Cantaloupe) S. Montevideo (Tomato) (University of Georgia L. Beuchat) 2 min 0.1 % sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) 0.1% Tween 80 (polysorbate 80) 22 40 6 log CFU/ml Reductions of 1.5 to 4 log CFU/ ml were achieved. The study evaluated the ecacies of these detergents in removing Salmonella from the surfaces of vine tomatoes at different treatment temps. Raiden et al., 2003

PAGE 9

9 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Firm tomatoes at the light-red stage of ripeness, free of external defects Unknown S. Montevideo G4639 (Tomato) S. Baildon 61-99 (Tomato) (University of Georgia L. Beuchat) Dip inoculated 2 min 200 ppm Cl25% H2O26010.13 log CFU/ ml Reduction: 1.34 log CFU/g (Cl2) 1.45 log CFU/g (H2O2) Ecacy of wash treatments in reducing population of Salmonella on dip-inoculated tomatoes. Sapers and Jones, 2006 Fully ripened (variety not known) Yes S. Montevideo G4639 (CDC) 1 ml inoculated on diced 2 min. treatment; At 5C (h) 22 46 96 142 216 At 20C (h) 6 22 46 70 96 142 At 30C (h) 6 22 46 70 Sodium hypochlorite (0.5%) 5 20 30 ~4.5 log CFU/g S. Montevideo remained essentially constant in tomatoes stored at 5C for 216 h. Growth 3 log CFU/g at 30C and 2 log CFU/g at 20C Fate of S. Montevideo in chopped ripe tomatoes. Zhuang et al., 1995 Red, ripened Unknown S. Braenderup (Tomato) (CDC) Whole tomatoes at room temp. (22C) were spot inoculated (at stem scar) with 0.1 ml of inoculum. 120 s High pressure processing (MPa) 350 450 550 20Whole skin: 6.33 log CFU/g Whole pulp: 5.44 CFU/g Reduction: Whole Skin 4.15 log CFU/g reduction Whole pulp 3.44 log CFU/g reduction To determine the eect of pressure to reduce or eliminate the more pressure-resistant S. enterica tomato outbreak serovar from whole red Round tomatoes. Maitland et al., 2011

PAGE 10

10 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Red, ripened (Lycopersicon esculentum) Unknown S. Montevideo (Tomato) (University of Georgia), resistant to rifampicin 100 l spot inoculated for 90 min at 22C under 97% RH (d) 0 0.4 1 4 7 10 NA 22 30 5 log CFU/ fruit before attachment; after attachment, 3.8 log CFU/ fruit Growth: After 10 days of storage at 30C, the S. Montevideo population increased to 0.7, 1.0, 1.2, and 2.2 log CFU/ tomato. A similar trend was observed at 22C, although populations were lower than at 30C. Relative humidity (%): 60, 75, 85, 97 Iturriaga et al., 2007 Mature, red, ripe, organic tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) Unknown S. Montevideo (Tomato) (University of Georgia), resistant to rifampicin 100 l drops on the tomato surface near the blossom; stored 22C for 90 min (min) 0 90 NA 225 and 8 log CFU/100 l Number is proportional to storage time. The highest percentage of attachment (6.6%) after 90 min occurred on tomatoes inoculated with the lowest population (4.95 log CFU/tomato). 100% RHEect of inoculum population on attachment of Salmonella on tomatoes. Iturriaga et al., 2003 Red, ripe No Salmonella Enter itidis IFO-3313, SE-1, SE-3, SE-4 (Chicken feces); SE-2 (Bovine feces) (Japan) 100 l spot inoculated 30 min Calcinated calcium 0.5% (wt/vol) 200 ppm chlorine water Sterile distilled water 227.36.46 log CFU/tomato for Salmonella Reduction: Treatment with 200 ppm chlorine and calcinated calcium resulted in 2.07 and 7.36 log CFU/tomato Antimicrobials were sprayed on. Bari et al., 2002 Lycopersicon esculentum No S. Agona (Alfalfa sprouts) S. Baildon (Tomato) S. Montevideo (Tomato) S. Gaminara (Orange juice) S. Michigan (Cantaloupe) 100 l spot inoculated and air dried 20 h at 22C (min) 0 6 12 25 ClO2 gas (mg/liter) 1.4 2.7 4.1 228 log CFU/tomato Reduction (log CFU/tomato): 1.11 2.04 4.33 Relative humidity: 34-62% Sy et al., 2005

PAGE 11

11 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Hydroponic (Lycopersicon esculentum) Unknown S. Javiana (Tomato) S. Baildon (Tomato) S. Montevideo (Tomato) 100 l spot inoculated and air dried 2 h at 22C (min) 0 12 ClO2 Gas (mg/liter) 0.1 0.3 0.5 228 log CFU/ tomato before drying and 7 log CFU/cm2 after drying Reduction (log CFU/cm2): ~2.5.0 ~3.0 >5 Relative humidity: 85% Bhagat et al., 2010 Hydroponic (Lycopersicon esculentum) Unknown Listeria monocytogenes LCDC 81-861 (Coleslaw/cabbage) and F4244 (Ice cream) 100 l spot inoculated and air dried 2 h at 22C (min) 0 12 ClO2 Gas (mg/liter) 0 0.1 0.3 0.5 228 log CFU/ tomato before drying and 7 log CFU/cm2 after drying Reduction: L. monocytogenes ~3.5, ~4.5, >5 log CFU/cm2Relative humidity: 85% Bhagat et al., 2010 Round, unripe, green Florida 47 No Cocktail of: S. Agona S. Gaminara S. Michigan S. Montevideo S. Poona (University of California Davis L. Harris) Rifampicin resistant Puncture: 10 l aliquot inoculum Shaved, stem scars, and intact surfaces: 100 l aliquot inoculum (s) 30 60 120 150 ppm free chlorine, pH 6.5 25 35 At 25C: 6.52 to 6.77 log CFU/ml At 30C: 5.77 to 6.49 log CFU/ml Reductions at 120 s: At 25C, Stem 1.86 log CFU/ml, Scrape 1.42 log CFU/ml, Puncture 0.73 log CFU/ml, Intact 6.36 log CFU/ml At 30C, Stem 1.0 log CFU/ml, Scrape 0.56 log CFU/l, Puncture 0.71 log CFU/ml, Intact 4.85 log CFU/ml Salmonella recovery was tested on four surface types: intact, punctures, shaves, and stem scars. Felkey et al., 2006 Round, unripe, green Florida 47 No S. Agona S. Gaminara S. Michigan S. Poona S. Montevideo Ten-10 l aliquot, spot inoculated around blossom scar (d) 0 1 3 7 11 14 21 28 20 30 4.6.1 log CFU/ ml Reduction by day 28: At 20C/60% RH, 3.1 log CFU/ml At 20C/90% RH, 3.2 log CFU/ml At 30C/80% RH, 5 log CFU/ml Relative humidity (%): 60, 80, 90 Allen et al., 2005

PAGE 12

12 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Lightly waxed, mature green Unknown S. Montevideo (Tomato) S. Michigan (Cantaloupe) v. Poona (Cantaloupe) S. Hartford Orange juice S. Enteritidis (Eggs) (CDC) Ampicillin resistant, inoculated 50 l near the blossom end of the tomato Tomatoes were analyzed after storage for (d) 0 1 2 4 7 10 14 NA 207.72 log CFU/ tomato Reduction of ~4 log CFU/tomato by day 14 70% RHDetermine the survival characteristics of Salmonella inoculated on tomato surfaces following storage at 20C. Guo et al., 2002 JFP Lightly waxed, mature green Unknown S. Montevideo (Tomato) S. Michigan (Cantaloupe) S. Poona (Cantaloupe) S. Hartford Orange juice S. Enteritidis (Eggs) (CDC) Ampicillin resistant, inoculated 50 l near the blossom end of the tomato Tomatoes were analyzed after storage for (d) 0 1 2 4 7 10 14 NA 207.77.15 CFU/g Growth of 2.5 log CFU/tomato at 4 days Study attachment and inltration of Salmonella into tomatoes placed on the surface of water-saturated soil inoculated with the pathogen. Guo et al., 2002 JFP Mature green (Lycopersicon esculentum cv Agriset, and Lycopersicon esculentum cv Solimar), stored at RT until ripe Unknown S. Montevideo G4639 (CDC) Rifampicin resistant 25 l spot inoculated NA NA Room temp. Four groups of 5 tomatoes each were inoculated on the stem scars with a bacterial population of 4.4 103, 5.4 104, 6.6 105,or 5.0 106 CFU in 25 l Detection: 1st set, 33% detectable on 1036 CFU 2nd set, 10% on 1056 CFU 3rd set, no detection Bacterial transfer by using a cutting knife from inoculated to uninoculated tomatoes. Bacteria were transferred by using a cutting knife from inoculated to uninoculated tomatoes at high CFU. Lin and Wei, 1997

PAGE 13

13 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Mature green (Lycopersicon esculentum cv Agriset, and Lycopersicon esculentum cv Solimar), stored at RT until ripe Unknown S. Montevideo G4639 (CDC) Rifampicin resistant 25 l spot inoculated NA NA Room temp. 25 l 2.8 102, 2.8 103, 2.8 104 or 2.8 105 CFU/ml in buttereld phosphate buer or tryptic soy broth was placed on the stem scars of 10 tomatoes to yield a nal population of 7, 70, 700, or 7,000 CFU. Detection: 3.8% detectable by direct plating for 70,000 CFU, no detection for 7 CFU, 4.2% detectable after 6 h enrichment for 7,000 CFU Determination of the rate of bacterial detection following cutting of inoculated tomatoes: introduction and/or transfer of bacterial contaminants by using a cutting knife could occur at a bacterial population as low as <10 CFU at the stem scar. Lin and Wei, 1997 Mature green (Lycopersicon esculentum cv Agriset, and Lycopersicon esculentum cv Solimar), stored at RT until ripe Unknown S. Montevideo G4639 (CDC) Rifampicin resistant 25 l spot inoculated NA NA Room temp. Four tomatoes were each inoculated with 6.25 103, 6.25 104, or 9.5 105 CFU in 25 l at stem scar. Detection: At the lower inoculum dose of 6.25 x 103 CFU, S. Montevideo colonies were found to cluster at the stem scar region on TSA-RIF plates. However, as the inoculum levels were increased, the colonies were found to spread from the stem scar region to the center and bottom of cut tomatoes along the cutting direction of the knife. Bacterial distribution on the cut surface of tomato halves. Lin and Wei, 1997 Green (Florida 47 cultivar) No S. Agona S. Gaminara S. Michigan S. Montevideo S. Poona (University of California Davis L. Harris) Rifampicin resistant, spot inoculated (s) 60 20 treatment and 5 d study 200 ppm chlorine (pH 6.5) 3530 L of inoculums of 108 to 109 CFU/ mL Salmonella cocktail Reduction of 96.19 >99.99 % at 120 sec on day 5 Eectiveness of 200 ppm chlorine (pH 6.5) treatment on smooth surface, stem scar tissue, and puncture wound of tomatoes. Yuk et al., 2005

PAGE 14

14 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Green (Florida 47 cultivar) No S. Agona S. Gaminara S. Michigan S. Montevideo S. Poona (University of California Davis L. Harris) Rifampicin resistant Spot inoculated (s) 60 20 treatment and 5 d study 1,200 ppm acidied sodium chlorite (ASC; pH 2.5) 3530-100 L of inoculums of 108 to 109 CFU/ mL Salmonella cocktail Reduction of 98.05 >99.99 % at 120 sec on day 5 Eectiveness of 1200 ppm acidied sodium chlorite wash on smooth surface, stem scar tissue, and puncture wound of tomatoes. Yuk et al., 2005 Green (Florida 47 cultivar) No S. Agona S. Gaminara S. Michigan S. Montevideo S. Poona (University of California Davis L. Harris) Rifampicin resistant Spot inoculated (s) 60 20 treatment and 5 d study 87 ppm peroxyacetic acid (PAA) 3530 L of inoculums of 108 to 109 CFU/ mL Salmonella cocktail Reduction of 94.79 >99.99 % at 120 sec on day 5 Eectiveness of 87 ppm peroxyacetic acid treatment on smooth surface, stem scar tissue, and puncture wound of tomatoes. Yuk et al., 2005 Green (Florida 47 cultivar) No S. Agona S. Gaminara S. Michigan S. Montevideo S. Poona (University of California Davis L. Harris) Rifampicin resistant Spot inoculated 1 h treatment and 5 d study 100 mg chlorine dioxide (ClO2) gas treatment 3530 L of inoculums of 108 to 109 CFU/ mL Salmonella cocktail Reduction of 99.35 >99.99 % at 120 sec on day 5 Eectiveness of chlorine dioxide (ClO2) gas treatment on smooth surface, stem scar tissue, and puncture wound of tomatoes. Yuk et al., 2005

PAGE 15

15 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Green (Florida 47 cultivar) No S. Agona S. Gaminara S. Michigan S. Montevideo S. Poona (University of California Davis L. Harris) Rifampicin resistant Spot inoculated NA 200 ppm chlorine (pH 6.5), a 1200 ppm acidied sodium chlorite (ASC; pH 2.5) a chlorine dioxide (ClO2), gas treatment 3530 L of inoculums of 108 to 109 CFU/ mL Salmonella cocktail Reduction of 99.245 >99.99 % at 120 sec on day 5 2 min in the chlorine bath (200 ppm, 35C, pH 6.5) as the initial treatment, followed by a 30 s washing in acidied sodium chlorite (1200 ppm, 35C, pH 2.5), and then tomatoes were treated with chlorine dioxide gas for 1 hour at room temp. (23C 2C) in a 22-quart vessel Eectiveness of combination treatment on smooth surface, stem scar tissue, and puncture wound of tomatoes. Yuk et al., 2005 Mature green (Sunny cultivar) No S. Montevideo G4639 (CDC) Batches of tomatoes (18 to 20) were submerged and constantly agitated in the bacterial suspension for 2 min and were then air dried in a laminar ow hood at 22C for 4 h. Storage (d) 1 2 4 7 9 15 18 NA 10 20 30 ~1.5 log CFU/ cm2Growth: Pathogen did not change signicantly on tomatoes stored at 10C throughout the 18-day storage period. Signicant increases in the population of S. Montevideo occurred within 7 days and within 1 day when tomatoes were stored at 20 and 30C, respectively. A 3 log CFU/cm2 growth at 30C Relative humidity 45% Fate of S. Montevideo on tomato surfaces. Zhuang et al., 1995

PAGE 16

16 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Mature green (Sunny cultivar) No S. Montevideo G4639 (CDC) 10 tomatoes were submerged and constantly agitated for 2 min, dried, placed in plastic bags, and stored at 10 or 20C. Storage (d) at 10C 1 3 5 8 At 20C (d) 1 3 5 8 18 NA 10 20 ~4.5 log CFU/g Growth: A signicantly higher number of S. Montevideo cells were taken up by core tissue when tomatoes at 25C were dipped in suspension at 10C compared with the number of cells taken up by tomatoes dipped in suspensions at 25 or 37C. Tomatoes remained essentially constant throughout subsequent storage for 18 days at 10C. Storage of tomatoes at 20C resulted in signicant increases in the population of S. Montevideo in core tissues within 3, 5, and 18 days of storage of tomatoes that had been dipped in suspension at 10, 25, and 37C. Uptake of S. Montevideo by core tissue. Eect of temp. differential between tomatoes (25C) and dip suspension (10, 25, or 37C) on uptake of S. Montevideo by core tissue, and eect of subsequent storage temp. (10 or 20C) on survival. Zhuang et al., 1995 Mature green (Sunny cultivar) No S. Montevideo G4639 (CDC) Batches (18 to 22) of tomatoes were submerged in the suspension, constantly agitated for 2 min, air dried for 5 h, and stored at 25C for 18 h. 2-min treatment Free Cl2 (ppm) 60 110 210 320 NA~4.95 log CFU/ cm2 on surface and unknown in core Reduction: Dipping in a solution containing 320 ppm chlorine for 2 min resulted in approximately 1.5 log reduction in the number of viable S. Montevideo on the surfaces of tomatoes. Concentrations of 110 to 320 ppm signicantly reduce the number of viable cells. Ecacy of chlorine for inactivating S. Montevideo. Zhuang et al., 1995

PAGE 17

17 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Freshly-harvested Unripened (green), and ripened Unknown Separately: S. Javiana 5913 (Chicken feces) S. Javiana 6027 (Bovine feces) S. Montevideo (Tomato) S. Newport (Alfalfa sprouts) v. Enteritidis (Egg) S. Hadar (Poultry house) S. Typhimurium (Pork slaughter line) S. Dublin (Raw milk) S. Senftenberg (Alfalfa sprouts) S. Infantis (Clinical isolate) (University of Guelph Culture Collection) (d) 7 14 NA 15 25 106 CFU/ml Growth (internal and external) was promoted at the high incubation temp. (25C) and high relative humidity (95%), although this was serovar dependent. The growth and persistence of Salmonella introduced on and into ripened (red) tomatoes was serovar dependent. Salmonella serovars Enteritidis, Typhimurium, and Dublin were less adapted to grow in or on intact red tomatoes than were serovars Hadar, Montevideo, or Newport. Vacuum chamber (operating at 103 Pa), 75 or 95% RH Inoculation of tomato fruit on surface and internally. Shi et al., 2007 Mature, red, ripe tomato; green tomato; ripened tomatillo (Physalis ixocarpa) Unknown S. Montevideo (Tomato) (University of Georgia) Rifampicin resistant 100 l spot inoculated 90 min NA 12 22 30 7 log CFU/fruitPopulation ranged from 4.0 to 5.4 log CFU/fruit). Temp. and RH alone did not aect the number of cells attached to the tomato or tomatillo surface. Both the type of product and interaction of temp. and RH showed a signicant eect on the attachment of Salmonella Monte video to the surface of tomatoes and tomatillos. Relative humidity (%): 75, 85, 97 Inuence of relative humidity, temp., and stage of ripening on attachment of Salmonella to tomatoes and tomatillos. Iturriaga et al., 2003

PAGE 18

18 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Mature green through fully red tomatoes of the Sunny variety Unknown S. Montevideo G4639 (CDC) Rifampicin resistant 25-l aliquots on the stem scar of each tomato 30 s 1 min 2 min Free chlorine (ppm) 100 Room temp. 8.09 log CFU/ tomato skin circle in DI 3.25 log CFU/ tomato skin circle in TSB Low 3.98 log CFU/stem scar in DI High 8.09 log CFU/stem scar in DI Reduction: After 2 min, 1.09 (DI) to 5.95 (TSB) log CFU/tomato skin circle and Low 1.27 log CFU/stem scar After 1 min, High 1.66 log CFU/ stem scar Ecacy of aqueous chlorine solutions against populations of S. Montevideo located on the surface, wounded areas, or stem scars of tomatoes. Wei et al., 1995 Mature green through fully red tomatoes of the Sunny variety Unknown S. Montevideo G4639 (CDC) 0.5 ml aliquot added 30 s 1 min 2 min Free chlorine (ppm) 50 75 100 Room temp. Tryptic soy broth: 3.72, 5.99, 9.07 log CFU/ml Buttereld buer: 9.34 log CFU/ml DI: 9.36 log CFU/ml Reduction: After 2 min for TSB, 2.60 (75 ppm), 3.61 (75 ppm), 7.18 (100 ppm) log CFU/ml Buer, 8.49 log CFU/ml (100 ppm) DI, 8.36 log CFU/ml (100 ppm) Ecacy of aqueous chlorine against S. Montevideo populations suspended in distilled water, in growth medium, or on the dried surface of glass beads (a model for cellular attachment or embedding in particulates). Wei et al., 1995 Mature green through fully red tomatoes of the Sunny variety Unknown S. Montevideo G4639 (CDC) 25 l aliquot added Growth (h) 18 24 48 Survival (d) 1 2 3 7 NA Growth 25C Survival 20C 25C Growth: 9.06 log CFU/ml to 9.48 CFU/ml Survival: 25 l of low 4.76, medium 5.76, or high 8.76 log CFU/ml, which dried up to be 3.16, 4.16, and 7.16 log CFU/ml Growth: Low ~1.75 log CFU/wounded area growth Medium ~0.4 log CFU/wounded area High no growth. Ripeness had no apparent eect on bacterial growth. Survival, relative humidity: 83 and 72% Determine the ability of S. Montevideo to grow and/or survive on tomato surfaces, including the unbroken skin, wounded areas, growth cracks, or stem scars. Wei et al., 1995

PAGE 19

19 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Roma (Lycopersicon esculentum) Unknown A 3-strain mixture of E. coli O157:H7 (C7927, EDL933, and 204P) Spot inoculated NA X-ray (#kGy/16 min) 0.1 0.5 0.75 1.0 1.5 22Three or two strains of each bacterium were mixed with an equal volume to give approximately 107-9 CFU/ml. Reduction: ~ 4.2 log CFU/tomato reduction of E. coli O157:H7 were achieved by treatment with 0.75 kGy X-ray. More than a 5 log CFU/tomato reduction was achieved at 1.0 or 1.5 kGy X-ray for all tested pathogens. Relative humidity: 55% Inactivation of inoculated Escherichia coli O157:H7 on whole Roma tomato surfaces. Mahmoud, 2010 Vine-ripened (Lycopersicon Esculentum Mill. cv Rutgers) No E. coli O157:H7 strains LJH557 (Apple cider), SEA-13B88 (Apple cider), CDC-658 (Cantaloupe), H1730 (Lettuce), and F4546 (Alfalfa sprouts) 50 l spot inoculated or dip inoculated in 5 liters for 1 min or 50 l spray inoculated for 2 sec with thinlayer chromatography reagent sprayer at 22C for 1 or 24 h Agitated at 150 rpm for 5 min Chlorine (200 mg/ml) solution NASpot and spray inocula to each tomato were 7.21, log CFU/ ml. Dip could not be determined. Reduction: Spot inoculation was reduced by 1.07 and 3.17 log CFU/ml after drying times of 1 and 24 h. Spray-inoculated tomatoes were 1.03 and 4.34 log CFU/ml at 1 and 24 h, no recovery from chlorine. Evaluate methods for applying inoculum and to examine the eect of inoculum drying time on survival and recovery of foodborne patho gens inoculated onto the surface of raw, ripe tomatoes. Lang et al., 2004 Firm tomato at the lightred stage of ripeness, free of external defects Unknown E. coli NRRL B-766 (ATCC 9637), a nonpathogenic surrogate for Salmonella (USDA-ARS-NCAUR L.K. Nakamura) (min) 2 3 5 5% H2O2609.71 log CFU/ml Reduction of 0.95.90 log CFU/g Eect of treatment time and surfactant addition on ecacy of 5% H2O2 in reducing population of E. coli NRRL B-766 on dip-inoculated tomatoes held 24 h at 20C prior to treatment. Sapers and Jones, 2006

PAGE 20

20 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Firm tomato at the lightred stage of ripeness, free of external defects Unknown E. coli NRRL B-766 (ATCC 9637), a nonpathogenic surrogate for Salmonella (USDA-ARS-NCAUR L.K. Nakamura) (h) 24 48 1% or 5 % H2O2 (2 min or 15 min) 20 60 5.62 log CFU/g (48 h) Reduction of 1.12 to 2.04 log CFU/g (48 h) Ecacy of H2O2 in reducing the population of E. coli NRRL B-766 on dip-inoculated tomatoes, as aected by post-inoculation storage at 20C. Sapers and Jones, 2006 Firm tomato at the lightred stage of ripeness, free of external defects Unknown E. coli NRRL B-766 (ATCC 9637), a nonpathogenic surrogate for Salmonella (USDAARS-NCAUR L.K. Nakamura) 48 h 200 ppm chlorine 4 3.98 log CFU/mL Reduction of 1.16 CFU/g Ecacy of water rinse and 200 ppm Cl2 treatment in reducing the population of E. coli NRRL B-766 on dip-inoculated tomatoes, as aected by post-inoculation storage at 4C. Sapers and Jones, 2006 Red, ripe No E. coli O157:H7 CR-3, MN-28, MY29, DT-66 (Bovine feces) (Japan) 100 l spot inoculated 30 min Calcinated calcium 0.5% (wt/vol), 200 ppm chlorine water, or sterile distilled water 227.63 -7.85 log CFU/tomato for E. coli O157:H7; Reduction: Treatment with 200 ppm chlorine and calcinated calcium resulted in 3.40 and 7.85 log reductions of E. coli O157:H7, respectively. Antimicrobials were sprayed on. Bari et al., 2002 Roma (Lycopersicon esculentum) Unknown A 3-strain mixture of L. monocytogenes (Scott A, F5069 and LCDC 81-861) Spot inoculated NA X-ray (#kGy/16 min) 0.1 0.5 0.75 1.0 1.5 22Three or two strains of each bacterium were mixed with an equal volume to give approximately 107-9 CFU/ml Reduction: ~2.3 log CFU/tomato reduction of L. monocytogenes were achieved by treatment with 0.75 kGy X-ray, respectively. More than a 5 log CFU/tomato reduction was achieved at 1.0 or 1.5 kGy X-ray for all tested pathogens. Relative humidity: 55% Inactivation of inoculated Listeria monocytogenes on whole Roma tomato surfaces. Mahmoud, 2010

PAGE 21

21 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Vine-ripened (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. cv Rutgers) No L. monocytogenes strains G1091 (Coleslaw), F8255 (Peach/plum), F8369 (Corn), HO222 (Potato), and F8027 (Celery) 50 l spot inoculated or dip inoculated in 5 liters for 1 min or 50 l spray inoculated for 2 sec with thinlayer chromatography reagent sprayer at 22C for 1 or 24 h Agitated at 150 rpm for 5 min Sterile deionized water (control) or chlorine (200 mg/ml) solution NA L. monocytogenes spot and spray inocula to each tomato were 7.37 log CFU/ml. Dip could not be determined. Reduction: Spot reduced by 1.00 and 1.54 log CFU/ml within 1 and 24 h. Reductions on spray-inoculated tomatoes were 0.52 and 1.45 log CFU/ml for 1 and 24 h. L. monocytogenes is known to be more resistant than E. coli O157:H7 and Salmonella to stresses. Higher numbers of cells were recovered from dip-inoculated tomatoes compared with spotor sprayinoculated tomatoes, regardless of drying time or treatment. Lang et al., 2004 Red, ripeNo Listeria monocytogenes ATCC 43256, ATCC 49594, JCM 7676, JCM 7672, JCM 7671 100 l spot inoculated 30 min Calcinated calcium 0.5% (wt/vol) 200 ppm chlorine water sterile distilled water 227.54 -7.59 log CFU/tomato for L. monocytogenes Reduction: Treatment with 200 ppm chlorine and calcinated calcium reduced L. monocytogenes numbers by 2.27 and 7.59 log CFU per tomato, respectively. Antimicrobials were sprayed on Bari et al., 2002 Roma Untreated (no washing, oiling, or waxing) No E. carotovora ATCC 495, ATCC 15359, ATCC 25272 300 l spot inoculated (s) 2 4 6 10 ClO2 (ppm) (High) 20 10 5 (Low) 0 1 3 5 10 237 log CFU/ml E. carotovora. Reduction: A full minute of contact with ClO2 at 20 and 10 ppm was required to achieve a 5 log reduction of E. carotovora on freshly spot-inoculated tomatoes. Immersing wet-inoculated tomatoes in water (0 ppm ClO2) for 1 min alone reduced E. carotovora by about 1.9 log CFU/cm2. On inoculated fruit surfaces, populations decreased >3 log CFU/cm2 during desiccation at 24C for 24 h. Populations of air-dried Erwinia were not signicantly reduced by ClO2 at ppm after 1 min. For each treatment, nine inoculated tomatoes were immersed in 2 liters of ClO2 or water for 20 to 60 s. Relative humidity: 40% Researchers investigated the sanitizing eects of a ClO2 solution on E. carotovora in water, on tomato surfaces, and between tomato loads. Pao et al., 2007

PAGE 22

22 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Roma, diced at the lightred to red stages Unknown S. Agona (Alfalfa sprouts) S. Baildon (Diced tomato) S. Gaminara (Orange juice) S. Michigan (Canataloupe) S. Montevideo (Tomato) Acidand non-acid adapted environment, 5ml inoculation of inoculums in 450 g diced tomatoes (d) 0 3 6 9 NA 4 12 21 Acid low 0.88 log CFU/g Acid high 2.88 log CFU/g No acid low 0.99 log CFU/g No acid high 2.99 log CFU/g Growth at 10 days for: Acid low at 12C and 21C, ~1.32 and ~8.22 log CFU/g. Acid high at 12C and 21C, ~3.62 log CFU/g and ~5.32 log CFU/g. No acid low at 12C and 21C, ~1.61 log CFU/g and ~7.71 log CFU/g. No acid high at 12C and 21C, ~3.81 CFU/g, and ~4.81 log CFU/g Survival and growth of acidadapted and not acid-adapted cells in diced Roma tomatoes. Beuchat and Mann, 2008 Diced Unknown Separately: S. Enteritidis NVI 153 (Cow) S. Infantis NVI 110 (Broiler chicken) S. Typhimurium NVI 199 (Broiler chicken) (Finland) Spot inoculated 6 24 48 NA 7 (only 48 h) 22 30 1 102 CFU/g Growth: S. Infantis No growth at 7C; At 48 h, 2.4 108 CFU/g at 22C, and 4.5 107 CFU/g at 30C. S. Enteritidis No growth at 7C; At 48 h, 8 108 CFU/g at 22C, and 6 107 CFU/g at 30C. S. Typhimurium No growth at 7C; At 48 h, 1.1 108 CFU/g at 22C, and 5 107 CFU/g at 30C. Asplund and Nurmi, 1991 Diced, Round, red, ripened tomato Unknown S. Braenderup (Tomato) (CDC) Diced tomatoes at room temp. (22C) were spot inoculated (at stem scar) with 0.1 ml of inoculum. 120 s High pressure processing (MPa) 350 450 550 20Diced, 5.93 log CFU/g Reduction: 550 MPa Diced, 3.65 log CFU/g reduction To determine the eect of pressure to reduce or remove S. enterica from whole red Round tomatoes. Maitland et al., 2011

PAGE 23

23 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Diced grape tomato Lycopersicon esculentum mill. Unknown S. Poona (Cantaloupe) S. Stanley H 1256 (Alfalfa sprouts) S. Baildon (Tomato) S. Typhimurium DT 104 (Resistant to multiple antibiotics) S. Montevideo (Tomato) (University of Georgia M. Harrison) Spot inoculated 100 l At 4C and 10C (d) 0 4 7 10 At 25C (h) 0 4 7 10 Allyl isothiocyanate (AIT, from mustard and horseradish) Carvacrol (from oregano) Cinnamaldehyde (from cinnamon) 5, 10, and 15 l (equivalent to 41.5, 83.3, and 125 l/liter of air, respectively) of % pure carvacrol or % pure cinnamaldehyde or 1, 2, and 4 l (equivalent to 8.3, 16.6, and 33.3 l/liter of air, respectively) of % pure AIT 4 10 25 Sliced tomatoes, 100 l 6.7 log CFU/ml placed on 10 separate spots Reduction: AIT exhibited the highest antimicrobial activity followed by cinnamaldehyde. The lowest level of AIT (8.3 l/liter of air) inactivated Salmonella on sliced tomatoes by 1.0 and 3.5 log at 4 and 10C, respectively, in 10 days and by 2.8 log at 25C in 10 h. Overall, greater inactivation occurred at 10 than at 4C and on the tomato surface than between slices. Elucidate the effect of antimicrobials activity on pathogen inactivation on tomato skin (using whole tomatoes). Obaidat and Frank, 2009 Stem scar tissue light red, Round Unknown S. Agona (Alfalfa sprouts) S. Baildon (Diced tomato) S. Gaminara (Orange juice) S. Michigan (Cantaloupe) S. Montevideo (Tomato) Acidand nonacid adapted environment, 20 l syringe inoculated (d) 0 3 6 10 NA 12 21 Acid-adapted and not acidadapted cells: Round, light red, 2.05 and 1.84 CFU/g Growth at 10 days for Light red, Round: Acid-adapted stem at 12C and 21C, ~2.05 log CFU/g and ~4.05 log CFU/g Not acid-adapted stem at 21C and 21C, ~0.76 log CFU/g and ~2.66 log CFU/g Survival and growth of acidadapted and not acid-adapted cells in Round tomatoes. Beuchat and Mann, 2008

PAGE 24

24 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Stem scar tissue of lightred Roma Unknown S. Agona (Alfalfa sprouts) S. Baildon (Diced tomato) S. Gaminara (Orange juice) S. Michigan (Cantaloupe) S. Montevideo (Tomato) Acidand nonacid adapted environment, 20 l syringe inoculated (d) 0 3 6 10 NA 12 21 Acid-adapted and not acidadapted cells: Roma, light red, 2.00 and 2.01 CFU/g Growth at 10 days, Roma light red: Acid-adapted stem at 12C and 21C, ~1.5 log CFU/g and ~3.8 log CFU/g Not acid-adapted stem at 21C and 21C, ~2.29 log CFU/g and ~4.19 log CFU/g Survival and growth of acidadapted and not acid adapted cells in Roma tomatoes. Beuchat and Mann, 2008 Stem scar tissues of Round and Roma, initially at the turning and/ or pink stages of ripeness Unknown S. Agona (Alfalfa sprouts) S. Baildon (Diced tomato) S. Gaminara (Orange juice) S. Michigan (Cantaloupe) S. Montevideo (Tomato) 20 l syringe inoculated 12C (d) 0 3 6 10 14 27 21C (d) 0 3 6 10 14 NA 12 21 Pre-inoculation 4 log CFU/ml and post-inoculation 0.08 log CFU/g Growth: Salmonella increased signicantly in the stem scar of tomatoes stored at both temps. Higher populations (4.9 to 8.4 log CFU/g) were reached at 21C than at 12C (3.3 to 4.9 log CFU/g) in tomatoes stored for 14 and 27 days, respectively Tomatoes were held up to 27 days at 12 or 21C with 15 and 36% relative humidity before experiment. Survival and growth of Salmonella in Round and Roma tomatoes. Beuchat and Mann, 2008 Stem scar on the skin surface of grape tomato Unknown S. Agona (Alfalfa sprouts) S. Baildon (Diced tomato) S. Gaminara (Orange juice) S. Michigan (Cantaloupe) S. Montevideo (Tomato) Not adapted to acidic environment 20 l inoculated 14 d NA 4 12 21 1.76 log CFU/ml (57 CFU/ml) Growth at 14 days: Stem at 12C and 21C, ~2.65 and ~4.05 log CFU/g Survival and growth of Salmonella in and on grape tomatoes. Beuchat and Mann, 2008

PAGE 25

25 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Stem scar tissue of green tomato Unknown S. Agona (Alfalfa sprouts) S. Baildon (Diced tomato) S. Gaminara (Orange juice) S. Michigan (Cantaloupe) S. Montevideo (Tomato) Acidand non-acid adapted environment 20 l syringe inoculated (d) 0 3 6 10 NA 12 21 Acid-adapted and not acidadapted cells: Green, 2.03 and 1.78 log CFU/g Growth at 10 days for Green: Acid-adapted stem at 12C and 21C, ~0.067 log CFU/g and ~1.77 log CFU/g Not acid-adapted stem at 21C, ~3.22 log CFU/g Survival and growth of acidadapted and not acid-adapted cells in green tomatoes. Beuchat and Mann, 2008 Round Pulp of light red Unknown S. Agona (Alfalfa sprouts) S. Baildon (Diced tomato) S. Gaminara (Orange juice) S. Michigan (Cantaloupe) S. Montevideo (Tomato) Acidand non-acid adapted environment 20 l syringe inoculated (d) 0 3 6 10 NA 12 21 Acid-adapted and not acidadapted cells: Round, light red, 2.05 and 1.84 CFU/g Growth at 10 days for Light red Round: Acid pulp at 12C and 21C, ~3.95 log CFU/ml and ~5.45 log CFU/ml Not acid-adapted pulp at 12C and 21C, ~2.46 log CFU/g and ~5.56 log CFU/g. Survival and growth of acidadapted and not acid adapted cells in Round tomatoes. Beuchat and Mann, 2008 Round and Roma tomato pulp (radial pericarp) initially at the turning and/ or pink stages of ripeness Unknown S. Agona S. Baildon S. Gaminara S. Michigan S. Montevideo 20 l syringe inoculated 12C (d) 0 3 6 10 14 27 21C (d) 0 3 6 10 14 NA 12 21 Pre-inoculation 4 log CFU/ml, and post-inoculation 0.08 log CFU/g Growth: Salmonella increased signicantly in the pulp tissues of tomatoes stored at both temps. Higher populations (4.9 to 8.4 log CFU/g) were reached at 21C than at 12C (3.3 to 4.9 log CFU/g) in tomatoes stored for 14 and 27 days, respectively. Tomatoes were held up to 27 days at 12 or 21C with 15 and 36% relative humidity before experiment. Survival and growth of Salmonella in Round and Roma tomatoes. Beuchat and Mann, 2008

PAGE 26

26 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Pulp of lightred Roma tomato Unknown S. Agona S. Baildon S. Gaminara S. Michigan S. Montevideo Acidand non-acid adapted environment 20 l syringe inoculated (d) 0 3 6 10 NA 12 21 Acid-adapted and not acid adapted cells: Roma light red 2.00 and 2.01 CFU/g Growth at 10 days Roma light red: Acid-adapted pulp at 12C and 21C, ~3.5 log CFU/ml and ~6.0 log CFU/ml Not acid-adapted pulp at 12C and 21C, ~3.29 log CFU/g and ~5.19 log CFU/g Survival and growth of acidadapted and not acid-adapted cells in Roma tomatoes. Beuchat and Mann, 2008 Pulp tissues on the skin surface of grape tomato Unknown S. Agona S. Baildon S. Gaminara S. Michigan S. Montevideo Acidand non-acid adapted environment 20 l syringe inoculated 14 d NA 4 12 21 1.76 log CFU/ml (57 CFU/ml) Growth at 14 days: Pulp at 12C and 21C, ~3.35 and ~4.85 log CFU/g Survival and growth of Salmonella in and on grape tomatoes. Beuchat and Mann, 2008 Pulp of green tomato Unknown S. Agona S. Baildon S. Gaminara S. Michigan S. Montevideo Acidand non-acid adapted environment 20 l syringe inoculated (d) 0 3 6 10 NA 12 21 Acid-adapted and not acidadapted cells: Green 2.03 and 1.78 log CFU/g Growth at 10 days for Green: Acid-adapted pulp at 12C and 21C, ~1.47 log CFU/ml and ~3.77 log CFU/ml Not acid-adapted pulp at 12C and 21C, ~1.52 log CFU/g and ~4.02 log CFU/g. Survival and growth of acidadapted and not acid-adapted cells in green tomatoes. Beuchat and Mann, 2008 Salsa with either fresh Roma tomato or canned whole tomato, different salsa recipes Unknown S. Typhimurium, DT 104 (Beef isolate) and PTC 1 (Poultry isolate) two S. Enteritidis, H4639 (Clinical iso late) and MH24981 (Environmental isolate) one S. Heidelberg, MH27651 (Turkey isolate) 100 l spot inoculated (d) 0 1 2 3 7 NA 215-6 log CFU/ tomato Salsa, depending on its ingredients, could be inhibitory to, or support the survival and possibly growth of, Salmonella during storage. Salsa can be formulated with ingredient combinations such as lime juice plus fresh garlic to prevent or suppress the growth of Salmonella. Inoculated whole tomatoes, then chopped them Fate of Salmonella in salsas. Ma et al., 2010

PAGE 27

27 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Salsa, ripened Roma tomato, intact Unknown S. Typhimurium, DT 104 (Beef isolate) and PTC 1 (Poultry isolate) two S. Enteritidis, H4639 (Clinical iso late) and MH24981 (Environmental isolate) one S. Heidelberg, MH27651 (Turkey isolate) 20 l spot inoculated, air dried 1 h RT (d) 0 1 2 5 7 NA 4 12 21 Inoculated at 5.36 log CFU/g and after spotinoculation was 2.47 log CFU/g Growth on surface of raw whole tomato: At 21C, 4-5 log CFU/g growth No growth observed at 4 and 12C Relative humidity: 55-65% Inoculated whole tomatoes, then chopped them Survival and growth of Salmonella on intact tomato, jalapeo, and cilantro. Ma et al., 2010 Salsa, ripened Roma tomato, diced Unknown S. Typhimurium, DT 104 (Beef isolate) and PTC 1 (Poultry isolate) two S. Enteritidis, H4639 (Clinical iso late) and MH24981 (Environmental isolate) one S. Heidelberg, MH27651 (Turkey isolate) 100 l spot inoculated (d) 0 1 2 5 7 NA 4 12 21 ~4 log CFU/g Growth on chopped tomato: No growth at 4C (kept at 3-4 log CFU/g) Growth at 12C at 6.02 log CFU/g and a decrease in growth at <1 log CFU/g (day 2) at 21C Survival and growth of Salmonella in chopped tomatoes, jalapeo peppers, and cilantro. Ma et al., 2010 Restaurantmade salsa with red tomato Unknown S. Enteritidis S. Typhimurium S. Thompson ATCC 8391 Spot inoculated on salsa container For 20C (h) 0 2 4 6 24 For 4C (d) 0 1 3 5 7 NA 20 4 15-20 CFU/ sample Comparison of detection methods between CHROMagar, XLD, and RapidCheck SELECT. RapidCheck SELECT was best to detect Salmonella under both temps. at all time points except 5 s, 7 d at 4C. Franco et al., 2010

PAGE 28

28 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Restaurantmade salsa with red tomato Unknown S. aureus ATCC 29247, ATCC 12600-U, and ATCC 35548 Spot inoculated on salsa container For 20C (h) 0 2 4 6 24 For 4C (d) 0 1 3 5 7 NA 20 4 Low (3.2 log CFU/g) High (4.2 log CFU/g) Reduction: At 20C, 1.1 log CFU/g for low and 0.6 log CFU/g for high At 4C, 1.7 log CFU/g for low and 2.5 log CFU/g for high pH at 4 C ranged from 3.96 to 3.65 pH at 20C ranged from 3.95 to 3.73 Survival study.Franco et al., 2010 Cultivar Better Boy tomato seeds grown for 7 days or until cotyledons emerged No S. Montevideo (Tomato) S. Michigan (Cantaloupe) S. Poona (Cantaloupe) S. Hartford (Orange juice) S. Enteritidis (Eggs) (CDC) All ampicillin resistant Plants with intact or cut roots were then transferred to trays containing 4 liters of Hoagland solution inoculated with the ve-serotype mixture. 7 d NA 25CHoagland solution modied to contain ampicillin (100 g/ml) in order to obtain a preparation containing 4.55 log CFU/ml Detection: Within 1 day of exposure of plant roots to nutrient solution containing ca. 4.5 log CFU of the pathogen/ml, populations were 3.0 log CFU/g of hypocotyls and cotyledons, and 3.4 log CFU/g of stems. Populations > 3.4 log CFU/g of hypocotyl/cotyledon, stem, and leaf tissue of plants grown for 9 days were detected. Hypocotyls, cotyledons, stem, leaves Investigate the possibility of association of Salmonellae with hypocotyls, cotyledons, stems, and leaves of young plants grown in a hydroponic nutrient solution inoculated with the pathogen. Guo et al., 2002 AEM

PAGE 29

29 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Tomato seeds (Lycopersicon esculentum variety Abigail VFET) Unknown S. Javiana 5913 (Chicken feces) S. Javiana 6027 (Bovine feces) S. Montevideo (Tomato) S. Newport (Alfalfa sprouts) S. Enteritidis (Egg) S. Hadar (Poultry house) S. Typhimurium (Pork slaughter line) S. Dublin (Raw milk) S. Senftenberg (Alfalfa sprouts) S. Infantis (Clinical isolate) (University of Guelph) 100 l spot inoculated 6-7 weeks NA NA100-l aliquots of Salmonella suspension (107 CFU/ml) were introduced onto the owers of the plants. Detection: The lowest recovery was observed for serovar Dublin (14%), and the highest was observed for Javiana 6027 (84%). Salmonella serovars introduced onto the owers of growing plants were recovered on and within the developing tomato fruit. Of all the Salmonella serovars tested, Montevideo appeared to be more adapted to survival within tomatoes and was recovered from 90% of the fruit screened. Batches (ve batches per serovar, three fruits per batch) were screened for the presence of Salmonella on the surface and in internal tissue. Inoculation of tomato plants with Salmonella. Shi et al., 2007 Tomato plants Bonnie Select No S. Montevideo ATCC 8387 Spot inoculated 48 h NA NA6.6 log CFU/ leaet Reductions of 3-4 log CFU/leaet occurred when leaves were dried after inoculation. When leaves were supported in a hydroponic nutrient medium and incubated at 100% RH, there was no signicant reduction for at least six days. Salmonella on the surface of excised leaves, leaf disks, and fruit pericarp disks under dry (60% RH) and high-humidity (100% RH) conditions Examine the survival of Salmonella Montevideo on tomato leaves. Rathinasabapathi, 2004 Tomato plants Bonnie Select No S. Montevideo ATCC 8387 Spot inoculation 6 d 20 No signicant eect on the survival of Salmonella on leaf surfaces 100 ppm Ethylene at 100% RH With high relative humidity and the addition of ethylene, it was examined for the pathogens survival on tomato leaves. Rathinasabapathi, 2004

PAGE 30

30 Tomato shape or variety according to publication Waxed Microbe Time Decontamination variable(s) Temp. (C) Initial bacterial counts Reduction or growth achieved; detection (positive or negative) ParametersCommentsReference Tomato plants Better Boy, harvested when redripe color was achieved No Separately: S. Montevideo (Tomato) S. Michigan (Cantaloupe) S. Poona (Cantaloupe) S. Hartford (Orange juice) S. Enteritidis (Egg) (CDC) Brushed by using a small paintbrush saturated with inoculum, or 25-gauge syringe needle stem injected 27 d NA NAOpen ower: 9 log CFU/ml Stem injection before and after owering: 7.5 log CFU/50 l Detection: Eleven of thirty tomatoes (37%) harvested from inoculated plants were positive for all Salmonella serotypes except S. Hartford. Presumptive Salmonella was detected in enriched samples of peptone wash water, stem scar tissue, and pulp of tomatoes from inoculated plants. Salmonella was detected on or in tomatoes from plants receiving stem inoculation before or after ower set and on or in tomatoes that developed from inoculated owers. Determine the fate of Salmonella inoculated into tomato stems and onto tomato owers. Guo et al., 2001

PAGE 31

31 ReferencesAllen, R. L., B.R. Warren, D. L. Archer, S. A. Sargent, and K. R. Schneider. 2005. Survival of Salmonella spp. on the surfaces of fresh tomatoes and selected packing line materials. HortTechnology 15, 831. Asplund, K., and E. Nurmi. 1991. e growth of Salmonellae in tomatoes. International Journal of Food Microbiology 13, 177. Bari, M. L., Y. Inatsu, S. Kawasaki, E. Nazuka, and K. Isshiki. 2002. Calcinated calcium killing of Escherichia coli O157:H7, Salmonella and Listeria monocytogenes on the surface of tomatoes. Journal of Food Protection 65, 1706. Beuchat, L. R., and D. A. Mann. 2008. Survival and growth of acid-adapted and unadapted Salmonella in and on raw tomatoes as aected by variety, stage of ripeness, and storage temperature. Journal of Food Protection 71, 1572. Bhagat, A., B. S. M. Mahmoud, and R. H. Linton. 2010. Inactivation of Salmonella enterica and Listeria monocyto genes inoculated on hydroponic tomatoes using chlorine dioxide gas. Foodborne Pathogens and Disease 7, 677. CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). 2007. Multistate outbreaks of Salmonella infections associated with raw tomatoes eaten in restaurants United States, 2005. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 56, 909. Das, E., G. C. Gurakan, and A. Bayindirli. 2006. Eect of controlled atmosphere storage, modied atmosphere packaging and gaseous ozone treatment on the survival of Salmonella Enteritidis on cherry tomatoes. Food Microbiol ogy 23, 430. FDACS (Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services). 2012. Overview of Florida Agriculture. http:// www.orida-agriculture.com/agfacts.htm. Accessed May 13, 2012. Felkey, K., D. L. Archer, J. A. Bartz, R. M. Goodrich, and K. R. Schneider. 2006. Chlorine disinfection of tomato surface wounds contaminated with Salmonella spp. HortTechnology 16, 253. Franco,W., W. Y. Hsu, and A. H. Simonne. 2010. Survival of Salmonella and Staphylococcus aureus in Mexican red salsa in a food service setting. Journal of Food Protection 73, 1116. Guo, X., J. R. Chen, R. E. Brackett, and L. R. Beuchat. 2001. Survival of Salmonellae on and in tomato plants from the time of inoculation at owering and early stages of fruit development through fruit ripening. Applied and Environ mental Microbiology 67, 4760. Guo, X. A., M. W. Van Iersel, J. R. Chen, R. E. Brackett, and L. R. Beuchat. 2002. Evidence of association of Salmonellae with tomato plants grown hydroponically in inoculated nutrient solution. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 68, 3639. Guo, X. A., J. R. Chen, R. E. Brackett, and L. R. Beuchat. 2002. Survival of Salmonella on tomatoes stored at high relative humidity, in soil, and on tomatoes in contact with soil. Journal of Food Protection 65, 274. Hedberg, C. W., F. J. Angulo, K. E. White, C. W. Langkop, W. L. Schell, M. G. Stobierski, A. Schuchat, J. M. Besser, S. Dietrich, L. Helsel, P. M. Grin, J. W. McFarland, and M. T. Osterholm. 1999. Outbreaks of salmonellosis associated with eating uncooked tomatoes: implications for public health. Epidemiology and Infection 122, 385. Iturriaga, M. H., E. F. Escartin, L. R. Beuchat, and R. Martinez-Peniche. 2003. Eect of inoculum size, relative humidity, storage temperature, and ripening stage on the attachment of Salmonella Montevideo to tomatoes and tomatillos. Journal of Food Protection 66, 1756. Iturriaga, M. H., M. L. Tamplin, and E. F. Escartin. 2007. Colonization of tomatoes by Salmonella Montevideo is aected by relative and storage temperature. Journal of Food Protection 70, 30. Lang, M. M., L. J. Harris, and L. R. Beuchat. 2004. Evaluation of inoculation method and inoculum drying time for their eects on survival and eciency of recovery of Escherichia coli O157 : H7, Salmonella ., and Listeria mono cytogenes inoculated on the surface of tomatoes. Journal of Food Protection 67, 732. Lin, C. M., and C. I. Wei. 1997. Transfer of Salmonella Mon tevideo onto the interior surfaces of tomatoes by cutting. Journal of Food Protection 60, 858. Lu, Y. J., and C. Q. Wu. 2010. Reduction of Salmonella enterica contamination on grape tomatoes by washing with thyme oil, thymol, and carvacrol as compared with chlorine treatment. Journal of Food Protection 73, 2270.

PAGE 32

32 Ma, L., G. D. Zhang, P. Gerner-Smidt, R. V. Tauxe, and M. P. Doyle. 2010. Survival and growth of Salmonella in salsa and related ingredients. Journal of Food Protection 73, 434. Mahmoud, B. S. M. 2010. e eects of x-ray radiation on Escherichia coli O157:H7, Listeria monocytogenes, Salmonella enterica and Shigella exneri inoculated on whole Roma tomatoes. Food Microbiology 27, 1057. Maitland, J. E., R. R. Boyer, J. D. Eifert, and R. C. Williams. 2011. High hydrostatic pressure processing reduces Salmonella enterica serovars in diced and whole tomatoes. International Journal of Food Microbiology 149, 113. Mattson, T. E., A. K. Johny, M. A. R. Amalaradjou, K. More, D. T. Schreiber, J. Patel, and K. Venkitanarayanan. 2010. Inactivation of Salmonella spp. on tomatoes by plant molecules. International Journal of Food Microbiology 144, 464. Niemira, B. A. 2011. Inuence of refrigerated storage time on ecacy of irradiation to reduce Salmonella on sliced Roma tomatoes. Journal of Food Protection 74, 990. Obaidat, M. M., and J. F. Frank. 2009. Inactivation of Salmonella and Escherichia coli O157:H7 on sliced and whole tomatoes by allyl isothiocyanate, carvacrol, and cinnamaldehyde in vapor phase. Journal of Food Protection 72, 315. Pan, W. J., and D. W. Schaner. 2010. Modeling the growth of Salmonella in cut red round tomatoes as a function of temperature. Journal of Food Protection 73, 1502. Pao, S., D. F. Kelsey, M. F. Khalid, and M. R. Ettinger. 2007. Using aqueous chlorine dioxide to prevent contamination of tomatoes with Salmonella enterica and Erwinia caroto vora during fruit washing. Journal of Food Protection 70, 629. Pao, S., D. F. Kelsey, and W. Long. 2009. Spray washing of tomatoes with chlorine dioxide to minimize Salmonella on inoculated fruit surfaces and cross-contamination from revolving brushes. Journal of Food Protection 72, 2448. Raiden, R. M., S. S. Sumner, J. D. Eifert, and M. D. Pierson. 2003. Ecacy of detergents in removing Salmonella and Shigella spp. from the surface of fresh produce. Journal of Food Protection 66, 2210. Rathinasabapathi, B. 2004. Survival of Salmonella Montevi deo on tomato leaves and mature green tomatoes. Journal of Food Protection 67, 2277. Sapers, G. M., and D. M. Jones. 2006. Improved sanitizing treatments for fresh tomatoes. Journal of Food Science 71, M252M256. Shi, X., A. Namvar, M. Kostrzynska, R. Hora, and K. Warriner. 2007. Persistence and growth of dierent Salmonella serovars on preand postharvest tomatoes. Journal of Food Protection 70, 2725. Song, H. J., D. W. Choi, and K. B. Song. 2011. Eect of aqueous chlorine dioxide and UV-C treatment on the microbial reduction and color of cherry tomatoes. Horticul ture Environment and Biotechnology 52, 488. Sy, K. V., M. B. Murray, M. D. Harrison, and L. R. Beuchat. 2005. Evaluation of gaseous chlorine dioxide as a sanitizer for killing Salmonella, Escherichia coli O157:H7, Listeria monocytogenes and yeasts and molds on fresh and fresh-cut produce. Journal of Food Protection 68, 1176. Trinetta, V., M. T. Morgan, and R. H. Linton. 2010. Use of high-concentration-short-time chlorine dioxide gas treatments for the inactivation of Salmonella enterica spp. inoculated onto Roma tomatoes. Food Microbiology 27, 1009. USDA-ERS (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service). 2009. Vegetables and Melons: Tomatoes. http://www.ers.usda.gov/brieng/vegetables/tomatoes.htm. Accessed January 9, 2012. USDA-ERS (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service). 2008. Background Statistics: Fresh-market Tomatoes. http://www.ers.usda.gov/News/tomatocoverage. htm Accessed May 19, 2012. Wei, C. I., T. S. Huang, J. M. Kim, W. F. Lin, M. L. Tamplin, and J. A. Bartz. 1995. Growth and survival of Salmonella Montevideo on tomatoes and disinfection with chlorinated water. Journal of Food Protection 58, 829. Yuk, H. G., J. A. Bartz, and K. R. Schneider. 2005. Effectiveness of individual or combined sanitizer treatments for inactivating Salmonella spp. on smooth surface, stem scar, and wounds of tomatoes. Journal of Food Science 70, M409M414. Zhuang, R. Y., L. R. Beuchat, and F. J. Angulo. 1995. Fate of Salmonella Montevideo on and in raw tomatoes as aected by temperature and treatment with chlorine. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 61, 2127.