期刊文献+

不同的混合酸处理对猪胴体表面细菌作用效果的研究 被引量:2

不同的混合酸处理对猪胴体表面细菌作用效果的研究
下载PDF
导出
摘要 采用乳酸(1%、2%、3%)+乙酸(0.5%、1%、1.5%)+柠檬酸(0.5%、1%、1.5%)9种不同浓度混合配比对冷却猪肉生产中的胴体进行在线喷淋实验,应用棉球擦拭法在胴体的槽头部位进行取样,研究微生物污染的控制效果。结果表明,9种不同浓度配比的混合酸处理对猪胴体表面的微生物有抑制作用。与未经混合酸处理的对照组相比,各处理组的细菌总数减少了0.29~0.61logcfu/cm2,大肠菌群数减少了0.31~0.84logcfu/50cm2。处理组2~9均与对照组有明显差异(P<0.05),只有处理组1(1%乳酸+0.5%乙酸+0.5%柠檬酸)差异不显著(P>0.05)。其中,3%乳酸+0.5%乙酸+1.5%柠檬酸(处理组7)混合使用对减少细菌总数和大肠菌群数效果最显著,且比单独使用乙酸效果更好。 Effectiveness of spraying acid combinations to reduce aerobic plate count (APC) and total coliform count (TCC) of chilled pork carcass surfaces were studied in this paper. Carcasses were divided into treated and control groups in a slaughter line, i.e. The groups treated with different combinations of lactic acid (1%, 2%, 3%) +acetic acid (0.5%, 1%, 1.5%)+citric acid (0.5%, 1%, 1.5%) and control group (no acid spraying). The results indicated that APC of all treated groups were reduced by 0.29-0.61 logcfu/cm^2 from group 1 to group 9 comparing to that of the control group, and only group1 (1%lactic acid +0.5% acetic acid +0.5% citric acid) was not significantly different (P〉0.05). It was also found that TCC of all treated groups were decreased by 0.31-0.84 logcfu/50cm^2 from group 1 to group 9. Compared with the control group, group 2-9 were of significantly different (P〈0.05), but others were not. The results showed that group 7 (3% lactic acid +0.5% acetic acid +1.5% citric acid) had the best effectiveness of bacteria removal, and acid combinations were more effective than acetic acid alone.
出处 《食品工业科技》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2006年第12期68-70,共3页 Science and Technology of Food Industry
基金 国家"十五"攻关项目(2001BA501A15-2.4)资助
关键词 有机酸 猪胴体 细菌总数 大肠菌群 organic acids pork carcasses aerobic plate count total coliform count
  • 引文网络
  • 相关文献

参考文献9

  • 1Z B Dubal,A M Paturkar,V S Waskar,et al.Effect of food grade organic acids on inoculated S aureus,L monocytogenes,E coli and S Typhimurium in sheep/goat meat stored at refrigeration temperature[J].Meat Science,2004,66(4):817~821.
  • 2C O Gill,M Badoni.Effects of peroxyacetic acid,acidified sodium chlorite or lactic acid solutions on the microflora of chilled beef carcass[J].International Journal of Food Microbiology,2004,91(1):43~50.
  • 3M F Bell,R T Marshall,M E Anderson.Microbiological and Sensory Tests of Beef Treated with Acetic and Formic Acids[J].Journal of Food Protection,1986,49(3):207~210.
  • 4J S Avens,P Clayton,D K Jones,et al.Acetic Acid Spray Ineffective on Beef Carcasses With Low Bacteria Counts[J].Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und-Technologie,1996,29(1-2):28~32.
  • 5Shaikh Nadeem Ahmed,U K Chattopadhyay,A T Sherikar,et al.Chemical sprays as a method for improvement in microbiological quality and shelf-life of fresh sheep and goat meats during refrigeration storage (5~7℃)[J].Meat Science,2003,63(3):339~344.
  • 6孙京新,邹晓葵,周光宏,徐幸莲,赵宁,甘泉.不同工艺条件对猪胴体和冷却猪肉微生物去污染效果的影响[J].食品科技,2003,28(z1):208-212. 被引量:2
  • 7J M McEvoy,J J Sheridan,I S Blair,D A McDowell.Microbial contamination on beef in relation to hygiene assessment based on criteria used in EU Decision 2001/471/EC[J].International Journal of Microbiology,2004:1~9.
  • 8彭梅仙,黄裕.肉联厂屠宰过程中肉品的致病性细菌污染分析及关键控制点[J].肉品卫生,2002(8):25-26. 被引量:5
  • 9王叔淳.食品卫生检验手册(第三版)[M].北京:化学工业出版社,2003.888.

二级参考文献8

  • 1[4]车文毅主编.食品安全控制体系-HACCP.北京:中国农业科学技术出版社,2002,222-232
  • 2[5]USDA-FSIS. Nationalwide beef microbiological baseline data collection program: market hogs. April1995-March1996. Washington, DC: USDA-FSIS, 1996.
  • 3[6]Sofos J N, Belk K E, Smith G C. Processes to reduce Contamination with pathogenic microorganisms in meat. Congress Proceedings of the 45th ICoMST, 1999 (2): 596 - 605
  • 4[7]Huffnan R D. Current and future technologies for the decontamination of carcasses and fresh meat. Congress Proceedings of the 48th ICoMST, 2002, ( 1 ): 9 - 16
  • 5<禽食品加工卫生与检验>、国家商检局、浙江科学技术出版社
  • 6<屠宰、肉类分割与深加工指南>、联合国粮农组织、中国农业科技出版社
  • 7张子平.冷却肉的加工技术及质量控制[J].食品科学,2001,22(1):83-89. 被引量:102
  • 8谢如鹤,周鹤林,罗荣武.我国肉类食品的市场特点及冷藏运输需求[J].肉类研究,2001,15(3):3-7. 被引量:8

共引文献7

同被引文献16

引证文献2

二级引证文献2

;
使用帮助 返回顶部