Heat resistance of<i>Cronobacter</i>species (<i>Enterobacter sakazakii</i>) in milk and special feeding formula
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To determine D- and z-values of Cronobacter species (Enterobacter sakazakii) in different reconstituted milk and special feeding formula and the effect of reconstitution of powdered milk and special feeding formula with hot water on the survival of the micro-organism. METHODS AND RESULTS: Five Cronobacter species (four C. sakazakii isolates and C. muytjensii) were heated in reconstituted milk or feeding formula pre-equilibrated at 52-58 degrees C for various times or mixed with powdered milk or feeding formula prior to reconstitution with water at 60-100 degrees C. The D-values of Cronobacter at 52-58 degrees C were significantly higher in whole milk (22.10-0.68 min) than in low fat (15.87-0.62 min) or skim milk (15.30-0.51 min) and significantly higher in lactose-free formula (19.57-0.66 min) than in soy protein formula (17.22-0.63 min). The z-values of Cronobacter in reconstituted milk or feeding formula ranged from 4.01 degrees C to 4.39 degrees C. Water heated to > or =70 degrees C and added to powdered milk and formula resulted in a > 4 log(10) reduction of Cronobacter. CONCLUSIONS: The heat resistance of Cronobacter should not allow the survival of the pathogen during normal pasteurization treatment. The use of hot water (> or =70 degrees C) during reconstitution appears to be an effective means to reduce the risk of Cronobacter in these products. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: This study supports existing data available to regulatory agencies and milk producers that recommended heat treatments are sufficient to substantially reduce risk from Cronobacter which may be present in these products.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".