Physical Treatments to Control Clostridium botulinum Hazards in Food
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clostridium botulinum produces Botulinum neurotoxins (BoNTs), causing a rare but potentially deadly type of food poisoning called foodborne botulism. This review aims to provide information on the bacterium, spores, toxins, and botulisms, and describe the use of physical treatments (e.g., heating, pressure, irradiation, and other emerging technologies) to control this biological hazard in food. As the spores of this bacterium can resist various harsh environmental conditions, such as high temperatures, the thermal inactivation of 12-log of C. botulinum type A spores remains the standard for the commercial sterilization of food products. However, recent advancements in non-thermal physical treatments present an alternative to thermal sterilization with some limitations. Low- (<2 kGy) and medium (3–5 kGy)-dose ionizing irradiations are effective for a log reduction of vegetative cells and spores, respectively; however, very high doses (>10 kGy) are required to inactivate BoNTs. High-pressure processing (HPP), even at 1.5 GPa, does not inactivate the spores and requires heat combination to achieve its goal. Other emerging technologies have also shown some promise against vegetative cells and spores; however, their application to C. botulinum is very limited. Various factors related to bacteria (e.g., vegetative stage, growth conditions, injury status, type of bacteria, etc.) food matrix (e.g., compositions, state, pH, temperature, aw, etc.), and the method (e.g., power, energy, frequency, distance from the source to target, etc.) influence the efficacy of these treatments against C. botulinum. Moreover, the mode of action of different physical technologies is different, which provides an opportunity to combine different physical treatment methods in order to achieve additive and/or synergistic effects. This review is intended to guide the decision-makers, researchers, and educators in using physical treatments to control C. botulinum hazards.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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 teacher head, 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".