Enumeration Of Total Aerobic Microorganisms In Foods By -Books Pdf

Enumeration of Total Aerobic Microorganisms in Foods by
18 Feb 2020 | 20 views | 0 downloads | 18 Pages | 471.49 KB

Share Pdf : Enumeration Of Total Aerobic Microorganisms In Foods By

Download and Preview : Enumeration Of Total Aerobic Microorganisms In Foods By


Report CopyRight/DMCA Form For : Enumeration Of Total Aerobic Microorganisms In Foods By



Transcription

258 FELDSINE ET AL JOURNAL OF AOAC INTERNATIONAL VOL 86 NO 2 2003. Table 1 SimPlate conversion table tive effectiveness of the SimPlate TPC CI method with that of. Wells populationa, the AOAC pour plate method for recovery of total aerobic mi. croorganisms The SimPlate method and the ISO pour plate. method were also evaluated in this same study,1 2 31 76 61 216. 2 4 32 80 62 224 Collaborative Study,3 6 33 84 63 232. Study Design,4 8 34 86 64 240, 5 10 35 90 65 248 Six food types representative of a wide range of food cate. 6 12 36 94 66 256 gories were evaluated ground black pepper frozen fruits. 7 14 37 96 67 266 flour nut meats frozen hamburger patties and fresh vegeta. bles Two test portions from 3 different lots were analyzed for. 8 16 38 100 68 276, each food type total of 6 test portions per food type All.
9 18 39 104 69 288, foods tested were naturally contaminated Collaborators were. 10 22 40 108 70 298 sent 2 sets of randomized test portions one set was used for. 11 24 41 112 71 312 analysis by the SimPlate method incubated at 35 C. 12 26 42 116 72 324 SimPlate 35 and the AOAC pour plate method incubated at. 13 28 43 120 73 338 35 C AOAC 35 The other set was used for analysis by the. SimPlate method incubated at 30 C SimPlate 30 and the ISO. 14 30 44 124 74 354, pour plate method incubated at 30 C ISO 30 The black pep. 15 32 45 128 75 372, per flour and nut meats were stored at room temperature until. 16 36 46 132 76 392 the day of analysis Fresh vegetables were kept refrigerated. 17 38 47 136 77 414 until analysis Frozen fruit and frozen hamburger patty test. 18 40 48 142 78 440 portions were kept frozen 20 C and tested unthawed. 19 42 49 146 79 470 For one set of test portions collaborators were instructed to. prepare the initial suspension and further decimal dilutions as. 20 46 50 150 80 508, recommended by AOAC Official Method 966 23 1 The ap. 21 48 51 156 81 556, propriate dilutions were analyzed by the AOAC pour plate.
22 50 52 160 82 624 method AOAC 966 23 and the SimPlate method both incu. 23 54 53 166 83 738 bated at 35 C For the second set of test portions collaborators. 24 56 54 172 84 738 prepared the initial suspension and further decimal dilutions. 25 58 55 178 If there are no positive according to ISO 6887 3 The appropriate dilutions were an. wells and the sponge alyzed according to ISO 4833 2 and the SimPlate method. 26 62 56 184, is positive both incubated at 30 C Results obtained were submitted on. 27 64 57 190 population is 1 summary forms with the appropriate raw data A minimum of. 28 68 58 196 If there are no positive 8 laboratories submitted valid data for each food type. wells and the sponge,29 70 59 202,is negative Test Portion Preparation. 30 74 60 208 population is 1, The naturally contaminated foods were purchased at the re. The population reflects the number of microorganisms per plate tail level in Seattle WA The bulk foods were thoroughly. To determine the number of microorganisms per g mL food. product refer to I c Reading and Interpretation of Results mixed and then packaged into 50 g test portions for shipment. to collaborators,Test Portion Distribution, Each collaborator received 2 sets of 6 test portions for each. number of wells allows accurate measure of the true microbial week the study was conducted Test products were distributed. population in a test sample by overnight delivery from the United States to laboratories. A recent methods comparison study compared the throughout North America and Europe Frozen foods were. SimPlate TPC CI method and the AOAC method for enumer shipped on dry ice ground black pepper flour and nut meat. ation of total aerobic microorganisms in 20 different foods test portions were shipped at room temperature Fresh vegeta. unpublished Overall the SimPlate method produced equiv bles were shipped on ice to North American collaborators only. alent or statistically greater mean log counts for all food types Test Portion Analysis. analyzed except for one lot of fresh fruit and one lot of fresh. juice The results indicated that SimPlate TPC CI is equiva The AOAC and ISO culture methods use different diluents. lent to the pour plate reference method A separate interna for initial suspension and decimal dilutions of test portions. tional multilaboratory collaborative study compared the rela This required collaborators to set up separate paired samples. FELDSINE ET AL JOURNAL OF AOAC INTERNATIONAL VOL 86 NO 2 2003 259. with one test portion prepared with the AOAC diluent and the tion the number of wells with a color change from the original. other test portion prepared with the ISO diluent background color was counted Table 1 was used to correlate. Designated food test portions were prepared as specified the number of positive wells to the total aerobic microorgan. by AOAC Method 966 23 For all food types except nut isms per SimPlate device by matching the number of positive. meats 50 g test portions were added to 450 mL Butterfield s wells counted to the corresponding microbial population. phosphate buffered diluent BPBD water and homogenized given in Table 1 If a dilution was made to the original food. by blending for 2 min For nut meats 50 g test portions were test portion before inoculation of the SimPlate device then the. added to 50 mL BPBD and vigorously shaken to produce the total aerobic microorganisms per gram of food was calculated. 100 dilution After homogenization test portions were serially by multiplying the population from Table 1 by the dilution. diluted into BPBD The number of dilutions necessary to per factor. form the test depended on the food type being analyzed Sub. Statistical Analysis, sequent 10 fold dilutions were prepared by adding 10 mL of.
the previous dilution to 90 mL sterile diluent and shaken For each lot of food duplicate plate counts were averaged. 25 times in a 30 cm arc BioControl provided the suggested di and reported as aerobic plate count per gram APC g for the. lution series for each food type the week before analysis was AOAC or ISO reference methods and the SimPlate methods. initiated From each appropriate dilution 1 mL aliquot was The base 10 logarithms of SimPlate counts and APC g for. transferred to a sterile Petri dish in duplicate A 12 15 mL each of the reference culture methods were used for statistical. amount of Standard Methods Agar SMA tempered to analysis Repeatability sr and reproducibility sR standard. 42 45 C was added and swirled to evenly distribute the deviations relative standard deviations of repeatability. dilution and agar Plate counts of each dilution level were per RSDr and reproducibility RSDR and repeatability r and. formed in duplicate All plates were incubated at 35 C for reproducibility R values were calculated according to the. 48 2 h All plates were counted after the required incubation methods of Youden and Steiner 4 after outliers were elimi. Data were recorded onto appropriate worksheets For the nated The Cochran test was used to remove laboratories. AOAC method plates containing 30 300 colonies were showing significantly greater variability among replicate. counted analyses than other laboratories for a particular set of test por. Designated food test portions were also prepared as speci tions An F statistic that computes the ratio of the 2 variances. fied by ISO method 6887 For all food types 50 g test portions was used to compare repeatability and reproducibility vari. were added to 450 mL peptone salt solution and homogenized ances Mean responses between the 2 methods were compared. by macerating for 1 min After homogenization test portions by using a 2 sample paired t test. were serially diluted into peptone salt solution The number of. dilutions necessary to perform the test depended on the food AOAC Official Method 2002 07. type being analyzed Subsequent 10 fold dilutions were pre Detection and Quantification. pared by adding 10 mL of the previous dilution to 90 mL ster of Total Aerobic Microorganisms. ile diluent and mixed well BioControl provided the suggested SimPlate Total Plate Count Color Indicator TPC CI Method. dilution series for each food type the week before analysis was First Action 2002. initiated From each appropriate dilution 1 mL aliquot was Applicable to detection and quantification of total aerobic. transferred to a sterile Petri dish in duplicate A 15 mL amount microorganism populations in milk chocolate cake mix. of SMA tempered to 44 5 45 5 C was added and swirled to ground pepper nut meats dairy foods red meats poultry. evenly distribute the diluted food test portion and agar Plate meats seafoods lunch meat frozen pot pies cereals pasta. counts of each dilution level were performed in duplicate All egg products flour hash brown potatoes vegetables fruits. plates were incubated at 30 1 C for 72 3 h All plates were and fruit juice. counted after the required incubation Data were recorded. onto appropriate worksheets Caution Test portion dilutions and incubated SimPlate de. Diluted test portions prepared for the AOAC and ISO ref vices from food products could contain patho. erence methods were also used for SimPlate analyses One set genic bacteria if the particular test portion was. of SimPlates was set up using the dilutions from the AOAC contaminated Standard aseptic microbiological. method A separate set of SimPlates was set up using the dilu laboratory techniques including decontamination. tions from the ISO method A 1 mL amount of the diluted test of any spills with disinfectant are recommended. portion was transferred to the center of the SimPlate device. The SimPlate was overlayed with 9 mL rehydrated TPC CI See Tables 2002 07A C for the results of the. medium for a final volume of 10 0 2 mL After the plate was interlaboratory study supporting acceptance of the method. covered with the lid the food medium homogenate was mixed. A Principle, and swirled into the wells Excess liquid was decanted into the. integrated collection sponge The SimPlate devices from the SimPlate Total Plate Count Color Indicator TPC CI. AOAC test portions were incubated upright at 35 1 C for method is used for detection and quantification of total aerobic. 24 28 h The SimPlate devices from the ISO test portions populations The TPC CI medium and food mixture is dis. were incubated upright at 30 1 C for 24 28 h After incuba pensed into a SimPlate device and incubated for 24 28 h The. Table 2002 07A Statistical analysis of interlaboratory results for total aerobic microorganisms by the AOAC 35 and SimPlate 35 methods. Meanb sre RSDr f rg sRh RSDR i Rj, Food group Lot Na AOACc SimPlated AOACc SimPlated AOACc SimPlated AOACc SimPlated AOACc SimPlated AOACc SimPlated AOACc SimPlated. Pepper A 12 6 04 6 13 0 09k 0 15 1 50 2 50 0 25 0 43 0 22 0 16l 3 70 2 60 0 63 0 44. B 13 7 30 7 53 0 11 0 14 1 60 1 80 0 32 0 38 0 35 0 17 4 80 2 30 0 99 0 48. C 14 6 44 6 66k 0 11l 0 16 1 70 2 30 0 31 0 44 0 34 0 22l 5 30 3 30 0 96 0 61. Flour Rye 14 5 73 5 83 0 15 0 18 2 70 3 10 0 43 0 50 0 27 0 28 4 70 4 70 0 76 0 77. Wheat 11 3 87 3 93 0 13l 0 19 3 30 4 80 0 35 0 53 0 30l 0 46 7 80 11 80 0 85 1 30. White 13 4 13 4 24 0 34 0 27 8 30 6 40 0 96 0 76 0 36 0 45 8 70 10 50 1 00 1 25. Nut meats Peanuts 13 4 04 4 24l 0 29l 0 41 7 30 9 70 0 83 1 15 0 33 0 37 8 20 8 60 0 92 1 02. Almonds 13 2 42 2 53 0 11k 0 23 4 70 9 10 0 32 0 64 0 31 0 29 12 90 11 60 0 88 0 82. Hazelnuts 12 3 67 3 72 0 69 0 57 18 80 15 30 1 93 1 59 0 65 0 69 17 60 18 60 1 81 1 93. Frozen patties A 15 2 78 3 01 0 13 0 25 4 30 7 90 0 35 0 69 0 27 0 38 9 40 12 10 0 76 1 06. B 15 3 84 4 06 0 31 0 17k 8 20 4 10 0 88 0 47 0 53 0 50 13 90 12 40 1 49 1 41. C 15 2 85 2 86 0 14 0 20 5 00 7 01 0 40 0 57 0 26 0 35 8 90 12 40 0 71 0 99. Frozen fruits Peaches 10 3 24 3 37 0 14 0 14 4 30 4 30 0 39 0 40 0 27 0 33 8 20 9 70 0 74 0 92. Strawberries 12 3 96 4 33k 0 14 0 12 3 60 2 60 0 40 0 32 0 27 0 21 6 80 4 90 0 75 0 60. Blueberries 10 2 85 3 08k 0 17 0 15 5 90 4 80 0 47 0 42 0 20 0 28 7 10 9 10 0 57 0 78. Fresh vegetables Carrots 12 7 27 7 30 0 27 0 31 3 70 4 20 0 75 0 86 0 58 0 47 7 90 6 40 1 61 1 31. 260 FELDSINE ET AL JOURNAL OF AOAC INTERNATIONAL VOL 86 NO 2 2003. Broccoli 12 7 20 7 22 0 26 0 18l 3 60 2 50 0 73 0 50 0 61 0 42l 8 50 5 90 1 71 1 19. Celery 10 7 47 7 40 0 13 0 19 1 70 2 50 0 36 0 53 0 74 0 36 9 90 4 90 2 07 1 01. Number of laboratories with valid data,Mean log aerobic microorganisms g. Standard Methods Agar incubated at 35 C,SimPlate method incubated at 35 C. Repeatability standard deviation,Repeatability relative standard deviation.
Repeatability values 2 8 sr,Reproducibility standard deviation. Reproducibility relative standard deviation,Reproducibility values 2 8 sR. Significantly different at p 0 01,Significantly different at p 0 05. Table 2002 07B Statistical analysis of interlaboratory results for total aerobic microorganisms by the ISO 30 and SimPlate 30 methods. Meanb sre RSDr f rg sRh RSDR i Rj, Food group Lot Na ISOc SimPlated ISOc SimPlated ISOc SimPlated ISOc SimPlated ISOc SimPlated ISOc SimPlated ISOc SimPlated. Pepper A 14 5 69 5 71 0 13 0 14 2 20 2 40 0 35 0 39 0 41 0 41 7 30 7 20 1 16 1 14. B 14 7 20 7 29 0 17k 0 35 2 40 4 80 0 48 0 98 0 34l 0 51 4 70 7 00 0 95 1 42. C 14 6 33 6 36 0 14 0 21 2 20 3 20 0 39 0 58 0 39 0 35 6 20 5 50 1 10 0 97. Flour Rye 14 5 74 5 84 0 22 0 24 3 90 4 00 0 62 0 66 0 41 0 30l 7 20 5 10 1 16 0 84. Wheat 14 3 86 3 79 0 13 0 23 3 30 6 00 0 36 0 64 0 35 0 33 9 10 8 80 0 98 0 93. White 14 4 33 4 46 0 12 0 13 2 70 2 80 0 33 0 35 0 27 0 24 6 30 5 40 0 77 0 67. Nut meats Peanuts 12 4 31 4 28 0 41 0 41 9 60 9 60 1 15 1 15 0 67 0 67 15 50 15 70 1 86 1 89. Almonds 12 2 29 2 52 0 16l 0 23 7 00 9 10 0 45 0 65 0 57 0 43 25 00 17 10 1 60 1 21. Hazelnuts 11 3 35 3 40 0 77 0 83 23 10 24 50 2 17 2 33 0 86 0 89 25 50 26 20 2 40 2 49. Frozen patties A 14 3 16 3 13 0 13 0 14 4 00 4 40 0 36 0 39 0 23 0 23 7 30 7 30 0 65 0 64. B 13 5 18 5 11 0 06k 0 10 1 10 1 90 0 17 0 27 0 23k 0 44 4 50 8 60 0 66 1 24. C 15 3 19 3 06 0 06 0 14 2 00 4 50 0 18 0 39 0 59 0 43 17 60 14 10 1 58 1 21. Frozen fruits Peaches 13 3 70 3 92 0 11k 0 21 2 90 5 30 0 30 0 59 0 47 0 32l 12 80 8 10 1 32 0 89. Strawberries 11 3 95 4 13 0 09 0 14 2 30 3 40 0 26 0 40 0 35 0 16k 9 00 3 90 0 99 0 45. Blueberries 13 2 66 2 78 0 16 0 20 6 10 7 20 0 46 0 56 0 25 0 32 9 50 11 50 0 71 0 90. Fresh vegetables Carrots 11 7 49 7 56 0 30 0 38 3 90 5 00 0 83 1 06 0 58 0 63 7 70 8 30 1 63 1 76. Broccoli 13 7 80 7 89 0 29 0 24 3 70 3 00 0 81 0 66 0 53 0 58 6 80 7 30 1 49 1 62. Celery 11 8 58 8 49 0 08k 0 43 0 90 5 00 0 23 1 20 0 52 0 73 6 10 8 60 1 46 2 04. Number of laboratories with valid data,Mean log aerobic microorganisms g.
Standard Methods Agar incubated at 30 C,SimPlate method incubated at 30 C. Repeatability standard deviation,Repeatability relative standard deviation. Repeatability values 2 8 sr,Reproducibility standard deviation. Reproducibility relative standard deviation,Reproducibility values 2 8 sR. Significantly different at p 0 01,Significantly different at p 0 05.
FELDSINE ET AL JOURNAL OF AOAC INTERNATIONAL VOL 86 NO 2 2003 261. Table 2002 07C Statistical analysis of interlaboratory results for total aerobic microorganisms by the ISO 30 and AOAC 35 methods. Meanb sre RSDr f rg sRh RSDR i Rj, Food group Lot Na ISOc AOACd ISOc AOACd ISOc AOACd ISOc AOACd ISOc AOACd ISOc AOACd ISOc AOACd. Pepper A 14 5 71 5 91 0 10 0 09 1 70 1 50 0 28 0 24 0 40 0 46 7 00 7 70 1 12 1 28. B 13 7 20 7 30 0 18 0 11 2 50 1 60 0 50 0 32 0 35 0 36 4 90 4 90 0 99 0 99. C 14 6 30 6 44 0 14 0 11 2 20 1 70 0 39 0 31 0 39 0 34 6 20 5 30 1 10 0 95. Flour Rye 13 5 69 5 73 0 12 0 16 2 20 2 70 0 34 0 44 0 36 0 28 6 40 4 70 1 02 0 79. Wheat 10 3 75 3 83 0 16 0 11 4 20 2 80 0 44 0 31 0 26 0 32 7 00 8 40 0 74 0 91. White 12 4 33 4 13 0 08 0 35 1 80 8 50 0 21 0 98 0 27 0 37 6 20 9 00 0 75 1 04. Nut meats Peanuts 12 4 31 4 05 0 41 0 30 9 60 7 40 1 15 0 84 0 67 0 34l 15 50 8 40 1 86 0 95. Almonds 12 2 29 2 32 0 16 0 10k 7 00 4 20 0 45 0 29 0 57 0 32l 25 00 13 00 1 60 0 89. Hazelnuts 12 3 34 3 62 0 78 1 18 23 30 33 70 2 18 3 29 0 88 1 20 26 20 34 60 2 45 3 37. Frozen patties A 14 3 19 2 93 0 14 0 14 4 30 4 60 0 39 0 38 0 23 0 28 7 30 9 50 0 65 0 78. B 14 5 14l 3 79 0 19l 0 32 3 70 8 50 0 53 0 90 0 33k 0 52 6 40 13 60 0 92 1 44. C 15 3 20l 2 86 0 07l 0 14 2 00 5 00 0 18 0 40 0 57 0 26l 17 90 9 00 1 60 0 72. Frozen fruits Peaches 11 3 86 3 25 0 09 0 17 2 40 5 40 0 26 0 49 0 34 0 27 8 90 8 20 0 96 0 74. Strawberries 11 3 95 3 97 0 09 0 14 2 30 3 50 0 25 0 39 0 35 0 28 8 90 7 00 0 99 0 77. Blueberries 10 2 71 2 85k 0 15 0 17 5 60 5 90 0 43 0 47 0 20 0 20 7 30 7 10 0 55 0 57. Fresh vegetables Carrot 11 7 49 7 33 0 30 0 28 3 90 3 70 0 83 0 76 0 58 0 55 7 70 7 50 1 62 1 54. 262 FELDSINE ET AL JOURNAL OF AOAC INTERNATIONAL VOL 86 NO 2 2003. Broccoli 11 7 82l 7 15 0 29 0 26 3 70 3 60 0 81 0 73 0 39k 0 57 5 00 8 00 1 09 1 60. Celery 9 8 69l 7 39 0 08k 0 12 0 90 1 60 0 23 0 34 0 42k 0 74 4 90 10 10 18 00 2 08. Number of laboratories with valid data,Mean log aerobic microorganisms g. Standard Methods Agar incubated at 30 C,Standard Methods Agar incubated at 35 C. Repeatability standard deviation,Repeatability relative standard deviation. Repeatability values 2 8 sr,Reproducibility standard deviation.
Reproducibility relative standard deviation,Reproducibility values 2 8 sR. Significantly different at p 0 05,Significantly different at p 0 01. FELDSINE ET AL JOURNAL OF AOAC INTERNATIONAL VOL 86 NO 2 2003 263. medium changes color in the presence of aerobic microorgan plement A per 100 mL water Add 0 1 mL prepared test por. isms The total aerobic microorganisms count is determined tion and mix well This is an additional 1 10 dilution from E. by counting the wells with changed color and correlating the Note The final volume of test portion medium mixture in. number of positive wells with the number of total aerobic mi the container should be 10 0 2 mL. croorganisms found in Table 1 c Remove lid from SimPlate device and transfer test por. tion medium mixture onto center of plate Immediately re. B Media and Reagents,place lid Continue with H a,a Dehydrated Total Plate Count Color Indicator. G TPC CI Test Procedure Multiple Test Medium, TPC CI medium In individually packaged single or mul. tiple test format a Empty contents of one container into 100 mL sterile. b Supplement A optional Add 1 0 mL sterile Sup deionized water containing 1 mL Supplement A per 100 mL. plement A solution per 100 mL sterile deionized H2O Alter water Shake to completely dissolve. natively add 1 0 mL Supplement A to 100 mL deionized H2O b Remove lid from SimPlate device Pipet prepared test. and autoclave for 15 min at 121 C portion onto center of plate If prepared test portion size is. c Butterfield s phosphate buffered diluent 1 0 mL overlay test portion with 9 0 mL medium Do not. BPBD See 966 23 m count this media addition as a dilution. d Peptone salt solution Dissolve 1 0 g enzymatic di c For 0 1 mL prepared test portion overlay with 9 9 mL. gest of casein and 8 5 g NaCl in 1 L deionized H2O Autoclave medium this is an additional 1 10 dilution of test portion from E. for 15 min at 121 C Final pH 7 0 0 2 at 25 C Note The final volume of test portion medium mixture on. e SimPlate devices Twenty devices per package the plate should be 10 0 2 mL. Items a b and e are available from BioControl Sys d Immediately replace the lid Continue with H a. tems Inc 12822 SE 32nd St Bellevue WA 98005,H Test Procedure for Single and Multiple Tests.
C Apparatus, a Gently swirl to distribute test portion medium mixture. a Incubator Maintaining 35 37 C into all wells Hold plate with both hands tilted slightly to. b Micropipetor Accurately dispensing 0 1 and help distribute medium into wells. 1 0 mL b Pour off excess medium by holding lid against plate on. c Pipets Accurately dispensing 1 0 and 10 mL either side of sponge cavity Tip plate toward you to allow liq. d Blender stomacher Waring or equivalent for uid to drain into sponge Observe background color of wells. blending test portions IUL Instruments Cincinnati OH Background is defined as color of the test portion medium. masticator or equivalent for macerating test portions Note mixture inside the wells before incubation. A blender is used if testing in accordance with the AOAC c If testing in accordance with AOAC BAM USDA. method a stomacher is used if testing in accordance with the methods incubate SimPlate devices in an upright position in. ISO method the dark for 24 28 h at 35 1 C 32 1 C for dairy products. If testing in accordance with ISO procedures incubate devices. D General Instructions, in an upright position in the dark for 24 28 h at 30 1 C. Do not use expired media Store reconstituted medium be. I Reading and Interpretation of Results, tween 15 and 25 C in the dark and use within 12 h Dispose of. medium in a decontamination container and sterilize before a After incubation observe color change of liquid in. discarding wells Disregard particulate matter if present Count number. of wells showing a color change from the background color. E Test Portions Preparation, The most common color change produced by microorganisms. a Weigh 50 g test portion into 450 mL sterile diluent e g is pink but orange peach red brown and white may also be. BPBD AOAC method or peptone salt solution ISO method observed. This is a 1 10 dilution Macerate or blend to homogenize b To determine the population perform the following. b If alternative test portion size is specified in testing calculations 1 Count the number of positive wells on the. procedure prepare 10 w v suspension plate 2 use Table 1 to determine total number of microor. c If necessary prepare 10 fold serial dilutions appropri ganisms per plate. ate for the anticipated population of the test portion c To calculate number of microorganisms per gram mL. multiply the count in I b 2 by the appropriate dilution factor. F TPC CI Test Procedure Single Test Medium, see E and F for Single test or E and G for Multiple test.
a For 1 0 mL test portion size Resuspend powdered Ref J AOAC Int 86 259 263 2003. medium with 9 0 mL sterile deionized water containing 1 mL. Supplement A per 100 mL water Add 1 0 mL prepared test por Results. tion and mix well Do not count this reconstitution as a dilution. b For 0 1 mL test portion size Resuspend powdered me Four methods for enumerating total aerobic microorgan. dium with 9 9 mL sterile deionized water containing 1 mL Sup isms in foods were compared in this collaborative study. 264 FELDSINE ET AL JOURNAL OF AOAC INTERNATIONAL VOL 86 NO 2 2003. AOAC pour plate method incubated at 35 C AOAC 35 ISO all there were 12 13 and 14 laboratories that submitted valid. pour plate incubated at 30 C ISO 30 SimPlate method incu data for Lots A C respectively Mean log counts recovered. bated at 30 C SimPlate 30 and SimPlate method incubated from Lot A were similar for the 2 methods Lots B and C con. at 35 C SimPlate 35 Nineteen laboratories throughout tained higher mean log counts as measured by the SimPlate. North America and Europe participated in the study Table 2 method p 0 01 The repeatability sr and reproducibility. Eight laboratories analyzed all 6 food types 6 laboratories an sR standard deviations SDs of the 2 methods were statisti. alyzed 5 food types one laboratory analyzed 4 food types and cally analyzed for the 3 lots Table 2002 07A For Lots A and. 4 laboratories analyzed one food type Table 2 The plate C the AOAC method reported better SDr values However. counts for individual test portions are presented in Tables 3 8 the SimPlate method showed better SDR values for Lots A C. Repeatability and reproducibility analyses are presented in Data generated by the ISO 30 and SimPlate 30 methods. Tables 2002 07A C, were compared statistically Overall 14 laboratories submit. ted valid data for the 3 lots of pepper analyzed The mean log. Ground Black Pepper, counts for the ISO 30 and the SimPlate 30 methods were not. Three lots of ground black pepper Lots A C were ana significantly different for the 3 lots analyzed The ISO method. lyzed Table 3 Throughout the analysis of ground black pep reported better SDr values for Lots B and C test portions The. per some laboratories reported aerobic plate counts for certain ISO method also reported better SDR values for Lot B. test portions that were not in the suitable counting range for p 0 01 The SDR values were not significantly different for. AOAC or ISO methods Table 3 Data from these paired test Lots A and C between the 2 methods Table 2002 07B. portions were not used for statistical analysis Data generated by the ISO 30 and the AOAC 35 methods. Data generated by the AOAC 35 and the SimPlate 35 were compared statistically Overall 14 laboratories submit. methods were compared statistically Laboratory 7 was deter ted valid data for Lots A and C and 13 laboratories submitted. mined to be an outlier for Lot A by the Cochran test therefore valid data for Lot B The mean log counts from the AOAC 35. the paired data were excluded from statistical analysis Over and the ISO 30 methods were not significantly different for. Table 2 Collaborator participation for SimPlate TPC CI interlaboratory study by food typea. Lab Ground black pepper Flour Nut meats Frozen hamburger patties Frozen fruits Fresh vegetables. 1 Y Y Y Y Y Y,2 Y Yb Y Y Y Y,3 Y Y Y Y Y Y,4 Y Y Y Y Y Y. 5 Y Y Y Y Y Y,6 N Y Y Y Y Y,7 Y Y Y Y Y Y,8 Y Y Y Y Yb Y. 9 Y Y Y Y Y N,10 Y Y Y Y Y N,11 Y Y Y Y Y N,12 Y Y N Y Y N.
13 Y Y Yb Y Y N,14 Y Y Y Y Y N,15 Y Y Y Y Y Y,16 N N N N N Y. 17 N N N N N Y,18 N N N N N Y,19 N N N N N Y,Total 14 15 14 15 15 13. Y Collaborator analyzed this food type N collaborator did not analyze this food type. Laboratory did not follow study instructions Results were not included in the statistical analysis for the designated food types. Total number of laboratories participating in analysis of this food type. Table 3 Interlaboratory results for aerobic plate counts for ground black pepper samples log10 CFU g by SimPlate 35 SimPlate 30 AOAC 35 and ISO 30. Lot A Lot B Lot C, Test portion 1 Test portion 2 Test portion 3 Test portion 4 Test portion 5 Test portion 6. SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO. Lab 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C. 1 6 20 6 24 5 91 6 03 6 06 6 14 5 95 5 99 7 65 7 62 7 36 7 36 7 76 7 77 8 69 7 42 7 03 6 89 6 80 6 36 7 01 6 77 6 68 6 39. 2 6 04 5 90 6 45 5 90 5 87 5 92 6 74 5 89 7 65 7 37 7 21 7 76 7 38 7 19 6 44 6 54 6 49 6 36 6 89 6 57 6 52 6 30. 3 6 02 6 17 5 88 6 03 6 06 6 06 5 79 5 93 7 41 7 59 6 96 6 94 7 54 7 54 6 96 6 97 6 56 6 68 6 15 5 94 6 77 6 52 6 18 5 95. 4 6 25 6 01 5 49 5 80 5 99 6 03 5 58 5 86 7 44 7 53 7 12 7 14 7 56 7 65 7 27 7 26 6 61 6 65 6 34 6 41 6 61 6 63 6 11 6 38. 5 6 16 5 83 5 58 5 32 5 99 5 73 5 77 5 25 7 54 6 95 7 18 7 00 7 72 7 11 7 20 7 15 6 68 6 13 6 31 6 12 6 48 6 13 6 31 6 15. 7 6 11 4 67 5 46 4 64 5 88 4 65 5 46 4 74 7 59 6 75 7 13 6 72 7 53 6 70 7 05 6 70 6 58 5 81 6 37 5 75 6 73 5 71 6 11 5 75. 8 6 04 5 91 5 95 5 91 6 00 5 99 5 78 5 52 7 49 7 30 7 62 7 29 7 55 7 39 7 53 7 37 6 67 6 35 6 47 6 34 6 53 6 37 6 45 6 69. 9 6 17 6 18 6 00 6 17 6 00 6 08 5 87 6 09 7 22 7 11 7 49 7 56 7 61 7 55 8 39 7 60 6 70 6 69 6 71 6 79 7 00 6 62 6 57 6 72. 10 6 02 5 76 5 45 5 81 6 22 6 01 5 54 5 71 7 53 7 27 7 88 7 92 7 49 7 26 7 29 7 13 6 54 6 61 6 02 5 99 6 59 6 54 6 07 5 91. 11 6 17 6 12 5 69 5 99 6 23 6 12 5 72 6 04 7 58 7 66 7 31 7 53 7 58 7 65 7 20 7 38 6 73 6 75 7 32 7 35 6 76 6 60 6 36 6 85. 12 6 31 5 83 5 67 5 82 6 20 5 62 5 66 5 61 7 22 6 72 7 38 7 37 7 52 6 71 7 32 7 26 6 92 6 08 6 53 6 10 6 61 6 54 6 60 6 43. 13 5 43 5 17 5 48 5 47 4 57 4 94 5 03 7 76 6 92 6 51 7 00 7 41 7 17 7 16 6 71 6 18 5 80 6 01 6 00 6 45 5 94 6 31 6 20. 14 6 66 6 61 4 85 5 37 6 09 6 42 5 00 5 31 7 26 7 18 6 23 6 51 7 16 7 25 6 32 6 69 6 26 6 33 5 64 5 79 6 44 6 40 5 63 5 91. 15 6 23 6 20 6 11 6 03 6 20 6 18 5 97 5 96 7 79 7 72 7 43 7 60 7 69 7 72 7 40 7 56 6 73 6 78 6 50 6 67 6 99 6 90 6 61 6 67. Counts were not in range The paired test portion was excluded from statistical analysis. Outlier data not used in analysis for method comparison of SIM 35 C and AOAC 35 C methods. FELDSINE ET AL JOURNAL OF AOAC INTERNATIONAL VOL 86 NO 2 2003 265. Table 4 Interlaboratory results for aerobic plate counts for flour samples log10 CFU g by SimPlate 35 SimPlate 30 AOAC 35 and ISO 30 methods. Rye Wheat White, Test portion 1 Test portion 2 Test portion 3 Test portion 4 Test portion 5 Test portion 6. SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO. Lab 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C. 1 5 98 5 81 5 61 5 54 5 64 5 67 5 62 5 54 3 54 a 3 58 3 73 3 43 3 49 3 59 3 41 3 81 3 80 4 09 4 15 3 52 3 54 4 20 4 32. b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b, 3 5 66 5 63 5 97 5 99 5 38 5 40 6 00 5 97 3 20 4 32 4 15 3 52 4 28 4 20 4 59 4 26 4 69 4 68 4 20 4 04 4 72 4 75.
4 5 57 5 66 5 56 5 52 5 52 5 63 5 40 5 52 3 74 3 57 3 40 3 61 3 90 3 68 3 08 3 51 4 04 4 15 4 36 4 28 4 26 4 08 4 00 4 15. 5 6 04 5 23 5 98 5 26 5 98 5 20 5 82 5 28 4 43 4 08 3 89 3 47 4 29 3 86 3 76 3 30 4 80 4 00 4 51 3 92 4 86 4 63 4 48 3 93. 6 5 88 5 79 5 88 5 87 6 00 5 65 6 84 6 86 4 26 3 83 3 96 3 88 4 26 3 81 3 28 3 53 4 43 4 20 4 54 4 40 4 46 4 36 4 58 4 34. 7 5 67 5 93 5 72 5 76 5 69 5 82 5 98 6 00 3 20 3 60 4 11 3 99 3 62 3 93 3 89 3 90 3 91 4 00c 4 52 4 84c 3 66 4 32c 4 34 4 34c. 8 5 79 5 86 5 81 5 86 5 94 5 88 6 26 5 83 3 23 3 64 3 58 3 85 3 08 3 57 3 85 3 71 4 36 4 23 4 43 4 26 3 23 3 11 4 26 4 26. 9 5 86 6 08 6 08 5 94 6 08 6 08 6 11 6 08 4 08 4 11 4 00 4 00 4 08 4 08 3 97 4 04 4 23 4 20 4 57 4 38 4 32 4 23 4 63 4 56. 10 5 73 5 58 5 47 4 69 5 99 4 95 5 74 5 20 3 71 3 46 4 56 4 09 4 11 4 79 4 03 4 56 4 53 4 11 3 52 3 53 4 23 4 08. 11 5 89 5 86 6 00 6 04 5 86 5 86 6 00 6 04 4 45 4 48 4 23 4 11 4 56 4 61 4 32 4 20 4 81 4 53 4 86 4 80 4 82 4 68 4 97 4 78. 12 6 01 5 90 5 32 5 18 5 81 5 57 5 60 5 36 3 81 4 06 3 18 a 4 04 3 76 3 45 3 41 4 67 a 4 34 4 09 4 34 a 4 02 4 06. 13 6 23 5 89 5 83 5 93 6 61 6 04 5 76 5 86 4 43 3 56 3 72 4 45 3 61 3 61 3 76 4 62 3 83 4 30 4 04 4 58 4 11 4 40 4 08. 14 5 15 5 82 5 83 5 96 5 72 5 77 5 83 6 04 2 90 a 3 90 3 97 3 00 a 3 81 3 93 4 11 4 04 4 65 4 48 4 08 4 08 4 74 4 64. 266 FELDSINE ET AL JOURNAL OF AOAC INTERNATIONAL VOL 86 NO 2 2003. 15 5 78 5 82 5 59 5 79 5 91 5 98 6 00 5 88 4 10 3 81 3 49 3 63 3 52 3 81 3 94 3 91 4 61 4 45 4 51 4 40 4 41 4 41 4 45 4 26. Counts were not in range The paired test portion was excluded from statistical analysis. Did not follow study instructions, Outlier data not used in analysis for method comparison of AOAC 35 C and ISO 30 C methods. Table 5 Interlaboratory results for aerobic plate counts for nut meats samples log10 CFU g by SimPlate 35 SimPlate 30 AOAC 35 and ISO 30 methods. Peanuts Almonds Hazelnuts, Test portion 1 Test portion 2 Test portion 3 Test portion 4 Test portion 5 Test portion 6. SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO. Lab 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C. 1 4 86 4 11 4 75 4 51 4 57 4 32 4 26 4 23 2 62 2 51 2 72 2 65 2 89 2 87 2 46 2 34 3 12 3 11 4 71 4 83 3 52 3 36 2 93 2 88. 2 3 38 3 54 4 73 4 64 4 38 4 51 4 49 4 26 2 40 2 15 2 45 2 40 2 18 2 18 2 62 2 32 4 26 4 18 4 85 4 64 4 11 3 73 3 94 4 00. 3 4 36 3 89 3 51 3 34 4 11 3 92 3 94 3 78 2 41 2 54 1 85 1 30 2 41 2 76 1 78 1 70 2 98 3 18 4 30 4 08 3 00 3 00 2 45 2 28. 4 4 00 3 57 3 08 3 93 3 95 3 82 3 34 3 48 3 20 2 38 2 60 2 40 2 41 2 41 2 74 2 26 5 36 5 23 1 90 2 81 3 54 3 43 2 72 2 20. 5 4 20 3 77 3 08 4 54 4 04 3 30 2 41 2 08 2 41 1 30 2 54 2 11 2 54 1 00 4 15 3 30 3 65 3 48 4 71 4 63 1 60 a. a a a a a a a a a, 6 3 87 3 69 4 43 4 43 4 43 4 26 4 28 4 43 2 34 2 36 2 66 2 54 2 71 2 40 a. 7 4 32 4 30 3 20 3 08 3 85 4 15 3 83 3 54 2 26 1 70 1 30 1 46 2 46 1 95 2 08 a 3 18 3 08 3 41 3 54 4 67 4 43 3 34 3 18. 8 4 49 4 43 3 72 4 84 4 34 4 04 4 23 4 04 2 56 2 63 2 85 2 20 2 85 2 63 2 79 2 15 3 36 3 20 2 32 2 15 2 69 3 76 2 38 2 38. 9 4 41 4 34 4 82 4 59 4 23 3 85 4 70 4 40 2 46 2 49 2 81 2 88 2 67 2 49 3 00 2 65 2 36 a 3 26 3 45 3 08 2 91 5 15 4 83. 10 4 32 4 20 4 40 4 52 4 48 4 00 4 88 4 58 2 15 1 93 2 15 2 64 1 78 2 11 2 72 2 71 4 00 3 78 4 26 4 08 3 48 3 52 2 76 2 76. 11 3 72 3 54 4 92 4 18 4 65 3 40 5 34 5 20 2 65 2 58 2 81 2 40 2 28 2 56 2 15 2 51 3 40 3 11 2 93 2 92 3 76 4 57 2 89 2 66. 13 b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b. 14 3 40 4 15 4 94 5 18 4 68 4 74 5 08 6 04 2 76 2 80 2 81 2 83 2 84 2 84 2 85 2 86 3 20 3 20 4 26 4 34 3 18 3 26 3 26 3 30. 15 4 32 4 20 4 66 4 54 4 32 4 23 3 11 3 67 2 63 2 60 2 54 2 64 2 86 2 72 3 02 2 99 4 11 3 79 5 46 a 4 59 4 68 3 11 2 87. Counts were not in range The paired test portion was excluded from statistical analysis. Did not follow study instructions, FELDSINE ET AL JOURNAL OF AOAC INTERNATIONAL VOL 86 NO 2 2003 267. Table 6 Interlaboratory results for aerobic plate counts for frozen hamburger patties samples log10 CFU g by SimPlate 35 SimPlate 30 AOAC 35 and ISO 30. Lot A Lot B Lot C, Test portion 1 Test portion 2 Test portion 3 Test portion 4 Test portion 5 Test portion 6.
SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO. Lab 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C. 1 2 79 2 74 2 91 3 12 2 79 2 76 2 90 3 10 3 94 3 81 3 93a 3 95a 3 81 3 59 3 88a 4 90a 2 41 2 64 2 68 3 15 2 54 2 62 2 72 3 08. 2 2 51 2 58 2 83 2 63 2 46 2 92 2 83 3 70 3 11 5 07 4 72 3 43 3 27 4 99 4 85 2 36 b 2 99 2 94 2 38 2 54 2 90 2 95. 3 3 48 2 95 3 28 3 36 3 11 2 73 3 14 3 35 4 24 4 11 5 25 5 01 4 23 3 75 4 86 5 03 2 85 2 69 2 94 3 18 3 13 2 70 2 54 3 09. 4 3 47 3 05 3 26 3 10 3 16 3 11 3 32 3 42 4 00 4 02 5 37 5 30 3 86 3 81 5 35 5 39 3 39 3 25 3 20 3 13 3 89 3 45 3 32 3 15. 5 2 61 2 53 2 96 3 04 3 39 2 66 3 09 2 91 4 58 4 05 5 37 4 95 4 00 2 91 5 30 4 96 2 54 2 57 2 68 2 59 3 18 3 00. 6 3 72 2 92 3 49 3 32 3 16 3 01 3 26 3 13 4 83 4 63 b b 4 81 4 42 b b 3 01 2 89 b b 2 75 2 62 4 87 5 86. 7 2 81 2 77 3 02 2 81 2 32 2 90 2 90 2 96 3 04 4 99 4 88 2 99 2 79 4 95 4 91 2 41 2 54 2 84 2 86 2 59 2 58 2 49 2 78. 8 2 76 2 85 3 48 3 28 3 18 2 82 2 94 3 13 4 25 4 42 3 86 5 14 4 31 4 44 3 94 5 25 2 38 2 81 3 08 3 16 2 71 2 90 3 04 3 05. 9 3 39 3 41 3 19 3 40 3 48 3 46 3 40 3 81 4 31 4 16 5 37 5 56 4 12 3 91 5 50 5 54 3 08 3 06 3 34 3 63 2 36 2 57 3 30 3 54. 10 3 48 2 69c 3 22a 3 90ac 3 61 2 60c 3 52a 2 77ac 4 37 3 19 5 54 5 10 4 32 4 03 5 48 5 26 2 95 2 99 3 01 2 79 2 95 3 09 3 21 2 96. 11 3 03 3 23 3 19 3 23 3 12 3 26 3 06 3 13 4 21 3 99 5 44 5 20 4 15 3 94 5 30 5 16 3 02 3 38 3 32 2 95 2 99 3 11 2 94 3 08. 12 3 44 3 01 3 06 3 06 3 19 b 3 14 3 12 4 11 4 18 5 01 5 09 4 66 4 86 5 19 5 21 2 80 2 72 2 74 3 11 2 97 3 04 2 70 3 02. 13 3 43 2 87 3 46 3 24 3 46 2 73 3 38 3 16 4 69 4 33 5 25 5 43 4 53 4 12 5 25 5 38 3 16 2 82 2 98 3 13 3 18 2 91 2 93 3 13. 268 FELDSINE ET AL JOURNAL OF AOAC INTERNATIONAL VOL 86 NO 2 2003. 14 2 43 2 69 2 63 3 14 2 45 2 63 2 81 3 26 3 22 3 29 4 61 5 40 3 33 3 30 4 66 5 44 2 73 2 88 3 05 3 13 2 71 2 85 3 04 3 18. 15 2 89 2 92 3 18 3 22 3 19 3 44 3 34 3 39 4 01 3 72 5 45 5 37 3 89 3 89 5 44 5 44 3 03 2 92 3 17 3 11 3 24 3 03 3 21 3 18. Outlier data not used in analysis for method comparison of ISO 30 C and SIM 30 C. Counts were not in range The paired test portion was excluded from statistical analysis. Outlier data not used in analysis for method comparison of ISO 30 C and AOAC 35 C. Table 7 Interlaboratory results for aerobic plate counts for frozen fruits samples log10 CFU g by SimPlate 35 SimPlate 30 AOAC 35 and ISO 30 methods. Peaches Strawberries Blueberries, Test portion 1 Test portion 2 Test portion 3 Test portion 4 Test portion 5 Test portion 6. SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO. Lab 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C. 1 2 83 3 10 3 45 a 2 99 3 04 3 29 3 04 3 15 a 3 26 a 3 28 a 3 41 a 2 80 2 92 2 81 2 79 3 04 2 91 2 67 2 63. 2 2 98 2 97 3 74 3 74 2 99 3 07 3 50 3 68 4 26 3 72 4 28 4 40 3 97 4 18 b 2 26 a 2 61 a 2 58 a 2 54 a. 3 3 53 2 87 4 25 3 67 3 47 3 00 3 93 3 97 4 40 3 94 4 22 4 00 4 46 4 13 4 09 3 99 3 51 3 11 2 49 2 72 3 18 2 87 2 36 2 53. 4 4 01 3 02 3 60 3 19 3 35 a 4 06 3 41 4 00 3 50 3 89 4 84 3 86 3 44 3 90 4 81 3 05 2 66 2 74 2 48 2 94 2 81 2 97 2 94. 5 2 86 a 3 67 3 23 2 92 a 3 63 3 28 4 26 3 75 3 97 3 79 4 19 3 44 4 19 3 87 2 61 a 2 61 2 24 2 61 2 54 2 95 2 63. 6 3 23 3 20 4 13 4 11 2 93 3 06 4 30 4 13 4 86 4 16 4 05 3 78 4 65 4 20 4 13 3 79 3 20 2 66 3 06 2 64 3 35 2 93 2 73 2 62. c c c c a a a a a a, 7 2 18 2 99 3 50 3 39 3 61 3 44 3 54 3 58 4 13 4 31 4 06 3 88 2 68 2 28 3 17 2 48 2 70 a. d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d, 9 3 35 3 50 4 03 4 04 3 54 3 58 4 16 4 05 4 18 3 90 4 15 3 96 4 19 4 11 4 27 3 83 3 22 2 69 2 41 2 67 3 39 3 15 3 03 2 95. 10 4 39 a 4 11 2 62 3 56 a 4 63 2 79 4 20 3 99 4 16 3 93 4 48 4 15 4 17 3 92 2 83 a 2 85 2 28 2 15 a 2 41 a. 11 3 30 3 06 3 76 3 98 3 47 3 43 4 20 3 95 4 09 4 02 4 22 3 91 4 26 4 07 4 49 4 23 3 24 3 03 3 14 2 80 3 23 3 05 3 41 2 85. 12 3 60 3 62 4 06 4 24 3 65 3 76 4 13 4 11 4 46 4 01 3 82 3 44 4 18 3 60 4 18 3 46 2 53 a 2 23 2 39 2 65 2 51 2 40 2 17. 13 3 87 3 36 3 65 4 05 3 46 3 29 3 91 4 02 4 36 3 87 4 18 3 63 4 48 3 96 4 02 3 60 2 63 2 88 2 53 2 83 2 69 2 42. 14 2 36 a 3 61 3 63 2 32 a 3 98 3 84 4 53 4 42 4 36 4 17 4 36 4 23 4 02 3 98 2 76 2 75 2 67 2 73 2 77 2 68 2 81 2 81. 15 3 36 3 18 4 26 4 14 3 51 3 54 4 06 4 08 4 37 4 22 4 15 3 94 4 40 4 18 4 29 4 06 3 46 3 16 3 15 2 94 3 10 2 88 3 26 2 90. Counts were not in range The paired test portion was excluded from statistical analysis. Spreading microorganisms unable to enumerate plates. Outlier data not used in analysis for method comparison of SIM 35 C and AOAC 35 C. Did not follow study instructions, FELDSINE ET AL JOURNAL OF AOAC INTERNATIONAL VOL 86 NO 2 2003 269. Table 8 Interlaboratory results for aerobic plate counts for fresh vegetables samples log10 CFU g by SimPlate 35 SimPlate 30 AOAC 35 and ISO 30 methods. Carrot Broccoli Celery, Test portion 1 Test portion 2 Test portion 3 Test portion 4 Test portion 5 Test portion 6.
SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO SIM AOAC SIM ISO. Lab 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C 35 C 35 C 30 C 30 C. 1 6 20 6 18 7 41 7 64 7 18 7 19 7 24 7 64 6 68 6 62 6 68 7 18 6 91 6 84 7 18 8 00 7 04 7 06 6 90 8 47 7 54 7 33 7 67 8 66. 2 7 42 7 79 7 74 7 62 7 56 7 74 7 81 7 62 7 13 7 35 7 27 7 26 7 49 7 64 7 92 8 18 8 67 8 81 8 65 8 81. 3 7 42 7 45 7 59 7 59 7 43 7 53 7 69 7 59 7 01 7 01 7 74 7 69 7 43 7 41 7 92 7 73 7 70 8 38 8 63 8 72 8 67 a 8 66 8 58. a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a,4 8 45 8 80 8 82 8 17 8 31 a. 5 7 08 6 39 6 78 6 59 7 22 6 19 6 94 6 59 7 03 5 87 7 90 7 39 6 96 5 70 7 81 7 22 7 34 6 30 7 70 7 88 6 97 6 03 8 36 8 04. 6 7 50 7 21 8 10 7 65 7 70 7 43 7 88 7 65 7 44 7 23 8 27 8 15 7 38 7 01 8 04 7 94 7 67 7 32 8 85 8 87 7 65 7 24 8 77 8 83. 7 7 03 7 03 7 10 7 05 6 69 6 83 7 40 7 05 6 57 6 60 7 76 7 67 6 37 7 48 7 79 7 70 6 89 6 77 8 17 8 20 6 52 6 67 8 22 8 25. 8 7 30 7 90 8 15 7 92 7 40 7 90 8 45 7 92 7 29 7 76 8 09 7 38 6 94 7 49 8 03 7 48 7 25 8 12 7 98 7 27 7 87 9 81 9 39. 15 7 40 7 41 8 07 7 83 7 65 7 45 7 89 7 83 7 07 7 01 8 53 8 35 7 11 7 07 8 35 7 97 7 73 7 51 9 07 8 98 7 78 7 65 8 97 8 95. 16 7 23 7 18 8 00 7 88 7 42 7 37 7 81 7 88 7 15 7 09 7 91 8 03 7 52 7 40 8 40 8 32 7 65 7 54 9 19 9 00 7 73 7 56 8 76 8 90. 17 7 58 7 73 7 76 7 93 7 82 8 05 7 89 7 93 7 38 7 77 8 44 8 29 7 45 7 69 8 58 8 39 7 68 8 54 9 20 9 00 7 49 8 42 8 81 8 87. 18 7 56 7 41 5 53 5 82 8 28 7 96 7 20 5 82 7 73 7 38 7 57 7 78 7 91 7 76 7 97 7 98 7 32 8 16 8 42 7 81 8 50. 19 6 23 6 35 5 60 a 6 88 6 68 5 60 a 4 30 a 5 90 a 4 30 a 6 40 6 32 4 60 a 6 90 7 42 4 30 a 8 41 7 56. 270 FELDSINE ET AL JOURNAL OF AOAC INTERNATIONAL VOL 86 NO 2 2003. Counts were not in range The paired test portion was excluded from statistical analysis. FELDSINE ET AL JOURNAL OF AOAC INTERNATIONAL VOL 86 NO 2 2003 271. the 3 lots analyzed The AOAC method reported better SDr dence of low aerobic plate counts that were not in the suitable. values for Lot B test portions but were not significantly dif counting range for AOAC 35 or ISO 30 methods for almond. ferent for Lots A and C The SDR values were not significantly test portions There may have been die off of microorganisms. different for the 3 lots analyzed Table 2002 07C during shipment before analysis All data reported for almond. test portions were used for statistical analysis For peanuts and. Flour hazelnuts some laboratories reported aerobic plate counts for. Three types of flour rye wheat and white were analyzed certain test portions that were not in the suitable counting. Table 4 Laboratory 2 did not follow study instructions The range for AOAC or ISO methods Table 5 Data from these. data from this laboratory were excluded from statistical analy paired test portions were not used for statistical analysis. sis Throughout the analysis of flour some laboratories re Data generated by the AOAC 35 and the SimPlate 35. ported aerobic plate counts for certain test portions that were methods were compared statistically Overall 13 laboratories. not in the suitable counting range for AOAC or ISO methods submitted valid data for peanut and almond test portions and. Table 4 Data from these paired test portions were not used 12 laboratories submitted valid data for hazelnut test portions. for statistical analysis The mean log counts for the AOAC and the SimPlate methods. Data generated by the AOAC 35 and the SimPlate 35 were not significantly different for the almond and hazelnut. methods were compared statistically Overall there were 11 test portions analyzed Higher mean log counts were recov. 13 and 14 laboratories that submitted valid data for wheat ered by the SimPlate method p 0 05 for peanut test por. white and rye flour test portions respectively The mean log tions The peanut and almond test portions reported better SDr. counts from the AOAC 35 and the SimPlate 35 methods were values for the AOAC method whereas the hazelnut test por. not significantly different for the 3 lots analyzed The AOAC tions reported similar SDr values between the 2 methods The. method reported better SDr and SDR values for wheat test por SDR values of the 2 methods were not significantly different. tions p 0 05 The SDr and SDR values for rye and white test for any of the 3 nut meats analyzed Table 2002 07A. portions were not significantly different between the 2 meth Data generated by the ISO 30 and SimPlate 30 methods. ods Table 2002 07A were compared statistically Overall 12 laboratories submit. Data generated by the ISO 30 and SimPlate 30 methods ted valid data for peanuts and almonds and 11 laboratories. were compared statistically Overall 14 laboratories submit submitted valid data for hazelnuts for statistical analysis. ted valid data for all 3 types of flour for statistical analysis Mean log counts between the 2 methods were equivalent for. The mean log counts from the ISO and the SimPlate methods all 3 lots of nut meat test portions The ISO method reported. were not significantly different for the 3 lots analyzed The better SDr values for almonds test portions p 0 05 The SDr. ISO method reported better SDr values for the wheat test por values were not significantly different between the 2 methods. tions However the SDR was not significantly different be for peanut and hazelnut test portions The SDR were not sig. tween the 2 methods for wheat test portions The SDR values nificantly different between the 2 methods for all 3 lots ana. for rye test portions were significantly better for the SimPlate lyzed Table 2002 07B. method p 0 05 The white flour test portions reported simi Data generated by the ISO 30 method and the AOAC 35. lar SDr and SDR values between the 2 methods Ta method were compared statistically Overall 12 laboratories. ble 2002 07B submitted valid data for all 3 types of nut meats analyzed. Data generated by the ISO 30 and the AOAC 35 methods Mean log counts between the 2 methods were equivalent for. were compared statistically Laboratories 6 and 7 were deter all 3 lots of nut meat test portions The AOAC method re. mined to be outliers by the Cochran test for rye flour and white ported better SDr values for almond test portions The SDR. flour test portions respectively These paired data were ex values were significantly better for the AOAC method for. cluded from statistical analysis Overall there were 10 12 peanut and almond test portions p 0 01 However the SDr. and 13 laboratories that submitted valid data for wheat white and SDR values were not significantly different between the 2. and rye flour test portions respectively Mean log counts be methods for the hazelnut test portions Table 2002 07C. tween the 2 methods were similar for rye and wheat flour test. Frozen Hamburger Patties, portions The ISO method recovered higher mean log counts. for white flour test portions p 0 05 The SDr and SDR val Three lots of frozen hamburger patties Lots A C were. ues of the 2 methods were not significantly different for the analyzed Table 6 Throughout the analysis of frozen ham. rye and wheat test portions analyzed The ISO method re burger patties some laboratories reported aerobic plate counts. ported better SDr values for white flour test portions How for certain test portions that were not in the suitable counting. ever the SDR values were not significantly different for white range for AOAC or ISO methods Table 6 Data from these. flour test portions Table 2002 07C paired test portions were not used for statistical analysis. Nut Meats Data generated by the AOAC 35 and the SimPlate 35. methods were compared statistically Overall 15 laboratories. Three types of nut meats peanuts almonds and hazelnuts submitted valid data for all 3 lots of patties analyzed The. were analyzed Table 5 Laboratory 13 did not follow study mean log counts between the AOAC and the SimPlate meth. instructions The data from this laboratory were excluded ods were not significantly different for the 3 lots analyzed. from statistical analysis Collaborators reported a higher inci The AOAC method reported better repeatability for Lots A.


Related Books

HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD

HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD

AUGUST 2010 REPORT NO. 2011-004 Hillsborough County District School Board Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Students and Student Transportation LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009

Preparing Students for Life

Preparing Students for Life

One Plan. e s 3 Executive Summary In Spring of 2015, the Superintendent and the School Board began working on a new direction for Hillsborough County Public Schools (HCPS), culminating in a five-year Strategic Plan.

Commissioning: a prerequisite for energy efficient buildings

Commissioning a prerequisite for energy efficient buildings

ASHRAE/IES Standard 202-2013 - Commissioning Process for Buildings and Systems ASHRAE Guideline 0-2005 - The Commissioning Process ASHRAE Guideline 1.1-2007 - The HVAC Commissioning Process NIBS Guideline 3-2012 - Building Enclosure Commissioning Process NFPA 3: Recommended Practice on Commissioning

VOCATIONAL ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE (VESL) TEMPLATE

VOCATIONAL ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE VESL TEMPLATE

ACCET Document 3.VESL Date Developed: August 1996 Date Revised: December 2005/August 2010 Pages: 1 of 7 Pertinent to: Vocational ESL Institutions

Factors Influencing the Selection of a University by High ...

Factors Influencing the Selection of a University by High

fastidious group. Finally, the results of correspondence analysis suggested that students of the pragmatic group are more likely to be attracted by NCYU, and also, students perceived NCYU to be strongly associated with lower tuition, fewer entrance-exam subjects, lower entrance-exam pass rates, and easier graduation requirements

EU DATA PROTECTION POLICY

EU DATA PROTECTION POLICY

EU Data Protection Policy The European Union has established a comprehensive legislative privacy framework aimed at protecting data pertaining to individuals.The EU is currently in the process of amending and supplementing its data protec-tion legislation to prepare for the information society. In this article, Professor Lucas Bergkamp ...

Building Trust Through Data Foundations A Call for a Data ...

Building Trust Through Data Foundations A Call for a Data

Building Trust in Data Foundations Sophie Stalla-Bourdillon, Alexsis Wintour, Laura Carmichael 4 Executive Summary This white paper sets out how to embody a Data Governance Model which builds trust, particularly when used with large group data sharing, within and between different organisations adopted for data sharingthrough the legal structure of a Data Foundation in the Channel Islands ...

Solaris - galactic

Solaris galactic

Solaris Stanislaw Lem. CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 The Arrival CHAPTER 2 The Solarists CHAPTER 3 The Visitors CHAPTER 4 Sartorius CHAPTER 5 Rheya CHAPTER 6 "The Little Apocrypha" CHAPTER 7 The Conference CHAPTER 8 The Monsters CHAPTER 9 The Liquid Oxygen CHAPTER 10 Conversation CHAPTER 11 The Thinkers CHAPTER 12 The Dreams CHAPTER 13 Victory CHAPTER 14 The Old Mimoid. 1 THE ARRIVAL At 19.00 hours, ship ...

Quantum Hearts: 2D Puzzle Game for Android OS using OpenGL ES

Quantum Hearts 2D Puzzle Game for Android OS using OpenGL ES

Quantum Hearts: 2D Puzzle Game for Android OS using OpenGL ES Abraham Botros SUNet ID: abotros abotros@stanford.edu Stanford University, Summer 2015 - CS148 Final Project Report 1Introduction \Quantum Hearts\ is a simple 2D, at-world, graphical puzzle game I created for Android OS using OpenGL ES (2.0).

ArchiGaming: Finding the Overlap

ArchiGaming Finding the Overlap

chitecture and game design - has a synergistic valu e in the overlap or common area of the pro-cess and goals of the respective disciplines. This paper reports the concept, process, and resul ts of a student and faculty university collaborative to explore the potential synergy of d igital game design capstone projects and archi-