1. Introduction
Growing global populations have greatly increased the demand of wholesome fresh produce including sweet potatoes. The global sweet potato market has been on the rise since 2012, producing 105.2 million tons of the crop and yielding 1.4 million tons in 2016 in the United States alone [1]. Sweet potatoes are recognized as nutritiously potent crops consumed and researched globally [2,3]. The sweet potato is potentially an ideal and efficient crop for providing sustenance for much of the world as well as being a viable crop for sustainable agriculture [2,4]. The majority of sweet potatoes are produced by developing countries where the usage of raw manure as fertilizer is still common practice. In addition to pathogens found in raw manure, contaminated irrigation water and wildlife excrements pose potential threats to soil contamination.
Fresh produce commodities have been subject to numerous foodborne outbreaks in both the domestic and international markets [5]. With cross-contamination vectors including soil and irrigation water contamination as well as produce handling by field workers, postharvest sanitation is often the most vital step in reducing microbial contamination [6,7,8]. Fresh-cut produce sanitation has been well-researched. Few studies have highlighted the importance of postharvest sanitation of root crops. Root crops tend to be overlooked in favor of minimizing cross-contamination in fresh produce that are consumed raw. However, crops grown under the soil are vulnerable to harboring pathogens as a result of poor compost practices and the usage of contaminated irrigation water [9]. Despite cooking being an acceptable kill step in eliminating most pathogens, root crops such as sweet potatoes and potatoes that are typically cooked in sealed aluminum foil, an anaerobic environment, are susceptible to botulism as a result of C. botulinum spores germinating during the baking process [10,11]. Additionally, root vegetables such as carrots, beets, radishes, and sweet potatoes may also be eaten raw, which may pose a food safety risk.
Produce are washed to remove excess dirt and debris from surfaces. However, without a sanitizing agent in the wash solution, washing will have minimal impact on reducing bacterial populations [12,13]. Sweet potatoes are sanitized in dump tanks using 100–150 ppm of sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) [14]. However, the efficacy of NaOCl diminishes as greater amounts of organic materials build up in the sanitizing solution [15]. Pathogen control is also reliant on maintaining a narrow pH range [16]. In addition, the chlorine treatment can potentially produce carcinogenic compounds, such as trichloramines, as byproducts of the treatment posing public health risks [17,18]. Chlorine dioxide (ClO2) has gained popularity within the last couple of decades to disinfect drinking water and wastewater, and to sanitize fresh produce and poultry [19]. ClO2 has 2.5 times the oxidizing capability as Cl2 and may be an effective alternative produce sanitizer [20]. ClO2 offers similar sanitation efficacy as chlorine-based sanitizers while requiring far less concentration in a wide pH range (3–8) [21]. Additionally, ClO2 does not have issues related to the production of carcinogenic byproducts [22].
Previous studies have demonstrated the efficacy of ClO2 in reducing human pathogens including Shiga-toxin-producing Escherichia coli, Salmonella enterica, Listeria monocytogenes, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus, and Yersinia enterocolitica on a variety of produce [19]. The microbial death is believed to be due to oxidation of sulfhydryl groups on cell-surface proteins and increased permeability of the outer membrane [23]. Another mechanism is its influence on internal components of the cells such as proteins and nucleic acids as well as interfering protein synthesis [19,24]. At 5 ppm, aqueous ClO2 has demonstrated cross-contamination control of Salmonella, Escherichia coli O157:H7, and Erwinia carotovora in washing produce [16,25]. Blueberries sanitized with 5 ppm aqueous ClO2 were found to have 2.24 log CFU/g reduction in L. monocytogenes after 30 min of treatment with further treatment time resulting in similar levels of reduction [26]. Green peppers exhibited a 6.45 log CFU/g reduction in E. coli O157:H7 after 30 min of 1.24 mg/L aqueous ClO2 treatment [13]. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of aqueous chlorine dioxide on reducing bacterial pathogens (E. coli O157:H7, Salmonella spp., and L. monocytogenes) from sweet potatoes and its role in minimizing cross-contamination during washing.
2. Materials and Methods 2.1. Produce Material Fresh Beauregard sweet potatoes (Ipomoea batatas) sourced from Black Gold farms in Delhi, Louisiana were held at 4 °C for no longer than 12 weeks. Freshly harvested sweet potatoes collected before the curing step, without removing the surface soil were also used to examine the difference between the cured and uncured samples. Sweet potatoes with average surface areas of 274–293 cm2 were selected for the experiment. 2.2. Bacterial Strains Several strains of S. enterica, E. coli O157:H7, L. monocytogenes derived from outbreaks as well as a nonpathogenic strain of Enterococcus spp., were used in this study. These pathogenic strains were generously supplied by Dr. Michelle D. Danyluk at the University of Florida. A cocktail of Salmonella enterica (Anatum strain 1715a, Enteritidis PT 30, and Enteritidis PT 9c Strain RM4635), E. coli O157:H7 (Odwalla strain 223, CDC 658, and H1730), and Listeria monocytogenes (101M serotype 4b, Scott A serotype 4b, and V7 serotype 1/2a) were used in this study. All serotypes were routinely grown in tryptic soy broth (TSB) (Hardy Diagnostics, Santa Maria, CA) at 37 °C for 24 h. The bacterial cultures were stored in glycerol (70:30, vol/vol, culture: glycerol) at −80 °C prior to usage. 2.3. Preparation of Inoculum
Each frozen culture was activated by three consecutive culture transfers (24 h each) to respective broth maintaining 37 °C [27]. The TSB (BD Difco, Sparks, MD, USA) was used for the activation of S. enterica and E. coli O157:H7 and TSB with 0.6% yeast extract (BD Difco, Sparks, MD, USA) for L. monocytogenes. The cocktail of pathogens was prepared by mixing 10 mL of each serotype broth into 50 mL centrifuge tubes and vortexed for 2 s. Cells were harvested via centrifugation (Allegra X-15R, Beckman Coulter, Indianapolis, IN, USA) at 6500 rpm for 5 min and the supernatant was decanted. Cell pellets were washed in 10 mL of sterile 1× phosphate buffer saline (PBS) (Hardy Diagnostics, Santa Maria, CA, USA), centrifuged at 6500 rpm for 5 min, and resuspended in 5 mL of sterile 1× PBS. To prepare the inocula, the cell suspension cocktails were diluted and adjusted to approximately 108–109 CFU/mL.
2.4. Inoculation of Sweet Potatoes Sweet potatoes were spot inoculated with 500 µL of the inoculum. The inoculum was gradually introduced at a rate of 100 µL aliquots on the upper surface of the sweet potatoes to minimize inoculum loss from runoff. Sweet potatoes were then air-dried for 1.5 h inside a biosafety cabinet to allow for bacterial attachment. During the study, the initial pathogen level on inoculated sweet potatoes was 4.2 to 5.7 log CFU/cm2. 2.5. Preparation of Aqueous ClO2
Sodium chlorite solution (450 mL of 10 μg/μL) was mixed with 1N hydrochloric acid (21 mL) in a 1000 mL PYREX® storage bottle and stored for 1 h at room temperature with continuous stirring [28,29]. The final working concentration of 5 ppm was prepared by diluting the stock solution with distilled water. The concentration was confirmed by direct-reading method (HACH DR 900, Loveland, CO, USA). The pH value of the ClO2 solutions averaged at 8.67.
2.6. Aqueous ClO2 Treatment Sweet potatoes inoculated with 4.2 to 5.7 log CFU/cm2 of S. enterica, E. coli O157:H7, or L. monocytogenes and noninoculated sweet potatoes were treated with aqueous ClO2 (5 ppm) or distilled water (control) for 10, 20, and 30 min at 22 ± 1 °C. Briefly, sweet potatoes were placed in sterile polypropylene bags (VWR®, Radnor, PA, USA) containing the treatment solutions. The bags were then sealed to minimize ClO2 concentration loss and were placed in buckets. Each sample was agitated for 30 s to ensure treatment contact on sweet potato surfaces. 2.7. Recovery of Pathogens and Microbiological Analyses Three additional controls that received no treatment were used in this study. The first control was conducted with a duplicate of noninoculated, untreated sweet potatoes used to detect background microbes and potential pathogens. The second control was conducted with two duplicates of inoculated, untreated sweet potatoes used to determine the initial pathogen levels of treated samples. The third control was conducted with a duplicate of inoculated, untreated sweet potatoes used to determine the surviving pathogen levels following the end of the treatments. Treatment solutions from aqueous ClO2 and water treatments were sampled for microbiological analysis. After treatment, inoculated and noninoculated sweet potato samples were aseptically transferred into a stomacher bag (Nasco Whirl-pak, Fort Atkinson, WI, USA) with 100 mL sterile 0.1% peptone water (Hardy Diagnostics, Santa Maria, CA, USA). Samples were gently massaged for 2 min to dislodge attached pathogens. Serial 10-fold dilutions were prepared in 0.1% peptone water. Dilutions were spread plated in duplicates on selective media with Xylose Lysine Deoxycholate agar (XLD) (BD Difco, Sparks, MD, USA) for S. enterica, Sorbitol MacConkey Agar (SMAC) (BD Difco, Sparks, MD, USA) supplemented with Cefixime-Tellurite Supplement (CT) (HiMedia Laboratories, Mumbai, India) for E. coli O157:H7, and Oxford Agar base (BD Difco, Sparks, MD, USA) for L. monocytogenes. Plates were incubated at 37 °C for 24 h. Enumerated colony results were expressed as log CFU/cm2. 2.8. Statistical Analysis The pathogen populations (CFU) recovered from sweet potatoes and treatment solutions were converted to log CFU/cm2 or ml. Each experiment was performed three times independently. The data was analyzed by ANOVA test using Statistical Analysis Software (SAS) with Tukey’s post hoc test to determine mean differences (p < 0.05) (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). 3. Results 3.1. Effects of Aqueous ClO2 Treatment on Salmonella Enterica
The effect of 5 ppm aqueous ClO2 treatment on reducing Salmonella populations inoculated on sweet potato surfaces was investigated with treatment times ranging from 10 to 30 min (Figure 1). The level of reduction in S. enterica population increased with an increase in exposure time. The level of reduction was 1.67, 2.14, and 2.37 log CFU/cm2 at 10, 20, and 30 min of exposure, respectively. Water resulted in the reduction of the population by 1.22 log CFU/cm2 at 10 min. However, no significant reduction was observed with an increase in exposure time with water, up to 30 min.
The disinfectant efficacy of aqueous ClO2 could be higher in water. The treatment with 5 ppm ClO2 resulted in the reduction of S. enterica level by ≥5-log within 6 s [30]. However, the efficacy of the sanitizer is drastically reduced on produce surfaces. Although complete elimination of pathogens from fresh produce is not possible using this sanitizer at acceptable concentration, its use in produce industry may help minimize produce safety risks by reducing the pathogens level and controlling cross-contamination between the products and the batches [22,30,31]. To our knowledge, there are no published findings on the sanitizing efficacy of aqueous ClO2 specifically on sweet potatoes. However, some studies have been published on other fruits and leafy vegetables. In a study with iceberg lettuce inoculated with S. typhimurium, similar results were observed after 10 min treatment with aqueous ClO2 [31]. Pathogen levels were reduced by 1.64 log CFU/g after the treatment with continuous mild agitation. Likewise, blueberries inoculated with S. typhimurium exhibited similar levels of reduction (1.93 log CFU/g) after 20 min of 5 ppm aqueous ClO2 treatment [26]. On apples, a total of up to 2 log reduction in Salmonella population was observed after 10 min of treatment with a similar concentration of the sanitizer [32]. Cherry tomatoes inoculated with S. typhimurium exhibited a 2.53 log CFU/g reduction after a 5 min treatment using 10 ppm aqueous ClO2 [33]. The treatment with 15 ppm of ClO2 resulted in the reduction of S. typhimurium by 3.32 log in 20 min on blueberry samples [26]. The treatment was more efficient on tomatoes samples. ClO2 of 20 ppm reduced S. enterica population by 5 log in 1 min [30]. While mungbean sprout required 100 ppm to eliminate the S. typhimurium by 3 log in 5 min [34]. The variations in the level of reductions between the studies can be attributed to differences in aqueous ClO2 concentrations and types of produce. The efficacy of the treatment increased with increase in the concentration of the aqueous ClO2 [31]. Our results indicated that, unlike water treatment, an increase in the ClO2 treatment time increased the level of reduction in Salmonella populations, with more than 2 log reduction after 20 min of exposure.
3.2. Effects of Aqueous ClO2 Treatment on E. coli O157:H7
The effect of 5 ppm aqueous ClO2 on E. coli O157:H7 on sweet potato surfaces was investigated with treatment times ranging from 10 to 30 min (Figure 2). The ClO2 treatment for 10 min resulted in the reduction of the population by 1.78 log CFU/cm2. At 20 min of treatment, the reduction was by 2.0 log CFU/cm2, which was significantly higher than water (1.31 log CFU/cm2). However, after 30 min, water had a similar level of reduction as compared to ClO2.
Some studies showed similar levels of reduction in E. coli O157: H7 populations on produce surfaces due to ClO2 and water washing. It was reported that water washing for 30 min reduced E. coli O157:H7 levels by up to 2.4 log CFU on green peppers [13]. Iceberg lettuce leaves inoculated with E. coli O157:H7 resulted in 1.98 and 1.46 log CFU/g reduction after 10 min of 5 ppm aqueous ClO2 and distilled water treatment, respectively [31]. Another study observed the reduction of the population of this pathogen by 1.2 log after 5 min of treatment with ClO2 of 10 ppm [35]. Increase in the concentration of the sanitizer to 20 ppm and the time to 15 min resulted in the reduction by 1.7 log [36]. On apples, the reduction was around 1 log after the treatment with 5 ppm for 10 min [32]. However, the effect of treatments could be variable with the type of produce and their surface characteristics. Higher levels of reductions were observed on (~6 log CFU/g) apples, whole lettuce, strawberries, and cantaloupes by 5 ppm of aqueous ClO2 with exposure for 5 min [37]. The water washing resulted in the reduction of E. coli O157:H7 levels by up to 1.7 log CFU on injured surfaces and by up to 2.4 log CFU on uninjured green pepper surfaces [13]. The sweet potatoes used in this study were free of lesions, injuries, and scars. Further study using sweet potatoes with injured surfaces and with different surface characteristics could help to better understand the variability in the sanitizing efficacy of aqueous ClO2 specifically on sweet potatoes.
3.3. Effects of Aqueous ClO2 Treatment on Listeria Monocytogenes
Reduction of L. monocytogenes on sweet potato surfaces increased with time, up to 30 min (Figure 3). Aqueous ClO2 treatment at 30 min had the greatest effect in reducing L. monocytogenes (1.98 log CFU/cm2). Although there was a higher reduction on ClO2 treated samples compared to the controls (water treated) at 10 min, a significantly higher reduction on those samples was observed only after 20 min. Similar to the effect on Salmonella, there was no significant difference between reductions due to water treatment among the three treatment times.
In a study with iceberg lettuce leaves contaminated with L. monocytogenes, reductions from approximately 7 log CFU/g to 5.36 log CFU/g were observed within 10 min of 5 ppm aqueous ClO2 treatment with light and continuous agitation [31]. This finding closer resembles the L. monocytogenes reduction achieved in our study after 20 min of treatment. As only 30 s of agitation was applied to treated samples at the start of the treatment, greater reduction may have been exhibited had continuous agitation been incorporated. Uninjured green peppers spot inoculated with L. monocytogenes observed 3.7 log reduction after 30 min of 3 ppm aqueous ClO2 treatment, far greater than our 30 min treatment result of 1.98 log CFU/cm2 [38]. In the same study, uninjured green pepper surfaces observed a 1.4 log reduction of L. monocytogenes populations after 30 min of water washing. However, our findings after 30 min of water washing (0.49 log CFU/cm2) showed more similarities to the 0.4 log reduction observed on injured green pepper surfaces [38]. The efficacy of the ClO2 treatment was different between the studies. The treatment of cabbage and lettuce with 5 ppm of ClO2 for 10 min resulted in the reduction of this pathogen by 0.8 log [39]. On blueberry samples, ClO2 of 15 ppm reduced the population by 4.88 log after 120 min of exposure [26]. While on mungbean sprouts, ClO2 of 100 ppm could reduce the population by 1.5 log after 5 min of treatment [34]. The differences in the efficacy between the studies may be attributed to the type of the produce used, the condition of the produce, bacterial strains and the study design. Some studies have already demonstrated that the type of pathogen or the strain could be one of the important factors influencing the efficacy of the sanitizers [22,30,31]. Surface properties of produce also has been found to have an influence on the efficacy of the sanitizers. Surface hydrophobicity was found to be an important factor in determining the inactivation of E. coli O157:H7, S. typhimurium, and L. monocytogenes by ClO2 gas [40].
3.4. Influences of Aqueous ClO2 on Cross Contamination of Noninoculated Sweet Potatoes
The ClO2 was extremely effective in controlling bacterial levels from wash water (Figure 4). Pathogens from aqueous ClO2 treatment wash solutions were below the detectable limit of the test following 10, 20, and 30 min treatments. However, pathogens were detected up to 4.92 log CFU/mL from wash water without ClO2. Water treatment wash solutions recovered the greatest pathogen population from 4.16 to 4.92 log CFU/mL for E. coli O157:H7. Water treatment wash solutions from treating Salmonella and L. monocytogenes recovered 3.81 to 3.96 log CFU/mL and 3.49 to 3.59 log CFU/mL, respectively. These results suggest that using ClO2 during the washing of sweet potatoes can significantly reduce the risk of cross-contamination. In addition, ClO2 concentrations were below 3 ppm on sweet potatoes after 30 min of treatment, meeting the maximum residual surface concentration approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) [41].
Use of ClO2 resulted in no recovery of the pathogens on noninoculated sweet potatoes when washed with inoculated samples (Table 1). Our results concurred with the findings reported by other studies. No recoverable E. coli O157:H7, Salmonella enterica and S. typhimurium was observed from noninoculated red chard baby leaves washed together with inoculated red chard baby leaves in 3 ppm aqueous ClO2 [16]. Similarly, 5 ppm aqueous ClO2 prevented the cross-contamination of tomatoes [25]. However, water wash contributed to the cross-contamination of noninoculated sweet potatoes by up to 3.40, 2.97 and 3.47 log CFU/cm2 of Salmonella, E. coli O157: H7 and L. monocytogenes, respectively (Table 1). In another study, wash water contaminated with 6.7 log CFU/mL of Salmonella spp. and 5.5 log CFU/mL of Erwinia spp., transferred 4.1 and 2.8 log CFU/cm2 of Salmonella spp. and Erwinia spp., respectively to tomatoes within 1 min of washing [25]. The ClO2 of 5 ppm was able to prevent the cross-contamination of tomatoes with Salmonella and Erwinia [30]. The results indicated that using ClO2 as low as 5 ppm could significantly reduce the risk of cross-contamination during postharvest washing.
3.5. Effects of Aqueous ClO2 on E. coli O157: H7 and Salmonella on Freshly Harvested Sweet Potatoes
The effect of ClO2 and water treatment on E. coli O157: H7 and Salmonella inoculated on the freshly harvested local sweet potatoes is shown in Figure 5. As the sweet potatoes were collected before the curing step, the level of soil on them was higher than on the samples used in previous studies. The effect of the treatments on reducing the level of Salmonella and E. coli O157: H7 on these fruits was lower compared to on cured sweet potatoes. The aqueous ClO2 treatment for 10 min reduced the level of Salmonella and E. coli O157: H7 by 1.46 and 1.20 log CFU/cm2, respectively. The effect of water treatment was by 0.79 and 0.77 log CFU/cm2, respectively, which was not significantly different from the ClO2 treatment.
This study was aimed to consider freshly harvested sweet potatoes with higher levels of soil and bruises on the surfaces. Mechanical harvesting may result in bruises on the surfaces. As sweet potatoes we used in this study skipped the curing step, if there were bruises on these fruits, there was not enough time for the healing [42]. The injuries on produce surfaces may reduce the efficacy of the sanitizers [22]. Aqueous ClO2 (3 ppm) reduced the L. monocytogenes population by 3.7 log CFU when bell pepper surfaces were not injured and by 0.44 when injured [38]. Reduced efficacy of the treatments in our study may be due to a higher level of bruises and attached soiled particles which may have allowed bacterial cells to hide better in the surfaces limiting the access to the sanitizer solutions [43,44]. However, a further rigorous study is needed to better understand the influence of individual factors on the efficacy of the sanitizer.
The efficacy of the treatment has been increased by the combination of other strategies. The combination of aqueous ClO2 and fumaric acid increased the efficacy of the treatment against E. coli O157:H7, S. typhimurium, and L. monocytogenes inoculated on broccoli sprouts [45]. The combined treatments of ClO2 and ultrasound was found to have a role in maintaining postharvest storage quality of plum fruit [46]. Use of ultraviolet-C along with ClO2 was also effective in inhibiting microorganisms and maintaining shelf-life of fresh produce [47]. Another study evaluated the efficacy of ClO2 plus chitosan coating and found that this strategy could maintain the quality of fresh-cut bamboo shoot and extend their postharvest life [48]. These strategies had no significant effect on the sensory quality of the products. Furthermore, storage of mungbean sprouts using atmosphere packaging (MAP) followed by the treatment reduced the microbial population [34]. These results indicated that there is a room for the improvement with the treatment by combining other strategies even for sweet potatoes.
Overall, the application of chlorine dioxide at 5 ppm significantly reduced the pathogen’ levels during the postharvest washing of sweet potatoes. In addition, aqueous ClO2 can control cross-contamination in wash solutions, reducing the risk of cross-contamination of pathogens to uncontaminated sweet potatoes. The final concentration of ClO2 in sweet potatoes was below 3 ppm after 30 min of treatment, meeting the maximum residual surface concentration approved by the FDA [41]. Future research should incorporate longer and more vigorous agitation during treatment to better simulate conditions in processing facilities as well as sensory studies to evaluate whether aqueous chlorine dioxide at 5 ppm affects the desirable sensory qualities of sweet potatoes.
Enlarge this image.Figure 1. Effects of aqueous ClO2 and water treatment on the reduction of Salmonella spp. Reduction of Salmonella spp. seeded on sweet potato surfaces was evaluated after 10, 20, and 30 min of aqueous ClO2 (5 ppm) and water treatments at 22 ± 1 °C. Each bar diagram represents average counts ± standard error. Different uppercase letters on the top of the diagrams means that the reductions between the treatments and times were significantly different (p < 0.05).
Enlarge this image.Figure 2. Effects of aqueous ClO2 and water treatment on the reduction of E. coli O157:H7. Reduction of E. coli O157:H7 on sweet potato surfaces after aqueous ClO2 treatment (5 ppm) for 10, 20, and 30 min and water treatment at 22 ± 1 °C. Each bar diagram represents average counts ± standard error. Different uppercase letters on the top of the diagrams means that the reductions between the treatments and times were significantly different (p < 0.05).
Enlarge this image.Figure 3. Effects of aqueous ClO2 and water treatment on the reduction of L. monocytogenes. Reduction of L. monocytogenes on sweet potato surfaces after 5 ppm aqueous ClO2 treatment for 10, 20, and 30 min and water treatment at 22 ± 1 °C. Each bar diagram represents average counts ± standard error. Different uppercase letters on the top of the diagrams means that the reductions between the treatments and times were significantly different (p < 0.05).
Enlarge this image.Figure 4. The recovery of pathogens from wash water. Pathogens recovered from wash solution following aqueous ClO2 treatment (5 ppm) for 10, 20, and 30 min and water treatment at 22 ± 1 °C.
Enlarge this image.Figure 5. Effects of aqueous ClO2 and water treatment on the reduction of E. coli O157: H7 and Salmonella on freshly harvested sweet potatoes. Reduction of E. coli O157: H7 and Salmonella on freshly harvested sweet potatoes after aqueous ClO2 treatment (5 ppm) and water treatment for 10 min at 22 ± 1 °C. The data are presented as average counts ± standard error. Same uppercase letters on the top of the diagrams indicate no significant difference (p < 0.05) in between the treatments.
| Pathogen | Treatment Time | Recovery Average of Pathogens (log CFU/cm2) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aqueous ClO2 | Water Treatment | ||
| Salmonella | 10 | ND | 3.40 ± 0.0 |
| 20 | ND | 2.84 ± 0.2 | |
| 30 | ND | 2.84 ± 0.1 | |
| E. coli O157:H7 | 10 | ND | 2.97 ± 0.7 |
| 20 | ND | 2.95 ± 0.5 | |
| 30 | ND | 2.38 ± 0.3 | |
| L. monocytogenes | 10 | ND | 3.00 ± 0.6 |
| 20 | ND | 3.18 ± 0.5 | |
| 30 | ND | 3.47 ± 1.1 | |
ND = Not Detectable.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, A.A.; data curation, P.L. and V.S.C.; funding acquisition, A.A.; investigation, P.L. and V.S.C.; methodology, P.L. and A.A.; project administration, A.A.; supervision, M.E.J., J.M.K. and A.A.; writing-original draft, P.L.; writing-review and editing, V.S.C., M.E.J., J.M.K. and A.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This work was supported by the USDA Specialty Crop Block Program PO#2000241663 and PO#2000317761 and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Hatch project 1006167.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Veerachandra Kranti Yemmireddy, Assem Abolmatty, Karuna Kharel, Cameron Cason, Brett Riviere, Daniela Zelaya, Janny Mendoza, Yu Han and David Huynh for their help during editing the manuscript and sample analysis.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
1. Prakash, P.; Kishore, P.; Jaganathan, D.; Immanual, S.; Sivakumar, P. The Status, Performance and Impact of sweet potato cultivation on farming communities of Odisha, India. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 28 July-2 August 2018.
2. Prakash, C. Sweet potato biotechnology: Progress and potential. Biotechnol. Dev. Monit. 1994, 18, 1819-1822.
3. Low, J.W.; Arimond, M.; Osman, N.; Cunguara, B.; Zano, F.; Tschirley, D. A food-based approach introducing orange-fleshed sweet potatoes increased vitamin A intake and serum retinol concentrations in young children in rural Mozambique. J. Nutr. 2007, 137, 1320-1327.
4. Peet, M. Sustainable Practices for Vegetable Production in the South; Focus Publishing, R. Pullins Co: Newburyport, MA, USA, 1996.
5. Mohammad, Z.H.; Yu, H.; Neal, J.A.; Gibson, K.E.; Sirsat, S.A. Food Safety Challenges and Barriers in Southern United States Farmers Markets. Foods 2020, 9, 12.
6. Lynch, M.F.; Tauxe, R.V.; Hedberg, C.W. The growing burden of foodborne outbreaks due to contaminated fresh produce: Risks and opportunities. Epidemiols. Infect. 2009, 137, 307-315.
7. Hanning, I.B.; Nutt, J.; Ricke, S.C. Salmonellosis outbreaks in the United States due to fresh produce: Sources and potential intervention measures. Foodborne Pathog. Dis. 2009, 6, 635-648.
8. Chhetri, V.S.; Fontenot, K.; Strahan, R.; Yemmireddy, V.K.; Parraga Estrada, K.J.; Adhikari, A. Effect of surrounding vegetation on microbial survival or die-off on watermelon surface in an agriculture setting. J. Food Saf. 2018, 38, e12520.
9. Islam, M.; Doyle, M.P.; Phatak, S.C.; Millner, P.; Jiang, X. Survival of Escherichia coli O157: H7 in soil and on carrots and onions grown in fields treated with contaminated manure composts or irrigation water. Food Microbiol. 2005, 22, 63-70.
10. Angulo, F.J.; Getz, J.; Taylor, J.P.; Hendricks, K.A.; Hatheway, C.L.; Barth, S.S.; Solomon, H.M.; Larson, A.E.; Johnson, E.A.; Nickey, L.N. A large outbreak of botulism: The hazardous baked potato. J. Infect. Dis. 1998, 178, 172-177.
11. Sobel, J.; Tucker, N.; Sulka, A.; McLaughlin, J.; Maslanka, S. Foodborne botulism in the United States, 1990-2000. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2004, 10, 1606.
12. Chhetri, V.S.; Janes, M.E.; King, J.M.; Doerrler, W.; Adhikari, A. Effect of residual chlorine and organic acids on survival and attachment of Escherichia coli O157: H7 and Listeria monocytogenes on spinach leaves during storage. LWT 2019, 105, 298-305.
13. Han, Y.; Sherman, D.; Linton, R.; Nielsen, S.; Nelson, P. The effects of washing and chlorine dioxide gas on survival and attachment of Escherichia coli O157: H7 to green pepper surfaces. Food Microbiol. 2000, 17, 521-533.
14. Suslow, T.; Oria, M.; Beuchat, L.; Garrett, E.; Parish, M.; Harris, L.; Farber, J.; Busta, F. Production practices as risk factors in microbial food safety of fresh and fresh-cut produce. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2003, 2, 38-77.
15. Boyette, M.; Ritchie, D.; Carballo, S.; Blankenship, S.; Sanders, D. Chlorination and postharvest disease control. Hort Technol. 1993, 3, 395-400.
16. Tomás-Callejas, A.; López-Gálvez, F.; Sbodio, A.; Artés, F.; Artés-Hernández, F.; Suslow, T.V. Chlorine dioxide and chlorine effectiveness to prevent Escherichia coli O157: H7 and Salmonella cross-contamination on fresh-cut Red Chard. Food Control 2012, 23, 325-332.
17. Richardson, S.; Thruston, A.; Caughran, T.; Collette, T.; Patterson, K. Chemical by-products of chlorine and alternative disinfectants. Food Technol. 1998, 52, 58-61.
18. Shen, C.; Norris, P.; Williams, O.; Hagan, S.; Li, K. Generation of chlorine by-products in simulated wash water. Food Chem. 2016, 190, 97-102.
19. Bridges, D.F.; Lacombe, A.; Wu, V.C. Integrity of the Escherichia coli O157: H7 Cell Wall and Membranes After Chlorine Dioxide Treatment. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 11, 888.
20. Benarde, M.A.; Israel, B.M.; Olivieri, V.P.; Granstrom, M.L. Efficiency of chlorine dioxide as a bactericide. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1965, 13, 776-780.
21. Huang, J.; Wang, L.; Ren, N.; Ma, F. Disinfection effect of chlorine dioxide on bacteria in water. Water Res. 1997, 31, 607-613.
22. Gómez-López, V.M.; Rajkovic, A.; Ragaert, P.; Smigic, N.; Devlieghere, F. Chlorine dioxide for minimally processed produce preservation: A review. Trends Food Sci. Tech. 2009, 20, 17-26.
23. Praeger, U.; Herppich, W.B.; Hassenberg, K. Aqueous chlorine dioxide treatment of horticultural produce: Effects on microbial safety and produce quality-A review. Crit Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2018, 58, 318-333.
24. Sharma, V.K.; Sohn, M. Reactivity of chlorine dioxide with amino acids, peptides, and proteins. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2012, 10, 255-264.
25. Pao, S.; Kelsey, D.F.; LONG III, W. Spray washing of tomatoes with chlorine dioxide to minimize Salmonella on inoculated fruit surfaces and cross-contamination from revolving brushes. J. Food Prot. 2009, 72, 2448-2452.
26. Wu, V.C.; Kim, B. Effect of a simple chlorine dioxide method for controlling five foodborne pathogens, yeasts and molds on blueberries. Food Microbiol. 2007, 24, 794-800.
27. Adhikari, A.; Bary, A.; Cogger, C.; James, C.; Ünlü, G.; Killinger, K. Thermal and starvation stress response of Escherichia coli O157: H7 isolates selected from agricultural environments. J. Food Prot. 2016, 79, 1673-1679.
28. Adhikari, A.; Chhetri, V.S.; Bhattacharya, D.; Cason, C.; Luu, P.; Suazo, A. Effectiveness of daily rinsing of alfalfa sprouts with aqueous chlorine dioxide and ozonated water on the growth of Listeria monocytogenes during sprouting. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2019, 69, 252-257.
29. Bang, J.; Kim, H.; Kim, H.; Beuchat, L.; Kim, Y.; Ryu, J.H. Reduction of Escherichia coli O157: H7 on radish seeds by sequential application of aqueous chlorine dioxide and dry-heat treatment. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2011, 53, 424-429.
30. Pao, S.; Kelsey, D.; Khalid, M.; Ettinger, M. Using aqueous chlorine dioxide to prevent contamination of tomatoes with Salmonella enterica and Erwinia carotovora during fruit washing. J. Food Prot. 2007, 70, 629-634.
31. Kim, Y.J.; Lee, S.H.; Park, J.; Park, J.; Chung, M.; Kwon, K.; Chung, K.; Won, M.; Song, K.B. Inactivation of Escherichia coli O157: H7, Salmonella typhimurium, and Listeria monocytogenes on stored iceberg lettuce by aqueous chlorine dioxide treatment. J. Food Sci. 2008, 73, M418-M422.
32. Huang, T.S.; Xu, C.; Walker, K.; West, P.; Zhang, S.; Weese, J. Decontamination efficacy of combined chlorine dioxide with ultrasonication on apples and lettuce. J. Food Sci. 2006, 71, M134-M139.
33. Song, H.-J.; Choi, D.-W.; Song, K.B. Effect of aqueous chlorine dioxide and UV-C treatment on the microbial reduction and color of cherry tomatoes. Hortic. Environ. Biotechnol. 2011, 52, 488.
34. Jin, H.H.; Lee, S.Y. Combined effect of aqueous chlorine dioxide and modified atmosphere packaging on inhibiting Salmonella typhimurium and Listeria monocytogenes in mungbean sprouts. J. Food Sci. 2007, 72, M441-M445.
35. Singh, N.; Singh, R.; Bhunia, A.; Stroshine, R. Effect of inoculation and washing methods on the efficacy of different sanitizers against Escherichia coli O157: H7 on lettuce. Food Microbiol. 2002, 19, 183-193.
36. Singh, N.; Singh, R.; Bhunia, A.; Stroshine, R. Efficacy of chlorine dioxide, ozone, and thyme essential oil or a sequential washing in killing Escherichia coli O157: H7 on lettuce and baby carrots. LWT 2002, 35, 720-729.
37. Rodgers, S.L.; Cash, J.N.; Siddiq, M.; Ryser, E.T. A comparison of different chemical sanitizers for inactivating Escherichia coli O157: H7 and Listeria monocytogenes in solution and on apples, lettuce, strawberries, and cantaloupe. J. Food Prot. 2004, 67, 721-731.
38. Han, Y.; Linton, R.; Nielsen, S.; Nelson, P. Reduction of Listeria monocytogenes on green peppers (Capsicum annuum L.) by gaseous and aqueous chlorine dioxide and water washing and its growth at 7 C. J. Food Prot. 2001, 64, 1730-1738.
39. Zhang, S.; Farber, J. The effects of various disinfectants against Listeria monocytogenes on fresh-cut vegetables. Food Microbiol. 1996, 13, 311-321.
40. Park, S.-H.; Kang, D.-H. Influence of surface properties of produce and food contact surfaces on the efficacy of chlorine dioxide gas for the inactivation of foodborne pathogens. Food Control. 2017, 81, 88-95.
41. FDA. Code of Federal Regulations. Available online: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?CFRPart=173 (accessed on 1 September 2020).
42. Wills, R.; McGlasson, B.; Graham, D.; Joyce, D.; Rushing, J.W. Postharvest: An introduction to the physiology and handling of fruit, vegetables and ornamentals. J. Veg. Crop Prod. 1999, 4, 83-84.
43. Chhetri, V.S.; Fontenot, K.; Strahan, R.; Yemmireddy, V.K.; Cason, C.; Kharel, K.; Adhikari, A. Attachment strength and on-farm die-off rate of Escherichia coli on watermelon surfaces. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0210115.
44. Gautam, D.; Dobhal, S.; Payton, M.E.; Fletcher, J.; Ma, L.M. Surface survival and internalization of Salmonella through natural cracks on developing cantaloupe fruits, alone or in the presence of the melon wilt pathogen Erwinia tracheiphila. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e105248.
45. Kim, Y.; Kim, M.; Song, K. Efficacy of aqueous chlorine dioxide and fumaric acid for inactivating pre-existing microorganisms and Escherichia coli O157: H7, Salmonella typhimurium, and Listeria monocytogenes on broccoli sprouts. Food Control. 2009, 20, 1002-1005.
46. Chen, Z.; Zhu, C. Combined effects of aqueous chlorine dioxide and ultrasonic treatments on postharvest storage quality of plum fruit (Prunus salicina L.). Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2011, 61, 117-123.
47. Kim, J.Y.; Kim, H.J.; Lim, G.O.; Jang, S.A.; Song, K.B. The effects of aqueous chlorine dioxide or fumaric acid treatment combined with UV-C on postharvest quality of 'Maehyang'strawberries. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2010, 56, 254-256.
48. Yang, H.; Zheng, J.; Huang, C.; Zhao, X.; Chen, H.; Sun, Z. Effects of combined aqueous chlorine dioxide and chitosan coatings on microbial growth and quality maintenance of fresh-cut bamboo shoots (Phyllostachys praecox f. prevernalis.) during storage. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2015, 8, 1011-1019.
Phillip Luu, Vijay Singh Chhetri, Marlene E. Janes, Joan M. King and Achyut Adhikari*
School of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Louisiana State University Agricultural Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
© 2020. This work is licensed under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Details
; Janes, Marlene E; King, Joan M; Adhikari, Achyut