Translate this page into:
Evaluating the effect of X ray irradiation in the control of food bacterial pathogens
-
Received: ,
Accepted: ,
This article was originally published by Elsevier and was migrated to Scientific Scholar after the change of Publisher.
Peer review under responsibility of King Saud University.
Abstract
Food-born pathogens need to be controlled in food industry. The efficiency of X ray irradiation to eliminate pathogens has been shown but the efficient dose of irradiation has not been standardized. The optimum dose, which controls pathogenic bacteria and does not deteriorate food quality, needs studies on many different foods. The efficiency of different energy levels of X-ray irradiation and the treatment cycles needed to control food bacteria were tested. X ray doses of 0.1, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 kGy/sec for 10 min (3 cycles) were used to solid and liquid foods, which were experimentally inoculated with bacterial pathogens Campylobacter jenjuni, Brucella abortus, Escherichia coli, Bacillus cerus, and Clostridium perfringes. The inoculation resulted high bacterial contamination, the colony forming units (CFU) were too high to be counted. After one cycle of irradiation with the highest dose, more than 100 CFU was counted. The efficient treatment was three cycles of 2.0 kGy irradiation, where no bacterial growth was observed. The dose of 1.5 gGy was almost as efficient. The lowest dose, 0.1 kGy, gave ca 10 CFU after three cycles. The analysis of sugar, fat, protein, and vitamins showed no change due to X ray irradiation indicating no deterioration of food quality. X ray irradiation technique is an efficient technique to control food-born pathogens and prevent food-born illnesses.
Keywords
X ray
Irradiation
Food-born pathogens
Inactivation
Dose
1 Introduction
Food manufacturing environment may support the growth of pathogenic microorganisms that may cause illnesses and even deaths to humans (Todd, 2014). Human complications are caused by both the ingested microbes through contaminated food and the toxins produced by the microbes present in food.
Natural antimicrobials such as the extracts of different microbial metabolites have been shown to inhibit pathogenic bacteria in food (Lozada et al., 2022; Yassin et al., 2022). The microbial treatment, however, is laborious and cannot easily be used to large amounts of food materials. Nanoparticles of different metals such as silver have been used in food packages to ensure food safety (Carbone et al., 2016). However, serious concern about the accumulation of metal nanoparticles in the environment and humans has raised recently (Rzayev et al., 2022; Siddiqui and Alrumman, 2021) Therefore, interest towards the use of physical control measures such as temperature, UV rays, and X rays has increased (Barkai-Golan and Follett, 2017). The physical methods aim to kill or inhibit the growth of undesirable microbes present in the food or in the food processing environment (Lung et al., 2015). The problem using UV-rays and heating above 150 °C is that they may change the chemical structure, odor, and taste of food (Todd, 2020). The recent advanced commercially available technology is X-ray radiation, of which use is increasing.
X-ray was shown to eliminate bacteria such as E. coli from parsley leaves (Mahmoud, 2012a). Dairy products, meat, seafood, berries, and vegetables have successfully been treated with X ray; the amounts of bacteria have decreased to minor amounts (Mahmoud et al., 2016; Moosekian et al., 2012; Ricciardi et al., 2019).More information on different foods and the possible change in taste and nutritional value is still needed, as reviewed recently (Zehi et al., 2020).
For the X ray treatment, the general assumption is that the effectiveness of the treatment depends only on the quantity of energy deposited in the target food (Gomez-Lopez et al., 2022). However, the ISO standard does not include technical requirements for the minimum energy or dose of the treatment. This is problematic because a wide range of different values can be chosen. Too low values chosen for energy and too few irradiation cycles are not efficient in eliminating bacteria from food. Too high values are unnecessary and may cause changes in the nutritional value and taste of food. Doses between 0.1 kGy and 10 kGy have been reported as efficient in reducing bacteria in different foods in a recent review (Zehi et al., 2020). More detailed information on the optimal treatment is needed and more food materials should be tested. In this study, we evaluated the efficiency of different doses of X-ray irradiation and the treatment cycles needed to control food bacteria using ten different food materials, both liquid and solid. We hypothesize that higher dose eliminates more bacteria. An experiment consisting of a wide range of doses with three irradiation cycles with a subsequent bacterial count was carried out. We also studied whether the irradiation causes chemical changes in the food.
2 Materials and methods
2.1 Sample collection
Ten chicken and shawarma foods were collected from Riyadh markets and transported to the laboratory of the Department of physics, IMSIU, Riyadh.
2.2 Isolation and molecular identification of bacteria from food
The food samples were serially diluted, plated over nutrient agar medium (NA medium) and incubated overnight at 37 °C. For the molecular identification of bacteria, pure cultures were prepared into nutrient broths, which were incubated at room temperature in orbital shaker. The bacterial DNA was extracted using the extraction kit HiPer following the manufacturer instructions. Bacterial 16S rRNA was amplified using primers 27F and 1492R (Ameen et al., 2020). The PCR reaction mixture (50 µl) contained 2 µl (50–100 ng) of DNA, 1x reaction buffer (TrisKCl-MgCl2), 2 mM MgCl2, 0.2 mM dNTP, 1 µM of each primer, and Taq polymerase (5U/µl, Fermentas). The PCR temperature cycling conditions were as follows: initial denaturation at 94 °C for 2 min; 30 cycles of denaturation at 94 °C for 1 min, annealing at 55 °C for 2 min, and elongation at 72 °C for 2 min followed by extension at 72 °C for 5 min. The product was sequenced by using Big Dye Terminator Sequencing Reaction mix (Applied Biosystem) then the obtained sequence was further subjected to BLAST analysis. The sequences were submitted to GenBank.
2.3 Inoculation of food pathogens into common foods in Riyadh
The bacterial pathogens isolated and identified from chicken and shawarma foods were further experimentally inoculated to different foods. Freshly cooked foods 100 g of rice, chicken, lamp, yogurt, shawarma, Harees, Gursan, Saleeg, Hiniy and Tarid were purchased from high quality restaurants in Riyadh and transported aseptically to the laboratory. The pathogens were first cultured in TSB containing 10 % (v/v) glycerol for 24 h at 37 °C ± 2 °C. The cultures were centrifuged and diluted with 0.85 % (w/v) saline water to obtain the desired pathogen concentration of approximately 106 CFU/mL. Food samples were inoculated with the pathogens (50 μl) and incubated at room temperature overnight.
2.4 Irradiation of test samples
Inoculated food samples were treated with various energy levels of irradiation (X-ray) performed with Siemens X-ray Machine. Radiation doses of 0.1, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 kGy/sec for 10 min at 22 °C and 55 % relative humidity were targeted to foods 1.5 m distance away from the X-ray source three times each. The growth of bacteria was measured after each exposure. All treatments were done as three replicates.
2.5 The growth of bacteria
After the irradiation treatment, the CFU of the pathogens were measured using selective culture mediums, FM medium (Farrell Medium) for Brucella abortus, skirrows medium (BD Campylobacter Agar) for Campylobacter jejuni, lauryl sulphate aniline blue agar for E. coli, tryptose sulfite cycloserine agar for Clostridium perfrigens and mannitol yolk polymyxin B agar for Bacillus cereus. The food samples were serially diluted, plated and incubated at room temperature overnight. The colonies (CFU) were counted using a colony counter.
2.6 Turbidometric analysis of food sample before and after X ray treatment
Turbidometric analysis of the food samples indicating the amount of pathogens in the given sample were carried out spectrophotometrically at 600 nm (Hatiboruah et al., 2020). For this, the original and incubated food samples were serially diluted and the last dilution 10−9 was taken for the analysis.
2.7 Food components analysis after and before X ray treatment
Analysis of sugar was carried out using the colorimetric Benedict’s method (Hernández-López et al., 2020). Food samples were diluted (10−9 dilution) by mixing food with distilled water. Proteins were measured using Biuret reagent titration method (Dawoud et al., 2021). Fat was measured using sudan III method by adding 3–4 drops of sudan dye to the sample solution (Khouri et al., 1989). Vitamin C was measured using the dye titration method (Tee et al., 1988).
3 Results
Five pathogens namely C. jenjuni, B. abortus, E. coli, B. cerus, and C. perfringes were identified (Table 1). coli
Contaminated food
Species
Accession Number
Chicken
Campylobacter jejuni
ON307225
Brucella abortus
ON306907
Shawarma
ON306906
Bacillus cereus
ON306905
Clostridium perfringes
ON306842
After the first X ray cycle, the bacterial counts were high (TNTC- Too numerous to count) at the lowest doses (0.1–0.5 kGy/h) (Table 2). Higher doses (1 – 2 kGy/h) gave bacterial counts of 250–100 CFU. The second cycle reduced bacterial counts in all foods remarkably, the bacterial counts varying between 20 and 36 CFU in the two lowest doses (Table 3). The highest dose gave 8 – 15 CFU. After the third cycle, no bacteria were observed at the highest dose 2 kGy/h (Table 4). Low counts (0 – 4 CFU) were observed also with 1.5 kGy/h dose. abortus cereus abortus cereus abortus cereus
Foods
Before
X ray irradiation kGy/h
After
C. jejuni
E. coli
C. perfringes
Rice
<250
0.1
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
0.5
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
1
166 ± 1
200 ± 1
203 ± 1
179 ± 1
186 ± 1
1.5
145 ± 2
160 ± 1
158 ± 1
123 ± 2
132 ± 1
2
126 ± 1
120 ± 2
136 ± 1
100 ± 1
105 ± 2
Chicken
<250
0.1
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
0.5
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
1
186 ± 1
210 ± 1
210 ± 1
165 ± 1
190 ± 1
1.5
129 ± 2
159 ± 1
196 ± 1
139 ± 2
145 ± 1
2
106 ± 1
111 ± 2
145 ± 1
100 ± 1
103 ± 2
Lamp
<250
0.1
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
0.5
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
1
170 ± 1
189 ± 1
200 ± 1
185 ± 1
189 ± 1
1.5
115 ± 2
140 ± 1
166 ± 1
129 ± 2
135 ± 1
2
100 ± 1
111 ± 2
115 ± 1
100 ± 1
110 ± 2
Yoguart
<250
0.1
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
0.5
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
1
186 ± 1
235 ± 1
219 ± 1
155 ± 1
160 ± 1
1.5
135 ± 2
186 ± 1
166 ± 1
129 ± 2
125 ± 1
2
106 ± 1
125 ± 2
135 ± 1
110 ± 1
100 ± 2
Shawarma
<250
0.1
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
0.5
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
1
226 ± 1
200 ± 1
210 ± 1
165 ± 1
190 ± 1
1.5
185 ± 2
160 ± 1
196 ± 1
139 ± 2
145 ± 1
2
123 ± 1
120 ± 2
145 ± 1
100 ± 1
103 ± 2
Harees
<250
0.1
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
0.5
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
1
184 ± 1
200 ± 1
210 ± 1
165 ± 1
176 ± 1
1.5
125 ± 2
168 ± 1
165 ± 1
130 ± 2
135 ± 1
2
102 ± 1
100 ± 2
125 ± 1
101 ± 1
101 ± 2
Gursan
<250
0.1
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
0.5
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
1
178 ± 1
223 ± 1
235 ± 1
178 ± 1
186 ± 1
1.5
126 ± 2
189 ± 1
190 ± 1
139 ± 2
158 ± 1
2
106 ± 1
138 ± 2
147 ± 1
102 ± 1
123 ± 2
Saleeg
<250
0.1
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
0.5
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
1
200 ± 1
210 ± 1
200 ± 1
186 ± 1
223 ± 1
1.5
169 ± 2
158 ± 1
168 ± 1
130 ± 2
198 ± 1
2
130 ± 1
118 ± 2
123 ± 1
101 ± 1
132 ± 2
Hiniy
<250
0.1
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
0.5
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
1
223 ± 1
223 ± 1
256 ± 1
220 ± 1
220 ± 1
1.5
169 ± 2
190 ± 1
189 ± 1
169 ± 2
186 ± 1
2
120 ± 1
135 ± 2
120 ± 1
123 ± 1
139 ± 2
Tarid
<250
0.1
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
0.5
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
TNTC
1
189 ± 1
223 ± 1
232 ± 1
170 ± 1
220 ± 1
1.5
140 ± 2
185 ± 1
169 ± 1
120 ± 2
159 ± 1
2
116 ± 1
126 ± 2
123 ± 1
100 ± 1
110 ± 2
Foods
X ray irradiation kGy/h
After two treatments
C. jejuni
E. coli
C.perfringes
Rice
0.1
29 ± 2
32 ± 2
31 ± 1
26 ± 2
25 ± 2
0.5
20 ± 1
25 ± 1
28 ± 1
22 ± 1
20 ± 1
1
16 ± 1
20 ± 1
23 ± 1
17 ± 1
18 ± 1
1.5
14 ± 2
10 ± 1
15 ± 1
12 ± 2
13 ± 1
2
12 ± 1
12 ± 2
13 ± 1
10 ± 1
10 ± 2
Chicken
0.1
30 ± 1
35 ± 1
32 ± 1
23 ± 1
35 ± 1
0.5
25 ± 1
26 ± 1
26 ± 1
20 ± 1
26 ± 1
1
18 ± 1
21 ± 1
20 ± 1
15 ± 1
19 ± 1
1.5
12 ± 2
15 ± 1
19 ± 1
13 ± 2
14 ± 1
2
10 ± 1
11 ± 2
14 ± 1
10 ± 1
10 ± 2
Lamp
0.1
32 ± 2
28 ± 2
30 ± 1
29 ± 2
28 ± 2
0.5
20 ± 1
26 ± 1
25 ± 1
22 ± 1
20 ± 1
1
17 ± 1
18 ± 1
20 ± 1
18 ± 1
19 ± 1
1.5
13 ± 2
10 ± 1
16 ± 1
19 ± 2
13 ± 1
2
8 ± 1
11 ± 2
15 ± 1
10 ± 1
11 ± 2
Yoguart
0.1
31 ± 1
30 ± 1
36 ± 1
26 ± 1
25 ± 1
0.5
25 ± 1
26 ± 1
28 ± 1
20 ± 1
21 ± 1
1
18 ± 1
23 ± 1
21 ± 1
15 ± 1
16 ± 1
1.5
13 ± 2
16 ± 1
16 ± 1
12 ± 2
12 ± 1
2
6 ± 1
15 ± 2
13 ± 1
10 ± 1
8 ± 2
Shawarma
0.1
31 ± 1
34 ± 1
31 ± 1
30 ± 1
33 ± 1
0.5
26 ± 1
26 ± 1
25 ± 1
23 ± 1
26 ± 1
1
22 ± 1
20 ± 1
21 ± 1
16 ± 1
19 ± 1
1.5
18 ± 2
16 ± 1
19 ± 1
13 ± 2
14 ± 1
2
13 ± 1
12 ± 2
14 ± 1
10 ± 1
10 ± 2
Harees
0.1
26 ± 2
30 ± 2
32 ± 1
25 ± 2
24 ± 2
0.5
21 ± 1
28 ± 1
26 ± 1
20 ± 1
20 ± 1
1
18 ± 1
20 ± 1
21 ± 1
16 ± 1
17 ± 1
1.5
12 ± 2
16 ± 1
16 ± 1
13 ± 2
13 ± 1
2
8 ± 1
10 ± 2
12 ± 1
10 ± 1
10 ± 2
Gursan
0.1
27 ± 2
31 ± 2
30 ± 1
25 ± 2
26 ± 2
0.5
22 ± 1
26 ± 1
26 ± 1
20 ± 1
22 ± 1
1
17 ± 1
22 ± 1
23 ± 1
17 ± 1
18 ± 1
1.5
12 ± 2
18 ± 1
19 ± 1
13 ± 2
15 ± 1
2
10 ± 1
13 ± 2
14 ± 1
10 ± 1
12 ± 2
Saleeg
0.1
28 ± 2
30 ± 2
29 ± 1
26 ± 2
29 ± 2
0.5
25 ± 1
26 ± 1
25 ± 1
22 ± 1
26 ± 1
1
20 ± 1
21 ± 1
20 ± 1
18 ± 1
23 ± 1
1.5
16 ± 2
15 ± 1
16 ± 1
13 ± 2
19 ± 1
2
13 ± 1
11 ± 2
12 ± 1
10 ± 1
12 ± 2
Hiniy
0.1
29 ± 2
30 ± 2
38 ± 1
30 ± 2
33 ± 2
0.5
26 ± 1
28 ± 1
32 ± 1
26 ± 1
29 ± 1
1
22 ± 1
22 ± 1
25 ± 1
22 ± 1
22 ± 1
1.5
16 ± 2
19 ± 1
18 ± 1
16 ± 2
18 ± 1
2
12 ± 1
15 ± 2
12 ± 1
12 ± 1
13 ± 2
Tarid
0.1
29 ± 2
30 ± 2
31 ± 1
31 ± 2
30 ± 2
0.5
22 ± 1
28 ± 1
28 ± 1
28 ± 1
26 ± 1
1
18 ± 1
22 ± 1
23 ± 1
17 ± 1
22 ± 1
1.5
14 ± 2
18 ± 1
16 ± 1
12 ± 2
15 ± 1
2
11 ± 1
12 ± 2
12 ± 1
10 ± 1
11 ± 2
Foods
X ray irradiation kGy/h
After three treatments
C. jejuni
E. coli
C. perfringes
Rice
0.1
9 ± 2
8 ± 2
10 ± 1
10 ± 2
10 ± 2
0.5
5 ± 1
6 ± 1
7 ± 1
8 ± 1
8 ± 1
1
3 ± 1
3 ± 1
4 ± 1
6 ± 1
4 ± 1
1.5
0 ± 2
1 ± 1
2 ± 1
3 ± 2
1 ± 1
2
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
0 ± 1
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
Chicken
0.1
8 ± 1
7 ± 1
9 ± 1
10 ± 1
8 ± 1
0.5
6 ± 1
4 ± 1
7 ± 1
8 ± 1
6 ± 1
1
3 ± 1
2 ± 1
4 ± 1
5 ± 1
9 ± 1
1.5
1 ± 2
0 ± 1
1 ± 1
3 ± 2
4 ± 1
2
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
0 ± 1
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
Lamp
0.1
7 ± 2
10 ± 2
10 ± 1
10 ± 2
10 ± 2
0.5
5 ± 1
8 ± 1
6 ± 1
8 ± 1
7 ± 1
1
3 ± 1
6 ± 1
2 ± 1
3 ± 1
5 ± 1
1.5
0 ± 2
3 ± 1
0 ± 1
1 ± 2
3 ± 1
2
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
0 ± 1
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
Yoghurt
0.1
5 ± 1
10 ± 1
10 ± 1
9 ± 1
10 ± 1
0.5
2 ± 1
6 ± 1
8 ± 1
6 ± 1
8 ± 1
1
0 ± 1
3 ± 1
3 ± 1
4 ± 1
6 ± 1
1.5
0 ± 2
1 ± 1
1 ± 1
2 ± 2
2 ± 1
2
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
0 ± 1
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
Shawarma
0.1
10 ± 1
8 ± 1
9 ± 1
10 ± 1
10 ± 1
0.5
6 ± 1
6 ± 1
7 ± 1
8 ± 1
7 ± 1
1
3 ± 1
2 ± 1
4 ± 1
5 ± 1
3 ± 1
1.5
1 ± 2
1 ± 1
2 ± 1
2 ± 2
1 ± 1
2
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
0 ± 1
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
Harees
0.1
7 ± 2
10 ± 2
8 ± 1
10 ± 2
8 ± 2
0.5
5 ± 1
8 ± 1
6 ± 1
8 ± 1
5 ± 1
1
3 ± 1
5 ± 1
2 ± 1
6 ± 1
3 ± 1
1.5
1 ± 2
2 ± 1
0 ± 1
3 ± 2
1 ± 1
2
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
0 ± 1
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
Gursan
0.1
6 ± 2
10 ± 2
10 ± 1
7 ± 2
6 ± 2
0.5
4 ± 1
8 ± 1
6 ± 1
4 ± 1
2 ± 1
1
2 ± 1
5 ± 1
3 ± 1
2 ± 1
0 ± 1
1.5
0 ± 2
2 ± 1
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
0 ± 1
2
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
0 ± 1
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
Saleeg
0.1
8 ± 2
10 ± 2
9 ± 1
9 ± 2
9 ± 2
0.5
5 ± 1
6 ± 1
5 ± 1
7 ± 1
6 ± 1
1
3 ± 1
2 ± 1
0 ± 1
5 ± 1
3 ± 1
1.5
1 ± 2
0 ± 1
0 ± 1
2 ± 2
1 ± 1
2
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
0 ± 1
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
Hiniy
0.1
6 ± 2
10 ± 2
6 ± 1
10 ± 2
10 ± 2
0.5
3 ± 1
5 ± 1
2 ± 1
6 ± 1
7 ± 1
1
2 ± 1
2 ± 1
0 ± 1
2 ± 1
4 ± 1
1.5
0 ± 2
0 ± 1
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
1 ± 1
2
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
0 ± 1
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
Tarid
0.1
9 ± 2
10 ± 2
8 ± 1
9 ± 2
10 ± 2
0.5
7 ± 1
8 ± 1
6 ± 1
7 ± 1
6 ± 1
1
5 ± 1
4 ± 1
3 ± 1
5 ± 1
2 ± 1
1.5
2 ± 2
1 ± 1
1 ± 1
2 ± 2
0 ± 1
2
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
0 ± 1
0 ± 1
0 ± 2
The turbidometric analysis of the foods before the treatment gave absorbance values between 1.85 and 8.6 (Table 5). After the treatment (2 kGy/sec) the values varied between 0.01 and 0.3 showing a drastic decrease. No changes were observed for the amounts of sugar, fat, proteins, and vitamin C due to the X ray irradiation (Table 6).
Foods
Absorbance (Before treatment) 600 nm
Absorbance (After treatment)
C. jejuni
B. abortus
E. coli
B. cereus
C.perfringes
C. jejuni
B. abortus
E. coli
B. cereus
C. perfringes
Rice
3.25 ± 1
4.65 ± 1
3.6 ± 1
4.6 ± 1
5.2 ± 1
0.017 ± 1
0.011 ± 1
0.02 ± 1
0.019 ± 1
0.02 ± 1
Chicken
5.6 ± 1
6.0 ± 1
6.2 ± 1
5.8 ± 1
5.9 ± 1
0.010 ± 1
0.026 ± 1
0.02 ± 1
0.013 ± 1
0.009 ± 1
Lamp
2.8 ± 1
3.5 ± 1
3.8 ± 1
4.1 ± 1
3.2 ± 1
0.012 ± 1
0.023 ± 1
0.027 ± 1
0.032 ± 1
0.031 ± 1
Yoghurt
3.2 ± 1
2.6 ± 1
2.9 ± 1
3.3 ± 1
3.9 ± 1
0.018 ± 1
0.023 ± 1
0.028 ± 1
0.032 ± 1
0.030 ± 1
Shawarma
7.23 ± 1
8.1 ± 1
8.2 ± 1
7.3 ± 1
8.6 ± 1
0.023 ± 1
0.019 ± 1
0.018 ± 1
0.022 ± 1
0.02 ± 1
Harees
5.2 ± 1
2.2 ± 1
2.5 ± 1
2.9 ± 1
3.2 ± 1
0.018 ± 1
0.026 ± 1
0.031 ± 1
0.03 ± 1
0.038 ± 1
Gursan
2.65 ± 1
3.9 ± 1
3.2 ± 1
3.6 ± 1
4.2 ± 1
0.010 ± 1
0.02 ± 1
0.025 ± 1
0.026 ± 1
0.028 ± 1
Saleeg
1.85 ± 1
2.5 ± 1
2.3 ± 1
3.1 ± 1
3.5 ± 1
0.011 ± 1
0.025 ± 1
0.019 ± 1
0.018 ± 1
0.013 ± 1
Hiniy
3.2 ± 1
2.6 ± 1
2.8 ± 1
2.5 ± 1
2.9 ± 1
0.008 ± 1
0.012 ± 1
0.014 ± 1
0.016 ± 1
0.018 ± 1
Tarid
4.0 ± 1
3.5 ± 1
2.5 ± 1
5.2 ± 1
3.6 ± 1
0.01 ± 1
0.05 ± 1
0.02 ± 1
0.03 ± 1
0.02 ± 1
Foods
Sugar
Fat
Protein
Vitamin C
Before
After
Before
After
Before
After
Before
After
Rice
Orange
Orange
Red ring
Red ring
Darker light blue
Darker light blue
Nil
Nil
Chicken
Nil
Nil
Red ring
Red ring
Purple
Purple
Nil
Nil
Lamp
Nil
Nil
Red ring
Red ring
Purple
Purple
Clear
Clear
Yoghurt
Nil
Nil
Red ring
Red ring
Lavender
Lavender
Clear
Clear
Shawarma
Green
Green
Red ring
Red ring
Purple
Purple
Clear
Clear
Harees
Nil
Nil
Red ring
Red ring
Purple
Purple
Clear
Clear
Gursan
Nil
Nil
Red ring
Red ring
Light blue
Light blue
Nil
Nil
Saleeg
Nil
Nil
Red ring
Red ring
Light blue
Light blue
Nil
Nil
Hiniy
Nil
Nil
Red ring
Red ring
Light blue
Light blue
Nil
Nil
Tarid
Nil
Nil
Red ring
Red ring
Light blue
Light blue
Nil
Nil
4 Discussion
X-ray technology has been shown efficient in reducing bacterial pathogens in foods as reviewed recently (Zehi et al., 2020). However, the technique needs the clarification of the doses used. Both low and high doses have been used. While a low dose of 0.75 kGy decreased bacterial counts to almost zero in ready-to-eat shrimp (Mahmoud, 2009), a relatively high dose of 3 kGy was needed to eliminate bacteria in raw chicken meat (Song et al., 2018).
This study was conducted in three parts, in first part the food samples were treated with X ray in five different doses (0.1, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 kGy/sec for 10 min). Here, 40–45 % of reduction observed in last dose (2.0 kGy/sec). In the second treatment there was a slight variation occurred between the last dose of 1st treatment and 1st dose of 2nd treatment. Similarly, last dose of 2nd treatment and 1st dose of 3rd treatment also have 30–35 % of variation. It is because of the influence of X ray on the growth and multiplication of the pathogens (Nohemi et al., 2022). Besides, there is no variation in components and taste of the checked food materials. Inactivation of pathogens isolated from spinach leaves by the application of X ray dose 0.1–2 kGy with no changes in colour or texture, in other hand this irradiation effectively control the pathogenic microbiota while preservation of food (Mahmoud et al., 2010).
Radiation processing of food one of the most valuable methods for the preservation and disinfection of food (Lima et al., 2018; Mahmoud, 2012a; Mahmoud et al., 2016).Irradiation of 2 kGy reduced natural bacteria in chicken meat, shrimps and strawberries (Van Calenberg et al., 1999). Similarly, Salmonella enterica was reduced in chicken meat to acceptable levels (Mahmoud et al., 2015). E.coli was reduced in meat with 0.3 to 0.8 kGy (Cho and Ha, 2019; Curry et al., 2000; Kundu, 2013). (Zehi et al., 2020) reported that by the application of X ray doses between 1 and 5 kGy decreased the bacterial growth in Atlantic oysters (Crassostrea virginica, without causing any changes in colour. Moreover, the count of pathogenic bacteria such as E. coli, Salmonella and Listeria were decreased by the application of X ray dose 0.6 kGy (Mahmoud, 2012b). (Tallentire and Miller, 2015) explained that X rays have high penetration power which have the ability to kill bacteria by damaging its DNA. No human health effects have been shown so far (Zehi et al., 2020). Our study showed that the efficient X ray dose was 1.5 and 2 kGy when the dose was given three times, ten min per cycle. We can report two remarkable observations. The first is that a very high amounts of bacteria, too high to be counted, was reduced to uncountable amounts with this treatment. The second is that the efficiency was shown with ten different foods including solid and liquid materials.
5 Conclusion
The results obtained from the study revealed that the X ray dose 1.5 kGy and 2 kGy have effective power for the inactivation of food pathogens in various solid and liquid foods. The treatment was efficient for ten types of liquid and solid foods opening up an immense possibility for the control of bacteria causing severe infection to humans.
Acknowledgement
The authors extend their appreciation to the Deputyship for research & innovation, Ministry of Education in Saudi Arabia for funding this research work through project number IFP-IMSIU202220.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The author declare that she has no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
- Soil bacteria Cupriavidus sp. mediates the extracellular synthesis of antibacterial silver nanoparticles. J. Mol. Struct.. 2020;1202 127233
- [Google Scholar]
- Irradiation for quality improvement, microbial safety and phytosanitation of fresh produce. Academic Press; 2017.
- Silver nanoparticles in polymeric matrices for fresh food packaging. J. King Saud Univ.. 2016;28:273-279.
- [Google Scholar]
- Application of X-ray for inactivation of foodborne pathogens in ready-to-eat sliced ham and mechanism of the bactericidal action. Food Control. 2019;96:343-350.
- [Google Scholar]
- The effect of high-dose-rate X-rays on E. coli 0157: H7 in ground beef. IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci.. 2000;28:122-127.
- [Google Scholar]
- Purification, Characterization and N-terminal Protein Sequencing of the Enzyme Dextransucrase Produced by Leuconostoc mesenteroides. Biosci. Biotechnol. Res. Asia. 2021;18:287.
- [Google Scholar]
- Guidelines on reporting treatment conditions for emerging technologies in food processing. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr.. 2022;62:5925-5949.
- [Google Scholar]
- Turbidimetric analysis of growth kinetics of bacteria in the laboratory environment using smartphone. J. Biophotonics. 2020;13:e201960159.
- [Google Scholar]
- Quantification of reducing sugars based on the qualitative technique of Benedict. ACS Omega. 2020;5:32403-32410.
- [Google Scholar]
- Sudan stain of fecal fat; new insight into an old test. Gastroenterology. 1989;96:421-427.
- [Google Scholar]
- Effect of low-dose X-ray and E-beam irradiation on Escherichia coli O157: H7, non-O157 (VTEC) Escherichia coli and Salmonella viability on meat surfaces and sensory quality of meat. University of Manitoba (Canada); 2013.
- Effects of radiation technologies on food nutritional quality. Descr. Food Sci.. 2018;1:17.
- [Google Scholar]
- Biological control for basal rot in yellow pitahaya fruits (Selenicereus megalanthus): Ex vivo trials. J. King Saud Univ.. 2022;34:102042
- [Google Scholar]
- Microbial decontamination of food by electron beam irradiation. Trends Food Sci. Technol.. 2015;44:66-78.
- [Google Scholar]
- Effect of X-ray treatments on inoculated Escherichia coli O157: H7, Salmonella enterica, Shigella flexneri and Vibrio parahaemolyticus in ready-to-eat shrimp. Food Microbiol.. 2009;26:860-864.
- [Google Scholar]
- Effects of X-ray treatments on pathogenic bacteria, inherent microflora, color, and firmness on whole cantaloupe. Int. J. Food Microbiol.. 2012;156:296-300.
- [Google Scholar]
- Effect of x-ray treatments on pathogenic bacteria, inherent microbiota, color, and texture on parsley leaves. Foodborne Pathog. Dis.. 2012;9:922-927.
- [Google Scholar]
- Effect of X-ray treatments on Salmonella enterica and spoilage bacteria on skin-on chicken breast fillets and shell eggs. Food Control. 2015;57:110-114.
- [Google Scholar]
- Improving the safety and quality of raw tuna fillets by X-ray irradiation. Food Control. 2016;60:569-574.
- [Google Scholar]
- X-ray irradiation as a microbial intervention strategy for food. Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol.. 2012;3:493-510.
- [Google Scholar]
- X-ray irradiation as a valid technique to prolong food shelf life: The case of ricotta cheese. Int. Dairy J.. 2019;99:104547
- [Google Scholar]
- Microscopic characterization of bioaccumulated aluminium nanoparticles in simplified food chain of aquatic ecosystem. J. King Saud Univ.. 2022;34:101666
- [Google Scholar]
- Influence of nanoparticles on food: An analytical assessment. J. King Saud Univ.. 2021;33:101530
- [Google Scholar]
- Toxicological and radiological safety of chicken meat irradiated with 7.5 MeV X-rays. Radiat. Phys. Chem.. 2018;144:211-217.
- [Google Scholar]
- Microbicidal effectiveness of X-rays used for sterilization purposes. Radiat. Phys. Chem.. 2015;107:128-130.
- [Google Scholar]
- Determination of vitamin C in fresh fruits and vegetables using the dye-titration and microfluorometric methods. Pertanika. 1988;11:39-44.
- [Google Scholar]
- Foodborne diseases: Overview of biological hazards and foodborne diseases. Food Saf: Encycl; 2014. p. :221.
- Food-borne disease prevention and risk assessment. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2020
- [Google Scholar]
- Comparison of the effect of X-ray and electron beam irradiation on the microbiological quality of foodstuffs. LWT-Food Sci. Technol.. 1999;32:372-376.
- [Google Scholar]
- In vitro antimicrobial potency of Elettaria cardamomum ethanolic extract against multidrug resistant of food poisoning bacterial strains. J. King Saud Univ.. 2022;34:102167
- [Google Scholar]
- The effects of X-ray irradiation on safety and nutritional value of food: A systematic review article. Curr. Pharm. Biotechnol.. 2020;21:919-926.
- [Google Scholar]