Note: Descriptions are shown in the official language in which they were submitted.
2 ~
~ his invention relates to an effective and safe
liquid bactericide for foods and food processing machines
or ut~nsils~ saia bactericide comprising a combinatlon of
(1) ethyl alcohol and (2) an organic acid or its salt
and/or an inorganic acid or its salt9 and a method for
killing noxious bacteria which adhere to foods and ~ood
processing machines or utensils to cause ~ood poisoning
or spoilage.
Nowadays, a variety of foods are processed in
great quantities at fixed places and transported from
there to places of consumption. Accordingly, a long
period of time elapses during transportation of the pro-
cessed foods from the manufacturers to the consumers9 and
also until the consumers cook or eat them~ During this
time, various problems tend to arise. ~he greatest
problem is the oecurrence of food poisoning and spoilage
owing to infecting microorganisms, and a great deal of
efforts have been made to prevent it.
Food poisoning and spoilage are caused~mainl~
b~ bacterial infection of raw materials, and bacterial
infection during processing and di~tribution. In this
regard, it is generally thought that seafood pastes, and
hams and sausages have a high de~ree of safety because
they undergo heat-treatment during processing. These
foods, however, OEe susceptible to secondary contamination
during a time period between the heat-treatment and packag
ing. In order to prevent food poisoning and spoilage of
these foods, it is necessary to prevent secondary con-
, "
i ' ' ~ .
,. ,
-- 3 --taminatio~
Salads9 Chinese ~oods9 hambergs9 meat balls, etc
are among those processed ~oods which have recently shown
a great demand in the Japanese market9 and the demand for
5 ~alads containing raw vegetables ls especially high. It
i9 known howover that raw vegetables used for salads, such
as cucumber, tomato, cabbage~ Chi~ese cabbageg onion and
celery, are frequently contamina ted strongly by ~ood-
poisoning bacteria and spoiling bacteriaO Pre~erltly9 the
noxious bacteria infecting vegetables is controlled by the
blanching methodO ~his method, however, ha~ the defect
that becauss it involves immersing the vegetables in a
liguid kept at a high temperature, the tissues of the
vegetables will be destroyed by heat~ and their flavor
decreases markedly~ Investigations have beerl undertaken,
on the other hand~ to remove the contaminating bacteria
by an immersion or spraying technique using sodium hypo~
chlorite, acetic acid, etc~ However~ since -the chemicals
must be used in high concerltrations1 they are likely to
20~ cause o~fen~ive odors, an~ adversely a~fect the flavor of
foods and the health of the consumers.
Contamination of the human body (a.g~, worklng
porsonnel and cooks in food processing factories), sea-
~ foods, chickens (especially boilers)~ and chicken eggs by
~ood-poisoning bacteria also pose~ a problem. Fox removal
of these bacteria, lt is -the ~eneral practice to treat
them with an aqueous solution of sodium hypochlorite in a
concentration of le~s than 200 ppm (as available Cl)~ but
the effec-t of this treatment is not sufficientO If`-the
sodium hypochlorite is used in a concentration of 200 ppm
or more, its odor remains in the chicken flesh, for ex
amp]e, and its flavor is drastically impaired
Xydrogen pexoxide has high bactericidal activity
with little deleterious effects on foods when used in
effective concentrations. However, since its carcinoge-
nicity was discovered7 it cannot be used in food treatment~
It is well known on the othex hand that ethyl alcohol has
been used widely as a medical disinfectant because of its
high safety and strong antimicrobial activity. In some
food processing plants, investigations are being made to
utilize the bactericidal activity of ethyl alcohol, and to
kill food-poisoning and spoiling bacteria of foods and
increase their preserving effect by directly spraying
ethyl alcohol to the foods or direckly dipping them in
ethyl alcohol.
In order to obtain a sufficient effect from
ethyl alcohol alone~ the concentration o~ ethyl alcohol
should be at least 70%. Such a high ethyl alcohol con-
centration resvlt~ in a strong smell of ethyl alcohol and
markedly impairs of the flavor of foods. Or it degenerates
proteins to reduce the quality of foods and their dis-
coloration~ Inorganic acids ~uch a~ phosphoric acid have
~ strong~st9rilizing effect, but for a sufficient effect,
they have to be used i~ a concentration of more than 3~0.
At effectiv~ concentrations, the irritation and sour taste
inherent to phosphoric acid remain in foods to reduce the
.~
-- 5 --
palatabillty of the foods~ Organic acids such as lactic
acid or acetic acid also exhibit a sterilizilng effect in
high conce~trations. In t-his case 9 too, their inherent
irritating odors and sour tastes greatly impair the flavor
of foods. The high-Goncentration ethyl alcohols inorganic
acids and organic acids are unsuitable as bactericides for
foods processing machines because they also adversely
affect the working environment by their inherent irri-tat-
ing odors.
In t~e circumstances, therefore~ no effective
means has been established yet for -the remo!val and kiling
of noxious microorganisms adhering to foods, food process-
ing machines or utensils etc., despite its utmost impor~
tance in food sanitation and food processing~
It is an object of this invention therefore to
provide a bactericide for foods and food processing
machines or utensils, which does not deteriorate the
flavor, and quality of foods nor destroy the food proce~
sing environment, and has very low toxicity and high
safety.
~ he present inventors have now found that an
excellent synergistic bactericidal ePfect can be obtained
by using a mixture of ethyl alcohol and at least one oP
organic acids, inorganic acids and salts of these~ and
contaminating kacteria can be killed at much lower con-
centrations ~han in the case of using the compo~ents of
the mixture individually.
~ hus, according to this invention, there is
provided a liquid bactericide for foods and food processing machines or uten-
sils, said bactericide comprising as active ingredien-ts 99.9 to 2~0Po (W/V) of
ethyl alcohol, and 0.1 to 98.0% (W/V) of an organic acid selected from the group
consis-ting of lactic acid, acetic acid, -tartaric acid, gluconic acid, citric
acid, ascorbic acid, malic acid, succinic acid, fumaric acid and phytic acid or
its acidic salt and/or 0.1 to 98.0% (W/V) of an inorganic acid selected from
the group consisting of phosphoric acid, condensed phosphoric acids, (e.g.,
acidic pyrophosphoric acid, hexametaphosphorlc acid, ultraphosphoric acid, etc.),
hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid and nitric acid or acidic salts thereof.
According to another aspect the invention provides a method for
sterili~ing a food or a food processing machine or utensil, which comprises
dissolving a liquid bactericide comprising 98.0 to 2.3% (W/V) of ethyl alcohol
and 1.0 to 96.7% (W/V) of an organic acid selected from the group consisting
of lactic acid, acetic acid, tartaric acid, gluconic acid, citric acid,
ascorbic acid, malic acid, succinic acid, Eumaric acid and phytic acid or its
acidic salt and/or 1.0 to 96.7% (W/V) of an inorganic acid selected from the
group consisting of phosphoric acid, condensed phosphoric acids, hydrochloric
acid, sulfuric acid and ni-tric acid or acidic salts thereof as active ingred-
ients in water and contacting the resulting aqueous solution with the food or
the food processing machine or untensil.
In addition to the active ingredien-ts, the bactericide of the inven-
tion may contain small amounts of water and a polyhydric alcohol such as
propylene glycol and glycerol. When the acid or its salt is no-t easily soluble
in ethyl alcohol, the addition of a small amount of water is preferred in order
to obtain a uniform liquid bactericide.
The bactericide of this invention is usually used as a solution in
water. Despite the fact that the bactericide of the invention contains -the
active
~ 7
ingredients in very low concentra-tions~ it sh.ows better
bactericidal effects than ths indivi.dual ingredients used
separately~ ~his synergistic effect can be seen from
~xperimental Examples and Examples given hereinb~low~ For
example, the concentra-t.ions of ethyl alcohol and the acid
or its salt required for performing sterilizatiol.l within
30 seconds using an aqueous solution can be decreased to
0.5 to 350/O (w/v)~ and 0.005 to 20% (W/V)q respec-tively~
'~he pH of the aqueous solution of -the bactericide
of the invention is preferably not more than 4OOo
When the bactericide of -the invention consists
of ethyl alcohol and at least one organic acid or salt~ it
preferably contains 99O4 to 20% (W/V) of ethyl alcohol and
0.6 to 80% (W/V) of the organic acid or its salt. Usually~
this bactericide is used in the form of an aqueous solution
in which the concentration of ethyl alcohol is ~5 to 5/09
preferably 10 to 5/0, (w/v) and the concentration of the
organic acid or its salt is 20 -to 0O 50/09 preferably 10 to
1% ( W/V) .
When the bactericidal agent of this invention
consists of ethyl alcohol and at least one inorganic ac.id
or salt, it preferably contains 99O9 to 20% (W/V) of ethyl
alcohol and 0.1 to 80% (W/V) of the lnorganic acid or its
salt~ Usually, this bactericide is used in the form of an
25 aqueous solution in which the concentration of ethyl alcohol
is 35 to 5/0, prefexably 10 to 50/O (w/V) and tha concentra~
tion of the inorganic acid or its salt is 0O005 -to 20%
preferably 0.005 to 10%9 (W/V).
-- 8 --
When the bactericide of the invention consists
of ethyl alcohol, at least one organic acid or salt and at
least one inorganic acid or salt, the bactericide prefer-
ably contaings 980 ~k to 2, ~/0 ( w/v), 9607 to l~/o ~W/V) of
the organic acid or its salt, and 96.7 to 1.0% (W~V) of theinorganic acid or its saltO Usually, this bactericide is
used in the form of an aqueous solution in which the con-
centration of ethyl alcQhol is 18.6 to 1%, preferably 14
59 1%~ (w/v) ~ the concentration of the organic acid or its
salt is 31 to 0.3/~, preferably 13.0 to 0.~/0, ~W/V), and
the concentration of the inorganic acid or its salt is 10
to 0.03/0, preferably 0.7 to 0.03%, (W/V).
~ he proportions and the effective concentrations
of these components in these bactericides mentioned above
are only examples which can ef`fect sterilizatîon within 30
seconds. ~hey can be properly changed depending upon the
t~pe of foods to be sterilized, the contact time, the
contacting method, etc.
For sterilization, an aqueous solution of the
bactericide of the invention is contacted with a food or
food processing machine or utensil.
Examples of foods which can be sterilized suit-
ably by the method of this invention include seafood and
meat products (such as fish pastes, sausage, ham, and
bacon), vegetables, especially those eaten raw (such as
cucumber, tomato, cabbage, onion, lettuce and celery).
various types of noodles, spaghetti, macaroni, seafoods,
meat, chicken9 chicken eggs, and semi-dried or dried
~ 9 ~
products of seafoods and meat-s.
Examples of the food processing machines and
utensils include cooking plates, cooking knives1 food
cotainers, cleaning cloths~ and varlous devices used in
food processing plan-ts such as agitators. mixers~
homogenizers, automa-tic cut-ters~ conveying containers and
packing containérs.
Contacting of foods or food processing machi.nes
and utensils with the bactericide can be ef~ected, for
example, by dipping~ spraying wiping, etcO
Since the bactericide o~ the invention has high
bactericidal activity at low concen-trations, sterilization
can generally be achieved by effec~ing the contacting for less
than 30 secondsO Longer contacting doss not appreciably
reduce the flavor and quality of foods, nor give rise any
safety probl~m. Noxious bacteria adhering to the working
personnel and cooks can be killed when they dip their
hands in an aqueous solution of the bactericide of the
invention, or wipe their hands with an absorben-t cotton or
gauze impregnatled wi-th the bacteri.cide solu-tion.
~he use of the bacteric~d~ of the invention i~
this manner prevents food poisoning and increases the
preservability of processed foods by inhibiting their
spoilage for a prolonged period of time
25. ~he following ~perimental Æxamples and Examples
illustrate the present invention more specifically~
In Experimental Examples 1 to 37 ef~ective
combinations of bactericidal compo~ents were determined
~3
~ 10 --
in vitro using EscheIich_a coli (NIHJ~JC~2) which is a
food-poisonin~ hacterium regarded as the most impor-tan-t
contamination-indicating bacterium in food sarlitation~
In ~xamples 1 to 79 bactericidal compositions
prepared on the basis of the re~ults of Experimental
Examples 1 to 3 were used f`or foods ancl food materials to
determine their bactericidal and bacteria~removing effects.
All percentages in these examples are by (W/V)/OO
~a~
(A3 ~he following experiment was conducted in order
to examine the ~actericidal effect of a mixture of ethyl
alcohol and an inorganic acid substance~
Escherichia coli (NIEIJ JC-2) was inoculated in a
brain heart infusion broth (BFII~ and cul-tivated at 37C
for 24 hours. ~he culture broth was dilu-ted to 1/10 with
sterilized physiological saline. ~he resulting
coli suspension was used as a sample. Phosphoric acid~
acidic sodium pyrophosphate, sodium hexametaphosphate9
sodium ultraphosphate and ni-tric acid were used as in-
organic acid substances~
One millili-ter of the sample bacterial sus
pension was added to 9 ml of a test chemical solution
prepared by adding physiological salin.e to ethyl alcohol
and each of the inorganic acid substances so that the
concentration of these compounds reached 10/9 of the con-
centrations indicated in ~able 1. ~hey were immedia~el~
mixed, and maintained at 20C. After a con-tact time of
30 seconds, ons platinumloopful of the mixture was
,
-- 1.1 ~
inoculated in a fresh BHI broth~ and cul-tiva-ted at ~7C
for 48 hours. Growth of -the bacterium in the culture
broth was observed wi-th the naked eyes~ '~hen no grow-th
of the bacteri~n was noted~ the result was evaluated as
(-) which means that complete sterillzatlon was possible,
and when growth of the bacterium was no-ted, the result
was evaluated as ~-~) which means that sterilization was
impossible The concentra-tions o~ the chemicals whlch
were required for complete sterilization were measured~
~he results are shown in ~able l~
~B) ~he bactericidal effect of a combination o~
ethyl alcohol and an organic acid was examined in the same
way as in (A) above. ~he organic acids tested were lac-tic
acid, acetic acid, citric acid~ tartalic acid, ~luconic
acid, malic acid9 ascorbic acid and phytic acidO ~he
results obtained with a contact time of 30 seconds are
shown in ~able 2~
-12 ~
Table 1
__ .
_ ~
concentration (/0) Concentration o:~ ethyl alcohol (%)
of the
inorganic acid 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
.. _ _ .. _ ~ .
. 20 _ _ _ ~ _ _ +
.10 _ _ _ _ . ,.... , +
acid 5
3 _ _ _ _ ~ + r + +
1 ~ t ~ t +
0O5 _ _ -~ + -~ -r t -t +
O _ r + -~ + -t i + -~
_ . . . _ ~___ __
o~5 _ ~ + .~ +
Sodium0.3 _ _ ~ _ + + + +
ultra-
phosphate 0.1 ~ r + ~ + +
0.05 ~ + -~ + -t -~ t
O _ + + + -t + + + +
_ -- . __~ ___ ~.~
0.5 _ _ _ + + + + +
Acidic 0O3 ~ + + ~ + +
sodium
p~ro- 0.1 _ _ + t r -~ 1 + ~~
phosphate
0.05 _ + -t -~ t + + -t +
~ O _ + + -t~ ~ + + + -t
- to be continued -
- 13 -
~able 1 - (continued )
.. _ . . ............ .
concentration (/0) Concentration of ethyl alcohol (/c)
of the
inorganic acid 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
- . _ __ ,.. . . _ .. _
O~ 5 _ _ _ + + r ~ + +
Sodium 0.3 _ _ ~ + + + +
hexameta-
phosphate 0~1 _ + + + + + + + +
~005 .- + + + + + + + -~
O _ + + + + + + + +
~, _~. . ._.. .
0.1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _
0~05 _ _ _ _ + + + + +
Nitric 0.03 _ _ _ _ + + + + +
. acid 0.01 _ _ _ _ + + + t +
. 0.005 ~ + ~ + + +
~ _ O
Table 2
co nc entr at lo n ( /0 )
organic acid 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
. ,. . ~
~ +
~, 10 ~ +
Lactie
aeid 5 ~ t +
3 ~ +
1 _ _ _ _ _ _ + -t +
0.5 _ _ ~ t -~
O _ t -t -r t + t + +
_. _ . _ _
_ _ .~
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -t
Acetic 5 _ _ _ ~ _ -t + +
,aeid ~ _ . ~ _ -t + + + -t
1 _ _ _ _ + + + +
0O5 _ _ _ + -~ + -t +
O - + + t t- + + + +
__ - - -- - --- - - : ., . .... ... . .. .__. _ . _
_ _ _ -t + + + ~ t
. 10 _ _ ~ + -t ~ + -~ +
Citrie 5 _ -t + + + ~ +
aeid 3 _ _ + + + + ~ + +
1 _ -t + + + + + + +
o.5 _ + + + + ~ .~ +
O + + ;t + + -t + +
__
- to be continued -
~75
Table 2 ( continued )
~_
concentration (%)
organic acid 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
, __ ..... ... _~
_ _ _ t + -~ + +
Tartaric 10 _ _ + + ~ + + +
acid 5 _ _ + + + + + + ~
3 _ _ + + + ~ + + +
1 _ _ + -1- t + + + +
0.5 _ + + -~ + + ~ t +
O _ ~ + + + + ~ + +
. .___ . .. ~
_ _ _ ~ ~ + + +
~ + + + + +
Gluconic 5 _ _ + + + ~ + ~ +
acid 3 _ _ + + ~ + + ~ ~
1 _ _ + + + + + + ~
0.5 _ + ~ ~ ~ + + ~ -~
O _ + + + + + + + ~
.. _ . _
~ _ _ _ + + + +
Malic 5 _ ~ + + +
acid 3 _ _ _ _ + + + + +
1 _ _ _ + + + + + +
_~.. ~ O ~ + + + + + + +.
.
- to be continued -
5~js~ ~
~ 16
:rable 2 (continued)
_ _
concentration ~/0) Concentratl.on of ct4~l 5l
o f the
organic acid 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
_ . . 7 . 5 _ _ ~ + + +
Ascorbic 3. 75 _ _ + ~ + + +
acid 2.25 _ _ _ + -~ + + ~ -t
0.75 _ _ _ + + + + + +
O _ + + + + + -r + +
105 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ + ~ +
Phytic 2. 5 _ _ _ _ _ + t + +
acid l o 25 _ _ _ _ _ + .~ ~ +
0.61 _ _ _ _ + + + +
O~,31 _ _ _ _ + ~ ~ + +
0015 _ _ _ _ + + + + -t
. O _ -~ + + + 1- + + ~-
_ ~
- 17 -
~ he results given in ~able 1 demonstrate tha-t a
marked synergistic effect was noted in a comblnation of
ethyl alcohol with phosphoric acidO It is also seen from
~able 2 that a combination of ethyl alcohol wi.th lactic
acid or acetic acid produces an excellent synergistic
effect a
(C) Because a strong effect was noted :in the combina~
tion of ethyl alcohol with phosphoric acid or lactic acid.
a combiration of ethyl alcohol, phosphoric acid and lactic
acid ~a~ examined for bactericidal activity in the same
way as in (A) above. The results obtained after a contact
time of 30 seconds are shown in Table 3.
It is seen from ~able 3 that the effect of the
combination of these three chemicals was much stronger
than that expected from the comblnation of ethyl alcohol
and lactic acid or phosphoric acid~
~ he experimental results thus obtained show that
when ethyl alcohol or the acids were individually used for
sterilization, the various adverse effects mentioned here~
inabove could not be avoided, whereas the combined use of
ethyl alcohol and an organic acid and/or an inorganic acid~
particularly the combined use of ethyl alcohol, lactic acid
and phosphoric acid, greatly reduced the required concen-
trations of the individual chemicals and made possible
effective sterilization without giving rise to problems of
a sour taste, odor, degeneration~ etcO
-- 18 --
able ~3
_ __ _ ~
PhosLactic Concentration of ~ thyL aloc) ho L (/0)
ac d (%) 40 35 30 25 20 15 lO 53 1 0, 5 0 .
. _ . . .. ~ ~
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ -r -1- ~ +
_ _ _ _ _ _ _~ + ~ +
0 5 _ ~ + -~ -~ -t
3 ~ -t t -~ t
1 - ~ lr +~ -t t -i
0.5 ~ + ~ + + +
O _ -t t ~ + -t + -t-t -~ + -1~
. _ ~
~ + +
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ + +
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ +
0. l3 _ ~ + +
1 ______+~++++
oo5 _ _ _ _ _ + ~ + + ~ +
O + ~ + + + + + t + -t
, ~ , _ . . __ ~ . __ . . _
20 _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~
10 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ +
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ +
0~,5 3 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ + + +
1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ + + ~ ~ +
o.5 _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ + ~ + + .~
__O _ - + + + +~+. + ~+
- to be continued -
- 19 -
Table 3 (con-tinued)
Pho~- Lactic Concentration of ethyl alcohol (/0)
phorlc acid
acid
(%) (%) 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 3 1 0~5 0
_ ___ _._ _ _____
_ . ~ t -t + + +
._
Since lactic acid and phosphoric acid are acidic
substances, the pH of the bactericidal solution which is
decreased as a result of using these acids presumably
contributes also to the bactericidal activity of the
solution~ ~o confirm this, the fo].lowin~ experiment was
performed~
A mixture of ethyl alcohol, phosphoric acid and
lactic acid was prepared~ ~he conce-ntrations of ethyl
alcohol and phosphoric acid were fixed at 10% and 0.1%7
respectively, whereas the concentra-tion of lactic acid
was varied within the range of 3 to 20% as shown in Table
4~ ~he pH of the mixture was adjusted to 5 - 1 with lN-
NaOH or ~ICl at the time of application~ ~he bactericidal
effect of the mixture was examined in the same way as in
~ 3~ ~
- 20 -
Experimental Example 1~ (A). The time of c~on-tact between
the sample bacterial suspension and the sample bactericidal
mixture was varied be-tween 30 seconds and 10 minutes. '~he
results are shown in Table 4O These results show -that a
pH of 4.0 or below is desirableO
Accordingly, organic acids and inorganic acids
other than lactic acid and phosphoric acid can fully ex-
hibit a bactericidal effect by using them -toge-ther wi-th
ethyl alcohol. For example, a combination of ethyl
alcohol, lactic acid and ano-ther organic acid or salt, a
combination of ethyl alcohol and, phosphoric acid and
another inorganic acid or salt. or a combination of ethyl
alcohol, another organic acid and another inorganic acid
is effective when a ~olution of such a combination is
adjusted to not more than 4Ø
21 --
~able L~
_._ ~ _ ~
p~ of the . Gontacting time
solution __ ~ ~ _~
duringlactic acid 30 1 5 10
contact (%) seconds minu-te minutes minutes
_ _ __ _ ~ -
1 and 2 10
_ ~ _ _ _
(Note): Ethyl alcohol 10%; phosphoric acid 0.1%.
~P~
_ 22 -
3~1~
'rhree mixtures having the following compositions
were prepared on the basis o~ -the results of Experimental
Examples 1 and 29 and examined for bactericidal effect in
the same way as in Example 1~ (a). The results are shown
in Table 5.
Mixture A
_ _ _
Ethyl alcohol 87.0 /0
Latic acid 8.7 ~0
Phosphoric acid4.3 %
Mixture B
Ethyl alcohol 61.7 %
Lactic acid 37.0 %
Phosphoric acid 1.~
'rotal 100 %
Mixture C
~thyl alcohol 37.0 %
Lactic acid 6107 %
Pho,sphoric acid ~
'rOtal 100 %
- 23
_ o~ ___
_ ~. _ __ , ___. ._ . _
.~ a) __ ______._
4 .~ i I + + 1- 1 1 ~ + ~
~3 __ _ _
,~ I I ~ ~ ~ i 1
~_ _ ___~
s~) i I + + + I I I ~ ~
_ _ _ , .. _ _ _
U~ O ~)
o h ~1
,~ a) o ,~ ~ Lr~
ro ~'--Si 1~ ~ ~1 ;;~ ~ (~ ~D ~ ~1
t~ ~ P~ ~OJ~O ~OOOO o
a) , u~ ~d o ~ ~ C~
.5:1 O-r~OOOOO OOOOO
o~ ~1 ~4 ~ P
C~ $
.,~ ~q,l ,~ ~ ~ ~I C' O
o ~ ~ C~ O 1~ ~D~ O (S` ~ r I C'
~ n t7-rl ~~D ~ ~JO 1~ Lr~ cO ~ ro
h o t~ o . o ~ ~
~'~ ~ OOOOO ~ lO
4) a) o _
O ~ cr ,1~ O ~ u~ ~1 ~ C~ ~ ~ ~ ~
V-~l ~ ~ o r~ o ~ ~ ~1 ~ O a: ~D
~ c~ ~ ~D ~ ~i O ~ ~ o
_
,- ~
~ ~ O ~ U~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~4
~ ... ,.. ___
td ~ a
. ~
- 24 ~
_ ___. _ _
~ ~ I I I I -~^ + ,~ ~ + ~ -~ +
.~
___ __ _ __ __ ~_ _____ __
.~
+~ Lr\ ~ I I I -~ ~ + + ~ , ,1. -~ +
.~ .~
_ _ _ ___, __ ~,
,~ I _~__ __ __ __ _____ +
. 0~
N~ O I I I + + + + I + + 1. +
. .. __. . ._. ~ . __ ____._ .. __ __. ___
rl
OO r-l ~ (~ N~
5:1 ~ ~ N~ (~ ~ N~ ,~
+~~ L~ ~1 0 0 0 0
a~ u~ ~
~0 ~ ~ ~ 'C) O O O O O
~ C) .~ ._ _
rl (~ ~ ~I C~
~ ra C' r~ 0 Il~ ~1
III 5~ c.)~rl r-l N~ 0 00 ~D
3 ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ N; ri O
& ~ o __
o ~ C ~ o ~ ~ ~, ~.
c~ ~ o c~ U~ N~
~ ~ o . o
~ N~ ~ ~ r~ O
~ ... _._ . ___ __ __ _____ __ _ . _
.~ ~ ~rl ~
o C~ h o C~ N~ r~ 1~1 (~1 + N~ N~ (~J O
~ __ ~0 rl ______
~1 a) c) rcl ~1
E'~ ~ ~ ~ 1~1~ ~10 t~
___ ...... __ O 0~0 ._ . ____ O
- 25 ~
As shown in Table 5. the bac-tericida1 e~fect
was strongest with the mix-ture C and least s-trong with the
mixture A. and the mixture B comes in be-tween~ ~ach of
the mixtures showed a bac-tericidal effec-t when the con--
centrations of ethyl alcohol, lac-tic acid and phosphoric
acid were much smaller than the effective concentrations
of these componen-ts used individuallyO ~hus t a marked
synergistic effect was noted.
Example 1
~he bactericidal effects of each of the chemicals
shown in ~able 6 on bacteria adhering to "crab leg~like
fish-cake (kamaboko-like product)" whose inPection by
coliform bacteria is especially notable were examined.
Refrigerated Alaska pollack 1 kg
Salt 30 g
L-glutamic acid 100 g
Crab flavor 5 g
Potato starch 50 g
Ice water 300 g
Total1485 g
A minced flesh of the above composition was
molded in-to a block having a weight of about 1 kg and
attached to a plate. ~he product was held at 40C for 1
hour, and its surface was colored with natural red dye.
~he product was steamed at 90C for 1 hour and cooled~
~ he plate was removed from the resulting
product, and dipped for 10 seconds in a suspension of
Escherichia coli (NIHJ~JC-2) to cause the bacteria to
26 -
adhere fully The con-taminated block was then dipped for
30 seconds in a wa-ter solution of each of -the mix-tures A~
B and C in the concerltrations sho~n in ~able 60 Immediate-
ly then7 it was wi-thdrawnO ~he standard pla-te count was
measured by a conventional plate dilution method using a
standard agar culture medium. ~he number o~ coliPorm
organisms was measured ~y -the plate dilu-tion method using
a desoxycholate agar culture medium. For comparison, the
number of bacteria was measured in the same way immediately
1~ after dipping of the block in -the bacterial suspension7 or
after further dipping it in hydrogen peroxide or ethyl
alcohol solution. ~he results are summarized in ~able 6.
The results show that the bactericidal agent of
the invention can perform complete sterilization at an
extremely low concentration which was 1/10 to 1/14 of the
e~fective concentration of ethyl alcohol alone. ~he
concentration of the required concentration of ethyl
alcohol in the mixtures was much loweri and is about 1/11
to 1/38 o~ that required when ethyl alcohol is used aloneO
~he same can be said with regard to the other components.
~his means that the combination of chemicals in accordance
with this invention produces a marked synergistic effect,
and therefore9 can simultaneously solve the conventional
problems of the quality of foods, the working environment,
safety, etc.
~ 27 ~
_ : _ . _ _ .
~ ~o ~o ~o o ~o ~o o ~o
td F~o~ CQ ~C ~ ~ O O ~ O O O ~ ~
U ~ h v N~ o ~i ~) o ~ ~i
~ _ , ___ _ ~ ~
., ~ ~ ~ O O C~ ~ o ~0 0
h ~ 1 ~t ~C ~ O O ~ O O O~ ~C
q~ u~ ~ q~ cr~ o ~1
.~q ~J Cl~ r~ ~i /~ U 00
_ o ~ _ ~ ~ ~
, ~ ~0~ a
~rd O O O O O O O O O O c>
~ , _ _ ____ _ ~ ~ ---- I a~
O ~ o~ D o O a~ o
h ~1 ~ O O O O O N~ ~`U ,1 ~1 0
a ~ _ _ _ _ .
~ ~ ~o g ff~ ~D co ~ ~ 0 u~
~ 0~ iO ~ o
_ . _ _ ._,
~ d o
0 O ~ O O C~ U~ N~ ~1 O C~ ~ N'~ ~1
-~1 C~ ~ O O
~ .___ __ ._ .__
~1 P~_ ~ x
,0 ~ ~ ~
E~ ~~ i ~ ~ cq
~1 ~ s
.. ~ I h ~d ~ b~
. ~ ~i ~ 0~ ~ o .__ . ~_ _
28
. .
~ _ __ b
~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ,,
h o ~n O O O ~C ~ O
¢ ~ ~ 0 ~1 ~ Lr~Lr~
h ~3 rl ~D tD . ~
O ~ O ~:) . ~1
~}; C) O_' r-~
W _ _
~ r~ ~ ~ ~
.,1 bD O O O
~n ,1 ~
h 4 ,1 o ,~ O O O ~q X O X
n ~ u~ C~
cl ~_ ~ ~ ~
_ _ . .
e~
1-~
tn h ~a N~ t~
f` =O,-rl ~1 0 0 0 0
_ ~ O O O O O
~ _
~ O~ U~ ~I C'
. ~ ~ C' ~1 ~
C~-rl ~ ~ O t~
~ t~D
O
_ ,
O
~J ~ O ~ U~
,~ ~) C' Lr~ tX) ~I K\
_ E~0 r~ O
_._ ________
tQ
d
S:~ O tl~ ~ ~
d h ~ O r~ ~ ~\ ~1 C~ ~D
~ t~ot~ _
~o) Q
_,
~D ~n t~ c
~ t~ ~ ~
o _
_. _ . . . ._ . . .
29 -
In order to examine the effects of the bac-
tericidal agent of the invention on the flavor of foods,
a paste product produced as above was removed fro~ -the
plate, and immediately then, dipped for 30 seconds in an
aqueous solution of each of various chemicals~ It was
then subjected to an organoleptic test by a panel of ten
persons for an unusual taste or an unusual odor. ~he
results are shown in Table 7.
It is seen from Table 7 that the bactericides of
the invention show no effect on the flavor of foods when
their concentrations were not more than 30/0. Since the
concentration of 30% is much higher than the effective
concentrations shown in Table 6, it is clear that the
bactericides of the invention can be used without any
deleterious effect on the flavor of foods.
p~
- ~o -
(Eish-cake product)
Concen- Number of the
trations panelists who felt an
Of the unusual taste or an
Chemicals chemicals unusual odor out of
. (/) 10
. ..__ _
Distilled water _ 0
~ .__ ~
Hydrogen peroxide 0O05 0
_~ __ _.___ -- --~
Mixture A 40 0
_ "" . _ __
Mixture B 40 5
_ _ _ 30 _ 0
Mixture C 30 o8
~_ _ __ _ __ ... _. 10
Ethyl alcohol
. ........... ~ . 60 8
_ _ ~__ _ _
In this Example, the bactericidal effects of
each of the chemicals shown in ~able 8 and 9 on onion
(about 100 g) and cucumber (about 100 g) whose infection
by noxious bacteria was heavies-t among edible vegetables
were examined in the same way as in Example 1. ~he
results are shown in ~ables 8 and 9O
~ he cucumber was subjected to an organoleptic
test in the same way as in Example 1. ~he results are
shown in Table 10.
~ 31 --
_ - _ I
Q h o ~ r lJo O O O O
1~ XO ~ X o o X X X
~ ~ O h V ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~
bJ ~; t) o ~ ~1 O~) ~
rl . _ _ __ ~
L ~, ~ i ~D O O O O O O O
F I ~ r1 X X ~C X O ~C X X ~C
U~ F~ a) ~ Lt~ (~ N~ ~ Lr\ ~ ~0
~ ~_ U~ ~ ~U N~ ~ ~ oi
_ , . _. _ .. _ _ __ __
Irl ~
h ~ ~ O~ rJ (~J ~
_ ~ F~ td O O O O O
~ __ __ _ _ ,~
~r 5 o J ~U o o
h __ O O O O O ~
.~1 C) r-l _ _____
O V ~ C' O N~ ~D co
l ~ ~ OJ O
_ _ .
E~ ~ ~ 0
~ O ~ c)~
'~ ~ l l O
V 4 O ~ O O C~ U~ ~ r1
._ . _~ __ __ .__ .____
~1 h ~
ra P~ ~ .~ X
rn $ 4 4 ~, bO ~ ~,
rl tll t~ 4 ~~ a) ~ c~
~) C~-rl td 4~rl rl
"~ 4 ~D h ~),5i r-\ O
~ f~ ~ 4 ~ .
sl ~ ~ ~d O ~q R ~ ~
. . _ . . . _.
` 32 _
_ . _____ . ___, _
.~ ~ K~ .~ ~ ~ ~
-~ S-l O ~ rl U~ O O r-J r-l r--l
a ~ rl tlS r-l O O O X ~C O O O PC X X
h ~ o h c) N C~ ~ ~u
æ c~ 0 ~ u~ ~D ~ oo ~i
~ _ ____
~ ~ r-~ ~D ~ ~ ~
C ~ 0 0~ O O O
h ~ O O O X X o O o X X X
r-l O r~ O 00 ~I t~l 00
~ C~ ~ ,~ .
4~c~ " . Lr . rt~
_ _ _ .
t) ~
l~rl ~ Lr~ \ ,~
u~ ~d ~C5~ ~r-l r~ o
O O O O r~ O ~5 0 0 C)
~ ~ C~ . . ~ . . . . . . .
_ ~ OOOOO OOOOO U~
1~1___ ___ ~ ~ ------ NO~
,~ o o~ U~
. ~ ~a oa~ r~ ~ C~ r~ l h
0 ~r-l C~ Ll~ 00 r-l ~\ r-l 1~\ 0 ) ~) q-l
:1 0 ~(~Jr~ r-l O ~ r~O V
~1 __ oo
r~ ~ ~r~ C~ O (~ Ll~\ r-l C~
!~ ~N~ O a) ~) c~ u~ OD r-l
r~ C) ~ ~ O 1~ 7 ~ 0
r1 ~ 1~ r-l O ~\ (~1 r-l r-/O h
_ .. . _ ~;:
I ~ ~
a~ ~r~ rl ~
O C~ ~ ~ r-l r-l O
C~ ~ O O ~rl
,~i ~ _ ~ __ ~
O r_l ~ rl
~3 r~
o~D ~
.. _ ~ .
- 33 -
_
~ _ __
h ~ u~ ~ O r~ r-~ ~ r~ r~
~ ~-t,l ~,4 X O X X o o X X X
0 ~ ~ o ~J ~D O' O
O ~ ~ ~t ~ O O
. _ . .
h ~ O r~ O O O O
h ~ a) ~ ~ X O X X O O X X X
~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ r~
~ C~ ~ r ~ Lr~
_ _ _ _
~ _~ ~ 'c) O O O O O
a _ __ _ _ _ __~
h,1 O O O O O o
O _ _ . .. . O
E~C~ ,~ c) O a~ D ~ ~
~ ~ o~ O
_ .
U~ ~
~ ~0
~-rl ~ r~
O O r~ r-~
o C~
_ ._ ..__ ~ __ _ ___
~ ~ X
a~ a~ 0-rl ~ ~ h
~n ~ h ~0 ~
rl 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~:i cq
~ a) r~ ~d ~ ~ ~1 a)
c) h ~ c~ ~t ,~ ~0
~; ~ ~ h ~ ~ ~ ~0 X
~_ ~ do -------- -- ---
~?X~ _ _.._.,1: . ~n.~: __,_.. _: _=___. ~ .. ~ ~ __ . _ __ __ _ ,,
_ 3~ _
~ 4~ .... . ... __ _ _
o ~ ~ ~o ~ ~ ~U ~ ~
~3 h u7 ~O O O O O
h o rl tq ~, t ~ ,1 ~1
~ a)~ ~,I
h ~ bD o O O O ~C X O O O X X X
O h o C~ ~ t' C' O
~ . . . . ,
b~ ~ N~ N~ ~ C:~
~ _ ._ . ... _ . .. . . _
~ ~ ~0 No ~o ~0 uO ~0
X X o o o X X X
a) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C`J
o
C~ U~r I O C~ ~D C' C' ~ cO
. ~,c),
_ ._._ .. __ ... . _ __
C~
l~r~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U~
u~ h ~ K~ D~ ~ K~ ~1 u~
~ ~0 ~o ~ ~1 0 0 0 0 ~1 0 0 0 0 ~:l
_ i:4 P~ O O O O O O O O O O t)
~ . .__. ___ ._ ~ . ___ U~
O .~ O ~,U~ ~ ~
~rl~ ~:1 O a~ U~ c~ o
c) rl C' U~ 00 ~ ~ ~ 1`~ 0 (X)
0~ C) . . . . ~ .
0 ~ l Q h
r-l - ------ - ---- ----- - ---------- ~
~1r~l ~ C~ r-l C~ r-l O Ci~ u~ ~ C~ OV
O ,~0 r~ O ~ O c~ U~ ~ O
V Ed 15 ~ r-l O ~ OJ r~ rl O
_ 4
_ .. F~
~ r~l 4
~1 o c) c~,~ ~:
~r~ ,~ r~ ~ O C~ u\ N~ ~ O C~ u~ O 0
~c:~oc) ~:1
r1 _ rl
~ ~:4
~ ~ r
~0
Cl~u~ Ir~ ~ o *
~`1 ~q ~ ~ ~
- 35 -
~able 10 (cucumber)
__.
Concen- Number of pane-
Chemicals tration lists who felt an
unusual tas-te or an
(%) unusual odor out of 10
. .... , __. . ~
Blanching 5
.. .. . _. _ ~ ~
Distilled water _ 0
_~ ..... _ __
Hydrogen peroxide 0O05 0
... _ . ._ _ _ ................. 4
Mixture A 30 0
~ ,.,,..... _ ~. _
Mixture B 30 0
.. ~ 0 ~
Mixture C 30 ol
~ , ~
Ethyl alcohol 60 _ .
Exam~e 3
In this Example, the mixture B shown in Experi-
mental Example 3 was used to kill bacteria adhering to
vegetables.
Cucumber and cabbage cut into four were washed
with water~ and dipped in each of the chemicals shown in
~able 11, and the number of bacteria was examined by the
conventional pl ate diluting method in the same way as in
Example 1. ~he results are shown in ~able 11~
-- '~6 --
~\ ___ __ ____ ________ . ID 3
~i O ~ QD ~1 ~1 O O ~-
~ ~1 O rl 0 X O O O O ~n
0 Q .,~ ta ~ ~D X X O O X ~ h
h ~ o h ~ Lt\ Lr~ I~r\ O a) Q
r ~iC)O~ ~1 0~) ~ L~t~l)
Q. . . _ __ _ _ . D ~ .
f' ~ ~D Ll~ ~ ~t ~ ~ ~ Ll~ N Ol c>
D O O O O O O O O O Oa) 0
~a ~ ~J ,~ , I ~1 , J ~1 .~~1 r I ~ ,si,D
h ~ ~ ~ X X X X X X X X X ~ ~ o
--I o C) O t~ ~`J ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~ r~ X) 0 h
~: u~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,. ~>
~ _ _ _ __ r~ ~
,~~D h ~ 0
~ ~ ~ R ~ N~ NO~ 0~ 0~ 0 0~Q,E~ a)
~1 '~ ~ ~ 0~
.. ___ _________.___ __.___ _ _~ 0,~ 0
~,o~ Q, ~ ~`æ a)'D,li
o h 4~ 5~ ol ,1 ~0 O L~ u~ ~ 0
__ .__ _ _~ 0
~ ',~
~ ~,~ ~ U~FiO~
Q) h ~ a~ h 3 R b~D
r~ ~d 4 ~:q ,~ 0 ~i ~q ~ 0 R
. 3:3 ~ ' U~ ~ ~0
~ ~ ,~ ,1 cq~ ~ ~.~ .~
.~_ __ ~__ a ~ ~n X
~QD c> * 0 ~
~ .. . _ ._ .
_
- 37 -
_a~
~he bactericidal effects oE each of the
chemicals shown in ~able 12 on bacteria adhering -to the
surface of chicken (broiler) were examined.
The test was carried out in the same way as in
~xample 1 using about 51 g of the flesh taken from near
the wing of a chicken. r~he results are shown in ~able 12
and demonstrake the marked effects of the bactericides of
the invention.
When the above test was repeated except that
the whole flesh of a chicke~ was used ins-tead of the flesh
near the wing Bacteria (general bacteria and
coliform organisms) were not detected when the mixture A
was used in an amount of 5/q the mixture B, in an amount
o~ 3%~ and the mixture C, in an amount of 3%~ At lower
concentrations than those shown in ~able 12, an effect of
complete sterilization was obtained.
By the same tests as above, it was confirmed
that the bactericides of the invention are equally
effective for beef, pork and fresh seafoods.
-- ~i8 --
h o .1 ~ ~ ---- to ~
~1 ,~ 1 0 0 P~ K ~C O O X PC
+~ ~ O h ~ cO o ~ C' C5' C~
O,~ r(~ ~ t6~ t~
a~
~0 C
_ I . ___
P~ ~1
.~ ~ C)
F~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Do ~ ~Do ~Do
4 ~ O ~ ~1 ~1 ~1
c~ ~ a~o ~ ~ ~: o o
$ ~ nS~ N~l ~ ~ ~ CO
u~ P1 ~ ~D ~ r~ r~ ~
C) O ~c~
_ _ ~_ _~ . ,
~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~U ~ O
,D .d ~ ~ rJ ~ l O C)
~ ~. ~ OOooo a~
0~ _ _ O
O~:) rd ~ g ~ ~) C ) ~
r~r I CO ~D ~ N O
h o _ . _ _ O O O O O
a~ ~ rO
O ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~D
r1 ~ r-l ~ ~D ~ Oi O
~ ~ _ _ ._ ~
~D ~ i l O O C~ L~\ ~ r~~
C)
.... _
~r~ h
1~ h 0 0
r~ r~l ~ 3 r~
r-l ~ ~ ~ ~ir~ h c~
0 h r~ ~ r~~5i
ri ~ G~ h C) r l ~ c)
I E~ ~ r~ O
a) ~ ~ ~ ~ u~rd P~
O-r-l q~ ~~r~O P~ ~r~
....... _. ... _. ~ d 0 F~ ~?.5i .. __... ..... _ I
~ 39 --
~â ~_ I e
h b~ ,1 O O O O O
h o ,l ~q
R a) ~ R O O O X X O O O X ~C X
a~ Q rl 0 0
O h ~ c
h ~ c> o ~ L-- ~ ~0 rt~ 01
~ `'_ __ .. _._ . __ _
.~ ~
. ~ . .
~o ~o ~o ~0 ~oO o
h C) X ~1 ,1 ~1 ~1 ~1
~0 o o o X X O O O X ~C X
~0 0~ r~1 ~ CO C~ CO
U~ U~ K\ ~ K~ C
a
__ _ _ _ _ ..
1~.~ ~1 ~ ~ ~D ,~
O u~ h rd N~ ~ ~D ~ ~ ~ C~
O O rl ~1 0 0 0 0 ~ O O O O
~1 ~ . o ~ . . .
P~0 O O O O O O OO O O
q~ ~__
R ,1 O ~u~ ~1
O ~ ~ O ~ Ll~ ,~ ~ C' ~1a) Is~ ~1
r~ U~ c) rl C~ 1 ~ ,I N~ O a) ~o
t~ C) ~
F~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~O ~ ~ ~ O
~ ~ - - - ~
a~ a) o ~u~ r-l C~ O
O h ~1 ~ C' rl ) ~ ~1 O (~~ r~ C~
R ~1 P~ O ~1 ~ 0 00 ~D C~L~ r-l N~
O R ~i C) . . . . ~
V ~r~ r~.0 ~ N~ r-l O N~ l r-l O
-- r-l -- _ _ ..
I ~ td
R~ ~o,~ ~
1:¦c) -1~ ~ E3 ~ O t~ 1~N~ ~--1 C~ U'\ ~ r-l O
$ ~ ~ ~ ~
~) C~oc) _ _
r~
m c~ ~
~} ~ ~ ~
_
~p~
-- L10 --
~xam~
~he bactericidal effects of the chemicals shown
in ~able 13 were -tested on chicken eggs~ -
Escherichia coli was caused to adhere to about
. . ,
67 g of egg in the same way as in Example 1, and the eggs
were then dipped for 30 seconds in an aqueous solution of
each of the chemicals~ ~hen, the surfaces of the eggs
were wiped off, and the standard plate count and the number
of coliform organisms were measured. ~he results are show
ir ~able 13.
It is seen from ~able 1.3 that the bactericides
of the invention show a marked effect as a bactericidal
treating agent for eggsO
~. `'l ~t~
----~ --~ ~ ----~ ---------------- - - - - - -
4 t r o r-l r~ r~ O O O
~ ,{~ ~rl ~a O ~C X X O O ~C X
~ ~ o h ~ u~ oo r~l a) ~ ~
~1 ¦r-l ~ Ll~ ~ (~ U~
b~) ~_ _ ................ _ __
rl 01~
F~~ r-l r lr l r~ r-J r-l r-l
t ~ a)o X ~q ~C o o ~c X x
td r~ Ll~tlO r l C~ L~
~n Qlr-l Ll~(~i ~ 0.1 ~ t
Q)r-l
d___ __ ___ _ _ __ __ I ,
~4~ ~rl rr\ O ~ ~ r o
e~t~ p~ ~,tlS _ O O O O O
r~ o ~rl ~ ai~ Lr~ r-l C~ 4
r l Ow O CO ~ K\~ C ~
h0 S: ~I w _ ___ O O O O O
r __
O,Si o g~ r
c~ . ~ r l c~ ~D ~ OJ O
__ r~ __ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _.
~D rl ,~ rl ~ l l O
;~ ~ O c) O ~0 L~- Lr\ ~ r-
_ p,,:l ~1 _ .__
4 ~ ~ ~ ~ h
~ 0~ ~ ~ o
.r 4 0 F~ ~ r~l rl O
0 ~a~ ~ ~
V O rl t~l 4 rl O P~ _ ___
_ 42 ~
_ h ~ O _ _ _
h O rl X ~I r-l r-lr~l r-l
O O O O X X C~ O O ~; ~ X
O h ~ C~ a~ 7~ r~
rl O~ ~;t
~ U _ _ _ __
.~ ~
,Pl
0~1 ~ N~ ~ N~
~1 ~ r-l O O O O O
r~ X r1 r-l r-l r~l r-l
c~ ~ O O G O O X ~C O O O X ~C
~ ~d ~ r~ r-l CO O ~
V~ ~ r~ IJ`\ N~ ~ ~1 N \
Q~
C)
_ _ _ _ __
I rl r~ tl~ ~\ ~1U~ C~ N~
a)U1 h rd N~ D N\ r~ N~ D N~ ~l
,s:! ,~0 O rl r l O OO O r~ O O O O
q~ P~ ~ O O O O O O O O O O
0~ _ _
)i ~rl O ~ Lt~ r~ C~
O ~ ~ O ~ L(\r~l ~ C~ r-l 00 IJ~ r~l
r r1 C~ u\ a~r1 N~ r~ ~\0 00 ~0
h G~ ~1 ~ N~ 01 r-l rl O ~ ~ N~ r~l O
~r~ _ _ . _ _
~ a) o (~ u\ rl C~ O
C) ~1 r-l ~ C~ r-l CO Lr~ ~1 O cr~ r-l C~
O ~ ~ O ~I N\ O a~~9 C~ U~ ) r-l N~
C)-rl r~d ~.D ~ N~ r-lO N~ ~1 r-J r~l O
___ _, ~ . ___
r~
~a
:1<D ~ r~ r~ ~
r~O h ~1 ~ O C~ Ll\N~ r-l O C~ LO N~ r-l O
~1~ ~ O C)
e~ __ _ ___ _
l .
N~ r-l
r-l ~
~3 ~L ~ C
.
- ~3 _
In this Example, the bactericidal effects of
each of the chemicals shown in Table 14 on bacteria
adhering to the surface of ham were testedO
Salt (loy/C)~ 120 ppm of sodium nitrite, 550
ppm of sodium er~thorba-te and 0O~/0 of sodium tripoly-
phosphate were uniformly injected into about 2 kg of
meat taken from the ham por-tion of a hog~ The meat was
then rubbed and kneaded, wrapped with a cotton cloth and
tied with a thread. It was then dried at 40C for 3
hours and smoked at 57C for 4 hours to produce a hamO
The ham was stored at 0C overnight, and used as a test
sample~
A pre-cultivated suspension of Escherichia coli
and ~ ~ was suspended in physiological
saline to prepare a bacterial suspension.
The ham sample was cut into blocks each weighing
about ~00 g. ~he block~ were dipped for 5 seconds in the
bac~erial suspension to cause the bacteria to adhere to
the surface of the blocks. rhe blocks were then dipped
in each of the bactericidal solutions shown in Table 14
for a predetermined period of -time, and withdrawn~- Then,
the surface portion of each block was cut off asepticall~,
and homogenized. The number of bacteria was measured.
The results are shown in Table 14~
~ I ~ o--~o ~o l No ~O-r~O ~0-~O ~0 ~0
~ ~ ~, ,4, r~ ~ ,,
C:~ ~ X ~C X I X ~C I ~ X ~ X
~ ~1 ~ O
h u~ u~ ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~ C~ U~ ~D
~ _ ............................. .
oq y No ~o ~0~ ~0 No ~o ~o o o ~ o
C I P$ ~ ~C X ~
h El ~U ~D oJ ~D ~ C` ~ ~ a) ~ ~1
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~D ~ ~ ~ ~ '
.~ _ ...__ ~ .. ._ .__ __
bD ~ O ~o ~0 ~0 0 No ~o o
.~ u~ ~ ~ l x x
.~ o ~ ~ a~ ~1
~ N~ Ir\ ~ ff~ ~ ~ ~ ~D OJ
~ -- --- ------ - -
h ~ ~3 ~ o~1 ~ E3 h~1 o
. o ~,, ~ ~0:~ ~ ~ ~0 ~ ~ o
0 ,,~ O ,a~ o,~-~ ~ o ~
l ~ _____
~ ~ ~ O
~ U~ ,0~ U~
ta _~ __ ~_
~ ~ a~ h~
~ ~ 3
... .. . . . . .
_ ~i5 _
.... . __ . ._
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '
O tD r-l r-l r~l r-l ~ rl
V S ~ X X X ~ X ~C 4
0 .~ ~ ~ ~)
rl u~ r-l r-l Ll~ _ _ r~
td (~ l`t\
rf ~ ~ O O O O O O ~i
~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~D
~rl X X X X X X h
h ~i ~ ~ ~ r~ (~ t~
~ r-l r-l K~ U~ r-~ h
.~ ' 0 _ . . I
t~ t'\J ~
O O O O O O
~1 C.) r~ r-l r-l ~1 ~IU
. tD X X X X ~ X h
rl O ~ CO CO O ~ F4
~1 1~ 1~ ~ r-l ~\J C~ Oi rl
. ~ _ h
td 4 0 4 ~
h ~ rl ~ 0
æ ~ ~ ~0 v ~
td 0 ~ td 0 O
~d ~D tt) 0 ,Q ~ 0
h h ~ ~1 h ~ ~1
4 O rl ~ O rl ~
0 h h ~1 0 ~d ~D
t ~ 1 ~ t~ r~ ~ ~1
rl ~ S~ ~
r-l V 0 ~ c) ~iS
O ~) ~ O ~ 4 0
t) r-l 0 c~ r 1 0 ~rl
__ __
~ O O cO~
rl r-l
O ~ -- -I rl
~i .--r . cd
cd C~ ~D
a~ CD ~dl
1~ ~
. .
~ 46 -
E~ æ~ Z
In the process o~ producing Vienna sausage,
before packaging, the heat~treated sausage is usually (1)
cooled and carried to a clean room~ (2) cut by a drum
cutter, (3) carried on a conveyor~ (4) sent to an aligner,
~na ( 5) put into a bucket.
In this ~xample~ the following two tests were
conducted in order to examine the bactericidal ef~ect of
the bactericide (mixture B) o~ the invention.
In the first test showing a conven-tional process~
the standard plate count~ the number of lactic acid
bacteria~ and the presence or absence (positive or
~egative) of coliform organisms were determined with regard
to the sausage (1) in the clean room, and the sauges (6)
which was passed through the drum cutter (2), conve~or (3),
the aligner (4), and bucket (5).
In the second test showing the proces~ o~ the
invention, the same test as above was carried out with
regard to the sausage (1l) treated with the bactericide
and placed within the clean room, the drum cutter (2')
treated with the bactericideS the conveyor (3') treated
with the bactericide, the aligner (4') treated with the
bactericide, and the bucket (5') treated wi-th the bac~
tericide. ~he same measurement as above was carried out
with regard to the sausage which passed through the
sterilized bucket (5~)O
~ he results are shown in ~able 15
7 -
~ he da-ta rega.rding the deviced (2) to (5) and
(2') to (5') were obtained with regard to a sterilized
gauze which was used to swab a 30 cm x 30 cm zone of each
of these devices~
48 -
~ ~ .
Standard Lactic
Sites inspected plate acid Coliform
__ _ _ c_un-t bacteria organisms
(1) Surface of Vienna 2 2
sausage in the clean 2.5 x 10 1.8 x 10
room (cells for each
sausage)
(2) ~hat portion of the
drum cutter which 2.0 x 102 80~ X 102 +
contacted the sausage
(3) Surface of the
conveyo r 6. 2 x 103 5. 2 x 103
~ (4) Aligner 7.2 x 102 5.3 x 10
g (5) Bucket 1.3 x 104 20 5 x 104
(6) ~he surface of the
sausage which passed 8.5 x 10~ 5.7 x 104
through the bucket (5)
_ . . . .,, . _ . . . . ~ _ _ _ (1') Vienna sausage
(sprayed with a 10% _ _
solution of the bac-~-
tericide) in the
clean room
(2') ~he product-contacting
portio~ of the drum - _
cutter sprayed with a
l~/o solution of the
P bactericide
. ~ (3') Surface of the con-
veyor sprayed with a . _
10% solution o:E the
bactericide
o (4') Aligner sprayed with
a 1~/G solution of the _ _
bactericide
o (5') Bucket sprayed with a
10% solution of the _
bactericide
(6') The sur~ace of the
sausage with passed _ _
through the bucket
(5 )
--~ .... _ ~_ . . ~ ,
-:negative~ +: positive
