European Journal of Wood and Wood Products

, Volume 69, Issue 3, pp 391–395 | Cite as

Pine heartwood and glass surfaces: easy method to test the fate of bacterial contamination

  • Tiina Vainio-Kaila
  • Aino Kyyhkynen
  • Pertti Viitaniemi
  • Anja Siitonen
Originals Originalarbeiten


The survival of two bacteria, Escherichia coli and Listeria monocytogenes was observed on pine heartwood and glass surfaces by using a simple test method. The development of the number of bacterial cells was evaluated by titration after vortexing the samples in BHI broth and culturing the resulting broth on agar plates. The bacterial count decreased clearly faster on pine heartwood than on glass surfaces. This result was confirmed by studying the wooden samples also one day after to exclude possible adherence of the bacterial cells on the porous surface. This study confirms the results of several other studies that suggest wood to have antibacterial properties.


Glass Surface Listeria Monocytogenes Bacterial Count Glass Sample Wood Sample 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Kiefernkernholz und Glasoberflächen: eine einfache Methode zur Prüfung von Bakterienbefall


Das Überleben von zwei Bakterienarten, Escherichia coli und Listeria monocytogenes, auf Kiefernkernholz und Glasoberflächen wurde mit einer einfachen Prüfmethode untersucht. Mittels Titrierung wurde die Entwicklung der Anzahl der Bakterienzellen untersucht, nachdem die Proben in einer BHI-Nährlösung gevortext wurden, die anschließend auf Agarplatten kultiviert wurde. Die Keimzahl nahm auf Kiefernkernholz deutlich schneller ab als auf Glasoberflächen.

Dieses Ergebnis konnte auch durch Untersuchungen der Holzproben am darauf folgenden Tag bestätigt werden, um ein mögliches Anhaften der Bakterienzellen auf der porösen Oberfläche auszuschließen. Mit dieser Studie konnten die Ergebnisse früherer Untersuchungen bestätigt werden, die Holz antibakterielle Eigenschaften zuschreiben.


  1. Abrishami SH, Tall BD, Bruursema TJ, Epstein PS, Shah DB (1994) Bacterial adherence and viability on cutting board surfaces. J Food Saf 14(2):153–172 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ak NO, Cliver DO, Kaspari CW (1994b) Decontamination of plastic and wooden cutting boards for kitchen use. J Food Prot 57(1):23–30 Google Scholar
  3. Ak NO, Cliver DO, Kaspari CW (1994a) Cutting boards of plastic and wood contaminated experimentally with bacteria. J Food Prot 57(1):16–22 Google Scholar
  4. Bertaud F, Holmbom B (2004) Chemical composition of earlywood and latewood in Norway spruce heartwood, sapwood and transition zone wood. Wood Sci Technol 38(4):245–256 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boursillon D, Riethmüller V (2007) The safety of wooden cutting boards: Remobilization of bacteria from pine, beech, and polyethylene. Br Food J 109(4):315–322 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gilbert RJ, Watson HM (1971) Some laboratory experiments on various meat preparation surfaces with regard to surface contamination and cleaning. Int J Food Sci Technol 6(2):163–170 Google Scholar
  7. Gough NL, Dodd CER (1998) The survival and disinfection of Salmonella typhimurium on chopping board surfaces of wood and plastic. Food Control 9(6):363–368 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Guyer MS, Reed RR, Steitz JA, Low KB (1981) Identification of a sex-factor-affinity site in E. coli as gamma delta. In: Cold Spring Harbor symposia on quantitative biology, vol 45. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, New York, pp 135–140 Google Scholar
  9. Koch AP, Kofod CJ, Konova D, Kvist KE, Lindegaard B (2002) Wood, plastic and steel—a comparison of hygienic properties. Partial report 10, Danish Technological Institute, pp 1–42 Google Scholar
  10. Lindberg LE, Willför SM, Holmbom BR (2004) Antibacterial effects of knotwood extractives on paper mill bacteria. J Ind Microbiol Biotech 31(3):137–147 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Miettinen H, Aarnisalo K, Salo S, Sjöberg A-M (2001) Evaluation of surface contamination and the presence of Listeria monocytogenes in fish processing factories. J Food Prot 64(5):635–639 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Miller A, Brown T, Call JE (1996) Comparison of wooden and polyethylene cutting boards: Potential for the attachment and removal of bacteria from ground beef. J Food Prot 59(8):854–858 Google Scholar
  13. Milling A, Kehr R, Wulf A, Smalla K (2005a) Survival of bacteria on wood and plastic particles: dependence on wood species and environmental conditions. Holzforschung 59(1):72–81 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Milling A, Smalla K, Kehr R, Wulf A (2005b) The use of wood in practice—a hygienic risk? Holz Roh-Werkst 63(6):463–472 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mourey A, Canillac N (2002) Anti-Listeria monocytogenes activity of essential oils components of conifers. Food Control 13(4–5):289–292 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Park PK, Cliver DO (1996) Disinfection of household cutting boards with a microwave oven. J Food Prot 59(10):1049–1054 Google Scholar
  17. Schmidt U (1989) Cleaning and disinfection methods—Effect of rinsing on surface bacterial count. Fleischwirtschaft 69(1):71–74 Google Scholar
  18. Schönwälder A, Kehr R, Wulf A, Smalla K (2002) Wooden boards affecting the survival of bacteria? Holz Roh-Werkst 60(4):249–257 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sipponen A, Rautio M, Jokinen JJ, Laakso T, Saranpaa P, Lohi J (2007) Resin-salve from Norway spruce—A potential method to treat infected chronic skin ulcers? Drug Metab Lett 1(2):143–145 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Welker C, Faiola N, Davis S, Maffatore I, Batt C (1996) Bacterial retention and cleanability of plastic and wood cutting boards with commercial food service maintenance practices. J Food Prot 60(4):407–413 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tiina Vainio-Kaila
    • 1
    • 2
  • Aino Kyyhkynen
    • 2
  • Pertti Viitaniemi
    • 1
  • Anja Siitonen
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Forest Products Technology, Faculty of Chemistry and Materials SciencesHelsinki University of TechnologyEspooFinland
  2. 2.Gastrointestinal Infections Unit, Department of Infectious Disease Surveillance and ControlNational Institute for Health and WelfareHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations