Journal of Food Science and Technology

, Volume 54, Issue 3, pp 802–809 | Cite as

An insight on the relationship between food compressibility and microbial inactivation during high pressure processing

  • Noor Akhmazillah Fauzi
  • Mohammed Mehdi Farid
  • Filipa Silva
Original Article
  • 135 Downloads

Abstract

This paper investigates the effect of high pressure liquid food compressibility on S. cerevisae inactivation. Honey with various adjusted sugar with different values of compressibility was selected as a model food. S. cerevisiae cells in different honey concentrations (0–80°Brix), 600 MPa (at ambient temperature) showed an increasing resistance to inactivation with increasing °Brix. D-values of S. cerevisiae at 200, 400 and 600 MPa, for 20 min/80°Brix were 136.99 ± 7.97, 29.24 ± 6.44 and 23.47 ± 0.86 min, respectively. These D-values resulted the Z p -value of 526 ± 39 MPa. A significant correlation (p < 0.05) of cell reduction, °Brix and compressibility was found. Cell reduction in high pressure-treated samples varied linearly with °Brix suggesting that the baroprotective effect of the food was not solely due to sugar content, but also due to its compressibility. This research could have significant implications on the success of HPP (high pressure processing) preservation of foods containing high sugar content.

Keywords

Compressibility Sugar content Microbial inactivation Saccharomyces cerevisiae High pressure processing Honey 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The first author would like to thank the SLAB scholarship to The Ministry of Higher Education of Malaysia and Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia. The supply of honey samples from Comvita® (New Zealand) is appreciated. Special thanks to all technicians from Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering, The University of Auckland for their technical support.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Akhmazillah MFN, Farid MM, Silva FVM (2013) High pressure processing (HPP) of honey for the improvement of nutritional value. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol 20:59–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Balasubramanian S, Balasubramaniam VM (2003) Compression heating influence of pressure transmitting fluids on bacteria inactivation during high pressure processing. Food Res Int 36(7):661–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Basak S, Ramaswamy HS, Piette JPG (2002) High pressure destruction kinetics of Leuconostoc mesenteroides and Saccharomyces cerevisiae in single strength and concentrated orange juice. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol 3:223–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bridgman PW (1970) The physics of high pressure. Dover Publications, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Campos FP, Cristianini M (2007) Inactivation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Lactobacillus plantarumin orange juice using ultra high-pressure homogenisation. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol 8:226–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Crowe JH, Oliver AE, Hoekstra FA, Crowe LM (1997) Stabilization of dry membranes by mixtures of hydroxyethyl starch and glucose: the role of vitrification. Cryobiology 35(1):20–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fauzi NA, Farid MM (2015) High-pressure processing of Manuka honey: brown pigment formation, improvement of antibacterial activity and hydroxymethylfurfural content. Int J Food Sci Technol 50:178–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fauzi NA, Farid MM, Silva FVM (2014) High-pressure processing of manuka honey: improvement of antioxidant activity, preservation of colour and flow behaviour. Food Bioprocess Technol 7(8):2299–2307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gibson B (1973) The effect of high sugar concentrations on the heat resistance of vegetative microorganisms. J Appl Bacteriol 36:365–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Goh ELC, Hocking AD, Stewarta CM, Buckleb KA, Fleet GH (2007) Baroprotective effect of increased solute concentrations on yeast and moulds during high pressure processing. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol 8(4):535–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Grainger MNC, Manley-Harris M, Fauzi NAM, Farid MM (2014) Effect of high pressure processing on the conversion of dihydroxyacetone to methylglyoxal in New Zealand Manuka (Leptospermum scoparium) honey and models thereof. Food Chem 153:134–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hashizume C, Kimur K, Hayashi R (1995) Kinetic analysis of yeast inactivation by high pressure treatment at low temperatures. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 59(8):1455–1458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Isaacs N (1981) Liquid phase high pressure chemistry. Wiley, Chichester, pp 63–105Google Scholar
  14. Iwahashi H, Obuchi K, Fujii S, Komatsu Y (1997) Barotolerance is dependent on both trehalose and heat shock protein 104 but is essentially different from thermotolerance in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Lett Appl Microbiol 5:43–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Leslie SB, Israeli E, Lighthart B, Crowe JH, Crowe LM (1995). Trehalose and sucrose protect both membranes and proteins in intact bacteria during drying. Appl Environ Microbiol 61(10):3592–3597Google Scholar
  16. Min S, Sastry SK, Balasubramanian VM (2010) Compressibility and density of select liquid and solid foods under pressures up to 700 MPa. J Food Eng 96(4):568–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Molina-Höppner A, Doster W, Vogel RF, Ganzle MG (2004) Protective effects of sucrose and sodium chloride for Lactococcus lactis during sublethal and lethal high-pressure treatments. Appl Environ Microbiol 70(4):2013–2020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Moussa M, Perrier-Cornet JM, Gervais P (2006) Synergistic and antagonistic effects of combined subzero temperature and high pressure on inactivation of Escherichia coli. Appl Environ Microbiol 7(2):150–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ogawa H, Fukuhisa K, Kubo Y, Fukumoto H (1990) Pressure inactivation of yeasts, molds, and pectinesterase in Satsuma mandarin juice: effects of juice concentration, pH, and organic acids, and comparison with heat sanitation. Agric Biol Chem 54(5):1219–1225Google Scholar
  20. Oxen P, Knorr D (1993) Baroprotective effects of high solute concentrations against inactivation of Rhodotorula rubra. Lebensmittel-Wissenchaft und Technology 26:220–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Palou E, López-Malo A, Bárbosa-Canovas GV, Welti-Chanes J, Swanson BG (1997) Effect of water activity on high hydrostatic pressure inhibition of Zygosaccharomyces bailii. Lett Appl Microbiol 24:417–420Google Scholar
  22. Palou E, López-Malo A, Barbosa-Cánovas GV, Welti-Chanes J, Davidson PM, Swanson BG (1998) High hydrostatic pressure come-up time and yeast viability. J Food Prot 12:1597–1697Google Scholar
  23. Parish ME (1998) High pressure inactivation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, endogenous microflora and pectinmethylesterase in orange juice. J Food Saf 18:57–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Satomi M, Yamaguchi T, Okuzumi M, Fujii T (1995) Effect of conditions on the barotolerance of Escherichia coli. J Food Hygenic Soc Jpn 36:29–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Senhajit AF, Loncins M (1977) The protective effect of fat on the heat resistance of bacteria (I). J Food Technol 12:203–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shimada S, Andou M, Naito N, Yamada N, Osumi M, Hayashi R (1993) Effects of hydrostatic pressure on the ultra-structure and leakage of internal substances in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 40:121–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Van Opstal I, Vanmuysen SCM, Michiels CW (2003) High sucrose concentration protects E. coli against high pressure inactivation but not against high pressure sensitization to the lactoperoxidase system. Int J Food Microbiol 88(1):1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Food Scientists & Technologists (India) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Noor Akhmazillah Fauzi
    • 1
    • 2
  • Mohammed Mehdi Farid
    • 2
  • Filipa Silva
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering TechnologyUniversiti Tun Hussein Onn MalaysiaParit RajaMalaysia
  2. 2.Department of Chemical and Materials EngineeringUniversity of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations