Application of Predictive Inactivation Models to Evaluate Survival of Staphylococcus aureus in Fresh-Cut Apples Treated with Different Plant Hydrosols

Figures & data

Table 1 Major volatile compounds of plant hydrosols.^{[ 25 ]}

Hydrosol types	Major volatile components	% Peak area
Bayleaf	Eugenol	4.02
	α-Curcumene	3.76
	β-Selinenol	3.75
Rosemary	α-Terpineol	3.68
	4-Chlorobenzenesulfonamide,	3.02
	N-methyl-eucalyptol	2.88
Sage	Linalool	13.41
	δ-Cadinene	10.18
	Carvacrol	8.96
Thyme	Carvacrol	48.30
	Thymol	17.55
	(−)-Spathulenol	9.90

Table 2 Parameters derived from the predictive modeling of the survival of Staphylococcus aureus in fresh-cut apples treated with different plant hydrosols

	Plant hydrosols
Parameters	Bay leaf	Rosemary	Sage	Thyme
Modified Gompertz
a (log cfu/g)	−1.399	−1.528	−1.235	−1.504
B (1/min)	0.135	0.099	0.442	0.208
m (min)	10.598	13.911	17.767	8.178
μ (log cfu/g/min)	−0.127	−0.056	−0.201	−0.115
R ^2	0.990	0.949	0.974	0.983
Logistic
a (log cfu/g)	−1.185	−1.500	−1.398	−1.500
d (dimensionless)	10.895	3.472	3.094	4.498
c (1/min)	0.625	0.195	0.151	0.499
μ (log cfu/g/min)	−0.185	−0.073	−0.053	−0.187
R ^2	0.996	0.934	0.957	0.982
Richards
a (log cfu/g/min)	−0.091	−0.439	−0.133	−0.402
b (log cfu/g)	0.179	0.103	0.493	−0.378
d (dimensionless)	0.254	0.027	0.333	0.158
c (1/min)	0.331	0.138	0.458	0.234
R ^2	0.966	0.859	0.801	0.982
Stannard
a (log cfu/g/min)	−1.398	−1.532	−1.235	−1.504
b (log cfu/g)	103.107	128.428	0.442	0.208
d (dimensionless)	6.169	4.645	17.767	8.178
c (1/min)	44.726	48.109	0.947	0.983
R ^2	0.990	0.989	0.983	0.983
Whiting and Buchanan
a (log cfu/g)	0.005	0.006	0.005	0.005
k (log cfu/g/min)	−0.974	−0.875	−1.438	−0.682
p (1/min)	4.179	4.922	2.964	7.264
R ^2	0.967	0.856	0.800	0.975

Figure 1 Fitting of the modified Gompertz, logistic, Richards, Stannard, and Whiting and Buchanan models to the experimental (observed) data obtained from the survival of S. aureus in fresh-cut apples: (a) bay leaf, (b) rosemary, (c) sage, and (d) thyme hydrosols.

Table 3 Regression parameters evaluating the performance of modified Gompertz, logistic, Richards, Stannard, and Whiting and Buchanan models

	Plant hydrosols
Regression parameters	Bay leaf	Rosemary	Sage	Thyme
Modified Gompertz
MPE	0.069	0.123	−0.174	−0.017
MBE	−0.023	−0.024	0.036	−0.006
RMSE	0.057	0.121	0.123	0.087
EF	0.990	0.955	0.944	0.982
χ^2	0.015	0.039	0.025	0.024
Logistic
MPE	0.052	0.065	0.131	−0.045
MBE	−0.001	0.040	0.093	−0.001
RMSE	0.045	0.143	0.093	0.087
EF	0.992	0.937	0.968	0.982
χ^2	0.002	0.051	0.017	0.124
Richards
MPE	−0.060	−0.511	−0.301	−0.053
MBE	−0.001	0.102	0.001	0.001
RMSE	0.104	0.191	0.239	0.087
EF	0.959	0.889	0.778	0.982
χ^2	0.021	0.088	0.210	0.029
Stannard
MPE	0.051	0.132	0.122	−0.028
MBE	−0.019	−0.029	−0.025	−0.004
RMSE	0.057	0.121	0.073	0.087
EF	0.990	0.955	0.980	0.982
χ^2	0.016	0.038	0.009	0.025
Whiting and Buchanan
MPE	−0.003	−0.053	−0.235	0.303
MBE	−0.018	−0.013	−0.018	−0.035
RMSE	0.106	0.233	0.239	0.098
EF	0.957	0.835	0.787	0.977
χ^2	0.023	0.111	0.207	0.032

Tornuk , F. , Cankurt , H. , Ozturk , I. , Sagdic , O. , Bayram , O. and Yetim , H. 2011 . Efficacy of various plant hydrosols as natural food sanitizers in reducing Escherichia coli O157: H7 and Salmonella typhimurium on fresh cut carrots and apples . International Journal of Food Microbiology , 148 : 30 – 35 .

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar