» Articles » PMID: 35875338

Inactivation Methods for Human Coronavirus 229E on Various Food-contact Surfaces and Foods

Overview
Journal Food Control
Date 2022 Jul 25
PMID 35875338
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), the cause of the COVID-19 outbreaks, is transmitted by respiratory droplets and has become a life-threatening viral pandemic worldwide. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of different chemical (chlorine dioxide [ClO] and peroxyacetic acid [PAA]) and physical (ultraviolet [UV]-C irradiation) inactivation methods on various food-contact surfaces (stainless steel [SS] and polypropylene [PP]) and foods (lettuce, chicken breast, and salmon) contaminated with human coronavirus 229E (HCoV-229E). Treatments with the maximum concentration of ClO (500 ppm) and PAA (200 ppm) for 5 min achieved >99.9% inactivation on SS and PP. At 200 ppm ClO for 1 min on lettuce, chicken breast, and salmon, the HCoV-229E titers were 1.19, 3.54, and 3.97 log TCID/mL, respectively. Exposure (5 min) to 80 ppm PAA achieved 1.68 log reduction on lettuce, and 2.03 and 1.43 log reductions on chicken breast and salmon, respectively, treated with 1500 ppm PAA. In the carrier tests, HCoV-229E titers on food-contact surfaces were significantly decreased (p < 0.05) with increased doses of UV-C (060 mJ/cm) and not detected at the maximum UV-C dose (Detection limit: 1.0 log TCID/coupon). The UV-C dose of 900 mJ/cm proved more effective on chicken breast (>2 log reduction) than on lettuce and salmon (>1 log reduction). However, there were no quality changes (p > 0.05) in food samples after inactivation treatments except the maximum PAA concentration (5 min) and the UV-C dose (1800 mJ/cm).

Citing Articles

Investigating the microbial inactivation effect of low temperature high pressure carbon dioxide and its application in frozen prawn ().

Lian Z, Yang D, Wang Y, Zhao L, Rao L, Liao X Food Control. 2022; 145:109401.

PMID: 36186659 PMC: 9512252. DOI: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2022.109401.

References
1.
Wutzler P, Sauerbrei A . Virucidal efficacy of a combination of 0.2% peracetic acid and 80% (v/v) ethanol (PAA-ethanol) as a potential hand disinfectant. J Hosp Infect. 2001; 46(4):304-8. DOI: 10.1053/jhin.2000.0850. View

2.
Sattar S, Springthorpe V, Karim Y, Loro P . Chemical disinfection of non-porous inanimate surfaces experimentally contaminated with four human pathogenic viruses. Epidemiol Infect. 1989; 102(3):493-505. PMC: 2249473. DOI: 10.1017/s0950268800030211. View

3.
Bauermeister L, Bowers J, Townsend J, McKee S . The microbial and quality properties of poultry carcasses treated with peracetic acid as an antimicrobial treatment. Poult Sci. 2008; 87(11):2390-8. DOI: 10.3382/ps.2008-00087. View

4.
Rajala R, Pulkkanen M, Pessi M, Heinonen-Tanski H . Removal of microbes from municipal wastewater effluent by rapid sand filtration and subsequent UV irradiation. Water Sci Technol. 2003; 47(3):157-62. View

5.
Song M, Hossain M, Jung S, Yeo D, Wang Z, Min A . Comparison of virucidal efficacy of sodium hypochlorite, chlorine dioxide, peracetic acid, and ethanol against hepatitis A virus by carrier and suspension tests. Int J Food Microbiol. 2022; 363:109506. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2021.109506. View