Inactivation efficiency of slightly acidic electrolyzed water against microbes on facility surfaces in a disinfection channel

Authors

  • Zang Yitian College of Animal Science and Technology, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Jiangxi 330045, China
  • Li Baoming Key Laboratory of Structure and Environment in Agricultural Engineering, Ministry of Agriculture, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100083, China
  • Shi Zhengxiang Key Laboratory of Structure and Environment in Agricultural Engineering, Ministry of Agriculture, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100083, China
  • Sheng Xiaowei College of Animal Science and Technology, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Jiangxi 330045, China
  • Wu Hongxiang College of Animal Science and Technology, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Jiangxi 330045, China
  • Shu Dengqun College of Animal Science and Technology, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Jiangxi 330045, China

Keywords:

slightly acidic electrolyzed water, disinfection channel, S. enteritidis, disinfection, bacterial infection, prevention and control, livestock farm

Abstract

Slightly acidic electrolyzed water (SAEW, pH 6.0-6.5) is an ideal and environmentally-friendly disinfectant, which was used to prevent and control bacterial infections on farms. This work aims to investigate the inactivation effectiveness of SAEW in inactivating microbes in a disinfection channel. The bactericidal efficiency of SAEW on equipment surfaces was compared to two commercial disinfectants, Kuei A bromide solution (KAS, 5:1000 vol/vol) and Glutaraldehyde solution (GS, 5:1000 vol/vol). The disinfection effectiveness of SAEW in inactivating Salmonella enteritidis (S. enteritidis) on equipment surfaces in the disinfection channel was evaluated, and a model was developed using multiple linear regression analysis. Results indicated that SAEW was significantly (p<0.05) more efficient than KAS and GS on kits and clothing in the disinfection channel at 1 min. The SAEW did not contribute as aggressively to respiratory difficulty as KAS and GS. Maximum reductions of 2.362 log10 CFU/cm2, 2.613 log10 CFU/cm2 and 2.359 log10 CFU/cm2 for Salmonella enteritidis were obtained from clothing surfaces, iron materials, and kits treated with SAEW for 2.5 min at a chlorine concentration of 220 mg/L. Moreover, the established model had a good fit-quantified by the determination coefficient R2 (0.939) and a lack of fit test (p>0.05). In addition, available chlorine concentration (ACC) was an important factor than other factors, and the inactivation efficiency of Salmonella enteritidis sprayed by SAEW treatment was different between iron materials, kits and clothing surfaces (iron > kit > clothing). Keywords: slightly acidic electrolyzed water, disinfection channel, S. enteritidis, disinfection, bacterial infection, prevention and control, livestock farm DOI: 10.25165/j.ijabe.20171006.2848 Citation: Zang Y T, Li B M, Shi Z X, Sheng X W, Wu H X, Shu D Q. Inactivation efficiency of slightly acidic electrolyzed water against microbes on facility surfaces in a disinfection channel. Int J Agric & Biol Eng, 2017; 10(6): 23–30.

References

[1] Dorea F C, Berghaus R, Hofacre C, Cole D J. Survey of biosecurity protocols and practices adopted by Growers on Commercial Poultry Farms in Georgia. U.S.A. Avian Diseases, 2010; 54 (3): 1007–1015.
[2] Groseclose S L, Brathwaite W S, Hall P A, Connor F J, Sharp P, Anderson W J, et al. Summary of notifiable diseases-United States. Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep., 2002; 51(53): 1–84.
[3] Davies R, Breslin M. Environmental contamination and detection of Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis in laying flocks. Vet. Rec, 2001; 149(23): 699–704.
[4] Farber J M. Safe handling of foods. Marcel Dekker, New York, 2000; 41–77.
[5] Baggesen D L, Wingstrand A, Thomsen L K, Mcfadden C, Nielsen B. Salmonella contamination of carcasses from “Salmonella high risk pig pulsed-field gel electrophor-esis”. J. Clinical Microbiol, 1997; 36: 2314–2321.
[6] Bialka K L, Demirci A, Knabel S J, Patterson P H, Puri V M. Efficacy of electrolyzed oxidizing water for the microbial safety and quality of eggs. Poultry Science, 2004; 83: 2071–2078.
[7] Dorea F C, Vieira A R, Hofacre C, Waldrip D, Cole D J. Stochastic model of the potential spread of highly pathogenic avian influenza from an infected commercial broiler operation in Georgia. Avian Dis, 2010; 54: 713–719.
[8] Capua I, Marangon S. Control of avian influenza in poultry. Emerg. Infect. Dis., 2006; 12(9): 1319–1324.
[9] Barrington G M, Allen A J, Parish S M, Tibary A. Biosecurity and biocontainment in alpaca operations. Small Rumin. Res., 2006; 61: 217–225.
[10] Gräslund S, Bengtsson B E. Chemicals and biological products used in south–east Asian shrimp farming, and their potential impact on the environment-a review. Sci Total Environ, 2001; 280: 93–131.
[11] Lewis S, McIndoe A K. Cleaning, disinfection and sterilization of equipment. Anaesth Intens Care Med, 2004; 5: 360–363.
[12] Böhm R. Disinfection and hygiene in the veterinary field and disinfection of animal houses and transport vehicles. Int. Biodeterior Biodegradation, 1998; 41: 217–224.
[13] Zheng W C, Ni L, Hui X, Li B M, Zhang J F. Optimization of slightly acidic electrolyzed water spray for airborne culturable bacteria reduction in animal housing. Int J Agric & Biol Eng, 2016; 9(4): 185–191.
[14] Huang Y R, Hung Y C, Hsu S Y, Huang Y W, Hwang D F. Application of electrolyzed water in the food industry. Food Contr, 2008; 19: 329–345.
[15] Abadias M, Usall J, Oliveira M, Alegre I, Vinas I. Efficacy of neutral electrolyzed water (NEW) for reducing microbial contamination on minimally processed vegetables. Int. J. Food Microbiol, 2008; 123: 151–158.
[16] Guentzel J L, Lam K L, Callan M A, Emmons S A, Dunham V L. Reduction of bacteria on spinach, lettuce, and surfaces in food service areas using neutral electrolyzed oxidizing water. Food Microbiol, 2008; 25: 36–41.
[17] Koide S, Takeda J, Shi J, Shono H, Atungulu G G. Disinfection efficacy of slightly acidic electrolyzed water on fresh cut cabbage. Food Contr, 2009; 20: 294–297.
[18] Yoshifumi H. Improvement of the electrolysis equipment and application of slightly acidic electrolyzed water for dairy farming. J. Jap. Socie. Agri. Machin., 2003; 65: 27–29.
[19] Cao W, Zhu Z, Shi Z X, Wang C Y, Li B M. Efficiency of slightly acidic electrolyzed water for inactivation of Salmonella enteritidis and its contaminated shell eggs. Int. J. Food Microbiol, 2009; 130: 88–93.
[20] Hao X X, Li B M, Wang C Y, Cao W. Application of slightly acidic electrolyzed water for inactivating microbes in a layer breeding house. Poult. Sci., 2013; 92: 2560–2566.
[21] Hao X X, Li B M, Zhang Q, Lin B Z, Ge L P, Wang C Y, Cao W. Disinfection effectiveness of slightly acidical electrolyzed water in swine barns. J. Appl. Microbiol, 2013; 115: 703–710.
[22] Park H, Hung Y C, Chung D. Effects of chlorine and pH on efficacy of electrolyzed water for inactivating Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Listeria mono-cytogenes. Int. J. Food Microbiol, 2004; 91: 13–18.
[23] Rahman S M E, Ding T, Oh D H. Inactivation effect of newly developed low concentration electrolyzed water and other sanitizers against microorganisms on spinach. Food Contr, 2010; 21: 1383–1387.
[24] Quan Y, Choi K D, Chung D, Shin I S. Evaluation of bactericidal activity of weakly acidic electrolyzed water (WAEW) against Vibrio vulnificus and Vibrio parahaemolyticus. Int. J. Food Microbiol, 2010; 136: 255–260.
[25] Anonymous. Principle of formation of electrolytic water. Hoshizaki Electric Co. Ltd., Sakae, Toyokae, Aichi, Japan, 1997.
[26] Liu C C, Su Y C. Efficiency of electrolyzed oxidizing water on reducing Listeria monocytogenes contamination on seafood processing gloves. Int. J. Food Microbiol, 2006; 110: 14–15.
[27] Arevalos-Sánchez M, Regalado C, Martin S E, Domínguez-Domínguez J, García-Almendárez B E. Effect of neutral electrolyzed water and nisin on Listeria monocytogenes biofilms, and on listeriolysin O activity. Food Contr, 2012; 24: 116–122.

Downloads

Published

2017-11-30

How to Cite

Yitian, Z., Baoming, L., Zhengxiang, S., Xiaowei, S., Hongxiang, W., & Dengqun, S. (2017). Inactivation efficiency of slightly acidic electrolyzed water against microbes on facility surfaces in a disinfection channel. International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, 10(6), 23–30. Retrieved from https://ijabe.migration.pkpps03.publicknowledgeproject.org/index.php/ijabe/article/view/2848

Issue

Vol. 10 No. 6 (2017): IJABE

Section

Animal, Plant and Facility Systems

License

IJABE is an international peer reviewed open access journal, adopting Creative Commons Copyright Notices as follows.


Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:


  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).