See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/307540346

Industrial perspectives of lactic acid bacteria for biopreservation and food safety

Article in Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences · August 2016

CITATIONS READS
16 2,357

3 authors:

Ali Akbar Imran Ali

University of Balochistan University of Balochistan
103 PUBLICATIONS 1,063 CITATIONS 58 PUBLICATIONS 719 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Anil Kumar Anal

Asian Institute of Technology
233 PUBLICATIONS 3,947 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Utilization of bio-waste derived from apples of Balochistan for functional potential View project

Occurrence and Diversity of Marine Yeast in the Mangrove Ecosystem of Lasbela Coast View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ali Akbar on 01 September 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Akbar et al., The Journal of Animal & Plant Sciences, 26(4): 2016, Page:
The J.938-948
Anim. Plant Sci. 26(4):2016
ISSN: 1018-7081

INDUSTRIAL PERSPECTIVES OF LACTIC ACID BACTERIA FOR

BIOPRESERVATION AND FOOD SAFETY
A. Akbar1,2*, I. Ali2,3, A. K. Anal1

1
Food Engineering and Bioprocess Technology, School of Environment, Recourses and Development, Asian Institute of
Technology, Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120, Thailand
2
Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Life Science, University of Balochistan Quetta, 87300, Pakistan
3
Plant Biomass Utilization Research Unit Chulalongkorn University Bangkok, 10330, Thailand
*Corresponding author E-mail:aliakbar.uob@gmail.com; ali.akbar@um.uob.edu.pk

ABSTRACT
Consumers are becoming more attentive towards the ingredients and preservation methods used for food preservation
and pathogens control. The rapid globalization and use of chemical preservatives have changed the behaviors of
foodborne pathogens. One of the most emerging problems is resistance to antibacterial compounds. Innovative and
alternative approaches are getting appraisal to combat with the common and resistant foodborne pathogens in order to
get maximum food safety in environment friendly manners. Amongst different alternative methods, one more interesting
and widely acceptable method is the use of living probiotic bacteria or its acceptable metabolites for food
biopreservation. The biopreservation phenomenon is the use of beneficial microbes and their products for food safety.
Lactic acid bacteria have a potential to be used for food preservation due to their probiotic capabilities. They have been
successfully used for the production and safety of foods including; meat, milk and vegetables. Lactic acid bacteria are
amongst the beneficial microbes, which can also enhance the food taste and aroma,other than food safety against
unwanted bacteria. The objective of this review is to cover and summarize the use of lactic acid bacteria for food safety
and biopreservation.
Keywords: Food safety. Bio-control. Protective culture. Antimicrobials. Biopreservatives. Foodborne pathogens.

INTRODUCTION pathogenic microorganisms and to extend the shelf life. It

is important to know the physical and chemical stresses
Quality and safety of food remains always the which can lead to the inactivation of microbes
prime concern for consumers as wells as food processing responsible for spoilage and foodborne diseases
industries. Consumers are becoming more diverse in food associated with the processing of food (Akbar and Anal,
selection for consumption(Henson and Northen, 2000; 2011). The uses of chemical additives in food production
Akbar and Anal, 2014a).Food safety standards have raised concerns, leading the European Union to ban
implementation in food production industries is important many antibiotics and growth promoters used in livestock
for safe and healthy food production (Banterle et al., industry (Atterbury,2009).The adulteration caused by
2006). Improper hygiene and insufficient sanitation are extensive use of chemicals and antibiotics in food
the important issues in food industries (Borch and preservation and the ban on them has provoked the
Arinder, 2002). Emergence of new pathogens and sources researchers to search the natural procedures for food
of foodborne illness have been identified recently by preservation (Paari et al.,2011).
researchers (Akbar and Anal,2013). Detection of Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) are generally
pathogens with classical and molecular techniques is regarded as safe. It has been associated with production
helpful for the identification of foodborne pathogens. of fermented foods from centuries. This group of bacteria
Epidemiology of foodborne pathogens is not totally can be an attractive mean of naturally controlling the
known for many of the existing potential foodborne growth of spoilage and pathogenic organisms in different
pathogenic bacteria and newly emerging food related foods (Harris et al.,1992). Bacteriocins obtained from
pathogens such as, Escherichiacoli O157, Entero LAB are antagonistic to other bacteria, most commonly
aggregative Escherichiacoli, Vibriovulnificus, Campylo to Gram-positive group (Cleveland et al.,2001). The use
bacterjejuni and Streptococcus parasanguinis (Akbar and of lactic acid bacteria as protective cultures or their
Anal 2015). antagonistic metabolites such as hydrogen peroxide,
Thermal and non-thermal processing are lactic acid and particularly bacteriocins are some of the
common practices for the preservation of raw food and its examples of biopreservation (Akbar and Anal, 2014b).
final products. The aim of all technologies involved in Food protection and preservation can be
food preservation processes is to prevent the spoilage and achieved by using different biological means including
medicinal plant materials and essential oils, all these

938
Akbar et al., The J. Anim. Plant Sci. 26(4):2016

materials are repeatedly reported with antimicrobial Gram-positive bacteria. It is micro-aerophilic, non-spore
activities and their uses in biopreservation. All these forming and catalase negative bacteria. It is divided in
except lactic acid bacteria and its antimicrobial cocci and rod shapes based on its morphology, such as
metabolites are beyond the scope of the current study. Bacillus, Lactococcus Pediococcus and Enterococcus
For continuous improvement, further research studies are (Khan et al.,2010). It produces lactic acid from glucose.
needed to investigate the possible ways of The G+C content is usually between 32 and 51 mol %. In
biopreservation of different foods. This review covers the homo-fermentation, it converts glucose to lactic acid,
use of LAB for the welfare of mankind in terms of food while inhetero-fermentation it producesCO2, ethanol and
safety. lactic acid. It contains approximately 125 species,
including L. casei, L. plantarumm, L. rhamnosus and L.
Food safety and foodborne pathogens: Food safety and
acidophilus (Gomes and Malcata, 1999), predominantly
foodborne diseases are common issues related to
mesophilic in nature and cannot usually resist high
everyone all around the world. It is related to all what we
temperature (Messaoudi et al., 2013).
eat and drink. The word “food safety” covers every
aspects of food contamination from chemical to Lactic acid bacteriaasprobiotics: Selection of LAB for
biological (Akbar and Anal, 2011). The perishable foods its uses as a probiotics is based on its ability to survive in
such as meat are rich in water and nutrition, making them diverse and extreme conditions and its ability to produce
more prone to pathogens growth (Xiaoshuan et al.,2009). bioactive compounds for host that also work against other
Meats from healthy animals at the stage of slaughtering bacteria (Akbar and Anal, 2014b; Galvez et al., 2010).
are thought to be free of any pathogens. Contamination Tolerance to a wide range of pH is one of the desired
occurs during processing and handling of meat due to properties in the probiotic bacteria, facilitating the
unhygienic practices and use of contaminated utensils survival of such probiotics in host gastrointestinal system
(Akbar and Anal,2015). Bacteria from gut, hide and (Dunne et al., 2001). Thermostability in probiotic
environment play important role in contaminating the bacteria is another required property for its use in
internal meat tissues during cutting and processing, which protective culture and bio-preservation of food and food
can be handled easily by following the good hygiene safety (Gaggia et al., 2011). Encapsulation technology
practices (GHP) during slaughtering and processing can enhance the probiotics protection in drastic
(Sofos, 2008). Ready-to-eat (RTE) foods such as, red conditions for its better use. Studies on the control release
meat, poultry meat, sea foods and vegetable products of probiotics and protection from high temperature and
have been recognized as potential foodborne pathogens low pH has been conducted and described in detail (Anal
vehicles (Borch and Arinder, 2002; Akbar and Anal, and Singh, 2007). In order to ensure the safe intestinal
2011). Listeriamono cytogenes exhibits its survival in passage of any probiotic bacteria, it needs to show
vacuum and gas packed RTE meat products stored at low sufficient tolerance to bile salt, which can be measured
temperature (Gibbons et al.,2006). Salmonella has been in-vitro by simply plating the isolates on media
confirmed in epidemics related to RTE foods (Reij and supplemented with bile salts (Messaoudi et al., 2013).
Den Aantrekker, 2004). Vaccines for foodborne The adherence ability of probiotic bacteria to the
pathogens particularly the newly emerging one is available human cell linesis desirable for its use as
unavailable and the multidrug resistance makes its probiotics. The evidences from ecological studies of
management harder (Tauxe, 1997; Akbar and Anal, some environmental habitats suggest that, to compete and
2011). Continuous monitoring of foodborne pathogens is survive successfully in a natural ecosystem, such as
needed as the detailed data regarding microbial risk human intestine, an effective adherence capability of
assessment in food is limited (Marthi, 1999). bacterium is desirable to adhere itself to the available
Implementation of food safety systems such as,microbial sites in the intestine (Duary et al., 2011; Juntunen et
risk assessments (MRA) and hazard analysis and critical al.,2001). One of the main functions of probiotics is the
control point (HACCP) is necessary to achieve microbial ability of competitive exclusion of the target pathogens
food safety from farm to fork (Perni et al.,2009). from intestinal epithelia. So the good adherence property
is directly proportional to the better activity of probiotics.
Lactic acid bacteria: It is a widespread microorganism
It has been observed in many studies that probiotic
and easily isolated from carbohydrates rich foods (Aureli
bacteria have the ability to attach itself to mucin
et al.,2011). Lactobacillus is the most common bacterium
efficiently. Adherence can be measured using
which is used for the human welfare. These bacteria help
hydrocarbons (xylene, toluene) or available cell lines
in the digestion of food, and produce active compounds
such as colon adenocarcinoma cell line Caco-2, porcine
like vitamin K and bacteriocins, and maintain the
epithelial cell line IPEC-J2 (Messaoudi et al., 2013;
balances of normal intestinal flora. It is more frequently
Juntunen et al., 2001). Probiotics bind the epithelial cells
used for protective culture in foods to inhibit the
binding sites to compete with pathogenic bacteria by
unwanted microbial flora (Aureli et al., 2011; Rodgers,
inhibiting thecolonization of pathogenic bacteria such as,
2003). The LAB is grouped in Clostridium branch of

939
Akbar et al., The J. Anim. Plant Sci. 26(4):2016

E. coli and Salmonella (Mazahreh and Ershidat, 2009). Bacteriophage resistance capabilities in lactic
The LAB (Lactobacillus reuteri 104R, Lactobacillus acid bacteria can be best alternative in phage prone starter
rhamnosus GG) possessing cell surface-localized mucus cultures (Dalyet al., 1996). Lactococcus lactis strains
adhesion-promoting protein (MapA), SpaCBA pili on the bearing natural antiphage barriers and mechanisms to
cell surface and SpaB, SpaF pilin subunits, which exhibit prevent phage infection. These mechanisms include
substantial binding capacity to mucus (Ossowski, et blocking of phage adsorption, DNA entry, DNA
al.,2010). replication and assembly. The antiphage system abortive
Bacteriocin production is an important property infection mechanism (Abi) present in LAB inhibits phage
of lactic acid bacteria making it more attractive for its use multiplication and protein synthesis after DNA entry
as probiotics in animals and human as well as in food (Haaber et al.,2010). Most of these mechanisms are
safety practices. These bacteria produce a variety of plasmid mediated and can transfer from one strain to
antimicrobial proteins collectively called bacteriocins another making the opportunity of phage resistance more
(Galvez et al., 2007) including metabolic products and prominent amongst different strains (Garneau and
short polypeptide with bacteriostatic and bacteriocidal Moineau, 2011).
activities. Bacteriocins are specific in their action against
Antimicrobial compounds and activity of lactic acid
species and act through the process of adsorption to
bacteria: Lactic acid bacteria often exhibit inhibition to
receptors on the surface of the target bacteria. The
other microbes, which is the basis of their ability to keep
resulting, morphological, biological and metabolic
on improving the safety and quality in many food
changes lead to the destruction of targeted
products. It produces bacteriocin, designated as natural or
bacteria(Muhammad et al., 2015; Messaoudi et al.,2013).
food grade protein andis widely acceptable for food
Strains having a diverse metabolic capability
preservations (Iyer et al., 2013; Messaoudi et
would be of greater advantage over the strains with
al.,2013).Lactic acid bacteria as a protective culture or
limited potential. The ability of probiotics to metabolize
fermentation microbes have already been used in
those nutrients which have not beenused by the host
production of food as one of an effective method for
would be auseful property of the species (Rajput and Li,
shelf-life extension by simple fermentation. Pediococcus,
2012).The non-digestible oligosaccharides of human’s
Streptococcus, Carynebacterium, Lactococcus,
intestine are normally available for microbial growth. The
Leuconostoc and Lactobacillus are the most commonly
bacteria Bifido bacterium and Lactobacillus are amongst
used genera as a starter cultures in the fermentation
the few microbes capable to metabolize these
processes of meat, milk, and vegetable products (Akbar
oligosaccharides. It provides them a significant advantage
and Anal, 2014b; Sobrino-Lopez and Martın-Belloso,
on other bacteria in the presence of these substrates. This
2008).One of the important roles of the LAB is to inhibit
concept leads the researcher to the phenomenon of
the natural flora, including spoilage bacteria and
prebiotic, where a specific nutrient supplement can be
pathogens (Akbar and Anal, 2014b). There is a group of
used for the enhancement of probiotics growth and
bioactive compounds produced by LAB responsible for
activity (Gaggia et al., 2011; Padma and Prabhasankar,
its antimicrobial activity against other bacteria (Kumaree
2014). The dietary carbohydrates which escape the
et al., 2015; Schillinger and Lucke, 1989). Some of the
digestion, can influence the microbial ecology of the gut.
prominent known antimicrobial compounds of LAB are
The fermentation of these compounds by Bifido
in discussion below.
bacterium and Lactobacillus results in the acidification of
The ability of LAB to produce antimicrobials
colon and formation of short chain fatty acid, facilitate
has been used to preserve different foods historically.
the regulation of cellular processes (Blaut,2002). β–
Preservation of milk and milk products, meat and meat
galactosidase or phosphor-β–galactosidase production by
products such as sausage by fermentation are the best
LAB can be exploited for lactose free milk production in
examples, the history of dairying can traced back to
food industries (Shah, 2007).
approximately 6000 B.C. Fermentation process reduces
The higher ability of competition for limiting
available carbohydrates and also produce some organic
factors in probiotics bacteria can deprive the unwanted
compounds that exhorts antimicrobial activity (Ross et
and pathogenic bacteria from available food in
al.,2002), the most common being propionic acids and
competitive environments (Malti and Amarouch,
lactic acid. Furthermore, the production of these
2008).Some bacteria secrete siderophores, a low
inhibitory primary metabolites and many other
molecular weight compounds to respond the iron
antimicrobial compounds can be produced by different
limitation in cell. Siderophores helps in transportation of
LAB. Changing the environment, e.g., acidification, or
environmental iron inside the cells. Such organisms
production of toxins against competitors are some known
dominate the environment by depriving iron to others
ways of LAB to inhibit the competing bacteria (Akbar
with the help of their potential scavenging system
and Anal 2014b; Ross et al.,2002). Lactic acid is
(Verschuere et al., 2000).
produced by the fermentation of hexoses by homo-

940
Akbar et al., The J. Anim. Plant Sci. 26(4):2016

fermentation or equimolar amounts of lactic acid, acetic humans, does not change the nutritional properties,
acid/ethanol, and carbon dioxide(CO2) produced by the effective at low concentration, have been found active
process of hetero-fermentation (Ross et al.,2002). It has under refrigerated storage and can also be used for food
been observed hat weak acids have high antimicrobial preservations. It has been extensively studied by the
activity at acidic pH than at neutral pH. Acetic acid is researcher for its use against unwanted bacteria and still
stronger inhibitor as compared to lactic acid and giving need more attention due its environmental and consumer
abroad range of inhibitory activity against microbes such friendly nature for its uses in the biopreservation of food
as, bacteria, molds, and yeasts, whereas propionic acid products (Messaoudi et al., 2013; Gaggia et al.,
has a high antimicrobial activity towardsmolds and yeasts 2011).There are several reports on the production of
(Malti and Amarouch, 2008; Eklund, 1983). In a mixture bacteriocins or bacteriocin-like substances by
of acids produced by LAB, it is forecasted that lactic acid Lactobacilli such as Lactacin B, Lactocin 27, Plantaricin
contributesto reduce theacidity, while the remaining acids A, Plantacin B and Helveticin J. It can affect the bacteria
such as, acetic acid and propionic acid, work as an by inhibiting cell wall synthesis, increasing the cell
antimicrobial agents by interfering its cell membrane membrane permeability of the target cells, or by
maintenance potential (Ross et al.,2002). inhibiting RNase or DNase activity (Galvez et al.,2007).
Some of the LAB (Lactobacillus johnsonii NCC Fig. 1. illustrates the possible uses of lactic acid bacteria
533, Lactobacillus paracasei subsp. paracasei) produce in food safety.
hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) in the presence of oxygen Production of antioxidants compounds from
through the action of flavoprotein-containing oxidases, LAB has been reported in milk and other fermented
superoxide dismutase and NADH oxidases (Pridmore et products (Parrella et al.,2012). The presence of LAB
al.,2008; Marty-Teysset et al., 2000). The bactericidal increased the antioxidant activity of soybean-yoghurt,
effect of H2O2has been attributed to its strong oxidizing fermented milk (Shori, 2013; Parrella et al., 2012) and
effect on the bacterial cell. Some of the H2O2 producing sourdough fermentation of cereal flours (Coda et al.,
reactions scavenges oxygen, thereby creates an anaerobic 2012).
environment which is not suitable for certain organisms. In hurdle technology the LAB and its products
Interestingly, the colonization of Lactobacilli strains in in combination with other preservation methods can be
urogenital tract has been found to decrease the chances of effectively used. The anaerobic, microaerophilic natureof
gonorrhoeal infection and other urinary tract infections LAB and its growth in the presence of CO2are an
(Condon,1987). effective combination with modified atmosphere
The LAB produces carbon dioxide (CO2) mainly packaging for food preservation (Borneman et al., 2012).
during hetero-fermentative process ofhexoses to lactic Bacteriocins in combination with metal chelators (EDTA,
acid-fermentation.There are some other metabolic sodium tripolyphosphate) and other physical methods
pathways by whichCO2generate during fermentation. The such as high hydrostatic pressure and heat can be
formation of CO2 not only creates an anaerobic effectively used against Salmonella and E. colifor its
environment but can also act as a potential antimicrobial control(Ananou et al., 2010; Ananouet al.,
agent to other microbes in the environment (King and 2005).Enterocin AS-48 in combination with NaCl and
Nagel, 1975).The lower concentration of CO2can low temperature has been found effective against
stimulate the growth of some organisms,but the presence Staphylococcus aureus (Ananouet al., 2004). Synergistic
of higher concentration prevents it(Bornemanet al. effect of LAB in combination with organic acid has been
2012).Carbon dioxide is a common source of microbial reported against E. coli O157:H7
growth inhibition in modified atmosphere packaging and and S. Typhimurium (Seoet al., 2013). Bacteriocins
hurdle technology.Gram-negative bacteria are more (Nisin, Pediocin, Enterocin) in combination with other
sensitive to the carbon dioxide as compared to gram- hurdles (low and high temperature, hydrostatic pressure,
positive bacteria (Akbar and Anal, 2011). Pulsed electric fields and salts) has been found active
Diacetyl is a majorflavouringand aroma against pathogenic bacteria such as S. aureus, L.
component in cheese, butter and cream. Some lactic acid monocytogenes, S. carnosus,B. subtilis, L. innocuaand
bacteria such as, Sreptococcus, Pediococcus, Arcobacterbutzleri (Ananouet al., 2007).
Leuconostoc, Lactobacillus and Lactococcus can produce
Biopreservation and Bio-control : The term
it in high quantities in citrate metabolism (Malti and
biopreservation refers to food safety and shelf life
Amarouch, 2008; Ross et al., 2002). Its activity has been
extension by using living microbes (LAB) and their
reported against Gram-negative bacteria, molds and
metabolites. The termbio-control is specified for the use
yeast.It interferes the amino acid utilization in Gram-
of one living species against another for its control
negative bacteria by reacting with arginine utilization
(Galvez et al., 2007). It has been reported that the food
(Malti and Amarouch, 2008; Pakdeeto et al., 2003).
preservation ability of LAB is due to the production of
Bacteriocin as antimicrobials is active against
hydrogen peroxide, diacetyl, organic acids, carbon
bacteria and has been found non-toxic to animals and

941
Akbar et al., The J. Anim. Plant Sci. 26(4):2016

dioxide, ethanol, antifungal compounds such as of Ostrich meat salami (Akbar et al., 2014c; Dicks et
phenyllactic acid or fatty acids, bacteriocins and al.,2004). Probiotic bacteria (Lactococcus, Lactobacillus
antibiotics such as Reutericyclin (Settanni and Corsetti, and Pediococcus) from fermented food have been
2008). Selective growth promotion of LAB utilizing its successfully used for the extension of shelf life in cheese
antagonistic ability to control meat-borne pathogens and ready-to-eat poultry meat (Paari et al., 2011; Akbar
would minimise the spoilage bacteria and its spoilage and Anal, 2014b). These bacteria enhance the physical
effects (Akbar and Anal,2014b). It has been reported that featuresof the meat such as, color and aroma by releasing
Enterococcus faeciumand Lactococcus lactis responsible aromatic substances during protective culture (Malti and
for producing a number of bacteriocinshave potential to Amarouch, 2008). The LAB used for fermented products
be used asbiopreservative agent for fresh foods especially as starter culture can grow during storage time, producing
vegetable products, ready-to-eat fruit and meat products acidic compounds making the food environment hostile
due to its low minimum inhibitory concentration against for pathogen growth (Rubio et al.,2013). Protective
Listeria spp. and S.aureus(Settanni and Corsetti, 2008). culture is not limited to the use of bacteriocin only; it is a
The Reuterin from Lactobacillus reuteri in a combination broad phenomenon where even the LAB itself is
with other bacteriocin such as enterocin AS-48, Nisin, or acceptable to consumer as a functional food component
Lacticin 481 have strong synergistic effects on the growth (Wessels et al.,2004).
of Listeria monocytogenes. Higher antimicrobial activity Meat products are prone to bacterial
of Nisin combined with Reuterin against S. aureus has contamination as it contains best growth enhancing
also been reported (Arques et al., 2008). The application compounds for microbes. The foodborne pathogens such
of Reuterin to control Gram-negative and Gram-positive as Listeriamonocytogenes and other psychrophilic
pathogens has been investigated in dairy (Arques et al., bacteria (Pseudomonas spp. and Brochothrix
2008; El-Ziney and Debevere, 1998) and meat products thermosphacta) can grow on refrigerated foods(Katikouet
(El-Ziney et al.,1999). al.,2005).Use of protective culture against the target
Salami manufacturing provides a good example pathogens in refrigerated food was found to be promising
of bio-control approaches where addition of LAB to (Maragkoudakis et al., 2009; Akbar and Anal, 2014b).
meatdoes not only impart desirable organoleptic qualities Vatanyoopaisarn et al.,(2011) reported Pediococcus
but also inhibit the spoilage and pathogenic acidilactici (CP7-3) and Lactobacillus plantarum (CP1-
bacteria(Khan et al., 2010; Pakdeeto et al., 2003).Nisin 15 and CP2-11) as starter cultures in Thai fermented
isan approved bio-control product of lactic acid bacteria sausage against S. aureus.In protective culture studies, it
for food application. Microbes with potential to inhibit was found that the LAB usually suppresses unwanted
mycotoxin producing fungi and to neutralize microbes as a co-culture. Streptococcusphocae has been
mycotoxin,has been successfully studied (Schillinger et found active against Vibrioparahaemolyticus,
al.,1996). Listeriamonocytogenesand coliforms in a protective
Fermentation of food is widely used and is a culture in seafood products (Paariet
common form of biopreservation. The process is usually al.,2011).Maragkoudakis et al.,(2009) applied
dependent on the growth of microorganisms in foods EnterococcusfaeciumPCD71 and Lactobacillusfermentum
from nature or added during the process. Lactic acid ACA-DC179 in raw chicken meat and found reduced
bacteria can provide better physiological properties, from growth of L. monocytogenes and Salmonella enteritidis.
taste/color to consistency (Rodgers, 2003). Antimicrobial Hu et al.,(2008) reported the suppressed growth of
metabolites production by LAB during fermentation is an spoilage bacteria in vacuum packed cooked ham in
additional quality, which can help in food safety and presence of Lactobacillus sakei as a protective culture.
product shelf life extension. Enterocin AS-48, Enterocins Adesokan et al.,(2008) reported the biopreservative
A and B, Leucocin A, Nisin, Sakacin and Pediocin PA- activity of Lactobacillusplantarum against coliform and
l/AcH are amongst the most-studied bacteriocins in meat S. aureus in suya produced from poultry meat.
and meat products. Various LAB have been used as Lactobacillus curvatus CRL705 was used for the
bioprotective cultures in food processing in order to control of spoilage bacteria growth in vacuum-packaged
control the pathogenic bacteria (Ananou et al.,2007; refrigerated meat (Castellano et al.,2010). Matamoros et
Rodgers, 2003). al.,(2009) reported the bio-preservation potential of
Leuconostoc gelidum EU2247 and Lactococcus piscium
Protective culture approaches: Protective culture is the
EU2441 applied on sea food. Protective culture activity
addition of antagonistic LAB to food products for the
of L.mesenteroides strains were reported in Iceberg
competitive exclusion or inhibition of unwanted bacteria
lettuce leaf cuts and wounded Golden Delicious apples
and extension of shelf life (Malti and Amarouch,
against E. coli, S. typhimurium and L. monocytogenes
2008).The starter culture of Lactobacillus plantarum,
(Trias et al., 2008). Vermeiren et al.,(2006) reported
Lactobacillus curvatus and Micrococcus sp. were found
protective culture activity of L. sakei 10A against
active against Listeriamono cytogenes in the production
spoilage bacteria in cooked meat products. Protective

942
Akbar et al., The J. Anim. Plant Sci. 26(4):2016

culture activities of different lactic acid bacteria in foods Concerns over the use of chemicals/antibioticscoupled
such as, meat ( L. curvatus CRL 705 and E. faecium PCD with the awareness and demands of consumers for natural
71 against B. thermosphacta, Listeria spp. S. enteritidis food preservatives have increased the provision to use the
and L. monocytogenes) (Castellano et al., 2010; probiotic LAB and its antimicrobial metabolites for food
Maragkoudakis et al., 2009), seafood (Streptococcus safety and functionality. The promising use of bacteriocin
phocae against V. parahemolyticus, coliform and L. and other metabolites from LAB has proved itself as a
monocytogenes) (Paari et al., 2011) have been repeatedly good natural preservative. The use of probiotics can
reported. Table 1 show few examples of LAB as effectively reduce the application of chemical
protective culture in different foods. preservatives. Currently only limited data is available
The use of LAB for protective culture has some describing the use of LAB against pathogens. Its use can
advantages on bacteriocin and its other antimicrobial effectively be exploited as protective culture in perishable
metabolites, as the living LAB can adopt itself to the foods to be stored in refrigerators. There is an acute need
changing environment and conditions of foods during to identify effective probiotics as a protective culture
processing and storage, producing antimicrobials and against specific target pathogens such as, Campylobacter
other metabolites constantly (Settanni and Corsetti, and Helicobacter. Studies for the isolation of
2008). psychrophilic and thermophilic probiotic bacteria capable
of antimicrobials production against varieties of bacteria
Conclusion and future perspectives: Prevention of
and its uses for food safety purposes is needed for the
foodborne infections and the assurance of food safety in
safe production of quality foods.
food products need proper attention to satisfy the
consumer and to reduce the economic and health losses.

Fig. 1Uses of lactic acid bacteria and its products for the welfare of human beings

943
Akbar et al., The J. Anim. Plant Sci. 26(4):2016

Table 1. Protective culture of lactic acid bacteria in foods.

Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) Target bacteria Food materials Reference

L. lactis subsp. lactis S. aureus Poultry meat sausage Akbar and Anal (2013)
Streptococcusphocae V.parahemolyticus, coliform, L. monocytogenes Seafood Paari et al., (2011)
Pediococcus acidilactici (CP7-3), S. aureus Thai fermented sausage (Sai- Vatanyoopaisarn et al., (2011)
Lactobacillus plantarum (CP1-15, Krok-Prew)
CP2-11)
Lactobacillus curvatus CRL705 Spoilage LAB, B. thermosphacta, Listeria spp. Beef meat Castellano et al. (2010)
E. faecium PCD71 S. enteritidis, L. monocytogenes Chicken meat Maragkoudakis et al. (2009)
Leuconostocgelidum EU2247, Vibrio spp., S.aureus, L. monocytogenes Cooked and fresh peeled Matamoros et al. (2009)
Lactococcuspiscium EU2441 shrimp
Lactobacillussakei B-2 Spoilage bacteria Vacuum packed cooked ham Hu et al., (2008)
Lactobacillusplantarum Coliform, S. aureus Poultry meat products Adesokan et al., (2008)
Leuconostoc mesenteroides S. enteritidis, S. typhimurium, E. coli, L. Iceberg lettuce / Golden Trias et al. (2008)
CM135, CM160, PM249 monocytogenes delicious apples
Lactobacillus sakei 10A Spoilage bacteria Ham Vermeiren et al. (2006)
Lactobacillus casei T3, Lb. L. innocua Cold-smoked salmon Vescovo et al. (2006)
plantarum Pe2,
Carnobacterium piscicola Sal3
Lactobacillus sakei CETC 4808 Enterobacteriaceae, Pseudomonas spp., B. Beef meat Katikou et al. (2005)
thermosphacta
Carnobacterium divergens V41 L. monocytogenes Cold-smoked salmon Brillet et al. (2005)
Lactobacillus curvatus (LR55) L. monocytogenes B164 (serotype 4b) Non-acidified deli-type pickles Reina et al., (2005)
Lactobacillusplantarum, Lb L.monocytogenes Ostrich meat salami Dicks et al., (2004)
curvatus, Micrococcus sp.

944
Akbar et al., The J. Anim. Plant Sci. 26(4):2016

REFERENCES Ananou, S., E. Valdivia, M.M. Bueno, A. Gálvez, and M.

Maqueda (2004). Effect of combined physico-
Adesokan, I.A, B.B. Odetoyinbo, and A.O. Olubamiwa chemical preservatives on enterocin AS-48
(2008). Biopreservative activity of lactic acid activity against the
bacteria on suya produced from poultry meat. enterotoxigenic Staphylococcus aureus CECT
Afr. J. Biotech. 7(20):3799-3803 976 strain. J. Appl. Microbiol. 97:48-56
Akbar, A., and A. K. Anal (2014a). Zinc oxide Arques, J.L., E. Rodríguez, M. Nuñez, and M. Medina
nanoparticles loaded active packaging a (2008). Antimicrobial activity of nisin, reuterin
challenge study against Salmonella typhimurium and the lactoperoxidase system on
and Staphylococcus aureus in ready-to-eat Listeriamonocytogenes and Staphylococcus
poultry meat. Food Cont. 38:88-95 aureus in Cuajada, a semisolid dairy product
Akbar, A., and A.K. Anal (2011). Food safety concerns manufactured in Spain. J. Dairy. Sci. 91(1):70-
and food-borne pathogens, Salmonella, 75
Escherichiacoli and Campylobacter. FUUAST. Atterbury, R.J. (2009). Bacteriophage biocontrol in
J. Biol. 1(1):5-17 animals and meat products. Microb. Biotech.
Akbar, A., and A.K. Anal (2013). Prevalence and 2(6):601-612
antibiogram study of Salmonella and Aureli, P., L. Capurso, A.M. Castellazzi, M. Clerici, M.
Staphylococcusaureus in poultry meat. Asian Giovannini, L. Morelli, A. Poli, F. Pregliasco, F.
Pac. J. Trop. Biomed. 3(2):163-168 Salvini, and G.V. Zuccotti (2011). Probiotics
Akbar, A., and A.K. Anal (2014b). Occurrence of and health: An evidence-based review. Pharm.
Staphylococcus aureus and evaluation of anti- Res. 63:366-376
staphylococcal activity of Lactococcus lactis Banterle, A., S. Stranieri, and L. Baldi (2006).
subsp. lactis in ready-to-eat poultry meat. Ann. Traceability and vertical co-ordination in the
Microbiol. 64(1):131-138 Italian dairy chain: A transaction cost approach.
Akbar, A., U. Sitara, I. Ali, N. Muhammad, and S.A. J. Chain Network Sci. 6(1):69-78
Khan (2014c). Isolation and characterization of Blaut, M. (2002). Relationship of prebiotics and food to
biotechnologically potent Micrococcus luteus intestinal microflora. Eur. J. Nutr. 41 (Suppl. 1),
strain from environment. Pakistan J. Zool. 46 I/11-I/16
(4): 967-973 Borch, E., and P. Arinder (2002). Bacteriological safety
Akbar, A., and A.K. Anal (2015). Isolation of Salmonella issues in red meat and ready-to-eat meat
from ready-to-eat poultry meat and evaluation of products, as well as control measures. Meat Sci.
its survival at low temperature, microwaving 62:381-390
and simulated gastric fluids. J. Food Sci. Tech, Borneman, A.R., J.M. McCarthy, P.J. Chambers, and E.J.
52(5):3051-3057 Bartowsky (2012). Comparative analysis of the
Anal, A.K., and H. Singh (2007). Recent advances in Oenococcus oeni pan genome reveals genetic
Microencapsulation of probiotics for industrial diversity in industrially-relevant pathways.
applications and targeted delivery. Trends Food BMC. Genom. 13:373
Sci. Tech. 18:240-251 Brillet, A., M.F. Pilet, H. Prevost, M. Cardinal, and F.
Ananou, S., M. Garriga, A. Jofré, T. Aymerich, A. Leroi (2005). Effect of inoculation of
Gálvez, M. Maqueda, M. Martínez-Bueno,and Carnobacteriumdivergens V41, a
E. Valdivia (2010). Combined effect of biopreservative strain against
enterocin AS-48 and high hydrostatic pressure to Listeriamonocytogenes risk, on the
control food-borne pathogens inoculated in low microbiological, chemical and sensory quality of
acid fermented sausages. Meat Sci. 84:594-600 cold-smoked salmon. Int. J. Food Microbiol.
Ananou, S., M. Maqueda, M. Martínez-Bueno, A. 104:309-324
Gálvez, and E. Valdivia (2005). Synergistic Castellano, P., C. Gonzalez, F. Carduza, and G. Vignolo
effect of enterocin AS-48 in combination with (2010). Protective action of
outer membrane permeabilizing treatments Lactobacilluscurvatus CRL705 on vacuum
against Escherichia coli O157:H7. J. Appl. packaged raw beef. Effect on sensory and
Microbiol. 99:1364-1372 structural characteristics. Meat Sci. 85:394-401
Ananou, S., M. Maqueda, M. Martinez-Bueno, and E. Cleveland, J., T.J. Montville, I.F. Nes, and M.L.
Valdivia (2007). Biopreservation, an ecological Chikindas (2001). Bacteriocins: safe, natural
approach to improve the safety and shelf-life of antimicrobials for food preservation. Int. J. Food
foods. Commun. Curr. Res. Edu. Topics trends Microbiol. 71:1-20
Appl. Microbiol. 475-486 Coda, R., C.G. Rizzello, D. Pinto, and M. Gobbetti
(2012). Selected lactic acid bacteria synthesize

945
Akbar et al., The J. Anim. Plant Sci. 26(4):2016

antioxidant peptides during sourdough source(s) of contamination of ready-to-eat meat

fermentation of cereal flours. Appl.Environ. products with Listeria spp. and other pathogens
Microbiol. 78(4):1087-1096 in a meat processing plant in Trinidad. Food
Condon, S. (1987) Responses of lactic acid bacteria to Microbiol. 23:359-366
oxygen. FEMS. Microbiol. Rev. 46:269-280 Gomes, A.M.P., and F.X. Malcata (1999).
Daly, C., G.F. Fitzgerald, and R. Davis (1996). Bifidobacterium spp. and Lactobacillus
Biotechnology of lactic acid bacteria with acidophilus: biological, biochemical,
special reference to bacteriophage resistance. technological and therapeutical properties
Antonie. Van. Leeuwenhoek. 70(2):99-110 relevant for use as probiotics. Trends Food Sci.
Dicks, L.M.T., E.D. Mellett, and L.C. Hoffman (2004). Tech. 10:139-157
Use of bacteriocin-producing starter cultures of Haaber, J., J.E. Samson, S.J. Labrie, V. Campanacci, C.
Lactobacillusplantarum and Lactobacillus Cambillau, S. Moineau, and K. Hammer (2010).
curvatus in production of ostrich meat salami. Lactococcal abortive infection protein AbiV
Meat Sci. 66:703-708 interacts directly with the phage protein SaV and
Duary, R.K., Y. S. Rajput, V.K. Batish, and S. Grover prevents translation of phage proteins. App.
(2011). Assessing the adhesion of putative Environ. Microbiol. 76(21):7085–7092
indigenous probiotic lactobacilli to human Harris, L.J., H.P Fleming, and T.R. Klaenhammer (1992).
colonic epithelial cells. Ind. J. Med. Res. Novel paired starter culture system for
134(5):664-671 sauerkraut, consisting of a nisin-resistant
Dunne, C., L. O’Mahony, L. Murphy, G. Thornton, D. Leuconostocmesenteroidesstrain and a nisin
Morrissey, S. O’Halloran, M. Feeney, S. Flynn, producing Lactococcuslactisstrain. Appl.
G. Fitzgerald, C. Daly, B. Kiely, G.C. Environ. Microbiol. 58:1484-1489
O’Sullivan, F. Shanahan, and J.K. Collins Henson, S., and J. Northen (2000) Consumer assessment
(2001). In vitro selection criteria for probiotic of the safety of beef at the point of purchase: a
bacteria of human origin: correlation with in pan-European study. J. Agri. Econ. 51:90-105
vivo findings. Amer. J. Clin. Nutr. 73:386s-392s Hu, P., X.L. Xu, G.H. Zhou, Y.Q. Han, B.C. Xu, and J.C
Eklund, T. (1983). The antimicrobial effect of dissociated Liu (2008). Study of the Lactobacillus sakei
and undissociated sorbic acid at different pH protective effect towards spoilage bacteria in
levels. J. Appl. Bacteriol. 54:383-389 vacuum packed cooked ham analyzed by PCR-
El-Ziney, M.G., and J.M. Debevere (1998). The effect of DGGE. Meat Sci. 80:462-469
reuterin on Listeriamono cytogenes and Iyer, B.K., R.S. Singhal, and L. Ananthanarayan (2013)
Escherichia coli O157:H7 in milk and cottage Characterization and in vitro probiotic
cheese. J. Food Prot. 61:1275-1280 evaluation of lactic acid bacteria isolated
El-Ziney, M.G., T. Van den Tempel, J. Debevere, and M. from idli batter. J. Food Sci. Tech. 50(6):1114-
Jakobsen (1999). Application of reuterin 1121
produced by Lactobacillusreuteri 12002 for Juntunen, M., P.V. Kirjavainen, A.C. Ouwehand, S.J.
meat decontamination and preservation Salminen, and E. Isolauri (2001). Adherence of
Lactobacillusreuteri. J. Food Prot. 62:257-261 probiotic bacteria to human intestinal mucus in
Gaggia, F., D.D. Gioia, L. Baffoni, and B. Biavati (2011) healthy infants and during rotavirus infection.
The role of protective and probiotics cultures in Clin. Diagn. Lab. Immunol. 8(2):293-296
food and feed and their impact in food safety. Katikou, P., I. Ambrosiadis, D. Georgantelis, P. Koidis,
Trends Food Sci. Tech. 22: S58-S66 and S.A. Georgakis (2005). Effect of
Galvez, A., H. Abriouel, N. Benomar, and R. Lucas Lactobacillus-protective cultures with
(2010). Microbial antagonists to food-borne bacteriocin-like inhibitory substances-producing
pathogens and biocontrol. Curr. Opin. Biotech. ability on microbiological, chemical and sensory
21:142-148. changes during storage of refrigerated vacuum-
Galvez, A., H. Abriouel, R.L. López, and N.B. Omar packaged sliced beef. J. Appl. Microbiol.
(2007). Bacteriocin-based strategies for food 99:1303-1313
biopreservation. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 120:51- Khan, H., S. Flint, and P-L. Yu (2010). Enterocins in
70 food preservation. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 141:1-
Garneau, J.E., and S. Moineau (2011). Bacteriophages of 10
lactic acid bacteria and their impact on milk King, A.D.J., and C.W. Nagel (1975). Influence of
fermentations. Microb. Cell Fact. 10 (Suppl carbon dioxide upon the metabolism of
1):S20 Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J. Food. Sci. 40:362-
Gibbons, I-S., A. Adesiyun, N. Seepersadsingh, and S. 366
Rahaman (2006). Investigation for possible

946
Akbar et al., The J. Anim. Plant Sci. 26(4):2016

Kumaree, K.K., A. Akbar, and A.K. Anal (2015). Penaeusmonodon using protective culture
Bioencapsulation and application of Streptococcusphocae PI 80 isolated from marine
Lactobacillus plantarum isolated from catfish shrimp Penaeusindicus. Probiotics Antimicrob.
gut as an antimicrobial agent and additive in fish Protein 3:103-111
feed pellets. Ann. Microbiol. 65(3):1439-1445 Padma, I.S., and P. Prabhasankar (2014). Prebiotics:
Malti, J.E., and H. Amarouch (2008). Protective cultures application in bakery and pasta products. Crit.
used for the biopreservation of horse meat Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 54(4):511-22
fermented sausage: Microbial and Pakdeeto, A., N. Naranong, and S. Tanasupawat (2003).
physicochemical characterization. J. Food Safety Diacetyl of lactic acid bacteria from milk and
28:324-345 fermented foods in Thailand. J. Gen. Appl.
Maragkoudakis, P.A., K.C. Mountzouris, D. Psyrras, S. Microbiol. 49(5):301-307
Cremonese, J. Fischer, and M.D. Cantor, E. Parrella, A., E. Caterino, M. Cangiano, E. Criscuolo, C.
Tsakalidou (2009). Functional properties of Russo, M. Lavorgna, and M. Isidori (2012).
novel protective lactic acid bacteria and Antioxidant properties of different milk
application in raw chicken meat against fermented with lactic acid bacteria and yeast.
Listeriamonocytogenes and Int. J. Food Sci. Tech. 47:2493-2502
Salmonellaenteritidis. Int. J. Food Microbiol. Perni, S., R. Rijkelt, and M.H. Zwietering (2009). Multi-
130:219-226 tools approaches for food safety risk
Marthi, B. (1999). Food safety challenges in developing management of steam meals. J. Food Prot.
countries: the Indian situation. Food Cont. 72(12):2638-2645.
10:243-245 Pridmore, R.D., A.C. Pittet, F. Praplan, and C. Cavadini
Marty-Teysset, C., F. De La Torre, and J. Garel (2000). (2008). Hydrogen peroxide production by
Increased production of hydrogen peroxide by Lactobacillusjohnsonii NCC 533 and its role in
Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus anti-Salmonella activity. FEMS. Microbiol. Lett.
upon aeration: involvement of an NADH 283:210-215
oxidase in oxidative stress. Appl. Environ. Rajput, I.R., and W.F. Li (2012). Potential role of
Microbiol. 66:262-267 probiotics in mechanism of intestinal immunity.
Matamoros, S., F. Leroi, M. Cardinal, F. Gigout, C.F. Pakistan Vet. J. 32(3):303-308
Kasbi, J. Cornet, H. Prévost, and M.F. Pilett Reij, M.W., and E.D. Den Aantrekker (2004).
(2009). Psychrotrophic lactic acid bacteria used Recontamination as a source of pathogens in
to improve the safety and quality of vacuum- processed foods. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 91(1):1-
packaged cooked and peeled tropical shrimp and 11
cold-smoked salmon. J. Food Prot. 72:365-374 Reina, L.D., J.R. Fredbreidt, H.P. Fleming, and S.
Mazahreh, A.S., and O.T.M. Ershidat (2009). The Kathariou (2005) Isolation and selection of
benefits of lactic acid bacteria in yoghurt on the lactic acid bacteria as biocontrol agents for
gastrointestinal function and health. Pakistan J. nonacidified, refrigerated pickles. J. Food Sci.
Nutr. 8:1404-1410 70(1):M7-M11
Messaoudi, S., M. Manai, G. Kergourlay, H. Prévost, N. Rodgers, S. (2003) Potential applications of protective
Connil, J.M. Chobert, and X. Dousset (2013). cultures in cook-chill catering. Food Cont 14:35-
Lactobacillussalivarius: Bacteriocin and 42
probiotic activity. Food Microbiol. 36:296-304 Ross, P.R., S. Morgan, C. Hill (2002). Preservation and
Muhammad, N., A. Akbar, A. Shah, G. Abbas, M. fermentation: past, present and future. Int. J.
Hussain, and T.A. Khan (2015). Isolation Food Microbiol. 79:3-16
optimization and characterization of Rubio, R., T. Aymerich, S. Bover-Cid, M.D. Guàrdia, J.
antimicrobial peptide producing bacteria from Arnau, and M. Garriga (2013). Probiotic strains
soil. The J. Anim. Plant Sci. 25:1107-1113 Lactobacillusplantarum 299V and
Ossowski, I.V., J. Reunanen, R. Satokari, S. Vesterlund, Lactobacillusrhamnosus GG as starter cultures
M. Kankainen, H. Huhtinen, S. Tynkkynen, S. for fermented sausages. LWT - Food Sci Tech
Salminen, W.M.D. Vos, and A. Palva (2010). 54:51-56
Mucosal adhesion properties of the probiotic Schillinger, U., R. Geisen, and W.H. Holzapfel (1996).
Lactobacillusrhamnosus GG SpaCBA and Potential of antagonistic microorganisms and
SpaFED pilin subunits. Appl. Environ. bacteriocins for the biological preservation of
Microbiol. 76(7):2049-2057 foods. Trends Food Sci. Tech. 7:58-64
Paari, A., K. Paulraj, S. Ramraj, Y. Neelkandan, P. Schillinger, U., and F-K. Lucke (1989). Antibacterial
Vellaiyan, P. Siva, and A. Venkatesan (2011). activity of lactobacillus sake isolated from meat.
Biopreservation of Sardinellalongiceps and Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 55 (8):1901-1906

947
 Akbar et al., The J. Anim. Plant Sci. 26(4):2016

Seo, S., D. Jung, X. Wang, D.J Seo, M.H. Lee, B-H. Lee, Potential use of lactic acid bacteria with
and C. Choi (2013). Combined effect of lactic bacteriocin-like activity against
acid bacteria and citric acid on Escherichia coli Staphylococcusaureus as dual starter cultures in
O157:H7 and Salmonella Typhimurium. Food Thai fermented sausage “Sai Krok Prew”. Int.
Sci. Biotech. 22(4):1171-1174 Food. Res. J. 18:697-704
Settanni, L., and A. Corsetti (2008). Application of Vermeiren, L., F. Devlieghere, and J Debevere (2006).
bacteriocins in vegetable food biopreservation. Co-culture experiments demonstrate the
Int. J. Food Microbiol. 121:123-138 usefulness of Lactobacillussakei 10A to prolong
Shah, N.P. (2007). Functional cultures and health the shelf-life of a model cooked ham. Int. J.
benefits. Int. Dairy J. 17:1262-1277 Food Microbiol. 108:68-77
Shori, A.B. (2013). Antioxidant activity and viability Verschuere, L., G. Rombaut, P. Sorgeloos, and W.
of lactic acid bacteria in soybean-yogurt Verstraete (2000). Probiotic bacteria as
made from cow and camel milk. J. Taibah biological control agents in aquaculture.
Uni. Sci.7(4):202-208 Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev.64 (4):655-671
Sobrino-Lopez, A., and O. Martın-Belloso (2008). Use of Vescovo, M., G. Scolari, and C. Zacconi (2006).
nisin and other bacteriocins for preservation of Inhibition of Listeriainnocua growth by
dairy products. Int. Dairy J. 18:329-343 antimicrobial-producing lactic acid cultures in
Sofos, J.N. (2008). Challenges to meat safety in the 21st vacuum-packed cold-smoked Salmon. Food
century. Meat Sci. 78:3-13 Microbiol. 23:689-693
Tauxe, R.V. (1997). Emerging foodborne diseases: An Wessels, S., L. Axelsson, E.B. Hansen, L. De Vuyst, S.
evolving public health challenge. Emerg. Inf. Laulund, L. Lahteenmaki,S. Lindgren, B.
Dis. 3(4):425-434 Mollet, S. Salminen, and A.V. Wright (2004).
Trias, R., E. Badosa, E. Montesinos, and L. Baneras The lactic acid bacteria, the food chain and their
(2008). Bioprotective Leuconostoc strains regulation. Trends Food Sci. Tech. 15:498-505
against Listeriamonocytogenes in fresh fruits Xiaoshuan, Z., Z. Jian, Z. Hu, and M. Weisong (2009).
and vegetables. Int. J. FoodMicrobiol.127:91-98 Research on the conceptualization model for
Vatanyoopaisarn, S., K. Prapatsornwattana, T. traceability system of meat food quality safety.
Kuhakongkeat, and C. Phalakornkule (2011). WSEAS. Trans. Inf. Sci. Appl.7(6):1083-1093.

948

View publication stats