食品科学 ›› 2013, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (1): 49-52.

• 基础研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

4种拍击式均质机的比较评估

Cesar G. CABALLERO1,赖卫华2,Daniel Y. C. FUNG1,*,Beth Ann CROZIER-DODSON1   

  1. 1.美国肯萨斯州立大学食品科学与动物科学工业研究院 2.南昌大学 食品科学与技术国家重点实验室
  • 收稿日期:2011-10-28 修回日期:2012-12-14 出版日期:2013-01-15 发布日期:2013-01-07
  • 通讯作者: Daniel Y. C. Fung E-mail:dfung@ksu.edu

Comparative Evaluation of Four Homogenization Machines

  • Received:2011-10-28 Revised:2012-12-14 Online:2013-01-15 Published:2013-01-07

摘要: 食品的微生物检测涉及到样品前处理和后续的均质。本实验对Stomacher™、Pulsifier™、Bagmixer™和Smasher™共4种拍击式均质机进行了四方面的比较:10种食品的活菌计数;距离5英尺远,人工和分贝计比较设备操作过程中的噪音强度;设备使用后清洗的难易程度;操作性。具体操作是从10种食品各取 25g,加入装有224.5mL 0.1%的蛋白胨水的样本袋中,再加入0.5mL大肠杆菌菌液。每种食品都用拍击式均质机均质60s。以拍击式均质机Stomacher™作为参照,确定设备使用后清洗的难易程度及操作性。结果表明:4种拍击式均质机活菌计数的结果相似,Smasher™和Bagmixer™的噪音强度最低,Stomacher™的噪音强度其次,Pulsifier™的噪音强度最高。Smasher™使用后清洗和操作最方便,依次分别是Bagmixer™、Stomacher™和Pulsifier™。

关键词: 噪音强度, 分贝, 操作性, 活菌计数

Abstract: Microbiological examination of foods involves sample preparation and subsequent homogenization. This paper addresses the effectiveness of Stomacher™, Pulsifier™, Bagmixer™ and Smasher™ instruments in terms of: 1) viable cell counts/g for 10 kinds of foods, 2) noise level of four instruments associated with human operation and decibel meter at 5 ft from each instrument, 3) convenience for cleaning instruments after use, and 4) ergonomics. Aliquots of 25 g for 10 kinds of foods were placed individually in a sample bag containing 224.5 mL of 0.1% peptone water plus 0.5 mL of Escherichia coli inoculum. Each food was homogenized for 60 s. Ease of cleaning and ergonomics when using Stomacher™ were determined as a reference. All 4 instruments revealed a similar performance regarding viable cell counts. As for noise level, Smasher™ and Bagmixer™ were the quietest, followed by Stomacher™ and Pulsifier™. Smasher™ ranked highest in ease of cleaning and ergonomics, followed by Bagmixer™, Stomacher™, and Pulsifier™.

Key words: noise level, decibels, ergonomics, viable cell count

中图分类号: