6 replies to this topic

[ok_crispy]

First time poster, long time reader.

 

Background on our process: We are a third-party frozen vegetable and fruit repacking operation. 

 

Relating to this topic - we sample and plate inbound IQF fruits and carrots for yeast & mold as per customer requirements; yesterday my rapid Y&M plates were a TNTC. Our acceptable range is <1000 yeast and <1000 mold. 

 

Our customer procures fruit and ships to us for repack. The COA and spec sheet for said item is <5000 for both Y&M. 

 

I am retesting currently and should the retest exceed our limit of <1000, how would you proceed with this from a risk assessment standpoint? 

 

We keep our limits low to protect our lines and Repack Room from excessive exposure, but it is also known that berries/fruit can have higher Y&M counts.  

 

How would some of your handle this situation? 

 

Thanks so much! 

[Charles.C]

First time poster, long time reader.

 

Background on our process: We are a third-party frozen vegetable and fruit repacking operation. 

 

Relating to this topic - we sample and plate inbound IQF fruits and carrots for yeast & mold as per customer requirements; yesterday my rapid Y&M plates were a TNTC. Our acceptable range is <1000 yeast and <1000 mold. 

 

Our customer procures fruit and ships to us for repack. The COA and spec sheet for said item is <5000 for both Y&M. 

 

I am retesting currently and should the retest exceed our limit of <1000, how would you proceed with this from a risk assessment standpoint? 

 

We keep our limits low to protect our lines and Repack Room from excessive exposure, but it is also known that berries/fruit can have higher Y&M counts.  

 

How would some of your handle this situation? 

 

Thanks so much! 

Hi OKC,

 

I assume the units are cfu/gram.

 

It is sometimes recommended to avoid implementing microbiological standards on fresh produce due the potential variations (eg ICMSF).

 

Based on how many samples ? Hopefully not 1 + 1.

How do you validate yr specification ?

Usual Supplier ?

Historical Compliance/typical levels?

[ok_crispy]

Hi Charles, 

 

Yes, units are cfu/gram. 

 

I understand the concept of fresh produce, however this is IQF fruits with correlating specification sheets and COAs upon arrival. The spec sheet limits from customer via supplier are higher than our required range (<1000 cfu/g). This was an oversight on the customer's part partially due to supply chain, product availability etc. 

 

To my understanding this is a new supplier for the customer and currently I do not have historical data as reference, but mentioned above the supplier's limits are higher than our requirements.  

 

Is it common to have higher acceptable ranges for frozen fruits? Higher than the acceptable range in my program? 

[pHruit]

What fruits are these that you're handling?

In some cases IQF is not that different to fresh in terms of potential micro levels - with some fruits you can give them a nice thorough wash, but smaller soft fruits and berries are remarkably difficult to clean in any sort of useful way without destroying them. As such, you can potentially see some fairly high limits on IQF specs for things like e.g. blackberry and raspberry. It's a while since I've worked with any IQF, but from memory it wasn't that unusual to see Y&M limits in the 10^4 cfu/g range for these, and TVC limits of 10^5 cfu/g.

 

What's the basis for your current limit? Is there any record of why this was set where it is, even if there is no historical data?

 

If all of your own products are achieving this limit then the other way to approach it would be to define a different limit for this customer's material - they're supplying the raw material and accepting the finished products against these limits, so would presumably be happy to agree a specification based on them?

 

Obviously it's also possible that your customer's supplier's limits aren't actually being achieved in practice - their own sampling methodology may be questionable, and/or they may not actually be testing sufficiently to really know. It might be worth getting some external analysis done at a dilution that will enable actual enumeration, as then you'll at least have some solid data to go back to the customer with. It should be a relatively cheap test even with an external accredited lab.

[ok_crispy]

Hi pHruit,

 

We repack mostly berries (strawberries, blackberries, raspberries) which are received already frozen. 

 

In discussing with some veteran employees (I've only come on board in October) the current limits were set before we ran fruits; we used to only test Y&M on inbound carrots. I think our current limits may be an oversight. In the interim, I've sent out sample to an accredited lab for confirmation and proper enumeration. 

 

I think that based on the origins of our limits coupled with research and review of various specifications sheets for Y&M in fruits, we can adjust our limits without compromising food safety and revise the dilution in our testing methods to be able to properly enumerate. 

 

Thank you everyone for your insight, I greatly appreciate it as I come from aseptic, shelf stable dairy - veggies and fruits are new to me.

[Charles.C]

Hi pHruit,

 

We repack mostly berries (strawberries, blackberries, raspberries) which are received already frozen. 

 

In discussing with some veteran employees (I've only come on board in October) the current limits were set before we ran fruits; we used to only test Y&M on inbound carrots. I think our current limits may be an oversight. In the interim, I've sent out sample to an accredited lab for confirmation and proper enumeration. 

 

I think that based on the origins of our limits coupled with research and review of various specifications sheets for Y&M in fruits, we can adjust our limits without compromising food safety and revise the dilution in our testing methods to be able to properly enumerate. 

 

Thank you everyone for your insight, I greatly appreciate it as I come from aseptic, shelf stable dairy - veggies and fruits are new to me.

Hi OKC,

 

In a situation of nil data and raw products, my approach is typically to have a look at the available Literature and also get some representative data to compare.

The reason, IIRC, for ICMSF changing their originally offered quality micro specs for raw fruits/vegetables to one of "limited opinion" was the finding of large variations in suppliers so that it became impractical to nominate a typical range. Looks like you are encountering a similar scenario due for example to comments in Post 4. Accordingly, since safety not a primary issue, it becomes necessary to get some relevant data as to if any correlation between "high" levels and other quality factors.

There are other threads here on yeast and mould levels in raw foods. The typical ranges desired/achieved from memory can vary widely/wildly, eg up to factors of x 100.

(JFI my main area is seafood and I find that basic APC specifications of cold-water marine fish are often simply unworkable for tropical items - force of Nature )

[Charles.C]

addendum to Post 6 - I have done a mini-search in the Literature regarding Yeast&Mould (YM cfu/gram) limits for  fruit/vegetables.

 

Published YM Limits seem to be extremely rare (APC counts are more widely used) and I only found 2 sources which seemed reasonably meaningful -

 

(a) Fruit (Spain,2001) - Y<10⁵, M<10³

(b) Vegetables (Debevere,1996) - Y<10⁵

(c) Fermented Vegetables (Philippines,2013) - Y<10⁴

 

Relevant files are attached.

 

I also noticed this rather potent caveat -

 

It is not practical to use a microbiological specification based only on nonspecific microbial test results to reject fresh-cut products on a commercial level.
APC and yeast, or lactic acid bacterial counts cannot be used solely to judge or predict shelf life or spoilage of lot of products, although there is an overall linear relationship between microbial load and quality of fresh-cut produce.
(see file [a,b] below)

 

 

 a,b - Microbial Spoilage of Fruits, Vegetables,2009.pdf   150.46KB   55 downloads

 c - Draft Guidelines for Processed Food Products,2013.pdf   7.95MB   51 downloads

 

There are a few quite large-scale  data studies on Fruits/Vegetables which indicate that failure of the above limits certainly occurs occasionally, eg this abstract -

 

A limited survey of fresh and minimally processed vegetables, and sprouts was conducted in the Washington, DC area to determine if potentially toxigenic and pathogenic fungi were present in these commodities. Thirty-nine ready-to-eat salads, 29 whole fresh vegetables and 116 sprout samples (bean, alfalfa, broccoli, crunchy, garlic, spicy, onion, clover, lentil and multi-seed sprouts) were purchased from 13 local supermarkets and tested for yeast and mould counts as well as the presence of toxigenic moulds. Yeasts were the most prevalent organisms found in these samples, at levels ranging from less than 100 to 4.0x10(8) cfu/g. Mould counts generally ranged from less than 100 to 4.0x10(4) cfu/g. Two crunchy sprout samples, however, contained unusually high numbers of Penicillium (1.1x10(8) and 1.3x10(8) cfu/g), two alfalfa sprout samples contained Geotrichum populations about 10(6) cfu/g, and two alfalfa sprout samples had Cladosporium counts higher than 2.5x10(5) cfu/g.

https://www.research...les_and_sprouts

 

PS - this comment is extracted from ICMSF/Microorganisms in Foods 2 (1986) -

 

Prepacked  frozen  vegetables  and  fruits  continue  to  be  popular  convenience  foods  and  are  in  international  trade.  These  products  have  a commendable  microbiological  safety  record.  Blanching,  a  commonly used procedure, intended primarily to inactivate degradative enzymes, usually kills any vegetative form of pathogens contaminating surfaces of vegetables and fruits. Therefore, the bacteriological condition of such products is primarily a reflection of the hygienic practices employed after  blanching.  In  many  instances,  however,  re-contamination  of  the blanched products occurs.
Although sampling plans for aerobic plate counts (APC)  and Escherichia  coli  were  recommended  in  the  first  edition  of  this  book,  the Commission no longer supports the need for the APC recommendation. Without  information  on  the  history  of  a  product  and  its  processing conditions, it is impossible to interpret the results of an APC performed at  a  port  of  entry.  If  this  information  is  available  (e.g.,  to  industry) appropriate limits can be established and case 1 or 2 would be applicable depending on whether or not the product is to be cooked.