Printer Friendly

Microbial contamination in industrial tofu/Contaminacao microbiana em tofu industrial.


Brazil is the second largest producer of soybeans in the world (EMBRAPA SOJA, 2016). The consumption of soy and its products is still low in Brazil, although the consumption of soy grains and products has been encouraged since the 1980s due to its high protein content (BEHRENS & DA SILVA, 2004; EMBRAPA, 2015). Another incentive to its consumption has been the positive correlations between the consumption of soybased foods with a reduction in the risk of developing certain diseases (FRITZ et al., 2013; LAI & YEW, 2015; TAKAGI et al., 2015; JAMILIAN & ASEMI, 2016).

Tofu, a soy based cheese, has a high water content which, combined with its high protein content, makes it susceptible to the growth of microorganisms, especially if proper manufacturing and/or storage procedures are not followed (CAI et al., 1999; PAULETTO & FOGACA, 2012). Microbiological quality of this product must be checked to avoid infections or food poisoning. But, few reports about the microbiological quality of tofu have been published (van KOOIJ & DE BOER, 1985; ASHENAFI, 1994; MALLET et al., 2007; DANIYAN et al., 2011; ANANCHAIPATTANA et al., 2012; ROSSI et al., 2016). Therefore the aim of this study was to evaluate the bacteriological quality of two different brands of industrialized tofu sold in a supermarket over a period of six months in 2015, at Porto Alegre city, Brazil. For this propos we searched for coliforms, mesophyles bacteria, Staphylococcus coagulase positive and negative, Bacillus cereus and Listeria sp.


Collection and dilution of samples

Two traditional tofu brands (hereinafter referred to as brands A and B) were collected monthly. Every month five samples of the same lot of each brand were purchased in a supermarket. At the time of collection cooling conditions, the date of manufacture, expiry date and batch number were observed and recorded. Only samples within the legal expiry date were collected. Samples were immediately sent to the laboratory under refrigeration and analyzed within a maximum of 24 hours. Sampling and analyses were carried out over six months (November to April).

Counting of aerobic mesophilic bacteria, coliforms, Staphylococcus sp. and Bacillus cereus

Each sample had the outermost layer of the product aseptically removed. An amount of 25g of the inner part of each tofu sample was first homogenised in 225mL of peptone saline. From this dilution subsequent dilutions ([10.sup.-2] to [10.sup.-5]) were performed, all in duplicate (SILVA et al., 2007).

Counting of mesophilic aerobic bacteria

All dilutions were spread onto a plate counting agar (PCA-Kasvi) as described by SILVA et al. (2007). The counts were expressed in colony forming units per gram (CFU [g.sup.-1]) of the product.

Coliform counting and Escherichia coli identification Total coliform counting was performed with violet red bile agar (VRBA-Fluka Analytica). Confirmation of total and fecal coliforms and E. coli identification were carried out according to Silva and co-workers (2007) using brilliant green bile broth and EC broth (Himedia). Counts were expressed in CFU [g.sup.-1] of the product.

Counting and identification of Staphylococcus coagulase positive and negative

All dilutions were spread in Baird Parker agar (Acumedia) supplemented with egg yolk solution and potassium tellurite according to SILVA et al. (2007). Typical and atypical colonies present were counted and expressed in CFU [g.sup.-1] of the product. Four to five typical and atypical Staphylococcus colonies were isolated and tested by Gram staining, catalase test, glucose oxidation and fermentation, mannitol fermentation, thermonuclease production and coagulase test (MACFADDIN, 2000; SILVA et al., 2007). Isolates were identified as Staphylococcus coagulase positive (SCP) or Staphylococcus coagulase negative (SCN).

Counting of B. cereus

The quantitative evaluation was performed by spreading all dilutions in cereus selective agar (Acumedia) (SILVA et al., 2007).

Detection of Listeria monocytogenes

Detection was carried out according to HITCHINS (2014) consisting of the enrichment of the food in Listeria enrichment broth (Acumedia) and isolation in Oxford Agar (Acumedia) and Palcam agar (Himedia).

Statistical analysis

Results from all bacterial counts were expressed in CFU [g.sup.-1] and analyzed using Tukey's test. A value of P [less than or equal to] 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.


A total of six lots of tofu from each manufacturer were collected, resulting in a total of 60 samples being analyzed. Distribution of the sampling over the different seasons was as follows: four (33%) in spring, six (50%) in summer and two (17%) in winter. The season in which the samples were obtained showed no effect on the bacterial counts that may indicate that probably no oscillation in the refrigeration temperature occurred during exposition of those cheeses on the shelves. All samples remained under refrigeration at the time of sampling. At the time of sampling, all samples had been on the shelf no more than three weeks and all were within three months of their expiry date. All samples showed the same characteristics: good-looking, white cheese with slightly yellowish liquid, sweet smell and soft texture.

Counting of mesophilic aerobic bacteria

All samples showed aerobic mesophilic bacteria above 4.3 x [10.sup.5] CFU [g.sup.-1] (Tables 1 and 2). There was no significant difference between the means of the lots for the two brands. There is no specific legislation outlining the maximum allowable mesophilic bacteria counts in tofu in Brazil. But the amount of these bacteria obtained in many batches showed values around [10.sup.6] CFU [g.sup.-1], which is higher than the limits for many other foods. For example, the limits for mesophilic bacteria in banked breast milk is [10.sup.2] CFU m[L.sup.-1], and for pasteurized milk drinks is 1.5 x [10.sup.5]CFU m[L.sup.-1] (BRAZIL, 2001). Also, the values reported in our study are higher than those recommended by "The Soy Food Association of America" for soy milk, where counts of mesophilic bacteria should not exceed 2 x [10.sup.4]CFU m[L.sup.-1] (TSAA, 1996). Our results are in agreement with van KOOIJ & DE BOER (1985) and ASHENAFI (1994) who also reported high scores of mesophilic bacteria in tofu. ASHENAFI (1994) demonstrated a correlation between the high bacterial counts in tofu and the handling throughout its production. Working with tofu produced in a small industrial scale, ROSSI et al. (2016) reported mesophilic bacteria in all samples analyzed of fresh tofu, and observed that this counts were one to three log higher than those observed with soybean samples obtained in the same industry. This observation showed that along the process of tofu manufacturing, conditions are being created (addition of water, grinding, coagulation, molding, etc) that favour a naturally enhancement of the microbial load. Fails in the process certainly will favour the development of unsuitable microorganisms also.

Coliform counting and E. coli identification

Tables 1 and 2 show the averages of fecal and total coliforms, and E. coli identification in all lots tested. Of the six lots analyzed for brand A, all presented total and fecal coliforms and three lots showed fecal coliform counts above the legal limit of [10.sup.2] CFU [g.sup.-1]. All samples of brand B showed total and fecal coliform levels above the established limits (BRAZIL, 2003). The presence of E. coli was confirmed in the three (50%) lots of brand A and in the six lots (100%) of brand B. These results demonstrated that there were failures in the production of tofu. ANANCHAIPATTANA et al. (2012) also reported coliforms and E. coli in 67% and 28%; respectively, in tofu samples, and highlighted the need of the improvement of hygienic practices during tofu production. E. coli, besides having toxigenic strains (not specifically searched in this research), is an indicator of possible contamination by other harmful microorganisms as Salmonella sp. and Campylobacter sp. (ANANCHAIPATTANA et al., 2012).

Counting and identification of Staphylococcus coagulase positive and negative

Two lots of brand A and four lots of brand B showed levels of SCP above the official limits of 5.3 x [10.sup.3]CFU [g.sup.-1] (Tables 1 and 2). These results show, once again, the likely inadequate hygiene in the production process of those cheeses or in the cooling conditions during storage. Contamination with SCP is a significant indicator of improper handling of the product during manufacturing. Staphylococcus sp. can be found in the microbiota of the handlers and in the absence of good hygiene practices may be transferred to food (SOARES et al., 2012). SCP counts as high as 5.5 x [10.sup.4]CFU [g.sup.-1] were observed, which are similar to the levels demonstrated by van KOOIJ & De BOER (1985) in Nigeria and by MALLET et al. (2007) in the city of Lavras, Brazil. The presence of SCP was also confirmed in tofu by DANIYAN et al. (2011).

SCN counts ranged from 3.4 x [10.sup.1] to 6.8 x [10.sup.4]CFU [g.sup.-1] in brand A and from 3.7 x [10.sup.1] to 6.3 x [10.sup.4]CFU [g.sup.-1] in brand B. Levels of SCN were higher than those of SCP in all samples. In all lots where SCP counts were above the legal limit, there were counts of SCN above [10.sup.4]CFU [g.sup.-1]. In a comparison between packaged and unpackaged tofu ANANCHAIPATTANA et al. (2012) showed a high contamination rate, of both kinds of samples, contaminated with SCN, but no bacterial counts were discriminated. FLEMING et al. (2010), studying bovine cheese, reported higher SCN counts in 50% of those samples where counts of SCP were also above the limits of legislation. The SCN may also hold enterotoxin genes and many reports of food poisoning from SCN through ingestion of raw cow's milk have been made (CARMO et al., 2002; CUNHA et al., 2006; PODKOWIK et al., 2013; MELLO et al., 2014). Despite the possible ability of SCN to produce enterotoxins, most reports of staphylococcal poisoning have been predominantly related to the presence of SCP. However, future studies should examine a possible role of SCN in staphylococcal food poisoning.

Counting of B. cereus and Detection of Listeria monocytogenes. B. cereus and Listeria sp. were not isolated in any of the tofu samples analyzed. Both bacteria are ubiquitously distributed, and can be present even in the food-processing environments (RYSER & MARTH, 2007; LOGAN, & De VOS, 2009). The search of these bacteria are important because they may cause food borne illness. Presence of L. monocytogenes may cause death in immunologically deficient persons. Unexpectedly there are no obligation to search Listeria sp. in tofu, despite their higher nutritive and water contends, conditions that favour bacterial growth, Listeria sp. particularly, by its ability of growing at cold temperatures (BRAZIL, 2001). But, the presence of some microorganisms in food at high counts is able to inhibit the growth of other microorganisms. For example, the presence of E. coli in high counts inhibits the growth of L. monocytogenes in food (DAILEY et al., 2014). In our study, the presence of high counts of mesophilic aerobic bacteria, coliforms and Staphylococcus sp. may have been an obstacle to the growth of B. cereus and Listeria sp. Other authors have been describing B. cereus and L. monocytogenes presence in tofu and recalls of contaminated tofu have been published (SCHAEFER, 2007; ANANCHAIPATTANA et al., 2012; UFDA, 2015).


Based on the levels of coliforms and SCP presented in the analyzed tofu, four of the six lots of brand A and all six lots of brand B were unsuitable for human consumption because of the high counts of these microorganisms. Contamination of fecal coliforms and SCP were most likely due to the absence of good manufacturing practices during the production of these cheeses, taking into account that these microorganisms are natural human microbiota. The high counts of mesophilic bacteria and SCN are also the reflection of the lack of hygiene in the process. Concluding, it seems that there are fails in the control of the good practices in the industries and that, this food, is not receiving attention by the Brazilian inspection services. 10.1590/0103-8478cr20160234

Received 03.06.16

Approved 10.10.16

Returned by the author 11.28.16 CR-2016-0234.R2


This work was supported by Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq) fellowship and Programa de Apoio a Pos-graduacao (PROAP)/Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS).


ANANCHAIPATTANA, C. et al. Bacterial contamination of soybean curd (Tofu) sold in Thailand. Food Science and Technology Research, v.18, p.843-848, 2012. Available from: <https://www.>. Accessed : Mar. 31, 2016. doi: 10.3136/fstr.18.843.

ASHENAFI, M. Microbiological evaluation of tofu and tempeh during processing and storage. Plant Foods for Human Nutrition, v.45, p.183-189, 1994. Available from: < BF01088476>. Accessed: Mar. 31, 2016. doi:10.1007/BF01088476.

BEHRENS, J. H.; DA SILVA, M. A. A. P. Atitude do consumidor em relacao a soja e produtos derivados. Ciencia e Tecnologia de Alimentos, v.24, p.431-439, 2004. Available from: <http://www.scielo. br/pdf/cta/v24n3/21939.pdf>. Accessed: Mar. 31, 2016. doi: 10.1590/ S0101-20612004000300023.

BRAZIL. Agencia Nacional de Vigilancia Sanitaria. Resolucao RDC 12, de 2 de janeiro de 2001. Available from: <http://portal.anvisa. RDC_12_2001.pdf?MOD=AJPERES>. Accessed: Jan. 15, 2016.

BRAZIL. Ministerio da Agricultura, Pecuaria e Abastecimento. Instrucao normativa n.62, de 26 de agosto de 2003, p.1-21. Available from: <>. Accessed: May 15, 2014.

CAI, T. et al. Processing effect on soybean storage proteins and their relationship with tofu quality. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, v.47, p.720-727, 1999. Available from: <http://pubs-acs->. Accessed: Mar. 31, 2016. doi: 10.1021/jf980571z.

CARMO, L. S. et al. Food poisoning due to enterotoxigenic strains of Staphylococcus present in Minas cheese and raw milk in Brazil. Food Microbiology, v.19, p.9-14, 2002. Available from: <http://www.>. Accessed: Mar. 31, 2016. doi: 10.1006/fmic.2001.0444.

CUNHA, M. L. R. S. et al. Detection of enterotoxins genes in coagulase-negative Staphilococci isolated from foods. Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, v.37, p.70-74, 2006. Available from: <http://www.scielo. br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1517-83822006000100013>. Accessed: Mar. 31, 2016. doi: 10.1590/S1517-83822006000100013.

DANIYAN, S. Y et al. Microbiological and physiochemical assessment of street vended soyabean cheese sold in Minna, Nigeria. International Journal of Biomedical and Advance Research, v.2, p.25-31, 2011. Available from: < view/56>. Accessed: Mar. 31, 2016. doi: 10.7439/ijbar.v2i1.19.

DAILEY, R. C. et al. The effects of competition from non-pathogenic foodborne bacteria during the selective enrichment of Listeria monocytogenes using buffered Listeria enrichment broth. Food Microbiology, v.44, p.173-179, 2014. Available from: <http://www.>. Accessed: Mar. 31, 2016. doi: 10.1016/

EMBRAPA. Programa de incentivo de utilizacao da soja na alimentacao humana. Agencia Embrapa de Informacao tecnologica. Available from: <http://www.agencia.cnptia.embrapa. br/gestor/soja/arvore/C0NT000fzyb8ypx02wx5ok0q43a0rch91zqd. html>. Accessed: Aug. 30, 2015.

EMBRAPA SOJA. Soja em numeros. Available from: <https://>. Accessed: Feb. 16, 2016.

FLEMING, L. R. et al. Quantification and antibiotic resistance of Staphylococci isolated from cheeses. Perspectivas da Ciencia e Tecnologia, v.2; n.1/2, p.13-19, 2010. Available from: <http:// article/view/31/128>. Accessed: Mar. 31, 2016.

FRITZ, H. et al. Soy, red clover, and isoflavones and breast cancer: a systematic review. PLoS ONE, v.8, p.e8, 1968. Available from: < pone.0081968.pdf>. Accessed: Mar. 31, 2016. doi: 10.1371/ journal.pone.0081968, 2013.

HITCHINS, A. D. Detection and enumeration of Listeria monocytogenes in foods. In: US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Bacteriological analytical manual online. Available from: <http://>. Accessed: June, 10, 2014.

JAMILIAN, M.; ASEMI, Z. The effects of soy isoflavones on metabolic status of patients with polycystic ovary syndrome. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, v.101, n.9, p. 3386-3394. Available from: <>. Accessed: Mar. 31, 2016. doi: 10.1210/jc.2016-1762, 2016.

LAI, Y. C.; YEW, Y W. Tofu, urinary phytoestrogens, and melanoma: An analysis of a national database in the United States. Dermatologica Sinica, v.33, p.210-214, 2015. Available from: <http://ac.els-cdn. com/S1027811715000531/1-s2.0-S1027811715000531-main.pdf?_ tid=2eea80ee-9f81-11e6-a52e-00000aacb362&acdnat=1477928967 _01bfad5cbe72a315a27cb821192920e1>. Accessed: Mar. 31, 2016. doi: 10.1016/j.dsi.2015.05.003.

LOGAN, N. A.; De VOS, P. Genus I. Bacillus Cohn 1872, 174AL. In: De VOS et al. The Firmicutes. Athens: Springer, 2009. V.3, p.21-128.

MACFADDIN, J. F. Biochemical tests for identification of medical bacteria. Philadelphia: Lippincott Willians & Wilkins, 2000. 912p.

MALLET, A. C. T. et al. Estudo da qualidade sanitaria do queijo de soja "TOFU". In: CONGRESSO DE POS GRADUACAO DA UFLA, 16., 2007, Universidade Federal de Lavras/UFLA. Anais... UFLA, 2007. p.1-6. Available from: < resumos/resumo_2007/Resumos/190.pdf>. Accessed: Mar. 31, 2016.

MELLO, J. F. et al. Sanitary quality, occurrence and identification of Staphylococcus sp. in food services. Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, v.45, p. 1031-1037, 2014. Available from: <https://>. Accessed: Mar. 31, 2016.

PAULETTO, F. B.; FOGACA, A. O. Avaliacao da composicao centesimal de tofu e okara. Disciplinarum Scientia, Serie: Ciencias da Saude, v.13, p.85-95, 2012. Available from: <http://sites.unifra. br/Portals/36/CSAUDE/2012/08.pdf>. Accessed: Mar. 31, 2016.

PODKOWIK, M. et al. Enterotoxigenic potential of coagulase-negative Staphylococci. International Journal of Food Microbiology, v.163, p.34-40, 2013. Available from: < S0168160513000913-main.pdf?_tid=9b67e328-9f82-11e6-a94d-00000aab0f01&acdnat=1477929578_9f45a291897cbb6a df96ac74ba259bc6>. Accessed: Mar. 31, 2016. doi: 10.1016/j. ijfoodmicro.2013.02.005.

ROSSI, F. et al. Microbiological characteristics of fresh tofu produced in small industrial sacale and identification of specific spoiling micro-organisms (SSO). Food Science and Technology, v.70, p.280-285, 2016. Available from: < 11e6- b50b-00000aab0f27&acdnat=1477929839_3dbbd489514dd1f6 35a6d080d83558a0>. Accessed: Mar. 31, 2016. doi: 10.1016/j. lwt.2016.02.057.

SCHAEFER, P. Organic Tofu Recall, Listeria Discovered. 2007. Available from: <>. Accessed: Aug. 31, 2016.

SILVA, N. et al. Manual de Metodos de Analise Microbiologica de Alimentos. Sao Paulo; Varela, 2007. 536p.

SOARES, L. S. et al. Knowledge, attitudes and practices in food safety and the presence of coagulase-positive Staphylococci on hands of food handlers in the schools of Camacari, Brazil. Food Control, v.27, p.206-213, 2012. Available from: <http://ac.els-cdn. com/S0956713512001442/1-s2.0-S0956713512001442-main.pdf?_ tid=9547cac0-9f83-11e6-890d-00000aacb362&acdnat=1477929997 b8b303e44a0ce063287e6af05b1d15ab>. Accessed: Mar. 31, 2016. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2012.03.016.

RYSER, E. T.; MARTH, E. H. Listeria, listeriosis, and food safety. Boca Raton: CRC, 2007. 873p.

TAKAGI, A. et al. Possibility of breast cancer prevention: use of soy isoflavones and fermented soy beverage produced using probiotics. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, v.16, p.10907-10920, 2015. Available from: < PMC4463682/pdf/ijms-16-10907.pdf doi: 10.3390/ijms160510907>. Accessed: Mar. 31, 2016. doi: 10.3390/ijms160510907.

TSAA (THE SOYFOODS ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA). Voluntary standards for the composition and labeling of soymilk in the United States. 1996. 16p. Available from: <http://www.>. Online. Accessed: Feb. 16, 2016.

UFDA (U S. FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION). Amy's kitchen recalls various products because of possible health risk. Available from: <>. Accessed: Aug. 31, 2016.

van KOOIJ, J. A. V; De BOER, E. A survey of the microbiological quality of commercial tofu in the Netherlands. Food Microbiology, v.2, p.349-354, 1985. Available from: <http://ac.els-cdn. com/016816058590025X/1-s2.0-016816058590025X-main.pdf?_ tid=9c9a5516-9f80-11e6-a0b6-00000aacb35e&acdnat=1477928721_ a7375a3bb88a846728337bbeba17312b>. Accessed: Mar. 31, 2016. doi: 10.1016/0168-1605(85)90025-X.

Thais Teresa Brandao Cavalheiro Ribeiro (1) Gessica Costa (1) Marisa da Costa (1) *

(1) Programa de Pos-graduacao em Microbiologia Agricola e do Ambiente, Instituto de Ciencias Basicas da Saude (ICBS), Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Rua Sarmento Leite, 500, Sala 216, 90050-170, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil. E-mail:

* Corresponding author.
Table 1--Bacterial counts of mesophilic bacteria, coliforms,
coagulase positive and negative Staphylococci in tofu brand A.

           Colony forming units [g.sup.-1] (a)

Lot   Mesophilic Bacteria       Total coliform

1     3.3 x [10.sup.6]          3.5 x [10.sup.4]

      (3 x [10.sup.6]-3.6 x     (3.1 x [10.sup.4]-3.7 x
      [10.sup.6]) (d)           [10.sup.4])

2     4.3 x [10.sup.5]          3.2 x [10.sup.1]
      (4 x [10.sup.5]-4.8 x     (2.9 x [10.sup.1]-3.5 x
      [10.sup.5])               [10.sup.1])

3     4.5 x [10.sup.5]          3.7 x [10.sup.1]
      (4.4 x [10.sup.5]-4.7 x   (3.5 x [10.sup.1]-3.9 x
      [10.sup.5])               [10.sup.1])

4     7.2 x [10.sup.6]          8.3 x [10.sup.5]
      (7 x [10.sup.6]-7.6 x     (8.1 x [10.sup.5]-8.5 x
      [10.sup.6])               [10.sup.5])

5     9.1 x [10.sup.6]          3.5 x [10.sup.1]
      (9 x [10.sup.6]-9.3 x     (3.4 x [10.sup.1]-3.7 x
      [10.sup.6])               [10.sup.1]

6     7.2 x [10.sup.6]          7.9 x [10.sup.5]
      (7 x [10.sup.6]-7.5 x     (7.7 x [10.sup.5]-8 x
      [10.sup.6])               [10.sup.5])

               Colony forming units [g.sup.-1] (a)

Lot   Fecal coliform            SCP (b)

1     0.2 x [10.sup.4]#         (3.1 x [10.sup.3] x 3.5 x

      (3.1 x [10.sup.3]-3.6 x   (3.1 x [10.sup.3] x 3.5 x
      [10.sup.3])               [10.sup.3])

2                               3.4 x [10.sup.3]
      NF (5)                    (3.1 x [10.sup.3]-3.7 x

3                               5.7 x [10.sup.1]
      NF                        (5.5 x [10.sup.1]-5.9 x

4     6 x [10.sup.5]#           5.5 x [10.sup.4]#
      (5.8 x [10.sup.5]-6.2 x   (5.4 x [10.sup.4]-5.7 x
      [10.sup.5])               [10.sup.4])

5     NF                        5.2 x [10.sup.4]#
                                (4.9 x [10.sup.4]-5.3 x

6     5.6 x [10.sup.5]#         NF
      (5.4 x [10.sup.5]-5.8 x

      Colony forming units [g.sup.-1] (a)

Lot   SCN (c)

1     (5 x [10.sup.3]-5.5 x

      (5 x [10.sup.3]-5.5 x

2     6.2 x [10.sup.3]
      (5.9 x [10.sup.3]-6.4 x

3     7.2 x [10.sup.1]
      (6.9 x [10.sup.1]-7.3 x

4     6.1 x [10.sup.4]
      (6 x [10.sup.4]-6.3 x

5     6.8 x [10.sup.4]
      (6.6 x [10.sup.4]-6.9 x

6     3.4 x [10.sup.1]
      (3.2 x [10.sup.1]-3.6 x

(a): Mean of five samples per lot. (b): CPS: coagulase positive
Staphylococci. (c): CNS: coagulase negative Staphylococci. (d): In
brackets: minimal and maximal values. Bold type indicates lots that
exceed the limits of Brazilian legislation to tofu. NF: not found.

Note: The lots that exceed the limits of Brazilian legislation to
tofu are indicated with #.

Table 2--Bacterial counts of mesophilic bacteria, coliforms,
coagulase positive and negative Staphylococci in tofu brand B.

                Colony forming units [g.sup.-1] (a)

Lot   Mesophilic Bacteria     Total coliform       Fecal coliform

1     5.3 x [10.sup.6]        6.2 x [10.sup.5]     4.4 x [10.sup.5]#
      (5 x [10.sup.6]-        (5.9 x [10.sup.5]-   (4 x [10.sup.5]-
      5.7 x [10.sup.6]) (d)   6.5 x [10.sup.5])    4.7 x [10.sup.5])

2     6.3 x [10.sup.5]        7.1 x [10.sup.4]     4.2 x [10.sup.4]#
      (6 x [10.sup.5]-        (6.7 x [10.sup.4]-   (3.9 x [10.sup.4]-
      6.6 x [10.sup.5])       7.3 x [10.sup.4])    4.4 x [10.sup.4])

3     4.8 x [10.sup.6]        7.3 x [10.sup.5]     6.5 x [10.sup.5]#
      (4.5 x [10.sup.6]-      (7 x [10.sup.5]-     (6.3 x [10.sup.5] x
      5.2 x [10.sup.6])       7.5 x [10.sup.5])    6.7 x [10.sup.5])

4     5.3 x [10.sup.6]        5.7 x [10.sup.5]     3.3 x [10.sup.5]#
      (5.1 x [10.sup.6]-      (5.3 x [10.sup.5]-   (3.1 x [10.sup.5]-
      5.5 x [10.sup.6])       5.8 x [10.sup.5])    3.5 x [10.sup.5])

5     7.4 x [10.sup.6]        8.2 x [10.sup.5]     3.7 x [10.sup.5]#
      (7.2 x [10.sup.6]-      (7.9 x [10.sup.5]-   (3.5 x [10.sup.5]-
      7.8 x [10.sup.6])       8.4 x [10.sup.5])    3.8 x [10.sup.5])

6     8.2 x [10.sup.6]        7.9 x [10.sup.5]     3.7 x [10.sup.5]#
      (8 x [10.sup.6]-        (7.7 x [10.sup.5]-   (3.5 x [10.sup.5]-
      8.4 x [10.sup.6])       8.2 x [10.sup.5])    3.9 x [10.sup.5])

         Colony forming units [g.sup.-1] (a)

Lot   SCP (b)              SCN (c)

1     4.5 x [10.sup.4]#    6.3 x [10.sup.4]
      (4.2 x [10.sup.4]-   (6 x [10.sup.4]-
      4.8 x [10.sup.4])    6.6 x [10.sup.4])

2     3.6 x [10.sup.3]#    4.1 x [10.sup.3]
      (3.3 x [10.sup.3]-   (3.9 x [10.sup.3]-
      3.9 x [10.sup.3])    4.3 x [10.sup.3])

3     4.1 x [10.sup.4]#    5.1 x [10.sup.4]
      (3.8 x [10.sup.4]-   (4.9 x [10.sup.4]-
      4.3 x [10.sup.4])    5.3 x [10.sup.4])

4     4 x [10.sup.4]#      4.7 x [10.sup.4]
      (3.8 x [10.sup.4]-   (4.5 x [10.sup.4]-
      4.2 x [10.sup.4])    4.9 x [10.sup.4])

5                          3.7 x [10.sup.1]
      NF                   (3.5 x [10.sup.1]-
                           3.8 x [10.sup.1])

6     3.5 x [10.sup.4]#    3.9 x [10.sup.4]
      (3.3 x [10.sup.4]-   (3.8 x [10.sup.4]-
      3.7 x [10.sup.4])    4.1 x [10.sup.4])

(a): Mean of five samples per lot. (b): CPS: coagulase positive
Staphylococci. (c): CNS: coagulase negative Staphylococci. (d): In
brackets: minimal and maximal values. Bold type indicates lots that
exceed the limits of Brazilian legislation to tofu. NF: not found.

Note: The lots that exceed the limits of Brazilian legislation to
tofu are indicated with #.
COPYRIGHT 2017 Universidade Federal de Santa Maria
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2017 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:texto en ingles
Author:Ribeiro, Thais Teresa Brandao Cavalheiro; Costa, Gessica; da Costa, Marisa
Publication:Ciencia Rural
Date:Mar 1, 2017
Previous Article:Performance of an agricultural engine using mineral diesel and ethanol fuels/Desempenho de um motor agricola utilizando diesel mineral e etanol.
Next Article:Origin and evolution of tomato production Lycopersicon esculentum in Mexico/Origem e evolucao da producao de tomate Lycopersicon esculentum no Mexico.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2020 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters