CA1186218A

CA1186218A - Liquid bactericide for foods and food processing machines or utensils, and bactericidal method using said bactericide

Info

Publication number: CA1186218A
Application number: CA000386712A
Authority: CA
Inventors: Tatsuo Kanayama; Ryuzo Ueno; Yatsuka Fujita; Munemitsu Yamamoto
Original assignee: Ueno Seiyaku Oyo Kenkyujo KK
Current assignee: Ueno Seiyaku Oyo Kenkyujo KK
Priority date: 1980-09-26
Filing date: 1981-09-25
Publication date: 1985-04-30
Also published as: JPS6228664B2; GB2087724B; AU558019B2; FR2490928A1; DE3138277A1; FR2490928B1; DE3138277C2; GB2087724A; JPS5758876A; AU7560881A

Abstract

ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE

The invention is an effective and safe liquid bactericide for foods and food processing machines, which comprises as active ingredients ethyl alco-hol, an organic acid or its salt and/or an inorganic acid or its salt. The sterilization is carried out by dissolving the active ingredients in water and contacting the food or food processing machine to be sterilised with the result-ing aqueous solution.

Description

2 ~
~ his invention relates to an effective and safe liquid bactericide for foods and food processing machines or ut~nsils~ saia bactericide comprising a combinatlon of (1) ethyl alcohol and (2) an organic acid or its salt and/or an inorganic acid or its salt9 and a method for killing noxious bacteria which adhere to foods and ~ood processing machines or utensils to cause ~ood poisoning or spoilage.
Nowadays, a variety of foods are processed in great quantities at fixed places and transported from there to places of consumption. Accordingly, a long period of time elapses during transportation of the pro-cessed foods from the manufacturers to the consumers9 and also until the consumers cook or eat them~ During this time, various problems tend to arise. ~he greatest problem is the oecurrence of food poisoning and spoilage owing to infecting microorganisms, and a great deal of efforts have been made to prevent it.
Food poisoning and spoilage are caused~mainl~
b~ bacterial infection of raw materials, and bacterial infection during processing and di~tribution. In this regard, it is generally thought that seafood pastes, and hams and sausages have a high de~ree of safety because they undergo heat-treatment during processing. These foods, however, OEe susceptible to secondary contamination during a time period between the heat-treatment and packag ing. In order to prevent food poisoning and spoilage of these foods, it is necessary to prevent secondary con-, "
i ' ' ~ .
,. , -- 3 --taminatio~
Salads9 Chinese ~oods9 hambergs9 meat balls, etc are among those processed ~oods which have recently shown a great demand in the Japanese market9 and the demand for 5 ~alads containing raw vegetables ls especially high. It i9 known howover that raw vegetables used for salads, such as cucumber, tomato, cabbage~ Chi~ese cabbageg onion and celery, are frequently contamina ted strongly by ~ood-poisoning bacteria and spoiling bacteriaO Pre~erltly9 the noxious bacteria infecting vegetables is controlled by the blanching methodO ~his method, however, ha~ the defect that becauss it involves immersing the vegetables in a liguid kept at a high temperature, the tissues of the vegetables will be destroyed by heat~ and their flavor decreases markedly~ Investigations have beerl undertaken, on the other hand~ to remove the contaminating bacteria by an immersion or spraying technique using sodium hypo~
chlorite, acetic acid, etc~ However~ since -the chemicals must be used in high concerltrations1 they are likely to 20~ cause o~fen~ive odors, an~ adversely a~fect the flavor of foods and the health of the consumers.
Contamination of the human body (a.g~, worklng porsonnel and cooks in food processing factories), sea-~ foods, chickens (especially boilers)~ and chicken eggs by ~ood-poisoning bacteria also pose~ a problem. Fox removal of these bacteria, lt is -the ~eneral practice to treat them with an aqueous solution of sodium hypochlorite in a concentration of le~s than 200 ppm (as available Cl)~ but the effec-t of this treatment is not sufficientO If`-the sodium hypochlorite is used in a concentration of 200 ppm or more, its odor remains in the chicken flesh, for ex amp]e, and its flavor is drastically impaired Xydrogen pexoxide has high bactericidal activity with little deleterious effects on foods when used in effective concentrations. However, since its carcinoge-nicity was discovered7 it cannot be used in food treatment~
It is well known on the othex hand that ethyl alcohol has been used widely as a medical disinfectant because of its high safety and strong antimicrobial activity. In some food processing plants, investigations are being made to utilize the bactericidal activity of ethyl alcohol, and to kill food-poisoning and spoiling bacteria of foods and increase their preserving effect by directly spraying ethyl alcohol to the foods or direckly dipping them in ethyl alcohol.
In order to obtain a sufficient effect from ethyl alcohol alone~ the concentration o~ ethyl alcohol should be at least 70%. Such a high ethyl alcohol con-centration resvlt~ in a strong smell of ethyl alcohol and markedly impairs of the flavor of foods. Or it degenerates proteins to reduce the quality of foods and their dis-coloration~ Inorganic acids ~uch a~ phosphoric acid have ~ strong~st9rilizing effect, but for a sufficient effect, they have to be used i~ a concentration of more than 3~0.
At effectiv~ concentrations, the irritation and sour taste inherent to phosphoric acid remain in foods to reduce the .~

palatabillty of the foods~ Organic acids such as lactic acid or acetic acid also exhibit a sterilizilng effect in high conce~trations. In t-his case 9 too, their inherent irritating odors and sour tastes greatly impair the flavor of foods. The high-Goncentration ethyl alcohols inorganic acids and organic acids are unsuitable as bactericides for foods processing machines because they also adversely affect the working environment by their inherent irri-tat-ing odors.
In t~e circumstances, therefore~ no effective means has been established yet for -the remo!val and kiling of noxious microorganisms adhering to foods, food process-ing machines or utensils etc., despite its utmost impor~
tance in food sanitation and food processing~
It is an object of this invention therefore to provide a bactericide for foods and food processing machines or utensils, which does not deteriorate the flavor, and quality of foods nor destroy the food proce~
sing environment, and has very low toxicity and high safety.
~ he present inventors have now found that an excellent synergistic bactericidal ePfect can be obtained by using a mixture of ethyl alcohol and at least one oP
organic acids, inorganic acids and salts of these~ and contaminating kacteria can be killed at much lower con-centrations ~han in the case of using the compo~ents of the mixture individually.
~ hus, according to this invention, there is provided a liquid bactericide for foods and food processing machines or uten-sils, said bactericide comprising as active ingredien-ts 99.9 to 2~0Po (W/V) of ethyl alcohol, and 0.1 to 98.0% (W/V) of an organic acid selected from the group consis-ting of lactic acid, acetic acid, -tartaric acid, gluconic acid, citric acid, ascorbic acid, malic acid, succinic acid, fumaric acid and phytic acid or its acidic salt and/or 0.1 to 98.0% (W/V) of an inorganic acid selected from the group consisting of phosphoric acid, condensed phosphoric acids, (e.g., acidic pyrophosphoric acid, hexametaphosphorlc acid, ultraphosphoric acid, etc.), hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid and nitric acid or acidic salts thereof.
According to another aspect the invention provides a method for sterili~ing a food or a food processing machine or utensil, which comprises dissolving a liquid bactericide comprising 98.0 to 2.3% (W/V) of ethyl alcohol and 1.0 to 96.7% (W/V) of an organic acid selected from the group consisting of lactic acid, acetic acid, tartaric acid, gluconic acid, citric acid, ascorbic acid, malic acid, succinic acid, Eumaric acid and phytic acid or its acidic salt and/or 1.0 to 96.7% (W/V) of an inorganic acid selected from the group consisting of phosphoric acid, condensed phosphoric acids, hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid and ni-tric acid or acidic salts thereof as active ingred-ients in water and contacting the resulting aqueous solution with the food or the food processing machine or untensil.
In addition to the active ingredien-ts, the bactericide of the inven-tion may contain small amounts of water and a polyhydric alcohol such as propylene glycol and glycerol. When the acid or its salt is no-t easily soluble in ethyl alcohol, the addition of a small amount of water is preferred in order to obtain a uniform liquid bactericide.
The bactericide of this invention is usually used as a solution in water. Despite the fact that the bactericide of the invention contains -the active ~ 7 ingredients in very low concentra-tions~ it sh.ows better bactericidal effects than ths indivi.dual ingredients used separately~ ~his synergistic effect can be seen from ~xperimental Examples and Examples given hereinb~low~ For example, the concentra-t.ions of ethyl alcohol and the acid or its salt required for performing sterilizatiol.l within 30 seconds using an aqueous solution can be decreased to 0.5 to 350/O (w/v)~ and 0.005 to 20% (W/V)q respec-tively~
'~he pH of the aqueous solution of -the bactericide of the invention is preferably not more than 4OOo When the bactericide of -the invention consists of ethyl alcohol and at least one organic acid or salt~ it preferably contains 99O4 to 20% (W/V) of ethyl alcohol and 0.6 to 80% (W/V) of the organic acid or its salt. Usually~
this bactericide is used in the form of an aqueous solution in which the concentration of ethyl alcohol is ~5 to 5/09 preferably 10 to 5/0, (w/v) and the concentration of the organic acid or its salt is 20 -to 0O 50/09 preferably 10 to 1% ( W/V) .
When the bactericidal agent of this invention consists of ethyl alcohol and at least one inorganic ac.id or salt, it preferably contains 99O9 to 20% (W/V) of ethyl alcohol and 0.1 to 80% (W/V) of the lnorganic acid or its salt~ Usually, this bactericide is used in the form of an 25 aqueous solution in which the concentration of ethyl alcohol is 35 to 5/0, prefexably 10 to 50/O (w/V) and tha concentra~
tion of the inorganic acid or its salt is 0O005 -to 20%
preferably 0.005 to 10%9 (W/V).

When the bactericide of the invention consists of ethyl alcohol, at least one organic acid or salt and at least one inorganic acid or salt, the bactericide prefer-ably contaings 980 ~k to 2, ~/0 ( w/v), 9607 to l~/o ~W/V) of the organic acid or its salt, and 96.7 to 1.0% (W~V) of theinorganic acid or its saltO Usually, this bactericide is used in the form of an aqueous solution in which the con-centration of ethyl alcQhol is 18.6 to 1%, preferably 14 59 1%~ (w/v) ~ the concentration of the organic acid or its salt is 31 to 0.3/~, preferably 13.0 to 0.~/0, ~W/V), and the concentration of the inorganic acid or its salt is 10 to 0.03/0, preferably 0.7 to 0.03%, (W/V).
~ he proportions and the effective concentrations of these components in these bactericides mentioned above are only examples which can ef`fect sterilizatîon within 30 seconds. ~hey can be properly changed depending upon the t~pe of foods to be sterilized, the contact time, the contacting method, etc.
For sterilization, an aqueous solution of the bactericide of the invention is contacted with a food or food processing machine or utensil.
Examples of foods which can be sterilized suit-ably by the method of this invention include seafood and meat products (such as fish pastes, sausage, ham, and bacon), vegetables, especially those eaten raw (such as cucumber, tomato, cabbage, onion, lettuce and celery).
various types of noodles, spaghetti, macaroni, seafoods, meat, chicken9 chicken eggs, and semi-dried or dried ~ 9 ~
products of seafoods and meat-s.
Examples of the food processing machines and utensils include cooking plates, cooking knives1 food cotainers, cleaning cloths~ and varlous devices used in food processing plan-ts such as agitators. mixers~
homogenizers, automa-tic cut-ters~ conveying containers and packing containérs.
Contacting of foods or food processing machi.nes and utensils with the bactericide can be ef~ected, for example, by dipping~ spraying wiping, etcO
Since the bactericide o~ the invention has high bactericidal activity at low concen-trations, sterilization can generally be achieved by effec~ing the contacting for less than 30 secondsO Longer contacting doss not appreciably reduce the flavor and quality of foods, nor give rise any safety probl~m. Noxious bacteria adhering to the working personnel and cooks can be killed when they dip their hands in an aqueous solution of the bactericide of the invention, or wipe their hands with an absorben-t cotton or gauze impregnatled wi-th the bacteri.cide solu-tion.
~he use of the bacteric~d~ of the invention i~
this manner prevents food poisoning and increases the preservability of processed foods by inhibiting their spoilage for a prolonged period of time 25. ~he following ~perimental Æxamples and Examples illustrate the present invention more specifically~
In Experimental Examples 1 to 37 ef~ective combinations of bactericidal compo~ents were determined ~3 ~ 10 --in vitro using EscheIich_a coli (NIHJ~JC~2) which is a food-poisonin~ hacterium regarded as the most impor-tan-t contamination-indicating bacterium in food sarlitation~
In ~xamples 1 to 79 bactericidal compositions prepared on the basis of the re~ults of Experimental Examples 1 to 3 were used f`or foods ancl food materials to determine their bactericidal and bacteria~removing effects.
All percentages in these examples are by (W/V)/OO
~a~
(A3 ~he following experiment was conducted in order to examine the ~actericidal effect of a mixture of ethyl alcohol and an inorganic acid substance~
Escherichia coli (NIEIJ JC-2) was inoculated in a brain heart infusion broth (BFII~ and cul-tivated at 37C
for 24 hours. ~he culture broth was dilu-ted to 1/10 with sterilized physiological saline. ~he resulting coli suspension was used as a sample. Phosphoric acid~
acidic sodium pyrophosphate, sodium hexametaphosphate9 sodium ultraphosphate and ni-tric acid were used as in-organic acid substances~
One millili-ter of the sample bacterial sus pension was added to 9 ml of a test chemical solution prepared by adding physiological salin.e to ethyl alcohol and each of the inorganic acid substances so that the concentration of these compounds reached 10/9 of the con-centrations indicated in ~able 1. ~hey were immedia~el~
mixed, and maintained at 20C. After a con-tact time of 30 seconds, ons platinumloopful of the mixture was , -- 1.1 ~
inoculated in a fresh BHI broth~ and cul-tiva-ted at ~7C
for 48 hours. Growth of -the bacterium in the culture broth was observed wi-th the naked eyes~ '~hen no grow-th of the bacteri~n was noted~ the result was evaluated as (-) which means that complete sterillzatlon was possible, and when growth of the bacterium was no-ted, the result was evaluated as ~-~) which means that sterilization was impossible The concentra-tions o~ the chemicals whlch were required for complete sterilization were measured~
~he results are shown in ~able l~
~B) ~he bactericidal effect of a combination o~
ethyl alcohol and an organic acid was examined in the same way as in (A) above. ~he organic acids tested were lac-tic acid, acetic acid, citric acid~ tartalic acid, ~luconic acid, malic acid9 ascorbic acid and phytic acidO ~he results obtained with a contact time of 30 seconds are shown in ~able 2~

-12 ~
Table 1 __ .

_ ~
concentration (/0) Concentration o:~ ethyl alcohol (%) of the inorganic acid 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 .. _ _ .. _ ~ .
. 20 _ _ _ ~ _ _ +
.10 _ _ _ _ . ,.... , +
acid 5

3 _ _ _ _ ~ + r + +
1 ~ t ~ t +
0O5 _ _ -~ + -~ -r t -t +
O _ r + -~ + -t i + -~
_ . . . _ ~___ __ o~5 _ ~ + .~ +
Sodium0.3 _ _ ~ _ + + + +
ultra-phosphate 0.1 ~ r + ~ + +
0.05 ~ + -~ + -t -~ t O _ + + + -t + + + +
_ -- . __~ ___ ~.~
0.5 _ _ _ + + + + +
Acidic 0O3 ~ + + ~ + +
sodium p~ro- 0.1 _ _ + t r -~ 1 + ~~
phosphate 0.05 _ + -t -~ t + + -t +
~ O _ + + -t~ ~ + + + -t - to be continued -~able 1 - (continued ) .. _ . . ............ .
concentration (/0) Concentration of ethyl alcohol (/c) of the inorganic acid 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 - . _ __ ,.. . . _ .. _ O~ 5 _ _ _ + + r ~ + +
Sodium 0.3 _ _ ~ + + + +
hexameta-phosphate 0~1 _ + + + + + + + +
~005 .- + + + + + + + -~
O _ + + + + + + + +
~, _~. . ._.. .
0.1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ 0~05 _ _ _ _ + + + + +
Nitric 0.03 _ _ _ _ + + + + +
. acid 0.01 _ _ _ _ + + + t +
. 0.005 ~ + ~ + + +
~ _ O

Table 2 co nc entr at lo n ( /0 ) organic acid 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 . ,. . ~
~ +
~, 10 ~ +
Lactie aeid 5 ~ t +
3 ~ +
1 _ _ _ _ _ _ + -t +
0.5 _ _ ~ t -~
O _ t -t -r t + t + +
_. _ . _ _ _ _ .~
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -t Acetic 5 _ _ _ ~ _ -t + +
,aeid ~ _ . ~ _ -t + + + -t 1 _ _ _ _ + + + +
0O5 _ _ _ + -~ + -t +
O - + + t t- + + + +
__ - - -- - --- - - : ., . .... ... . .. .__. _ . _ _ _ _ -t + + + ~ t . 10 _ _ ~ + -t ~ + -~ +
Citrie 5 _ -t + + + ~ +
aeid 3 _ _ + + + + ~ + +

1 _ -t + + + + + + +
o.5 _ + + + + ~ .~ +
O + + ;t + + -t + +
__ - to be continued -~75 Table 2 ( continued ) ~_ concentration (%) organic acid 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 , __ ..... ... _~
_ _ _ t + -~ + +
Tartaric 10 _ _ + + ~ + + +
acid 5 _ _ + + + + + + ~
3 _ _ + + + ~ + + +
1 _ _ + -1- t + + + +
0.5 _ + + -~ + + ~ t +
O _ ~ + + + + ~ + +
. .___ . .. ~
_ _ _ ~ ~ + + +
~ + + + + +
Gluconic 5 _ _ + + + ~ + ~ +
acid 3 _ _ + + ~ + + ~ ~
1 _ _ + + + + + + ~
0.5 _ + ~ ~ ~ + + ~ -~
O _ + + + + + + + ~
.. _ . _ ~ _ _ _ + + + +
Malic 5 _ ~ + + +
acid 3 _ _ _ _ + + + + +
1 _ _ _ + + + + + +
_~.. ~ O ~ + + + + + + +.
.

- to be continued -5~js~ ~
~ 16 :rable 2 (continued) _ _ concentration ~/0) Concentratl.on of ct4~l 5l o f the organic acid 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 _ . . 7 . 5 _ _ ~ + + +
Ascorbic 3. 75 _ _ + ~ + + +
acid 2.25 _ _ _ + -~ + + ~ -t 0.75 _ _ _ + + + + + +
O _ + + + + + -r + +

105 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ + ~ +

Phytic 2. 5 _ _ _ _ _ + t + +
acid l o 25 _ _ _ _ _ + .~ ~ +
0.61 _ _ _ _ + + + +
O~,31 _ _ _ _ + ~ ~ + +
0015 _ _ _ _ + + + + -t . O _ -~ + + + 1- + + ~-_ ~

~ he results given in ~able 1 demonstrate tha-t a marked synergistic effect was noted in a comblnation of ethyl alcohol with phosphoric acidO It is also seen from ~able 2 that a combination of ethyl alcohol wi.th lactic acid or acetic acid produces an excellent synergistic effect a (C) Because a strong effect was noted :in the combina~
tion of ethyl alcohol with phosphoric acid or lactic acid.
a combiration of ethyl alcohol, phosphoric acid and lactic acid ~a~ examined for bactericidal activity in the same way as in (A) above. The results obtained after a contact time of 30 seconds are shown in Table 3.
It is seen from ~able 3 that the effect of the combination of these three chemicals was much stronger than that expected from the comblnation of ethyl alcohol and lactic acid or phosphoric acid~
~ he experimental results thus obtained show that when ethyl alcohol or the acids were individually used for sterilization, the various adverse effects mentioned here~
inabove could not be avoided, whereas the combined use of ethyl alcohol and an organic acid and/or an inorganic acid~
particularly the combined use of ethyl alcohol, lactic acid and phosphoric acid, greatly reduced the required concen-trations of the individual chemicals and made possible effective sterilization without giving rise to problems of a sour taste, odor, degeneration~ etcO

able ~3 _ __ _ ~
PhosLactic Concentration of ~ thyL aloc) ho L (/0) ac d (%) 40 35 30 25 20 15 lO 53 1 0, 5 0 .
. _ . . .. ~ ~
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ -r -1- ~ +
_ _ _ _ _ _ _~ + ~ +
0 5 _ ~ + -~ -~ -t 3 ~ -t t -~ t 1 - ~ lr +~ -t t -i 0.5 ~ + ~ + + +
O _ -t t ~ + -t + -t-t -~ + -1~
. _ ~
~ + +
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ + +
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ +
0. l3 _ ~ + +
1 ______+~++++
oo5 _ _ _ _ _ + ~ + + ~ +
O + ~ + + + + + t + -t , ~ , _ . . __ ~ . __ . . _ 20 _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~
10 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ +
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ +
0~,5 3 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ + + +
1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ + + ~ ~ +
o.5 _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ + ~ + + .~
__O _ - + + + +~+. + ~+
- to be continued -Table 3 (con-tinued) Pho~- Lactic Concentration of ethyl alcohol (/0) phorlc acid acid (%) (%) 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 3 1 0~5 0 _ ___ _._ _ _____ _ . ~ t -t + + +
._ Since lactic acid and phosphoric acid are acidic substances, the pH of the bactericidal solution which is decreased as a result of using these acids presumably contributes also to the bactericidal activity of the solution~ ~o confirm this, the fo].lowin~ experiment was performed~
A mixture of ethyl alcohol, phosphoric acid and lactic acid was prepared~ ~he conce-ntrations of ethyl alcohol and phosphoric acid were fixed at 10% and 0.1%7 respectively, whereas the concentra-tion of lactic acid was varied within the range of 3 to 20% as shown in Table

4~ ~he pH of the mixture was adjusted to 5 - 1 with lN-NaOH or ~ICl at the time of application~ ~he bactericidal effect of the mixture was examined in the same way as in ~ 3~ ~

Experimental Example 1~ (A). The time of c~on-tact between the sample bacterial suspension and the sample bactericidal mixture was varied be-tween 30 seconds and 10 minutes. '~he results are shown in Table 4O These results show -that a pH of 4.0 or below is desirableO
Accordingly, organic acids and inorganic acids other than lactic acid and phosphoric acid can fully ex-hibit a bactericidal effect by using them -toge-ther wi-th ethyl alcohol. For example, a combination of ethyl alcohol, lactic acid and ano-ther organic acid or salt, a combination of ethyl alcohol and, phosphoric acid and another inorganic acid or salt. or a combination of ethyl alcohol, another organic acid and another inorganic acid is effective when a ~olution of such a combination is adjusted to not more than 4Ø

~able L~
_._ ~ _ ~
p~ of the . Gontacting time solution __ ~ ~ _~
duringlactic acid 30 1 5 10 contact (%) seconds minu-te minutes minutes _ _ __ _ ~ -1 and 2 10 _ ~ _ _ _ (Note): Ethyl alcohol 10%; phosphoric acid 0.1%.

~P~
_ 22 -3~1~
'rhree mixtures having the following compositions were prepared on the basis o~ -the results of Experimental Examples 1 and 29 and examined for bactericidal effect in the same way as in Example 1~ (a). The results are shown in Table 5.
Mixture A
_ _ _ Ethyl alcohol 87.0 /0 Latic acid 8.7 ~0 Phosphoric acid4.3 %

Mixture B
Ethyl alcohol 61.7 %
Lactic acid 37.0 %
Phosphoric acid 1.~
'rotal 100 %
Mixture C
~thyl alcohol 37.0 %
Lactic acid 6107 %
Pho,sphoric acid ~
'rOtal 100 %

_ o~ ___ _ ~. _ __ , ___. ._ . _ .~ a) __ ______._ 4 .~ i I + + 1- 1 1 ~ + ~
~3 __ _ _ ,~ I I ~ ~ ~ i 1 ~_ _ ___~
s~) i I + + + I I I ~ ~
_ _ _ , .. _ _ _ U~ O ~) o h ~1 ,~ a) o ,~ ~ Lr~
ro ~'--Si 1~ ~ ~1 ;;~ ~ (~ ~D ~ ~1 t~ ~ P~ ~OJ~O ~OOOO o a) , u~ ~d o ~ ~ C~
.5:1 O-r~OOOOO OOOOO
o~ ~1 ~4 ~ P
C~ $
.,~ ~q,l ,~ ~ ~ ~I C' O
o ~ ~ C~ O 1~ ~D~ O (S` ~ r I C' ~ n t7-rl ~~D ~ ~JO 1~ Lr~ cO ~ ro h o t~ o . o ~ ~
~'~ ~ OOOOO ~ lO
4) a) o _ O ~ cr ,1~ O ~ u~ ~1 ~ C~ ~ ~ ~ ~
V-~l ~ ~ o r~ o ~ ~ ~1 ~ O a: ~D
~ c~ ~ ~D ~ ~i O ~ ~ o _ ,- ~
~ ~ O ~ U~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~4 ~ ... ,.. ___ td ~ a . ~

- 24 ~
_ ___. _ _ ~ ~ I I I I -~^ + ,~ ~ + ~ -~ +
.~
___ __ _ __ __ ~_ _____ __ .~
+~ Lr\ ~ I I I -~ ~ + + ~ , ,1. -~ +
.~ .~
_ _ _ ___, __ ~, ,~ I _~__ __ __ __ _____ +
. 0~
N~ O I I I + + + + I + + 1. +

. .. __. . ._. ~ . __ ____._ .. __ __. ___ rl OO r-l ~ (~ N~

5:1 ~ ~ N~ (~ ~ N~ ,~
+~~ L~ ~1 0 0 0 0 a~ u~ ~
~0 ~ ~ ~ 'C) O O O O O
~ C) .~ ._ _ rl (~ ~ ~I C~
~ ra C' r~ 0 Il~ ~1 III 5~ c.)~rl r-l N~ 0 00 ~D
3 ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ N; ri O
& ~ o __ o ~ C ~ o ~ ~ ~, ~.
c~ ~ o c~ U~ N~
~ ~ o . o ~ N~ ~ ~ r~ O
~ ... _._ . ___ __ __ _____ __ _ . _ .~ ~ ~rl ~
o C~ h o C~ N~ r~ 1~1 (~1 + N~ N~ (~J O

~ __ ~0 rl ______ ~1 a) c) rcl ~1 E'~ ~ ~ ~ 1~1~ ~10 t~
___ ...... __ O 0~0 ._ . ____ O

- 25 ~
As shown in Table 5. the bac-tericida1 e~fect was strongest with the mix-ture C and least s-trong with the mixture A. and the mixture B comes in be-tween~ ~ach of the mixtures showed a bac-tericidal effec-t when the con--centrations of ethyl alcohol, lac-tic acid and phosphoric acid were much smaller than the effective concentrations of these componen-ts used individuallyO ~hus t a marked synergistic effect was noted.
Example 1 ~he bactericidal effects of each of the chemicals shown in ~able 6 on bacteria adhering to "crab leg~like fish-cake (kamaboko-like product)" whose inPection by coliform bacteria is especially notable were examined.
Refrigerated Alaska pollack 1 kg Salt 30 g L-glutamic acid 100 g Crab flavor 5 g Potato starch 50 g Ice water 300 g Total1485 g A minced flesh of the above composition was molded in-to a block having a weight of about 1 kg and attached to a plate. ~he product was held at 40C for 1 hour, and its surface was colored with natural red dye.
~he product was steamed at 90C for 1 hour and cooled~
~ he plate was removed from the resulting product, and dipped for 10 seconds in a suspension of Escherichia coli (NIHJ~JC-2) to cause the bacteria to adhere fully The con-taminated block was then dipped for 30 seconds in a wa-ter solution of each of -the mix-tures A~
B and C in the concerltrations sho~n in ~able 60 Immediate-ly then7 it was wi-thdrawnO ~he standard pla-te count was measured by a conventional plate dilution method using a standard agar culture medium. ~he number o~ coliPorm organisms was measured ~y -the plate dilu-tion method using a desoxycholate agar culture medium. For comparison, the number of bacteria was measured in the same way immediately 1~ after dipping of the block in -the bacterial suspension7 or after further dipping it in hydrogen peroxide or ethyl alcohol solution. ~he results are summarized in ~able 6.
The results show that the bactericidal agent of the invention can perform complete sterilization at an extremely low concentration which was 1/10 to 1/14 of the e~fective concentration of ethyl alcohol alone. ~he concentration of the required concentration of ethyl alcohol in the mixtures was much loweri and is about 1/11 to 1/38 o~ that required when ethyl alcohol is used aloneO
~he same can be said with regard to the other components.
~his means that the combination of chemicals in accordance with this invention produces a marked synergistic effect, and therefore9 can simultaneously solve the conventional problems of the quality of foods, the working environment, safety, etc.

~ 27 ~

_ : _ . _ _ .
~ ~o ~o ~o o ~o ~o o ~o td F~o~ CQ ~C ~ ~ O O ~ O O O ~ ~
U ~ h v N~ o ~i ~) o ~ ~i ~ _ , ___ _ ~ ~
., ~ ~ ~ O O C~ ~ o ~0 0 h ~ 1 ~t ~C ~ O O ~ O O O~ ~C
q~ u~ ~ q~ cr~ o ~1 .~q ~J Cl~ r~ ~i /~ U 00 _ o ~ _ ~ ~ ~
, ~ ~0~ a ~rd O O O O O O O O O O c>
~ , _ _ ____ _ ~ ~ ---- I a~
O ~ o~ D o O a~ o h ~1 ~ O O O O O N~ ~`U ,1 ~1 0 a ~ _ _ _ _ .
~ ~ ~o g ff~ ~D co ~ ~ 0 u~
~ 0~ iO ~ o _ . _ _ ._, ~ d o 0 O ~ O O C~ U~ N~ ~1 O C~ ~ N'~ ~1 -~1 C~ ~ O O
~ .___ __ ._ .__ ~1 P~_ ~ x ,0 ~ ~ ~
E~ ~~ i ~ ~ cq ~1 ~ s .. ~ I h ~d ~ b~
. ~ ~i ~ 0~ ~ o .__ . ~_ _ . .

~ _ __ b ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ,, h o ~n O O O ~C ~ O
¢ ~ ~ 0 ~1 ~ Lr~Lr~
h ~3 rl ~D tD . ~
O ~ O ~:) . ~1 ~}; C) O_' r-~
W _ _ ~ r~ ~ ~ ~
.,1 bD O O O
~n ,1 ~
h 4 ,1 o ,~ O O O ~q X O X
n ~ u~ C~
cl ~_ ~ ~ ~
_ _ . .
e~
1-~
tn h ~a N~ t~
f` =O,-rl ~1 0 0 0 0 _ ~ O O O O O
~ _ ~ O~ U~ ~I C' . ~ ~ C' ~1 ~
C~-rl ~ ~ O t~
~ t~D
O
_ , O
~J ~ O ~ U~
,~ ~) C' Lr~ tX) ~I K\
_ E~0 r~ O
_._ ________ tQ
d S:~ O tl~ ~ ~
d h ~ O r~ ~ ~\ ~1 C~ ~D
~ t~ot~ _ ~o) Q
_, ~D ~n t~ c ~ t~ ~ ~
o _ _. _ . . . ._ . . .

In order to examine the effects of the bac-tericidal agent of the invention on the flavor of foods, a paste product produced as above was removed fro~ -the plate, and immediately then, dipped for 30 seconds in an aqueous solution of each of various chemicals~ It was then subjected to an organoleptic test by a panel of ten persons for an unusual taste or an unusual odor. ~he results are shown in Table 7.
It is seen from Table 7 that the bactericides of the invention show no effect on the flavor of foods when their concentrations were not more than 30/0. Since the concentration of 30% is much higher than the effective concentrations shown in Table 6, it is clear that the bactericides of the invention can be used without any deleterious effect on the flavor of foods.

p~

- ~o -(Eish-cake product) Concen- Number of the trations panelists who felt an Of the unusual taste or an Chemicals chemicals unusual odor out of . (/) 10 . ..__ _ Distilled water _ 0 ~ .__ ~
Hydrogen peroxide 0O05 0 _~ __ _.___ -- --~
Mixture A 40 0 _ "" . _ __ Mixture B 40 5 _ _ _ 30 _ 0 Mixture C 30 o8 ~_ _ __ _ __ ... _. 10 Ethyl alcohol . ........... ~ . 60 8 _ _ ~__ _ _ In this Example, the bactericidal effects of each of the chemicals shown in ~able 8 and 9 on onion (about 100 g) and cucumber (about 100 g) whose infection by noxious bacteria was heavies-t among edible vegetables were examined in the same way as in Example 1. ~he results are shown in ~ables 8 and 9O
~ he cucumber was subjected to an organoleptic test in the same way as in Example 1. ~he results are shown in Table 10.

~ 31 --_ - _ I

Q h o ~ r lJo O O O O
1~ XO ~ X o o X X X
~ ~ O h V ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~
bJ ~; t) o ~ ~1 O~) ~
rl . _ _ __ ~
L ~, ~ i ~D O O O O O O O
F I ~ r1 X X ~C X O ~C X X ~C
U~ F~ a) ~ Lt~ (~ N~ ~ Lr\ ~ ~0 ~ ~_ U~ ~ ~U N~ ~ ~ oi _ , . _. _ .. _ _ __ __ Irl ~
h ~ ~ O~ rJ (~J ~
_ ~ F~ td O O O O O
~ __ __ _ _ ,~
~r 5 o J ~U o o h __ O O O O O ~
.~1 C) r-l _ _____ O V ~ C' O N~ ~D co l ~ ~ OJ O
_ _ .
E~ ~ ~ 0 ~ O ~ c)~
'~ ~ l l O
V 4 O ~ O O C~ U~ ~ r1 ._ . _~ __ __ .__ .____ ~1 h ~
ra P~ ~ .~ X
rn $ 4 4 ~, bO ~ ~, rl tll t~ 4 ~~ a) ~ c~
~) C~-rl td 4~rl rl "~ 4 ~D h ~),5i r-\ O
~ f~ ~ 4 ~ .
sl ~ ~ ~d O ~q R ~ ~
. . _ . . . _.

` 32 _ _ . _____ . ___, _ .~ ~ K~ .~ ~ ~ ~
-~ S-l O ~ rl U~ O O r-J r-l r--l a ~ rl tlS r-l O O O X ~C O O O PC X X
h ~ o h c) N C~ ~ ~u æ c~ 0 ~ u~ ~D ~ oo ~i ~ _ ____ ~ ~ r-~ ~D ~ ~ ~
C ~ 0 0~ O O O
h ~ O O O X X o O o X X X
r-l O r~ O 00 ~I t~l 00 ~ C~ ~ ,~ .
4~c~ " . Lr . rt~
_ _ _ .
t) ~
l~rl ~ Lr~ \ ,~
u~ ~d ~C5~ ~r-l r~ o O O O O r~ O ~5 0 0 C) ~ ~ C~ . . ~ . . . . . . .
_ ~ OOOOO OOOOO U~
1~1___ ___ ~ ~ ------ NO~
,~ o o~ U~
. ~ ~a oa~ r~ ~ C~ r~ l h 0 ~r-l C~ Ll~ 00 r-l ~\ r-l 1~\ 0 ) ~) q-l :1 0 ~(~Jr~ r-l O ~ r~O V
~1 __ oo r~ ~ ~r~ C~ O (~ Ll~\ r-l C~
!~ ~N~ O a) ~) c~ u~ OD r-l r~ C) ~ ~ O 1~ 7 ~ 0 r1 ~ 1~ r-l O ~\ (~1 r-l r-/O h _ .. . _ ~;:
I ~ ~
a~ ~r~ rl ~
O C~ ~ ~ r-l r-l O
C~ ~ O O ~rl ,~i ~ _ ~ __ ~
O r_l ~ rl ~3 r~
o~D ~

.. _ ~ .

_ ~ _ __ h ~ u~ ~ O r~ r-~ ~ r~ r~
~ ~-t,l ~,4 X O X X o o X X X
0 ~ ~ o ~J ~D O' O
O ~ ~ ~t ~ O O
. _ . .
h ~ O r~ O O O O

h ~ a) ~ ~ X O X X O O X X X
~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ r~
~ C~ ~ r ~ Lr~
_ _ _ _ ~ _~ ~ 'c) O O O O O
a _ __ _ _ _ __~

h,1 O O O O O o O _ _ . .. . O
E~C~ ,~ c) O a~ D ~ ~
~ ~ o~ O
_ .
U~ ~
~ ~0 ~-rl ~ r~
O O r~ r-~
o C~
_ ._ ..__ ~ __ _ ___ ~ ~ X
a~ a~ 0-rl ~ ~ h ~n ~ h ~0 ~
rl 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~:i cq ~ a) r~ ~d ~ ~ ~1 a) c) h ~ c~ ~t ,~ ~0 ~; ~ ~ h ~ ~ ~ ~0 X
~_ ~ do -------- -- ---~?X~ _ _.._.,1: . ~n.~: __,_.. _: _=___. ~ .. ~ ~ __ . _ __ __ _ ,, _ 3~ _ ~ 4~ .... . ... __ _ _ o ~ ~ ~o ~ ~ ~U ~ ~
~3 h u7 ~O O O O O
h o rl tq ~, t ~ ,1 ~1 ~ a)~ ~,I
h ~ bD o O O O ~C X O O O X X X
O h o C~ ~ t' C' O
~ . . . . , b~ ~ N~ N~ ~ C:~
~ _ ._ . ... _ . .. . . _ ~ ~ ~0 No ~o ~0 uO ~0 X X o o o X X X
a) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C`J
o C~ U~r I O C~ ~D C' C' ~ cO
. ~,c), _ ._._ .. __ ... . _ __ C~
l~r~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U~
u~ h ~ K~ D~ ~ K~ ~1 u~
~ ~0 ~o ~ ~1 0 0 0 0 ~1 0 0 0 0 ~:l _ i:4 P~ O O O O O O O O O O t) ~ . .__. ___ ._ ~ . ___ U~
O .~ O ~,U~ ~ ~
~rl~ ~:1 O a~ U~ c~ o c) rl C' U~ 00 ~ ~ ~ 1`~ 0 (X) 0~ C) . . . . ~ .
0 ~ l Q h r-l - ------ - ---- ----- - ---------- ~
~1r~l ~ C~ r-l C~ r-l O Ci~ u~ ~ C~ OV
O ,~0 r~ O ~ O c~ U~ ~ O
V Ed 15 ~ r-l O ~ OJ r~ rl O
_ 4 _ .. F~
~ r~l 4 ~1 o c) c~,~ ~:
~r~ ,~ r~ ~ O C~ u\ N~ ~ O C~ u~ O 0 ~c:~oc) ~:1 r1 _ rl ~ ~:4 ~ ~ r ~0 Cl~u~ Ir~ ~ o *

~`1 ~q ~ ~ ~

~able 10 (cucumber) __.
Concen- Number of pane-Chemicals tration lists who felt an unusual tas-te or an (%) unusual odor out of 10 . .... , __. . ~
Blanching 5 .. .. . _. _ ~ ~
Distilled water _ 0 _~ ..... _ __ Hydrogen peroxide 0O05 0 ... _ . ._ _ _ ................. 4 Mixture A 30 0 ~ ,.,,..... _ ~. _ Mixture B 30 0 .. ~ 0 ~

Mixture C 30 ol ~ , ~
Ethyl alcohol 60 _ .

Exam~e 3 In this Example, the mixture B shown in Experi-mental Example 3 was used to kill bacteria adhering to vegetables.
Cucumber and cabbage cut into four were washed with water~ and dipped in each of the chemicals shown in ~able 11, and the number of bacteria was examined by the conventional pl ate diluting method in the same way as in Example 1. ~he results are shown in ~able 11~

-- '~6 --~\ ___ __ ____ ________ . ID 3 ~i O ~ QD ~1 ~1 O O ~-~ ~1 O rl 0 X O O O O ~n 0 Q .,~ ta ~ ~D X X O O X ~ h h ~ o h ~ Lt\ Lr~ I~r\ O a) Q
r ~iC)O~ ~1 0~) ~ L~t~l) Q. . . _ __ _ _ . D ~ .
f' ~ ~D Ll~ ~ ~t ~ ~ ~ Ll~ N Ol c>
D O O O O O O O O O Oa) 0 ~a ~ ~J ,~ , I ~1 , J ~1 .~~1 r I ~ ,si,D
h ~ ~ ~ X X X X X X X X X ~ ~ o --I o C) O t~ ~`J ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~ r~ X) 0 h ~: u~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,. ~>
~ _ _ _ __ r~ ~
,~~D h ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ R ~ N~ NO~ 0~ 0~ 0 0~Q,E~ a) ~1 '~ ~ ~ 0~

.. ___ _________.___ __.___ _ _~ 0,~ 0 ~,o~ Q, ~ ~`æ a)'D,li o h 4~ 5~ ol ,1 ~0 O L~ u~ ~ 0 __ .__ _ _~ 0 ~ ',~
~ ~,~ ~ U~FiO~
Q) h ~ a~ h 3 R b~D
r~ ~d 4 ~:q ,~ 0 ~i ~q ~ 0 R
. 3:3 ~ ' U~ ~ ~0 ~ ~ ,~ ,1 cq~ ~ ~.~ .~
.~_ __ ~__ a ~ ~n X

~QD c> * 0 ~
~ .. . _ ._ .
_ _a~
~he bactericidal effects oE each of the chemicals shown in ~able 12 on bacteria adhering -to the surface of chicken (broiler) were examined.
The test was carried out in the same way as in ~xample 1 using about 51 g of the flesh taken from near the wing of a chicken. r~he results are shown in ~able 12 and demonstrake the marked effects of the bactericides of the invention.
When the above test was repeated except that the whole flesh of a chicke~ was used ins-tead of the flesh near the wing Bacteria (general bacteria and coliform organisms) were not detected when the mixture A
was used in an amount of 5/q the mixture B, in an amount o~ 3%~ and the mixture C, in an amount of 3%~ At lower concentrations than those shown in ~able 12, an effect of complete sterilization was obtained.
By the same tests as above, it was confirmed that the bactericides of the invention are equally effective for beef, pork and fresh seafoods.

-- ~i8 --h o .1 ~ ~ ---- to ~
~1 ,~ 1 0 0 P~ K ~C O O X PC
+~ ~ O h ~ cO o ~ C' C5' C~
O,~ r(~ ~ t6~ t~
a~
~0 C
_ I . ___ P~ ~1 .~ ~ C) F~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Do ~ ~Do ~Do 4 ~ O ~ ~1 ~1 ~1 c~ ~ a~o ~ ~ ~: o o $ ~ nS~ N~l ~ ~ ~ CO
u~ P1 ~ ~D ~ r~ r~ ~
C) O ~c~
_ _ ~_ _~ . , ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~U ~ O
,D .d ~ ~ rJ ~ l O C) ~ ~. ~ OOooo a~
0~ _ _ O
O~:) rd ~ g ~ ~) C ) ~
r~r I CO ~D ~ N O
h o _ . _ _ O O O O O
a~ ~ rO
O ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~D
r1 ~ r-l ~ ~D ~ Oi O
~ ~ _ _ ._ ~
~D ~ i l O O C~ L~\ ~ r~~
C) .... _ ~r~ h 1~ h 0 0 r~ r~l ~ 3 r~
r-l ~ ~ ~ ~ir~ h c~
0 h r~ ~ r~~5i ri ~ G~ h C) r l ~ c) I E~ ~ r~ O
a) ~ ~ ~ ~ u~rd P~
O-r-l q~ ~~r~O P~ ~r~
....... _. ... _. ~ d 0 F~ ~?.5i .. __... ..... _ I

~ 39 --~â ~_ I e h b~ ,1 O O O O O
h o ,l ~q R a) ~ R O O O X X O O O X ~C X
a~ Q rl 0 0 O h ~ c h ~ c> o ~ L-- ~ ~0 rt~ 01 ~ `'_ __ .. _._ . __ _ .~ ~
. ~ . .
~o ~o ~o ~0 ~oO o h C) X ~1 ,1 ~1 ~1 ~1 ~0 o o o X X O O O X ~C X
~0 0~ r~1 ~ CO C~ CO
U~ U~ K\ ~ K~ C
a __ _ _ _ _ ..
1~.~ ~1 ~ ~ ~D ,~
O u~ h rd N~ ~ ~D ~ ~ ~ C~
O O rl ~1 0 0 0 0 ~ O O O O
~1 ~ . o ~ . . .
P~0 O O O O O O OO O O
q~ ~__ R ,1 O ~u~ ~1 O ~ ~ O ~ Ll~ ,~ ~ C' ~1a) Is~ ~1 r~ U~ c) rl C~ 1 ~ ,I N~ O a) ~o t~ C) ~
F~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~O ~ ~ ~ O
~ ~ - - - ~
a~ a) o ~u~ r-l C~ O
O h ~1 ~ C' rl ) ~ ~1 O (~~ r~ C~
R ~1 P~ O ~1 ~ 0 00 ~D C~L~ r-l N~
O R ~i C) . . . . ~
V ~r~ r~.0 ~ N~ r-l O N~ l r-l O
-- r-l -- _ _ ..
I ~ td R~ ~o,~ ~
1:¦c) -1~ ~ E3 ~ O t~ 1~N~ ~--1 C~ U'\ ~ r-l O
$ ~ ~ ~ ~
~) C~oc) _ _ r~
m c~ ~
~} ~ ~ ~

_ ~p~

~xam~
~he bactericidal effects of the chemicals shown in ~able 13 were -tested on chicken eggs~ -Escherichia coli was caused to adhere to about . . , 67 g of egg in the same way as in Example 1, and the eggs were then dipped for 30 seconds in an aqueous solution of each of the chemicals~ ~hen, the surfaces of the eggs were wiped off, and the standard plate count and the number of coliform organisms were measured. ~he results are show ir ~able 13.
It is seen from ~able 1.3 that the bactericides of the invention show a marked effect as a bactericidal treating agent for eggsO

~. `'l ~t~

----~ --~ ~ ----~ ---------------- - - - - - -4 t r o r-l r~ r~ O O O
~ ,{~ ~rl ~a O ~C X X O O ~C X
~ ~ o h ~ u~ oo r~l a) ~ ~
~1 ¦r-l ~ Ll~ ~ (~ U~
b~) ~_ _ ................ _ __ rl 01~
F~~ r-l r lr l r~ r-J r-l r-l t ~ a)o X ~q ~C o o ~c X x td r~ Ll~tlO r l C~ L~
~n Qlr-l Ll~(~i ~ 0.1 ~ t Q)r-l d___ __ ___ _ _ __ __ I , ~4~ ~rl rr\ O ~ ~ r o e~t~ p~ ~,tlS _ O O O O O
r~ o ~rl ~ ai~ Lr~ r-l C~ 4 r l Ow O CO ~ K\~ C ~
h0 S: ~I w _ ___ O O O O O
r __ O,Si o g~ r c~ . ~ r l c~ ~D ~ OJ O
__ r~ __ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _.

~D rl ,~ rl ~ l l O
;~ ~ O c) O ~0 L~- Lr\ ~ r-_ p,,:l ~1 _ .__ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ h ~ 0~ ~ ~ o .r 4 0 F~ ~ r~l rl O
0 ~a~ ~ ~
V O rl t~l 4 rl O P~ _ ___ _ 42 ~

_ h ~ O _ _ _ h O rl X ~I r-l r-lr~l r-l O O O O X X C~ O O ~; ~ X
O h ~ C~ a~ 7~ r~
rl O~ ~;t ~ U _ _ _ __ .~ ~
,Pl 0~1 ~ N~ ~ N~
~1 ~ r-l O O O O O
r~ X r1 r-l r-l r~l r-l c~ ~ O O G O O X ~C O O O X ~C
~ ~d ~ r~ r-l CO O ~
V~ ~ r~ IJ`\ N~ ~ ~1 N \
Q~
C) _ _ _ _ __ I rl r~ tl~ ~\ ~1U~ C~ N~
a)U1 h rd N~ D N\ r~ N~ D N~ ~l ,s:! ,~0 O rl r l O OO O r~ O O O O
q~ P~ ~ O O O O O O O O O O
0~ _ _ )i ~rl O ~ Lt~ r~ C~
O ~ ~ O ~ L(\r~l ~ C~ r-l 00 IJ~ r~l r r1 C~ u\ a~r1 N~ r~ ~\0 00 ~0 h G~ ~1 ~ N~ 01 r-l rl O ~ ~ N~ r~l O
~r~ _ _ . _ _ ~ a) o (~ u\ rl C~ O
C) ~1 r-l ~ C~ r-l CO Lr~ ~1 O cr~ r-l C~
O ~ ~ O ~I N\ O a~~9 C~ U~ ) r-l N~
C)-rl r~d ~.D ~ N~ r-lO N~ ~1 r-J r~l O
___ _, ~ . ___ r~
~a :1<D ~ r~ r~ ~
r~O h ~1 ~ O C~ Ll\N~ r-l O C~ LO N~ r-l O
~1~ ~ O C) e~ __ _ ___ _ l .
N~ r-l r-l ~
~3 ~L ~ C

.

- ~3 _ In this Example, the bactericidal effects of each of the chemicals shown in Table 14 on bacteria adhering to the surface of ham were testedO
Salt (loy/C)~ 120 ppm of sodium nitrite, 550 ppm of sodium er~thorba-te and 0O~/0 of sodium tripoly-phosphate were uniformly injected into about 2 kg of meat taken from the ham por-tion of a hog~ The meat was then rubbed and kneaded, wrapped with a cotton cloth and tied with a thread. It was then dried at 40C for 3 hours and smoked at 57C for 4 hours to produce a hamO
The ham was stored at 0C overnight, and used as a test sample~
A pre-cultivated suspension of Escherichia coli and ~ ~ was suspended in physiological saline to prepare a bacterial suspension.
The ham sample was cut into blocks each weighing about ~00 g. ~he block~ were dipped for 5 seconds in the bac~erial suspension to cause the bacteria to adhere to the surface of the blocks. rhe blocks were then dipped in each of the bactericidal solutions shown in Table 14 for a predetermined period of -time, and withdrawn~- Then, the surface portion of each block was cut off asepticall~, and homogenized. The number of bacteria was measured.
The results are shown in Table 14~

~ I ~ o--~o ~o l No ~O-r~O ~0-~O ~0 ~0 ~ ~ ~, ,4, r~ ~ ,, C:~ ~ X ~C X I X ~C I ~ X ~ X
~ ~1 ~ O
h u~ u~ ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~ C~ U~ ~D
~ _ ............................. .
oq y No ~o ~0~ ~0 No ~o ~o o o ~ o C I P$ ~ ~C X ~
h El ~U ~D oJ ~D ~ C` ~ ~ a) ~ ~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~D ~ ~ ~ ~ ' .~ _ ...__ ~ .. ._ .__ __ bD ~ O ~o ~0 ~0 0 No ~o o .~ u~ ~ ~ l x x .~ o ~ ~ a~ ~1 ~ N~ Ir\ ~ ff~ ~ ~ ~ ~D OJ
~ -- --- ------ - -h ~ ~3 ~ o~1 ~ E3 h~1 o . o ~,, ~ ~0:~ ~ ~ ~0 ~ ~ o 0 ,,~ O ,a~ o,~-~ ~ o ~

l ~ _____ ~ ~ ~ O
~ U~ ,0~ U~
ta _~ __ ~_ ~ ~ a~ h~

~ ~ 3 ... .. . . . . .

_ ~i5 _ .... . __ . ._ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' O tD r-l r-l r~l r-l ~ rl V S ~ X X X ~ X ~C 4 0 .~ ~ ~ ~) rl u~ r-l r-l Ll~ _ _ r~

td (~ l`t\
rf ~ ~ O O O O O O ~i ~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~D
~rl X X X X X X h h ~i ~ ~ ~ r~ (~ t~
~ r-l r-l K~ U~ r-~ h .~ ' 0 _ . . I
t~ t'\J ~
O O O O O O
~1 C.) r~ r-l r-l ~1 ~IU
. tD X X X X ~ X h rl O ~ CO CO O ~ F4 ~1 1~ 1~ ~ r-l ~\J C~ Oi rl . ~ _ h td 4 0 4 ~
h ~ rl ~ 0 æ ~ ~ ~0 v ~
td 0 ~ td 0 O
~d ~D tt) 0 ,Q ~ 0 h h ~ ~1 h ~ ~1 4 O rl ~ O rl ~
0 h h ~1 0 ~d ~D
t ~ 1 ~ t~ r~ ~ ~1 rl ~ S~ ~
r-l V 0 ~ c) ~iS
O ~) ~ O ~ 4 0 t) r-l 0 c~ r 1 0 ~rl __ __ ~ O O cO~
rl r-l O ~ -- -I rl ~i .--r . cd cd C~ ~D
a~ CD ~dl 1~ ~

. .

~ 46 -E~ æ~ Z
In the process o~ producing Vienna sausage, before packaging, the heat~treated sausage is usually (1) cooled and carried to a clean room~ (2) cut by a drum cutter, (3) carried on a conveyor~ (4) sent to an aligner, ~na ( 5) put into a bucket.
In this ~xample~ the following two tests were conducted in order to examine the bactericidal ef~ect of the bactericide (mixture B) o~ the invention.
In the first test showing a conven-tional process~
the standard plate count~ the number of lactic acid bacteria~ and the presence or absence (positive or ~egative) of coliform organisms were determined with regard to the sausage (1) in the clean room, and the sauges (6) which was passed through the drum cutter (2), conve~or (3), the aligner (4), and bucket (5).
In the second test showing the proces~ o~ the invention, the same test as above was carried out with regard to the sausage (1l) treated with the bactericide and placed within the clean room, the drum cutter (2') treated with the bactericideS the conveyor (3') treated with the bactericide, the aligner (4') treated with the bactericide, and the bucket (5') treated wi-th the bac~
tericide. ~he same measurement as above was carried out with regard to the sausage which passed through the sterilized bucket (5~)O
~ he results are shown in ~able 15 ~ he da-ta rega.rding the deviced (2) to (5) and (2') to (5') were obtained with regard to a sterilized gauze which was used to swab a 30 cm x 30 cm zone of each of these devices~

~ ~ .
Standard Lactic Sites inspected plate acid Coliform __ _ _ c_un-t bacteria organisms (1) Surface of Vienna 2 2 sausage in the clean 2.5 x 10 1.8 x 10 room (cells for each sausage) (2) ~hat portion of the drum cutter which 2.0 x 102 80~ X 102 +
contacted the sausage (3) Surface of the conveyo r 6. 2 x 103 5. 2 x 103 ~ (4) Aligner 7.2 x 102 5.3 x 10 g (5) Bucket 1.3 x 104 20 5 x 104

(6) ~he surface of the sausage which passed 8.5 x 10~ 5.7 x 104 through the bucket (5) _ . . . .,, . _ . . . . ~ _ _ _ (1') Vienna sausage (sprayed with a 10% _ _ solution of the bac-~-tericide) in the clean room (2') ~he product-contacting portio~ of the drum - _ cutter sprayed with a l~/o solution of the P bactericide . ~ (3') Surface of the con-veyor sprayed with a . _ 10% solution o:E the bactericide o (4') Aligner sprayed with a 1~/G solution of the _ _ bactericide o (5') Bucket sprayed with a 10% solution of the _ bactericide (6') The sur~ace of the sausage with passed _ _ through the bucket (5 ) --~ .... _ ~_ . . ~ , -:negative~ +: positive

Claims

THE EMBODIMENTS OF THE INVENTION IN WHICH AN EXCLUSIVE
PROPERTY OR PRIVILEGE IS CLAIMED ARE DEFINED AS FOLLOWS:

1. A liquid bactericide for foods and food processing machines or uten-sils, said bactericide comprising as active ingredients 99.9 to 2.0% (W/V) of ethyl alcohol, and 0.1 to 98.0% (W/V) of an organic acid selected from the group consisting of lactic acid, acetic acid, tartaric acid, gluconic acid, citric acid, ascorbic acid, malic acid, succinic acid, fumaric acid and phytic acid or its acidic salt and/or 0.1 to 98.0% (W/V) of an inorganic acid selected from the group consisting of phosphoric acid, condensed phosphoric acids, hydro-chloric acid, sulfuric acid and nitric acid or acidic salts thereof.

2. The bactericide of claim 1 wherein the acidic salt of the organic acid or of the inorganic acid is selected from the group consisting of sodium, potassium, calcium and magnesium salts.

3. The bactericide of claim 1 wherein the organic acid is selected from the group consisting of lactic acid, acetic acid, tartaric acid, gluconic acid, citric acid, ascorbic acid, malic acid, succinic acid, fumaric acid and phytic acid, and the acidic organic acid salt is selected from sodium, potassium, calcium and magnesium salts of these organic acids.

4. The bactericide of claim 1 wherein the inorganic acid is selected from the group consisting of phosphoric acid, acidic pyrophosphoric acid, hexameta-phosphoric acid, ultraphosphoric acid, hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid and nitric acid, and the inorganic acid salt is selected from the group consisting of sodium, potassium, calcium and magnesium salts of these inorganic acids.

5. The bactericide of claim 1 which comprises 98.0 to 2.3% (W/V) of ethyl alcohol, 1.0 to 96.7% (W/V) of the said organic acid or its salt, and 1.0 to 96.7% (W/V) of the said inorganic acid or its salt.

6. The bactericide of claim 1, 3 or 5 which contains lactic acid, acetic acid or phytic acid.

7. The bactericide of claim 1, 4 or 5 which contains phosphoric acid, ultraphosphoric acid or nitric acid.

8. The bactericide of claim 1, 2 or 5 which contains lactic acid and phosphoric acid.

9. The bactericide of claim 1 which comprises 99.4 to 20% (W/V) of ethyl alcohol and 0.6 to 80% (W/V) of the said organic acid or its acidic salt.

10. The bactericide of claim 1 which comprises 99.9 to 20% (W/V) of ethyl alcohol and 0.1 to 80% (W/V) of the said inorganic acid or its acidic salt.

11. A method for sterilizing a food or a food processing machine or uten-sil, which comprises dissolving aliquidbactericide comprising 98.0 to 2.3%
(W/V) of ethyl alcohol and 1.0 to 96.7% (W/V) of an organic acid selected from the group consisting of lactic acid, acetic acid, tartaric acid, gluconic acid, citric acid, ascorbic acid, malic acid, succinic acid, fumaric acid and phytic acid or its acidic salt and/or 1.0 to 96.7% (W/V) of an inorganic acid selected from the group consisting of phosphoric acid, condensed phosphoric acids, hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid and nitric acid or acidic salts thereof as active ingredients in water and contacting the resulting aqueous solution with the food or the food processing machine or utensil.

12. The method of claim 11 wherein the acidic salt of the organic acid or of the inorganic acid is selected from the group consisting of sodium, potassium, calcium and magnesium salts.

13. The method of claim 11 or 12 wherein the liquid bactericide comprises ethyl alcohol and the said organic acid or its acidic salt as active ingredients.

14. The method of claim 11 or 12 wherein the liquid bactericide comprises ethyl alcohol and the said inorganic acid or its acidic salt as active ingred-ients.

15. The method of claim 11 or 12 wherein the liquid bactericide comprises ethyl alcohol, the said organic acid or its salt and the said inorganic acid or its salt as active ingredients.

16. The method of claim 11 or 12 wherein the aqueous solution of the bactericide contains 0.5 to 35% (W/V) of ethyl alcohol and 0.005 to 20% (W/V) of the said organic acid or its acidic salt and/or the said inorganic acid or its acidic salt.

17. The method of claim 11 or 12 wherein the aqueous solution of the bactericide contains 5 to 35% (W/V) of ethyl alcohol and 0.5 to 20% (W/V) of the said organic acid or its salt.

18. The method of claim 11 or 12 wherein the aqueous solution of the bactericide contains 5 to 35% (W/V) of ethyl alcohol and 0.005 to 20% (W/V) of the said inorganic acid or its salt.

19. The method of claim 11 or 12 wherein the aqueous solution of the bactericide contains 1 to 18.6% (W/V) of ethyl alcohol, 0,3 to 31% (W/V) of the said organic acid or its salt, and 0.03 to 10% (W/V) of the said inorganic acid or its salt.

20. The method of claim 11 or 12 wherein the said liquid bactericide contains lactic acid and phosphoric acid.

21. The method of claim 11 or 12, wherein the aqueous solution of the bactericide has a pH of not more than 4Ø