Next Article in Journal
The Effectiveness of E-Health Interventions Promoting Physical Activity and Reducing Sedentary Behavior in College Students: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Previous Article in Journal
Ecosystem Health Evaluation and Ecological Security Patterns Construction Based on VORSD and Circuit Theory: A Case Study in the Three Gorges Reservoir Region in Chongqing, China
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Communication

Risk Reduction Assessment of Vibrio parahaemolyticus on Shrimp by a Chinese Eating Habit

1
College of Food Science and Technology, Shanghai Ocean University, Shanghai 201306, China
2
Greentown Agricultural Testing Technology Co., Ltd., Hangzhou 310051, China
3
Laboratory of Quality and Safety Risk Assessment for Aquatic Products on Storage and Preservation (Shanghai), Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Shanghai 201306, China
4
Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Aquatic-Product Processing and Preservation, Shanghai 201306, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20(1), 317; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010317
Submission received: 14 November 2022 / Revised: 20 December 2022 / Accepted: 22 December 2022 / Published: 25 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Innovative Research on the Assessment and Prevention of Food Safety)

Abstract

:
In China, a traditional perspective recommended that consuming seafood should be mixed or matched with vinegar, because people thought this traditional Chinese eating habit could reduce the risk of pathogenic microorganism infection, such as Vibrio parahaemolyticus induced diarrhea. However, this empirical viewpoint has not yet been evaluated scientifically. This study conducted a simplified quantitative microbiological risk assessment (QMRA) model, which was employed to estimate the risk reduction of V. parahaemolyticus on ready-to-eat (RTE) shrimp by consuming with vinegars (white vinegar, aromatic vinegar, or mature vinegar). Results showed the reduction of V. parahaemolyticus density on RTE shrimp after consuming with white vinegar, aromatic vinegar and mature vinegar was respectively 0.9953 log CFU/g (90% confidence interval 0.23 to 1.76), 0.7018 log CFU/g (90% confidence interval 0.3430 to 1.060) and 0.6538 log CFU/g (90% confidence interval 0.346 to 0.9620). The infection risk of V. parahaemolyticus per meal in this QMRA model was quantified by a mean of 0.1250 with the standard deviation of 0.2437. After consuming with white vinegar, aromatic vinegar, and mature vinegar, the mean infection risk of V. parahaemolyticus on shrimp decreased to 0.0478, 0.0652, and 0.0686. The QMRA scenarios indicated significant reductions in infection risk when eating RTE shrimp by the Chinese eating habit (consuming with vinegar). This good eating habit should be recommended to promote the spread of around the world.

1. Introduction

Vibrio parahaemolyticus, the leading foodborne pathogen in China, is frequently isolated from a variety of seafood [1,2]. its salinity and fear of acid, in 3–5% salt water can multiply rapidly, but in the pH below 6 acidic conditions is poor growth [3,4]. Acute gastroenteritis brought on by a V. parahaemolyticus infection might present as diarrhea, headache, vomiting, nausea, and abdominal cramps [5,6]. One of the most significant types of seafood, shrimp is also in high demand on the global market. However, it is frequently linked to outbreaks of V. parahaemolyticus, particularly during the warm seasons [7], which may be brought on by a high incidence of the virus in shrimps. That presented possible threats to the public’s health and seafood safety.
The most preferred method for reducing the risk of infection from V. parahaemolyticus on shrimp was thermal processing. Additionally, customers are becoming more and more enamored with cooked, ready-to-eat shrimp due to their convenience and flavor. However, due to cross-contamination from subpar production methods and careless eating and handling habits, ready-to-eat shrimp was also easily infected with V. parahaemolyticus [8]. In China, a traditional perspective recommended consuming fish combined with vinegar, since it was believed that this traditional Chinese eating habit might lower the risk of infections from harmful microorganisms found in seafood. However, up to now, this empirical viewpoint has not yet been proved scientifically. Quantitative microbiological risk assessment (QMRA) was considered as a scientific and internationally accepted tool to evaluate the infection risks of foodborne pathogens [9,10,11]. The QMRA model was widely employed to estimate the infection probability of pathogenic bacteria in different foods, such as Listeria monocytogenes in ready-to-eat food [12], Salmonella spp. in eggs [13], and V. parahaemolyticus in seafood [14,15,16,17,18] etc. In addition, it is also a useful tool to quantify the reduction in potential risks of pathogens by sterilization techniques. However, to the best of our knowledge, this approach has not been used to assess the effect of an eating habit on the microbiological infection risk.
Therefore, this study firstly conducted a simplified QMRA model to simulate the circumstance of consuming seafood with vinegar, and attempted to calculate the reduction in infection risk of V. parahaemolyticus in shrimp by this kind of Chinese eating habit. The three most comment vinegars in China, white vinegar, aromatic vinegar, and mature vinegar have been chosen in this study. A Monte Carlo simulation was applied to describe the uncertainty and variability of the influence of consuming with vinegar on reduction of V. parahaemolyticus concentration. This study aims to promote the adoption of this healthy eating practice worldwide by providing scientific proof that this Chinese eating practice does lower the risk of V. parahaemolyticus in shrimp.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Bacterial Strain and Culture Preparation

The pathogenic V. parahaemolyticus O3:K6 strain is a pandemic strain currently preserved at our laboratory at −80 °C in Tryptone soy broth (TSB, Beijing Land Bridge Technology Company Ltd., Beijing, PR China) containing 3% NaCl (pH 8.0) with addition of 25% (v/v) sterilized glycerol as a cryoprotector.
To prepare the inoculum culture, the stock V. parahaemolyticus culture was transferred to TSB plus 3% NaCl and incubated at 37 °C for 18–20 h. After two passages, the suspension from the last culture was centrifuged at 4000 rpm for 10 min at room temperature, the supernatant was discarded and the absorbance was adjusted with fresh sterile Phosphate Buffer Solution (PBS) and the absorbance was determined by colony counting until the bacterial load was approximately 109 CFU/mL.

2.2. Preparation of Artificial Contaminated Shrimp Samples

Shrimp samples (10 ± 1 g per) were purchased from a local supermarket in Shanghai. The shrimp samples were stored at −20 °C, and thawed at 4 °C overnight before treatment.
The shrimp samples were randomly selected and dipped into a V. parahaemolyticus O3:K6 suspension containing ~109 CFU/mL with shaking for 20 min. The whole shrimp samples were then air-dried in a biosafety hood for 20 min to allow for bacterial attachment. This treatment insured a uniform distribution of V. parahaemolyticus on the shrimp (~106 CFU/g).

2.3. Treatment of Shrimp Samples with Chinese Traditional Vinegar

Three Chinese traditional vinegars, white vinegar, aromatic vinegar, and mature vinegar, were purchased from a local supermarket in Shanghai. The major components were listed in Table 1. Each group of five inoculated shrimps was immersed in 500 mL of each condiment for 5, 10, 15, 30, 60, 90 and 120 s, respectively. Inoculated samples treated with sterile 0.85% saline solution were used as control.
After vinegar treatment, shrimp samples were placed in a sterile 400 mL filter stomacher bag (Beijing Land Bridge Technology Company Ltd., Beijing, PR China) with 100 mL of sterile alkaline peptone water (APW, Beijing Land Bridge Technology Company Ltd., Beijing, PR China) with 3% NaCl (pH 8.0), and then homogenized (BagMixer400, Interscience, France) for 2 min. Subsequently, the homogenate was serially diluted with APW and plated onto thiosulfate–citrate–bile salts–sucrose (TCBS,) to enumerate V. parahaemolyticus O3:K6 after incubation at 37 °C for 18–24 h. Three replicates at each sampling time were performed.

2.4. Latin Hypercube Sampling

LHS is a statistical technique that was developed by McKay [19] et al. that offers the benefits of efficient space filling and the capacity to match nonlinear connections. As a result, in this investigation, sample points were created using LHS.

2.5. Risk Reduction Assessment

A simplified QMRA model was used in this study to evaluate the risk reduction of V. parahaemolyticus on ready-to-eat shrimp by consuming three different vinegars. The scope used in the QMRA model from market to table was shown in Figure 1, and the variables and models were listed in Table 2.
A uniform distribution was employed to describe the contamination of V. parahaemolyticus on ready-to-eat shrimp. The minimum of uniform distribution was 0, since we assumed there is no Vibrio on shrimp as the best circumstance. According to the previous researches, the most probable density of V. parahaemolyticus on shrimp was about 9 log CFU/g [20,21]. Hence, the 9 log CFU/g was chosen as the maximum of uniform distribution.
According to the surveillance research of Shanghai Food and Drug Administration (Shanghai FDA), the maximum of consumption of shrimp for one person per meal was approximately 43.74, and the minimum and maximum consumption was 10.85 g [22]. Hence, a normal distribution was used in this model for the possible shrimp consumption as normal (10.85, 43.74).
For appropriate assessment of the probability risk caused by a single cell of V. parahaemolyticus, a dose–response model was employed to estimate the risk of foodborne illness associated with shrimp consumption in the current research. Due to the lack of data in the city, the dose–response model used in this work was the same beta-Poisson model (Equation (1)) used by US FDA [17], including the distribution of uncertainty of parameters alpha and beta.
P = 1 ( 1 + D β ) α
where P denotes the probability of illness for an individual exposed to a certain dose (D cells); D is the number of V. parahaemolyticus consumed (CFU), α (0.60) and β (1.31 × 106) are parameters of the dose–response.
The “Distribution Fitting” tool in @Risk software was employed to investigate the optimal distribution to describe the reduction of V. parahaemolyticus contamination level on ready-to-eat shrimp by three vinegars. In addition, the Chi-squared statistic, Anderson darling statistic, and Kolmogorov–Smirnov statistic were used to evaluate the goodness-of-fit of the distribution models.

2.6. Statistical Analyses

The statistical analyses were performed by using SPSS statistical package 17.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) with a significant level of 5% of probability. The model was developed by using a Microsoft® Excel 2010 spreadsheet (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA). All simulations were run by using the Monte Carlo sampling method of input variables and combining the values properly in order to generate the output variables. The simulations were implemented by using the @Risk software. The distribution of uncertainty for the probability of disease was determined by running 10,000 iterations.

3. Results

3.1. Reduction of V. parahaemolyticus on Shrimp by Three Vinegars

The bactericidal effects of three vinegars (white vinegar, aromatic vinegar, and mature vinegar) on V. parahaemolyticus on ready-to-eat shrimp were experimented in the laboratory. According to the Chinese eating habit, the treatment times of 5 s to 120 s was chosen to investigate in this study, and the results of the effect of white vinegar, aromatic vinegar, and mature vinegar on V. parahaemolyticus on ready-to-eat shrimp can be found in Table 3.
The distributions of decreased contamination of V. parahaemolyticus for vinegars were fitted by @Risk software. The adequacy of the adjustment of data to a distribution of probability was evaluated by Chi-squared statistic, Anderson darling statistic, and Kolmogorov–Smirnov statistic using @Risk software. Figure 2 shows the optimal distribution for description of the reduction of V. parahaemolyticus contamination level on shrimp by three vinegars. The mean reduction of V. parahaemolyticus on ready-to-eat shrimp by consuming with white vinegar was 0.9953 log CFU/g (90% confidence interval 0.23 to 1.76). The mean reduction of V. parahaemolyticus on ready-to-eat shrimp by consuming with aromatic vinegar was 0.7018 log CFU/g (90% confidence interval 0.3430 to 1.060). The mean reduction of V. parahaemolyticus on ready-to-eat shrimp by consuming with mature vinegar was 0.6538 log CFU/g (90% confidence interval 0.3460 to 0.9620).

3.2. Final Contamination Level of V. parahaemolyticus on Shrimp after Consuming with Vinegars

As shown in Figure 3, a uniform distribution was employed to describe the contamination of V. parahaemolyticus on ready-to-eat shrimp. The uniform distribution showed the mean contamination of V. parahaemolyticus on ready-to-eat shrimp assumed in this study was 4.50 log CFU/g with the standard deviation of 2.5982.
According to fitting results of @Risk software, after consuming with white vinegar, the mean contamination of V. parahaemolyticus on shrimp decreased as 3.5047 log CFU/g with the standard deviation of 2.6322. After consuming with aromatic vinegar, the mean contamination of V. parahaemolyticus on shrimp decreased as 3.7982 log CFU/g with the standard deviation of 2.6079. After consuming with mature vinegar, the mean contamination of V. parahaemolyticus on shrimp decreased as 3.8462 log CFU/g with the standard deviation of 2.6053.

3.3. Estimated Infection Risk Reductions from the QMRA

The ingested dose of a single pathogenic organism was translated into the probability of illness using the dose–response model. Latin Hypercube sampling method was run for each simulated scenario to estimate the V. parahaemolyticus most probable final load and the probable number of illnesses after the complete process. Histograms depicting distributions of risk was shown in Figure 4, and the distributions approached their upper limit of one, and therefore had long right tails.
The infection risk of V. parahaemolyticus per meal in this QMRA model was quantified by a mean of 0.1250 with the standard deviation of 0.2437. However, after consuming with white vinegar, the mean infection risk of V. parahaemolyticus on shrimp decreased as 0.0478 with the standard deviation of 0.1292. After consuming with aromatic vinegar, the mean infection risk of V. parahaemolyticus on shrimp decreased as 0.0652 with the standard deviation of 0.1550. After consuming with mature vinegar, the mean infection risk of V. parahaemolyticus on shrimp decreased as 0.0686 with the standard deviation of 0.1600. Particularly, consuming with white vinegar is the most effective scenario to reduce the potential risk, where the proportion of risk reduction is high up to 61.76%.

4. Discussion

Today, the ready-to-eat seafood, such as ready-to-eat shrimp, fish steak, crab sticks, etc., become more and more popular by consumers since they are convenient and delicious [23]. However, this type of food is thought to be extremely prone to microbial pathogen contamination and might be dangerous to consumer health [24,25]. Human health is greatly concerned about the incidence and presence of foodborne pathogens in food, which can lead to illness outbreaks [26,27]. In shrimp that has been prepared for consumption, a number of foodborne viruses, most notably V. parahaemolyticus [28], may persist if no heat treatment step or other curing action is taken. A traditional viewpoint in China advocated pairing or mixing fish with vinegar to lower the danger of eating infectious microorganisms. However, up to now, this empirical traditional Chinese eating habit has not yet been proved scientifically. Therefore, this is the first study to evaluate the availability of a Chinese eating habit to reduce the infection risk of human from ready-to-eat shrimp contaminated with V. parahaemolyticus based on QMRA.
In China, the history of vinegar is well documented [29,30]. Vinegar serves as a medicine as well as a condiment [31]. White vinegar, aromatic vinegar, and mature vinegar were the three Chinese traditional vinegars used for this investigation. The treatment times of 5, 10, 15, 30, 60, 90, and 120 s were chosen to correspond to the Chinese eating custom. The “Distribution Fitting” feature in the @Risk program was used to match the best distribution for characterizing the decrease in V. parahaemolyticus contamination level on shrimp caused by the use of three vinegars. The findings indicated that the logistic distribution may well reflect the trend of three vinegars in reducing the amount of V. parahaemolyticus on shrimp. White vinegar, aromatic vinegar, and mature vinegar consumption resulted in a 0.9953 log CFU/g, 0.7018, and 0.7018 log CFU/g mean decrease in V. parahaemolyticus on ready-to-eat shrimp, respectively. This showed that this Chinese eating style can lower the amount of V. parahaemolyticus on shrimp that are ready to eat, and pairing it with white vinegar would have the biggest impact.
Within this QMRA model, the infection risk of V. parahaemolyticus per meal was quantified by a mean of 0.1250 and a standard deviation of 0.2437. That is significantly greater than what has been reported in previous studies, such as those on bloody clams in Malaysia [32] and Thailand [14], and horse mackerel in Japan [15], where the estimated risks were, respectively, 4.8 × 10−6, 5.6 × 10−4, and 5.6 × 10−6 to 1.4 × 10−4. This result was obtained because the worst case scenario (9 log CFU/g) was taken into account in this investigation. When researchers cannot precisely estimate the risk, they frequently utilize the worst-case scenario in a QMRA model [33,34]. In this method, researchers can constantly focus on the worst case scenario rather than having to think about the effects of uncertainty. As we can see, even though the worst-case scenario (9 log CFU/g) was chosen, the QMRA scenarios still showed that there were substantial decreases in the risk of infection when ingesting shrimp that had been prepared with vinegar. More precisely, the mean infection risk of V. parahaemolyticus on shrimp fell as 0.0478, 0.0652, and 0.0686 following consumption with white vinegar, aromatic vinegar, and mature vinegar, respectively.
Based on the above analysis, our study simulated the effects of vinegar on pathogenic microorganisms in seafood through a simplified quantitative microbial risk assessment model. Despite the lack of validation of epidemiological data of V. parahaemolyticus, comprehensive insights can be obtained that consuming with vinegar can reduce the infection risks from shrimp derived V. parahaemolyticus. Similar results were found in some published literatures, e.g., consuming sashimi with mustard had an effectively antimicrobial effect [35]. This Japanese eating habit can also reduce the infection risk of foodborne disease. That indicated a good eating habit will contribute the human health. In a summary, consuming seafood mixed or matched with vinegar was proved as a good eating habit to reduce the risk of bacterial infection, which should be suggested as a healthy dietary culture to spread around the world.

Author Contributions

Z.Z., T.L., O.C.O.C. and Y.Z. conceived and supervised the study. H.X., J.L. (Jing Liu) and Z.Z., designed and performed the experiments. H.X., J.L. (Jiawen Liu) and M.Y. analyzed the data. H.X. and Z.Z. wrote the manuscript. C.T., J.L. (Jing Liu) and Y.P. revised the manuscript. Z.Z. and Y.Z. reviewed and edited the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was funded by Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) (31972188) and Program of Shanghai Academic Research Leader (21XD1401200).

Data Availability Statement

All datasets generated for this study are included in the article.

Acknowledgments

The authors are thankful to Zhaohuan Zhang for her help with this manuscript preparation.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Fridman, C.M.; Keppel, K.; Gerlic, M.; Bosis, E.; Salomon, D. A comparative genomics methodology reveals a widespread family of membrane disrupting T6SS effectors. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 1085. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Wang, R.; Zhong, Y.; Gu, X.; Yuan, J.; Saeed, A.F.; Wang, S. The pathogenesis, detection, and prevention of Vibrio parahaemolyticus. Front. Microbiol. 2015, 6, 144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Yang, L.; Zhan, L.; Han, H.; Gao, H.; Guo, Z.; Qin, C.; Yang, R.; Liu, X.; Zhou, D. The low-salt stimulon in Vibrio parahaemolyticus. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2010, 137, 49–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Koo, J.; Jahncke, M.L. Acid adapted Vibrio parahaemolyticus and Vibrio vulnificus enhance survival in acidic environments. J. Aquat. Food Prod. Technol. 2006, 15, 47–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Yanagihara, I.; Nakahira, K.; Yamane, T.; Kaieda, S.; Mayanagi, K.; Hamada, D.; Fukui, T.; Ohnishi, K.; Kajiyama, S.; Shimizu, T.; et al. Structure and Functional Characterization of Vibrio parahaemolyticus Thermostable Direct Hemolysin. J. Biol. Chem. 2010, 285, 16267–16274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  6. Ritchie, J.M.; Rui, H.; Zhou, X.; Iida, T.; Kodoma, T.; Ito, S.; Davis, B.M.; Bronson, R.T.; Waldor, K.M. Inflammation and Disintegration of Intestinal Villi in an Experimental Model for Vibrio parahaemolyticus Induced Diarrhea. PLOS Pathog. 2012, 8, e1002593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  7. McLaughlin, J.B.; DePaola, A.; Bopp, C.A.; Martinek, K.A.; Napolilli, N.P.; Allison, C.G.; Murray, S.L.; Thompson, E.C.; Bird, M.M.; Middaugh, J.P. Outbreak of Vibrio parahaemolyticus Gastroenteritis Associated with Alaskan Oysters. N. Engl. J. Med. 2005, 353, 1463–1470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Zhang, H.-N.; Hou, P.-B.; Chen, Y.-Z.; Ma, Y.; Li, X.-P.; Lv, H.; Wang, M.; Tan, H.-L.; Bi, Z.-W. Prevalence of foodborne pathogens in cooked meat and seafood from 2010 to 2013 in Shandong Province, China. Iran J. Public Health 2016, 45, 1577–1585. [Google Scholar]
  9. Aiassa, E.; Higgins, J.; Frampton, G.; Greiner, M.; Afonso, A.; Amzal, B.; Deeks, J.; Dorne, J.-L.; Glanville, J.; Lövei, G.L.; et al. Applicability and feasibility of systematic review for performing evidence-based risk assessment in food and feed safety. Crit. Rev. Food Sci Nutr. 2015, 55, 1026–1034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Aguilera, J.; Gomes, A.R.; Olaru, I. Principles for the risk assessment of genetically modified microorganisms and their food products in the European Union. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2013, 167, 2–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. More, S.; Bampidis, V.; Benford, D.; Bragard, C.; Halldorsson, T.; Hernández-Jerez, A.; Bennekou, S.H.; Koutsoumanis, K.; Lambré, C.; Machera, K.; et al. Evaluation of existing guidelines for their adequacy for the food and feed risk assessment of microorganisms obtained through synthetic biology. EFSA J. 2022, 20, e07479. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  12. Brusa, V.; Prieto, M.; Campos, C.; Epszteyn, S.; Cuesta, A.; Renaud, V.; Schembri, G.; Vanzini, M.; Michanie, S.; Leotta, G.; et al. Quantitative risk assessment of listeriosis associated with fermented sausage and dry cured pork shoulder consumption in Argentina. Food Control 2021, 123, 107705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Rawson, T. A hierarchical Bayesian quantitative microbiological risk assessment model for Salmonella in the sheep meat food chain. Food Microbiol. 2022, 104, 103975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Yamamoto, A.; Iwahori, J.I.; Vuddhakul, V.; Charernjiratragul, W.; Vose, D.; Osaka, K.; Shigematsu, M.; Toyofuku, H.; Yamamoto, S.; Nishibuchi, M. Quantitative modeling for risk assessment of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in bloody clams in southern Thailand. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2008, 124, 70–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Iwahori, J.; Yamamoto, A.; Suzuki, H.; Yamamoto, T.; Tsutsui, T.; Motoyama, K.; Sawada, M.; Matsushita, T.; Hasegawa, A.; Osaka, K.; et al. Quantitative risk assessment of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in finfish: A model of raw horse mackerel consumption in Japan. Risk Anal. 2010, 30, 1817–1832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Liu, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Wang, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Lu, Y.; Xu, X.; Yan, J.; Pan, Y. A highly sensitive and flexible magnetic nanoprobe labeled immunochromatographic assay plaform for pathogen Vibrio parahaemolyticus. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2015, 211, 109–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. World Health Organization (WHO). Risk Assessment of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in Seafood: Interpretative Summary and Technical Report; World Health Organization (WHO): Geneva, Switzerland, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  18. Sobrinho, P.d.S.C.; Destro, M.T.; Franco, B.D.G.M.; Landgraf, M. A quantitative risk assessment model for Vibrio parahaemolyticus in raw oysters in Sao Paulo State, Brazil. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2014, 180, 69–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. McKay, M.D.; Beckman, R.J.; Conover, W.J. A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics 2000, 42, 55–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Boonyawantang, A.; Mahakarnchanakul, W.; Rachtanapun, C.; Boonsupthip, W. Behavior of pathogenic Vibrio parahaemolyticus in prawn in response to temperature in laboratory and factory. Food Control 2012, 26, 479–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Tang, X.; Zhao, Y.; Sun, X.; Xie, J.; Pan, Y.; Malakar, P.K. Predictive model of Vibrio parahaemolyticus O3:K6 growth on cooked Litopenaeus vannamei. Ann. Microbiol. 2015, 65, 487–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Du, S.; Zhang, Z.; Lou, Y.; Xiao, L.; Pan, X.; Zhao, Y. Risk reduction assessment of combined acidic electrolyzed water and high hydrostatic pressure effects on Vibrio parahaemolyticus in shelled shrimp. Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 32, 146–154. [Google Scholar]
  23. Kim, H.W.; Hong, Y.J.; Jo, J.I.; Ha, S.D.; Kim, S.H.; Lee, H.J.; Rhee, M.S. Raw ready-to-eat seafood safety: Microbiological quality of the various seafood species available in fishery, hyper and online markets. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2017, 64, 27–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Bai, J.; Jeon, B.; Ryu, S. Effective inhibition of Salmonella Typhimurium in fresh produce by a phage cocktail targeting multiple host receptors. Food Microbiol. 2019, 77, 52–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Giaouris, E.; Heir, E.; Hébraud, M.; Chorianopoulos, N.; Langsrud, S.; Møretrø, T.; Habimana, O.; Desvaux, M.; Renier, S.; Nychas, G.-J. Attachment and biofilm formation by foodborne bacteria in meat processing environments: Causes, implications, role of bacterial interactions and control by alternative novel methods. Meat Sci. 2014, 97, 298–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Callejón, R.M.; Rodríguez-Naranjo, M.I.; Ubeda, C.; Ortega, R.H.; Garcia-Parrilla, M.C.; Troncoso, A.M. Reported foodborne outbreaks due to fresh produce in the United States and European Union: Trends and causes. Foodborne Pathog. Dis. 2015, 12, 32–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Zhu, Q.; Gooneratne, S.R.; Hussain, M.A. Listeria monocytogenes in Fresh Produce: Outbreaks, Prevalence and Contamination Levels. Foods 2017, 6, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Cho, T.J.; Kim, N.H.; Kim, S.A.; Song, J.H.; Rhee, M.S. Survival of foodborne pathogens (Escherichia coli O157:H7, Salmonella Typhimurium, Staphylococcus aureus, Listeria monocytogenes, and Vibrio parahaemolyticus) in raw ready-to-eat crab marinated in soy sauce. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2016, 238, 50–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Liu, D.; Zhu, Y.; Beeftink, R.; Ooijkaas, L.; Rinzema, A.; Chen, J.; Tramper, J. Chinese vinegar and its solid-state fermentation process. Food Rev. Int. 2004, 20, 407–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Liu, L.; Hu, H.; Yu, Y.; Zhao, J.; Yuan, L.; Liu, S.; Zhao, S.; Huang, R.; Xie, J.; Shen, M. Characterization and identification of different Chinese fermented vinegars based on their volatile components. J. Food Biochem. 2021, 45, e13670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Mahbubeh, S.; Sedighe, A.; Shaghayegh, H.; Bahar, N. Reduces cholesterol induced atherosclerotic lesions in aorta artery in hypercholesterolemic rabbits. J. Med. Plants Res. 2011, 5, 1518–1525. [Google Scholar]
  32. Malcolm, T.T.H.; Cheah, Y.K.; Radzi, C.W.J.W.M.; Kantilal, H.K.; Martinez-Urtaza, J.; Nishibuchi, M.; Son, R. Microbial risk assessment of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in bloody clams in Malaysia: A preliminary model from retail to consumption. Microbe Risk Anal. 2016, 4, 43–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Collineau, L.; Chapman, B.; Bao, X.; Sivapathasundaram, B.; Carson, C.A.; Fazil, A.; Reid-Smith, R.J.; Smith, B. A farm-to-fork quantitative risk assessment model for Salmonella Heidelberg resistant to third-generation cephalosporins in broiler chickens in Canada. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2020, 330, 108559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Gurman, P.M.; Ross, T.; Kiermeier, A. Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment of Salmonellosis from the Consumption of Australian Pork: Minced Meat from Retail to Burgers Prepared and Consumed at Home. Risk Anal. 2018, 38, 2625–2645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Rhee, M.S.; Lee, S.Y.; Dougherty, R.H.; Kang, D.H. Antimicrobial effects of mustard flour and acetic acid against Escherichia coli O157:H7, Listeria monocytogenes, and Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2003, 69, 2959–2963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Diagram of the quantitative risk reduction assessment model for V. parahaemolyticus on ready-to-eat shrimp. The figure shows stages and their inputs from market to table. The input parameters of each stage are described in Table 2.
Figure 1. Diagram of the quantitative risk reduction assessment model for V. parahaemolyticus on ready-to-eat shrimp. The figure shows stages and their inputs from market to table. The input parameters of each stage are described in Table 2.
Ijerph 20 00317 g001
Figure 2. The reduction of V. parahaemolyticus contamination level on ready−to−eat shrimp by consuming with white vinegar (A), aromatic vinegar (B) and mature vinegar (C). Note: Vp = Vibrio parahaemolyticus.
Figure 2. The reduction of V. parahaemolyticus contamination level on ready−to−eat shrimp by consuming with white vinegar (A), aromatic vinegar (B) and mature vinegar (C). Note: Vp = Vibrio parahaemolyticus.
Ijerph 20 00317 g002aIjerph 20 00317 g002b
Figure 3. The final contamination level of V. parahaemolyticus on ready−to−eat shrimp by consuming without anything (Red Line), and with white vinegar (Blue Line), aromatic vinegar (Green Line) and mature vinegar (Grey Line). Note: Vp = Vibrio parahaemolyticus.
Figure 3. The final contamination level of V. parahaemolyticus on ready−to−eat shrimp by consuming without anything (Red Line), and with white vinegar (Blue Line), aromatic vinegar (Green Line) and mature vinegar (Grey Line). Note: Vp = Vibrio parahaemolyticus.
Ijerph 20 00317 g003
Figure 4. The infection risk of Vibrio parahaemolyticus on ready−to−eat shrimp by consuming without anything (A), and with white vinegar (B), aromatic vinegar (C) and mature vinegar (D).
Figure 4. The infection risk of Vibrio parahaemolyticus on ready−to−eat shrimp by consuming without anything (A), and with white vinegar (B), aromatic vinegar (C) and mature vinegar (D).
Ijerph 20 00317 g004aIjerph 20 00317 g004b
Table 1. The major components of three vinegars.
Table 1. The major components of three vinegars.
CondimentTotal Acid Content (g/100 mL)pHActive Compounds
White vinegar>6.002.59 ± 0.01Polyphenols, organic acid
Aromatic vinegar~5.753.82 ± 0.17Polyphenols, organic acid
Mature vinegar>6.003.48 ± 0.19Polyphenols, organic acid
Table 2. Description and distribution of variables and models for risk reduction assessment of V. parahaemolyticus on ready-to-eat shrimp.
Table 2. Description and distribution of variables and models for risk reduction assessment of V. parahaemolyticus on ready-to-eat shrimp.
VariablesDefinitionUnitAssumption/Formula/DistributionSource
C0The contamination level of Vp on shrimplog CFU/gUniform(0, 9)Assumption
R1Vp reduction on shrimp by consuming with white vinegarlog CFU/gLogistic(0.99525, 0.25934)Fitted by @Risk
R2Vp reduction on shrimp by consuming with aromatic vinegarlog CFU/gLogistic(0.70173, 0.12168)Fitted by @Risk
R3Vp reduction on shrimp by consuming with mature vinegarlog CFU/gLogistic(0.65378, 0.10464)Fitted by @Risk
C1Final contamination level of Vp on shrimp by consuming with white vinegarlog CFU/gC0–R1Calculated
C2Final contamination level of Vp on shrimp by consuming with aromatic vinegarlog CFU/gC0–R2Calculated
C3Final contamination level of Vp on shrimp by consuming with mature vinegarlog CFU/gC0–R3Calculated
SConsumption of shrimp per mealgNormal (10.85, 43.74)Shanghai FDA
PInfection risk of Vp on shrimp 1 − [1 + (10C0 × S)/(27 × 1.31 × 106)]−0.6Calculated
P1Infection risk of Vp on shrimp by consuming with white vinegar 1 − [1 + (10C1 × S)/(27 × 1.31 × 106)]−0.6Calculated
P2Infection risk of Vp on shrimp by consuming with aromatic vinegar 1 − [1 + (10C2 × S)/(27 × 1.31 × 106)]−0.6Calculated
P3Infection risk of Vp on shrimp by consuming with mature vinegar 1 − [1 + (10C3 × S)/(27 × 1.31 × 106)]−0.6Calculated
Note: a Vp = Vibrio parahaemolyticus; The distributions in Table 2 were performed according to Guide to Using @RISK-Risk Analysis and Simulation Add-In for Microsoft® Excel Version 5.7, Palisade Corporation.
Table 3. Inhibitory effect of three vinegars to shrimp-derived V. parahaemolyticus.
Table 3. Inhibitory effect of three vinegars to shrimp-derived V. parahaemolyticus.
Treatment TimeChinese Traditional Vinegar (log CFU/g)
White VinegarAromatic VinegarMature Vinegar
5 s0.27 ± 0.05 a0.20 ± 0.22 ab0.25 ± 0.15 a
10 s0.74 ± 0.27 b0.56 ± 0.40 ab0.55 ± 0.23 ab
15 s0.94 ± 0.23 b0.69 ± 0.02 a0.58 ± 0.18 b
30 s0.97 ± 0.10 b0.71 ± 0.16 ab0.65 ± 0.11 ab
60 s1.04 ± 0.09 b0.77 ± 0.04 ab0.75 ± 0.33 b
90 s1.25 ± 0.44 b0.81 ± 0.21 ab0.81 ± 0.10 ab
120 s1.97 ± 0.03 b0.98 ± 0.29 b0.84 ± 0.10 b
Mean values (p < 0.05). Values followed by different lowercase letters in the same row indicate significant differences during treatment.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Xu, H.; Liu, J.; Yuan, M.; Tian, C.; Lin, T.; Liu, J.; Osaris Caridad, O.C.; Pan, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Zhang, Z. Risk Reduction Assessment of Vibrio parahaemolyticus on Shrimp by a Chinese Eating Habit. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 317. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010317

AMA Style

Xu H, Liu J, Yuan M, Tian C, Lin T, Liu J, Osaris Caridad OC, Pan Y, Zhao Y, Zhang Z. Risk Reduction Assessment of Vibrio parahaemolyticus on Shrimp by a Chinese Eating Habit. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023; 20(1):317. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010317

Chicago/Turabian Style

Xu, Huan, Jing Liu, Mengqi Yuan, Cuifang Tian, Ting Lin, Jiawen Liu, Olivera Castro Osaris Caridad, Yingjie Pan, Yong Zhao, and Zhaohuan Zhang. 2023. "Risk Reduction Assessment of Vibrio parahaemolyticus on Shrimp by a Chinese Eating Habit" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 20, no. 1: 317. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010317

APA Style

Xu, H., Liu, J., Yuan, M., Tian, C., Lin, T., Liu, J., Osaris Caridad, O. C., Pan, Y., Zhao, Y., & Zhang, Z. (2023). Risk Reduction Assessment of Vibrio parahaemolyticus on Shrimp by a Chinese Eating Habit. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(1), 317. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010317

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop