Wash water is circulated for use in the minimal processing industry, and inefficient disinfection methods can lead to pathogen cross-contamination. Moreover, few disinfection strategies are available for ready-to-eat fruits that do not need to be cut. In this study, the use of chlorine and ultrasound, two low-cost disinfection methods, were evaluated to disinfect winter jujube, a delicious, nutritious, and widely sold fruit in China. Ultrasound treatment (28 kHz) alone could not decrease the cross-contamination incidence of Escherichia coli O157:H7, non-O157 E. coli, and Salmonella Typhimurium, and free chlorine treatment at 10 ppm decreased the incidence from 55.00% to 5.00% for E. coli O157:H7, 65.00% to 6.67% for non-157 E. coli, and 70.00% to 6.67% for S. Typhimurium. The cross-contamination incidence was completely reduced (pathogens were not detected in sample) when the treatments were combined. The counts of aerobic mesophiles, aerobic psychrophiles, molds, yeasts, and three pathogens in the group subjected to combination treatment (28 kHz ultrasound + 10 ppm free chlorine) were significantly lower than those in the control, chlorine-treated, and ultrasound-treated groups during storage (0-7 d at 4 °C). Analysis of weight loss, sensory quality (crispness, color, and flavor), instrument color (a*/b*), soluble matter contents (total soluble solids, reducing sugar, total soluble sugar, and titratable acid), and nutritional properties (ascorbic acid and polyphenolic contents) indicated that treatment with ultrasound, chlorine, and their combination did not lead to additional quality loss compared with properties of the control. Additionally, the activities of phenylalanine ammonia-lyase and polyphenol oxidase were not significantly increased in the treatment group, consistent with the quality analysis results. These findings provide insights into disinfection of uncut ready-to-eat fruits using a minimum dose of disinfectant for cross-contamination prevention under ultrasonication. The use of ultrasound alone to decontaminate fresh produce is accompanied by a high risk of pathogen contamination, and the use of sanitizers to decrease cross-contamination incidence is recommended.

Evaluating the efficacy of disinfection processes to inactivate human enteric viruses is important for the prevention and control of waterborne diseases caused by exposure to those viruses via drinking water. Here, we evaluated the inactivation of two representative human enteric viruses (adenovirus type 40 [AdV] and coxsackievirus B5 [CV]) by thermal or free-chlorine disinfection. In addition, we compared the infectivity reduction ratio of a plant virus (pepper mild mottle virus [PMMoV], a recently proposed novel surrogate for human enteric viruses for the assessment of virus removal by coagulation‒rapid sand filtration and membrane filtration) with that of the two human enteric viruses to assess the suitability of PMMoV as a human enteric virus surrogate for use in thermal and free-chlorine disinfection processes. Finally, we examined whether conventional or enhanced viability polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis using propidium monoazide (PMA) or improved PMA (PMAxx) with or without an enhancer could be used as alternatives to infectivity assays (i.e., plaque-forming unit method for AdV and CV; local lesion count assay for PMMoV) for evaluating virus inactivation by disinfection processes. We found that PMMoV was more resistant to heat treatment than AdV and CV, suggesting that PMMoV is a potential surrogate for these two enteric viruses with regard to thermal disinfection processes. However, PMMoV was much more resistant to chlorine treatment compared with AdV and CV (which is chlorine-resistant) (CT value for 4-log10 inactivation: PMMoV, 84.5 mg-Cl2·min/L; CV, 1.15-1.19 mg-Cl2·min/L), suggesting that PMMoV is not useful as a surrogate for these enteric viruses with regard to free-chlorine disinfection processes. For thermal disinfection, the magnitude of the signal reduction observed with PMAxx-Enhancer-PCR was comparable with the magnitude of reduction in infectivity, indicating that PMAxx-Enhancer-PCR is a potential alternative to infectivity assay. However, for free-chlorine disinfection, the magnitude of the signal reduction observed with PMAxx-Enhancer-PCR was smaller than the magnitude of the reduction in infectivity, indicating that PMAxx-Enhancer-PCR underestimated the efficacy of virus inactivation (i.e., overestimated the infectious virus concentration) by chlorine treatment. Nevertheless, among the PCR approaches examined in the present study (PCR alone, PMA-PCR or PMAxx-PCR either with or without enhancer), PMAxx-Enhancer-PCR provided the most accurate assessment of the efficacy of virus inactivation by thermal or free chlorine disinfection processes.