Difference between revisions of "Quality Assurance"
(→Biofilms) |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
==Avoiding Cross Contamination== | ==Avoiding Cross Contamination== | ||
===General=== | ===General=== | ||
| − | While most microorganisms cannot survive in beer due to the hops, low pH, alcohol content, relatively high carbon dioxide, and shortage of nutrients, certain species are considered to be beer spoilage organisms due to their ability to form biofilms and survive in beer and make a potential impact on the beer's flavor by producing acidity, phenols, and turbidity with just a few surviving cells. Adaption to the brewing environment also makes them more able to survive the harsh environment of beer. These species include [[Brettanomyces|''Brettanomyces'']] species, numerous [[Lactobacillus|''Lactobacillus'']] species, ''Pediococcus damnosus'', ''Pectinatus cerevisiphilus'', ''P. frisingensis'', ''Megasphaera cerevisiae'', ''Selenomonas lactifex'', and [[Saccharomyces#Saccharomyces_cerevisiae_var._diastaticus|''Saccharomyces cerevisiae'' var. ''diastaticus'']]. In sour beers with a pH below 4.3, only the lactic acid bacteria, ''Brettanomyces'', and some wild ''Saccharomyces'' have the potential for unwanted growth, while beers with low alcohol, a small amount of hops, lower CO<sup>2</sup> volumes (cask ales and beers dispensed with nitrogen, for example), and higher pH (4.4-4.6) are the most susceptible to contamination. Other species of microbes do not grow in beer but can become contaminants earlier on in the brewing process (for example during kettle souring). These species include enterobacteria such as ''Clostridium'' species, ''Obesumbacterium proteus'' and ''Rahnella aquatilis'', and wild ''Saccharomyces'' that might not be able to grow in finished beer. Other species are considered "indicator" species because they do not directly cause spoilage of beer, but indicate that there is a hygiene problem. These include ''Acetobacter'', ''Gluconobacter'', and ''Klebsiella'' species, as well as aerobic yeasts | + | While most microorganisms cannot survive in beer due to the hops, low pH, alcohol content, relatively high carbon dioxide, and shortage of nutrients, certain species are considered to be beer spoilage organisms due to their ability to form biofilms and survive in beer and make a potential impact on the beer's flavor by producing acidity, phenols, and turbidity with just a few surviving cells. Adaption to the brewing environment also makes them more able to survive the harsh environment of beer. These species include [[Brettanomyces|''Brettanomyces'']] species, numerous [[Lactobacillus|''Lactobacillus'']] species, ''Pediococcus damnosus'', ''Pectinatus cerevisiphilus'', ''P. frisingensis'', ''Megasphaera cerevisiae'', ''Selenomonas lactifex'', and [[Saccharomyces#Saccharomyces_cerevisiae_var._diastaticus|''Saccharomyces cerevisiae'' var. ''diastaticus'']]. In sour beers with a pH below 4.3, only the lactic acid bacteria, ''Brettanomyces'', and some wild ''Saccharomyces'' have the potential for unwanted growth, while beers with low alcohol, a small amount of hops, lower CO<sup>2</sup> volumes (cask ales and beers dispensed with nitrogen, for example), and higher pH (4.4-4.6) are the most susceptible to contamination. Other species of microbes do not grow in beer but can become contaminants earlier on in the brewing process (for example during kettle souring). These species include enterobacteria such as ''Clostridium'' species, ''Obesumbacterium proteus'' and ''Rahnella aquatilis'', and wild ''Saccharomyces'' that might not be able to grow in finished beer. Other species are considered "indicator" species because they do not directly cause spoilage of beer, but indicate that there is a hygiene problem. These include ''Acetobacter'', ''Gluconobacter'', and ''Klebsiella'' species, as well as aerobic yeasts <ref name="Wirtanen_2001">[https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273439407_Disinfectant_testing_against_brewery-related_biofilms. Disinfectant testing against brewery-related biofilms. Erna Storgårds, Gun Wirtanen. 2001.]</ref>. |
| − | Sources for contamination can occur as "primary" contaminations (yeast pitching, and brewhouse related contaminations), or as "secondary" contaminations (packaging and cellaring), as well as in tap systems. They are usually not sudden occurrences, but a result of continued growth of microorganisms in a problem area. Historically, re-pitching yeast was often a source of contamination, however, more recently this has become less of a source for contaminations due to better education and techniques. Typical sources for contamination also include unclean equipment such as thermometers, manometers, valves, dead ends, gas pipes, leaks in any part of the system (especially at heat exchangers), wort aeration equipment, and even worn floor surfaces. More than half of documented contaminations come from the packaging system. These are typically the sealer (35%), the filler (25%), the bottle inspector (10%), dripping water from the bottle washer (10%), and the environment close to the filler and sealer (10%). In regards to the environment as a source of contamination, this has been found to be from airborne contaminants near the filler and crowner. The higher the humidity and the more airflow, the more chances of airborne contamination. In tap systems at taverns, 'one-way' valves that are attached to kegs have been found to be a source of contamination, as well as the dispensing line <ref name="storgards_2000" />. | + | Biofilm forming spoilage organisms include a much wider range and higher frequency in beer tap systems than in brewhouses. This is due to the availability of oxygen and higher temperatures at certain points in the tap system, as well as poorer hygiene in tap systems as well as the difficulty to effectively clean plastic hoses. Of particular concern here is the ability of ''E. coli'' serotype O157:H7 to survive in tap systems, which has had a couple of documented occurrences in contaminated apple cider. Another study showed that aerobic yeasts were able to grow in dispensing lines, as well as ''L. brevis'', and in many cases the draft lines were re-contaminated after just one week of cleaning, indicating that a contamination in draft lines is difficult to remove <ref name="storgards_2000">[http://www.vtt.fi/inf/pdf/publications/2000/P410.pdf Process hygiene control in beer production and dispensing. Erna Storgårds. VTT Publications 410. 2000.]</ref><ref name="Wirtanen_2001" />. |
| + | |||
| + | Sources for contamination in breweries can occur as "primary" contaminations (yeast pitching, and brewhouse related contaminations), or as "secondary" contaminations (packaging and cellaring), as well as in tap systems. They are usually not sudden occurrences, but a result of continued growth of microorganisms in a problem area. Historically, re-pitching yeast was often a source of contamination, however, more recently this has become less of a source for contaminations due to better education and techniques. Typical sources for contamination also include unclean equipment such as thermometers, manometers, valves, dead ends, gas pipes, leaks in any part of the system (especially at heat exchangers), wort aeration equipment, and even worn floor surfaces. More than half of documented contaminations come from the packaging system. These are typically the sealer (35%), the filler (25%), the bottle inspector (10%), dripping water from the bottle washer (10%), and the environment close to the filler and sealer (10%). In regards to the environment as a source of contamination, this has been found to be from airborne contaminants near the filler and crowner. The higher the humidity and the more airflow, the more chances of airborne contamination. In tap systems at taverns, 'one-way' valves that are attached to kegs have been found to be a source of contamination, as well as the dispensing line <ref name="storgards_2000" />. | ||
===Biofilms=== | ===Biofilms=== | ||
| − | |||
Many microorganisms can form ''biofilms'' which is defined as a community of cells of one or more species that are attached to each other and/or a surface and are embedded in a matrix of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS), including polysaccharides and proteins, similar to a [[Pellicle|pellicle]]. Biofilms allow microbes to survive less vigorous cleaning and sanitizing regiments and chemicals and has become a concern in the food industry as well as in the brewing and winemaking industries <ref>[https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1541-4337.12087 The Paradox of Mixed‐Species Biofilms in the Context of Food Safety. Iqbal Kabir Jahid and Sang‐Do Ha. 2014.]</ref>. Biofilms most often form in the packaging system somewhere, but can also be found on side rails, wearstrips, conveyor tracks, drip pans, and in-between chain links <ref name="storgards_2000" />. | Many microorganisms can form ''biofilms'' which is defined as a community of cells of one or more species that are attached to each other and/or a surface and are embedded in a matrix of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS), including polysaccharides and proteins, similar to a [[Pellicle|pellicle]]. Biofilms allow microbes to survive less vigorous cleaning and sanitizing regiments and chemicals and has become a concern in the food industry as well as in the brewing and winemaking industries <ref>[https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1541-4337.12087 The Paradox of Mixed‐Species Biofilms in the Context of Food Safety. Iqbal Kabir Jahid and Sang‐Do Ha. 2014.]</ref>. Biofilms most often form in the packaging system somewhere, but can also be found on side rails, wearstrips, conveyor tracks, drip pans, and in-between chain links <ref name="storgards_2000" />. | ||
| − | Bacteria and yeast form a biofilm in two stages, which are determined by a number of variables. In the first stage, the microbes remain in their [http://www.dictionary.com/browse/planktonic|"planktonic"] form (floating around in the liquid), but they begin to adhere on surfaces and to each other as those surfaces. Other species of microbes can also be adhered to during this phase. The second stage is where the microbes start producing exopolysaccharides (EPS) which helps them bind together in a matrix, along with any available proteins and exopolymers produced by the bacteria. A large portion of biofilms is actually water (80-80%) as this allows the microbes to remove waste and consume nutrients. This matrix helps the microbes resist antibiotics, UV radiation, and cleaning chemicals. Gene exchange also occurs more frequently. At the end of this second stage, the microbes become attached to surfaces in such a way that is permanent without the use of cleaning chemicals. This is known as the microbe's [http://www.dictionary.com/browse/sessile|"sessile"] form (immobile). Bacteria in this form continue to multiply, and upon maturation of the biofilm, eventually, planktonic cells begin to be produced and released from the biofilm to find new homes. They also display different phenotypes, which might contribute to their ability to resist cleaning chemicals. Rough | + | Bacteria and yeast form a biofilm in two stages, which are determined by a number of variables. In the first stage, the microbes remain in their [http://www.dictionary.com/browse/planktonic|"planktonic"] form (floating around in the liquid), but they begin to adhere on surfaces and to each other as those surfaces. Other species of microbes can also be adhered to during this phase. The second stage is where the microbes start producing exopolysaccharides (EPS) which helps them bind together in a matrix, along with any available proteins and exopolymers produced by the bacteria. A large portion of biofilms is actually water (80-80%) as this allows the microbes to remove waste and consume nutrients. This matrix helps the microbes resist antibiotics, UV radiation, and cleaning chemicals. Gene exchange also occurs more frequently. At the end of this second stage, the microbes become attached to surfaces in such a way that is permanent without the use of cleaning chemicals. This is known as the microbe's [http://www.dictionary.com/browse/sessile|"sessile"] form (immobile). Bacteria in this form continue to multiply, and upon maturation of the biofilm, eventually, planktonic cells begin to be produced and released from the biofilm to find new homes. They also display different phenotypes, which might contribute to their ability to resist cleaning chemicals. Rough surfaces, scratched surfaces, jagged edges, and pores are more prone to biofilm formation due to the higher surface area. Hydrophobic surfaces, such as Teflon and other plastics, are more prone to biofilm formation than hydrophilic surfaces (glass and stainless steel). Nitrile butyl rubber (NBR) was found to inhibit biofilm formation when new, but as the material breaks down biofilms are able to grow <ref>Biofilms in the Food and Beverage Industries. P M Fratamico, B A Annous, N W Guenther. Elsevier, Sep 22, 2009. Pp 4-14.</ref>. Biofilm formation is strain specific rather than species specific; some strains can form thicker biofilms than others within the same species and faster, and some strains of lactic acid species are not good biofilm producers. Full biofilms can form within 2-4 days for some strains, while 10 days is required for significant biofilm formation in other strains. For example, one strain of ''Lactobacillus brevis'' isolated from draft beer did not form any biofilm, while another strain of ''L. brevis'' tested was a strong biofilm producer. Similar results were observed for ''Brettanomyces'' strains. In general, mixed cultures form stronger biofilms than single cultures. The presence of soil (biological residue) encourages biofilm formation <ref name="Wirtanen_2001" />. |
The efficacy of different chemicals to kill microbes within a biofilm isn't widely studied in the brewing or wine industries, partly because testing procedures are laborious and difficult to standardize. One study found that alcohol-based disinfectants (ethanol and isopropyl alcohol) were effective at killing microbes within a biofilm, and peracetic acid disinfectants were not as effective. A higher concentration of peracetic acid (from 0.25% to 1% of products containing 4-15%) was required to be more effective than lower concentrations. However, these disinfectants did not kill all of the cells without a cleaning regiment first. Yeast biofilms, in general, are more susceptible to cleaning chemicals than bacteria biofilms. Biofilms that are formed under static conditions (still or dried up liquid) are more resistant to disinfectants than biofilms that form under flow conditions (movement of liquid) <ref name="Wirtanen_2001" />. | The efficacy of different chemicals to kill microbes within a biofilm isn't widely studied in the brewing or wine industries, partly because testing procedures are laborious and difficult to standardize. One study found that alcohol-based disinfectants (ethanol and isopropyl alcohol) were effective at killing microbes within a biofilm, and peracetic acid disinfectants were not as effective. A higher concentration of peracetic acid (from 0.25% to 1% of products containing 4-15%) was required to be more effective than lower concentrations. However, these disinfectants did not kill all of the cells without a cleaning regiment first. Yeast biofilms, in general, are more susceptible to cleaning chemicals than bacteria biofilms. Biofilms that are formed under static conditions (still or dried up liquid) are more resistant to disinfectants than biofilms that form under flow conditions (movement of liquid) <ref name="Wirtanen_2001" />. | ||
| Line 24: | Line 25: | ||
====Cleaning and Sanitizing==== | ====Cleaning and Sanitizing==== | ||
| − | The goal of cleaning is to remove as much biomaterial as possible, while the goal of sanitizing is to reduce the population of viable microbes as much as possible and prevent them from growing on surfaces during the non-production time. It's been shown that chemical cleaners are better at removing biofilms than sanitizers and disinfectants, and sanitizers that kill cells in suspension may not be effective at killing cells within biofilms. Complete removal of unwanted microbes within biofilms can be achieved by first using a cleaning agent followed by a sanitizing agent. CIP procedures may not be enough to remove biofilms without high turbulent flow with spray nozzles and the use of heat (low cleaning temperatures are not effective at removing biofilms). Chlorinated alkaline detergents were found to be the most effective at removing biofilms <ref name="Wirtanen_2001" />. Below is a typical CIP process according to [http://www.vtt.fi/inf/pdf/publications/2000/P410.pdf Erna Storgårds (2000)]; use hot temperatures when | + | The goal of cleaning is to remove as much biomaterial as possible, while the goal of sanitizing is to reduce the population of viable microbes as much as possible and prevent them from growing on surfaces during the non-production time. It's been shown that chemical cleaners are better at removing biofilms than sanitizers and disinfectants, and sanitizers that kill cells in suspension may not be effective at killing cells within biofilms. Complete removal of unwanted microbes within biofilms can be achieved by first using a cleaning agent followed by a sanitizing agent. CIP procedures may not be enough to remove biofilms without high turbulent flow with spray nozzles and the use of heat (low cleaning temperatures are not effective at removing biofilms). Chlorinated alkaline detergents were found to be the most effective at removing biofilms <ref name="Wirtanen_2001" />. Below is a typical CIP process according to [http://www.vtt.fi/inf/pdf/publications/2000/P410.pdf Erna Storgårds (2000)]; CIP processes at room temperatures are not adequate enough to remove biofilms, so use hot temperatures when applicable. Also, the higher the velocity of the cleaning fluid through the system, the more efficient it is at removing biofilms: |
{| class="wikitable sortable" | {| class="wikitable sortable" | ||
| Line 45: | Line 46: | ||
|} | |} | ||
| − | Open surfaces such as bottle inspectors, fillers, and conveyor belts in the packaging line should be first rinsed with water, then cleaned with a foaming agent, rinsed again with water, and then sprayed with a disinfectant solution and a final rinse. Components that cannot be visually inspected should be dismantled and inspected <ref name="Wirtanen_2001" />. | + | Open surfaces such as bottle inspectors, fillers, and conveyor belts in the packaging line should be first rinsed with water, then cleaned with a foaming agent, rinsed again with water, and then sprayed with a disinfectant solution and a final rinse. Components that cannot be visually inspected should be dismantled and inspected. Rubber gaskets and sealings have been found to house biofilms, especially after deteriorating, and so they should be inspected and replaced as needed. NBR rubber has been found to inhibit biofilms when new, and EPDM rubber has been found to be anti-bacterial towards some bacteria <ref name="Wirtanen_2001" />. |
See also: | See also: | ||
Revision as of 16:22, 2 April 2018
(In progress)
Quality Assurance refers to the process if developing standard operating procedures for proactively avoiding quality problems [1]. In the brewing industry, this includes avoiding off-flavors from contamination, dissolved oxygen in beer, fermentation and ingredient issues, etc.
Contents
Avoiding Cross Contamination
General
While most microorganisms cannot survive in beer due to the hops, low pH, alcohol content, relatively high carbon dioxide, and shortage of nutrients, certain species are considered to be beer spoilage organisms due to their ability to form biofilms and survive in beer and make a potential impact on the beer's flavor by producing acidity, phenols, and turbidity with just a few surviving cells. Adaption to the brewing environment also makes them more able to survive the harsh environment of beer. These species include Brettanomyces species, numerous Lactobacillus species, Pediococcus damnosus, Pectinatus cerevisiphilus, P. frisingensis, Megasphaera cerevisiae, Selenomonas lactifex, and Saccharomyces cerevisiae var. diastaticus. In sour beers with a pH below 4.3, only the lactic acid bacteria, Brettanomyces, and some wild Saccharomyces have the potential for unwanted growth, while beers with low alcohol, a small amount of hops, lower CO2 volumes (cask ales and beers dispensed with nitrogen, for example), and higher pH (4.4-4.6) are the most susceptible to contamination. Other species of microbes do not grow in beer but can become contaminants earlier on in the brewing process (for example during kettle souring). These species include enterobacteria such as Clostridium species, Obesumbacterium proteus and Rahnella aquatilis, and wild Saccharomyces that might not be able to grow in finished beer. Other species are considered "indicator" species because they do not directly cause spoilage of beer, but indicate that there is a hygiene problem. These include Acetobacter, Gluconobacter, and Klebsiella species, as well as aerobic yeasts [2].
Biofilm forming spoilage organisms include a much wider range and higher frequency in beer tap systems than in brewhouses. This is due to the availability of oxygen and higher temperatures at certain points in the tap system, as well as poorer hygiene in tap systems as well as the difficulty to effectively clean plastic hoses. Of particular concern here is the ability of E. coli serotype O157:H7 to survive in tap systems, which has had a couple of documented occurrences in contaminated apple cider. Another study showed that aerobic yeasts were able to grow in dispensing lines, as well as L. brevis, and in many cases the draft lines were re-contaminated after just one week of cleaning, indicating that a contamination in draft lines is difficult to remove [3][2].
Sources for contamination in breweries can occur as "primary" contaminations (yeast pitching, and brewhouse related contaminations), or as "secondary" contaminations (packaging and cellaring), as well as in tap systems. They are usually not sudden occurrences, but a result of continued growth of microorganisms in a problem area. Historically, re-pitching yeast was often a source of contamination, however, more recently this has become less of a source for contaminations due to better education and techniques. Typical sources for contamination also include unclean equipment such as thermometers, manometers, valves, dead ends, gas pipes, leaks in any part of the system (especially at heat exchangers), wort aeration equipment, and even worn floor surfaces. More than half of documented contaminations come from the packaging system. These are typically the sealer (35%), the filler (25%), the bottle inspector (10%), dripping water from the bottle washer (10%), and the environment close to the filler and sealer (10%). In regards to the environment as a source of contamination, this has been found to be from airborne contaminants near the filler and crowner. The higher the humidity and the more airflow, the more chances of airborne contamination. In tap systems at taverns, 'one-way' valves that are attached to kegs have been found to be a source of contamination, as well as the dispensing line [3].
Biofilms
Many microorganisms can form biofilms which is defined as a community of cells of one or more species that are attached to each other and/or a surface and are embedded in a matrix of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS), including polysaccharides and proteins, similar to a pellicle. Biofilms allow microbes to survive less vigorous cleaning and sanitizing regiments and chemicals and has become a concern in the food industry as well as in the brewing and winemaking industries [4]. Biofilms most often form in the packaging system somewhere, but can also be found on side rails, wearstrips, conveyor tracks, drip pans, and in-between chain links [3].
Bacteria and yeast form a biofilm in two stages, which are determined by a number of variables. In the first stage, the microbes remain in their "planktonic" form (floating around in the liquid), but they begin to adhere on surfaces and to each other as those surfaces. Other species of microbes can also be adhered to during this phase. The second stage is where the microbes start producing exopolysaccharides (EPS) which helps them bind together in a matrix, along with any available proteins and exopolymers produced by the bacteria. A large portion of biofilms is actually water (80-80%) as this allows the microbes to remove waste and consume nutrients. This matrix helps the microbes resist antibiotics, UV radiation, and cleaning chemicals. Gene exchange also occurs more frequently. At the end of this second stage, the microbes become attached to surfaces in such a way that is permanent without the use of cleaning chemicals. This is known as the microbe's "sessile" form (immobile). Bacteria in this form continue to multiply, and upon maturation of the biofilm, eventually, planktonic cells begin to be produced and released from the biofilm to find new homes. They also display different phenotypes, which might contribute to their ability to resist cleaning chemicals. Rough surfaces, scratched surfaces, jagged edges, and pores are more prone to biofilm formation due to the higher surface area. Hydrophobic surfaces, such as Teflon and other plastics, are more prone to biofilm formation than hydrophilic surfaces (glass and stainless steel). Nitrile butyl rubber (NBR) was found to inhibit biofilm formation when new, but as the material breaks down biofilms are able to grow [5]. Biofilm formation is strain specific rather than species specific; some strains can form thicker biofilms than others within the same species and faster, and some strains of lactic acid species are not good biofilm producers. Full biofilms can form within 2-4 days for some strains, while 10 days is required for significant biofilm formation in other strains. For example, one strain of Lactobacillus brevis isolated from draft beer did not form any biofilm, while another strain of L. brevis tested was a strong biofilm producer. Similar results were observed for Brettanomyces strains. In general, mixed cultures form stronger biofilms than single cultures. The presence of soil (biological residue) encourages biofilm formation [2].
The efficacy of different chemicals to kill microbes within a biofilm isn't widely studied in the brewing or wine industries, partly because testing procedures are laborious and difficult to standardize. One study found that alcohol-based disinfectants (ethanol and isopropyl alcohol) were effective at killing microbes within a biofilm, and peracetic acid disinfectants were not as effective. A higher concentration of peracetic acid (from 0.25% to 1% of products containing 4-15%) was required to be more effective than lower concentrations. However, these disinfectants did not kill all of the cells without a cleaning regiment first. Yeast biofilms, in general, are more susceptible to cleaning chemicals than bacteria biofilms. Biofilms that are formed under static conditions (still or dried up liquid) are more resistant to disinfectants than biofilms that form under flow conditions (movement of liquid) [2].
Methods For Avoiding Contamination
Reducing Microorganisms
Several generalized procedures are used for limiting the number of unwanted microorganisms. These include acid washing yeast that is re-pitched (kills bacteria but not wild yeast), keeping beer cool (slows the growth of microbes in general), filtration (removes yeast), pasteurization (kills vegetative cells in the finished beer, but not spores - most beer spoilers are killed at 15 pasteurization units (PU) and all are killed at 30 PU using a recommended pasteurization temperature of 66°C ), and aseptic or hygienic packaging. Packaging systems should be frequently flooded with hot water between 80-95°C or saturated steam (every 2 hours in the summer and every 4 hours in the winter). UV light or disinfecting chemicals are also used. The filler and crowner should be disinfected frequently as well. Packaging in an aseptic room with HEPA filtration and higher air pressure within the room compared to outside, along with special clothing, is another method that larger breweries use to remain aseptic [3].
Most brewing equipment should be designed for good hygiene. Pits and crevices should be avoided, and all surfaces should be smooth when possible. All equipment and pipelines should be self-draining. Valves are a typical source of contamination because they are not easily CIP'ed, especially plug valves and ball valves (although butterfly, gate, and globe valves are also difficult to CIP) [3].
Cleaning and Sanitizing
The goal of cleaning is to remove as much biomaterial as possible, while the goal of sanitizing is to reduce the population of viable microbes as much as possible and prevent them from growing on surfaces during the non-production time. It's been shown that chemical cleaners are better at removing biofilms than sanitizers and disinfectants, and sanitizers that kill cells in suspension may not be effective at killing cells within biofilms. Complete removal of unwanted microbes within biofilms can be achieved by first using a cleaning agent followed by a sanitizing agent. CIP procedures may not be enough to remove biofilms without high turbulent flow with spray nozzles and the use of heat (low cleaning temperatures are not effective at removing biofilms). Chlorinated alkaline detergents were found to be the most effective at removing biofilms [2]. Below is a typical CIP process according to Erna Storgårds (2000); CIP processes at room temperatures are not adequate enough to remove biofilms, so use hot temperatures when applicable. Also, the higher the velocity of the cleaning fluid through the system, the more efficient it is at removing biofilms:
| Action [2] | Temperature | Duration |
|---|---|---|
| Pre-rinse | cold or hot | 5-10 min |
| Alkali cleaning with 1.5-4% sodium hydroxide (caustic) | cold or hot (60-85°C) | 10-60 min |
| Rinse | cold | 10-30 min |
| Acid wash (phosphoric, nitric, or sulphuric acid) | cold | 10-30 min |
| Rinse | cold | 10-30 min |
| Disinfection (chemical or hot water at 85-90°C) | cold (or hot if using water) | 10-30 min with chemical, or 45-60 min with hot water |
| Rinse (might contain a low concentration disinfectant) | cold | 5-10 min |
Open surfaces such as bottle inspectors, fillers, and conveyor belts in the packaging line should be first rinsed with water, then cleaned with a foaming agent, rinsed again with water, and then sprayed with a disinfectant solution and a final rinse. Components that cannot be visually inspected should be dismantled and inspected. Rubber gaskets and sealings have been found to house biofilms, especially after deteriorating, and so they should be inspected and replaced as needed. NBR rubber has been found to inhibit biofilms when new, and EPDM rubber has been found to be anti-bacterial towards some bacteria [2].
See also:
- Joe Idoni's heat sanitation based SOP.
- MTF thread on brewing mixed fermentation beers with clean beers in a commercial brewery.
- Another MTF thread on sanitation.
Efficacy of Cleaning Agents
EDTA (ethylene diaminetetra-acetic acid), chlorinated disinfectants, and hydrogen peroxide-based disinfectants such as Pur-Ox from Birko or Lerasept-O from Loeffler are effective at breaking up biofilms [2][6][7]. Peracetic acid (PAA) has been shown to be effective against biofilms, but its effectiveness decreases below 20°C. Chlorine and iodine-based disinfectants destroy microbe at colder temperatures, however, they are less effective in the presence of wort or other residues. Hot water is one of the most effective disinfectants, however, dry heat is not effective at killing bacteria (one strain of L. brevis was able to withstand 80°C dry heat for 60 minutes) [2].
Quality Control
(To do)
Quality Control is the process of identifying quality problems in the product, and is a reactive process aimed at correcting a detected problem [1].
Detection methods [2]:
- ATP bioluminescence system monitors for contaminants.
- Swabbing and cultivating on agar and PCR.
- Direct epifluorescence filter technique (DEFT)/microcolony method.
- Direct impedimetry.
- Flow cytometry.
Quality Improvement
(To do)
See Also
Additional Articles on MTF Wiki
External Resources
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 "Quality Assurance vs. Quality Control". Diffen website. Retrieved 03/28/2018.
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 Disinfectant testing against brewery-related biofilms. Erna Storgårds, Gun Wirtanen. 2001.
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 Process hygiene control in beer production and dispensing. Erna Storgårds. VTT Publications 410. 2000.
- ↑ The Paradox of Mixed‐Species Biofilms in the Context of Food Safety. Iqbal Kabir Jahid and Sang‐Do Ha. 2014.
- ↑ Biofilms in the Food and Beverage Industries. P M Fratamico, B A Annous, N W Guenther. Elsevier, Sep 22, 2009. Pp 4-14.
- ↑ Brandon Jones. Private correspondence with Dan Pixley. 04/02/2018.
- ↑ Levader on Reddit.com. "The Brewery". Retrieved 04/02/2018.