This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions Copyright Information Books from ASM Press MicrobeWorld Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Andrews, W H Articles by Gentile, D E Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Andrews, W H Articles by Gentile, D E Agricola Articles by Andrews, W H Articles by Gentile, D E

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Appl Environ Microbiol. 1978 January; 35(1): 89-93

Usefulness of the stomacher in a microbiological regulatory laboratory.

ABSTRACT

The relative efficiency of the Waring blender, the Stomacher 400, and the Stomacher 3500 for preparing food samples for microbiological analysis was studied. Comparative aerobic plate count (APC) values were determined on 671 samples, representing 30 categories of foods. Of the 26 categories of nonfatty foods, the blender gave significantly higher geometric mean APC values than those given by the Stomacher 400 and the Stomacher 3500 in 65 and 69 percent of the categories, respectively. In a comparison of the two Stomacher models, the Stomacher 400 gave significantly higher geometric mean APC values than these given by the Stomacher 3500 in 73 percent of the food categories. Addition of Tween 80 to four categories of fatty foods at concentrations of 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 percent did not raise the APC values given by either model of stomacher to the levels given by the Waring blender. Overall, the efficiency of both models of Stomacher, relative to the blender and to each other, was specific and depended upon the particular food being analyzed.