Next Article in Journal
TgKDAC4: A Unique Deacetylase of Toxoplasma’s Apicoplast
Next Article in Special Issue
Biocontrol of Pathogen Microorganisms in Ripened Foods of Animal Origin
Previous Article in Journal
Healthy Diet and Lifestyle Improve the Gut Microbiota and Help Combat Fungal Infection
Previous Article in Special Issue
Fermented Beverage Benefits: A Comprehensive Review and Comparison of Kombucha and Kefir Microbiome
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Microorganisms
Volume 11
Issue 6
10.3390/microorganisms11061557
microorganisms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Microorganisms in Organic Food-Issues to Be Addressed

by
Aparna P. Murali
,
Monika Trząskowska
* and
Joanna Trafialek
Department of Food Gastronomy and Food Hygiene, Institute of Human Nutrition Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences (WULS), Nowoursynowska 159C, 02-776 Warsaw, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Microorganisms 2023, 11(6), 1557; https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms11061557
Submission received: 30 April 2023 / Revised: 28 May 2023 / Accepted: 9 June 2023 / Published: 11 June 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Latest Review Papers in Food Microbiology 2023)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The review aimed to analyse the latest data on microorganisms present in organic food, both beneficial and unwanted. In conclusion, organic food’s microbial quality is generally similar to that of conventionally produced food. However, some studies suggest that organic food may contain fewer pathogens, such as antibiotic-resistant strains, due to the absence of antibiotic use in organic farming practices. However, there is little discussion and data regarding the importance of some methods used in organic farming and the risk of food pathogens presence. Concerning data gaps, it is necessary to plan and perform detailed studies of the microbiological safety of organic food, including foodborne viruses and parasites and factors related to this method of cultivation and specific processing requirements. Such knowledge is essential for more effective management of the safety of this food. The use of beneficial bacteria in organic food production has not yet been widely addressed in the scientific literature. This is particularly desirable due to the properties of the separately researched probiotics and the organic food matrix. The microbiological quality of organic food and its potential impact on human health is worth further research to confirm its safety and to assess the beneficial properties resulting from the addition of probiotics.

1. Introduction

Organic agriculture is one of the fastest-growing agricultural sectors [1] and is different from conventional agriculture in its approach to farming practices, with organic agriculture prioritizing natural methods and minimizing synthetic inputs, while conventional farming relies heavily on synthetic chemicals as well as genetically modified organisms to achieve high yields [2,3,4]. Generally, organic foods are products derived from organic agriculture, and as a consequence, these products lack Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), artificial colours, preservatives, and flavour enhancers. Organic cultivation avoids or prohibits the utilization of artificial feed additives, pesticides, herbicides, growth hormones, and similar substances [5,6,7,8,9]. Furthermore, one of the fastest-expanding sectors presently is the worldwide organic food market, experiencing a growth rate of several per cent annually [7,10]. This can be attributed to the overall progress of the organic farming industry and the societal focus of national policies. There is a shift towards promoting sustainable development in rural areas through the adoption of resource-conserving technologies [10].
Consumers buy organic foods because they associate this kind of food with a healthy and sustainable diet and lifestyle [10,11,12,13]. Global sales of organic products have increased significantly in the 21st century. For instance, according to a survey conducted in 2016, the majority of Americans (68%) indicated that they had bought organic food at least once during the previous month [7]. Between 2014 and 2018, organic retail market in the European Union (EU) and across Europe has seen strong progress. Every year in that period, the EU market grew by 3.4 to 3.5 billion Euros [14]. Between 2016 and 2020, the organic food market in the Asia–Pacific region experienced a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 11.4%, resulting in total revenues of $16.4 billion in 2020 [15].
The notion that organic food might be healthier has some support [16,17]. While there seems to be minimal variation in terms of macronutrient content (such as protein, fat, carbohydrate, and dietary fibre) between organic and conventional food products, additional differences in composition have been observed These contain higher antioxidant concentrations (particularly polyphenols) in organic crops [16,18], increased levels of omega-3 fatty acids in organic dairy products [11,16] and better fatty acid profiles in organic meat products [3,16]. When contrasting organic goods with alternatives made using conventional methods, consumers of organic food take several non-monetary factors into account [19]. Food safety, nutritional, and sensory features are these non-monetary factors that influence consumers’ preferences between organic and conventionally grown produce [19,20]. Product flavour, shelf-life, and freshness are other attributes that contribute to purchasing decisions of organic shoppers [19,21,22]. Several studies revealed that organically grown foods have lower nitrate content and higher mineral and dry matter contents than non-organically grown foods [19,23,24]. Total daily nitrates intake in vegetables from organic farming was equal to 1.91 mg NO3 kg−1 bw day−1 (28.5% ADI) [25]. In most cases, the majority of the time, the nitrate content of organic veggies was lower than that of conventional vegetables. However, production procedures, seasonal variations, and the size of those variations can all affect the nitrate level [26]. Regarding the impact on human health, a higher frequency of organic food consumption was linked with a reduced risk of cancer [27].
For centuries, different microorganisms are used in the production of food and food ingredients mainly in the processing of wine, beer, bakery, and dairy products as well as vegetables and cereals [28].
Among valuable microbes are probiotics, i.e., “live microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit on the host”. Probiotics can have different means of administration, for example as drugs, with common and medicinal foods, non-oral probiotics, animal feed, defined microbial consortia, dietary supplements, or infant formula [29]. Probiotics have various health benefits, including intestinal and non-intestinal effects. Among others, the prevention of diarrhoea and gastrointestinal cancers, the alleviation of lactose intolerance, and a decrease in Helicobacter pylori infections. The impact of using probiotics on immunological conditions, including asthma, and atopic disorders is unconfirmed in humans. However, they may have an advantageous effect by reducing symptom severity and medication usage [30,31,32].
The other group of microorganisms present in food are spoilage and pathogenic microorganisms, which are considered as one of the main causes of food loss [33]. Moreover, foodborne illnesses due to the consumption of foods contaminated with foodborne pathogens pose a significant public health problem [34]. Like conventional food, organic food must by law fulfil the food safety requirements, and it must be produced according to specific regulations [35,36,37,38]. The microbial quality of organic food can vary depending on a variety of factors, including production practices, handling, processing, and storage conditions [39].
In 2017, Garcia and Teixeira conducted an in-depth literature review and discussion of the safety of organic food [35]. Regarding pathogens, food samples contained harmful microorganisms more often than those from conventional systems. The authors suggested further food safety studies comparing organic and conventional production with more samples analysed and over a longer period.
Therefore, the purpose of the review was to analyse the latest data on microorganisms present in organic food, not only undesirable but also beneficial. Comprehensive knowledge of the microbiological quality of organic food is essential to fully understand the factors that shape its unique value. Determining data gaps allows for proper planning of further research and, consequently, ensuring the highest microbiological quality and safety of organic food.

2. Materials and Methods

A comprehensive search of relevant reports from academic databases, such as PubMed, Scopus, and Science Direct, was conducted. The search was related to the keywords, such as organic food, organic food standards, microorganisms, microbial quality, food safety, pathogens, probiotics, etc.
The timeline for the literature sources was set from 2017 to 2023. The article titles and abstracts were reviewed and duplicates were eliminated. Only studies on organic food quality and safety and microorganisms were considered for inclusion. Selected sources of evidence included research and review articles, short communications, peer-reviewed conference materials, book chapters, and to a minimum extent, websites of recognized institutions.

3. Results

3.1. Standards for Organic Food

Some standards are referring to the set of guidelines and regulations that define what qualifies as organic food. Furthermore, they ensure that organic food is produced in a way that minimizes harm to the environment and promotes sustainable agriculture. In this context, various regulatory bodies around the world have developed their organic food standards, which are designed to meet the unique needs of their respective countries and regions. Whenever doubts exist relating to the usage of synthetic chemicals, the relevant law should be consulted.
The USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) [36,37,40,41] and the EU (European Union) [38,42] have established stringent standards for organic foods, ensuring the integrity and quality of these products. In Asia, the standards for organic foods vary among countries. While some Asian countries have developed their organic certification systems, there is no unified standard across the region. A regional standard for organic production in East, Southeast, and South Asia is called the Asia Regional Organic Standard (AROS). The procedure that led to AROS was intended to harmonize regional organic standards and promote new ones [43,44].
Legal requirements do not define any additional precautions for food products regarding microbiological quality. However, care must be taken with plant and animal components to preserve or improve soil organic matter in a way that avoids the transmission of pathogenic organisms into crops, soil, or water [45].
Microbial quality is an essential parameter that determines the safety and shelf-life of food products [45,46]. Organic food should not be treated with chemical preservatives, which can increase the risk of bacterial growth during storage and transportation. However, there are allowed natural substances and processes that are used along the organic food chain to ensure food safety. Moreover, consumers need to handle and prepare organic food safely to minimize the risk of microbial contamination [47]. The presence of harmful microorganisms, such as pathogenic bacteria, viruses, and parasites, in food can cause foodborne illnesses, leading to severe health consequences [48,49,50]. Therefore, ensuring the microbial safety of organic food is very important.
In the EU, from a legal point of view, Commission Regulation (EC) No. 2073/2005 of 15 November 2005 and Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1441/2007 of 5 December 2007 on microbiological criteria for food products lay down microbiological criteria for certain microorganisms and the implementing regulations to be met by food stakeholders. The regulation sets limits on the levels of microorganisms that are considered acceptable in organic food products based on the potential health risks associated with their consumption. These limits are based on scientific evidence and are designed to ensure that organic food products are safe for consumers to eat. In addition to setting limits on microbial contamination, the regulation also requires organic food producers to implement good hygiene practices and monitor and test their products for microbial contamination. This helps to further ensure that organic food products meet the microbial quality standards established by the EU [51,52].

3.2. Microorganisms in Organic Food

Microbial contamination in organic food production can pose health risks to consumers as it may lead to foodborne illnesses, such as bacterial infections, viral outbreaks, and fungal infections. Vulnerable populations, such as pregnant women, elderly individuals, and those with weakened immune systems, may be particularly susceptible to these risks [53].
Microorganisms can be present in any type of food, including organic food. Microbes are found all over the globe with a few exceptions, for example, sterilized surfaces [54]. Microorganisms such as Salmonella spp., Escherichia coli O157:H7, and Listeria spp. are commonly associated with plant foods. Salmonella spp. is frequently found in cut fruits, pre-cut melons, fresh papayas, cucumbers, and other fresh produce [55,56,57]. Escherichia coli O157:H7 is frequently associated with sprouts, lettuce, spinach, and other leafy greens [56,58,59,60]. Listeria spp. are often found in cantaloupes, mushrooms, apples, stone fruits, and other fresh produce [56,61,62,63]. Salmonella Typhimurium is a type of bacteria commonly found in animal foods such as poultry, beef, pork, and seafood [64,65,66]. Campylobacter jejuni and Campylobacter coli are two species of bacteria widely found in animal foods such as poultry, cattle, pigs, and even domestic pets [64,67]. Shiga-toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) is another type of bacteria that can be found in animal foods such as beef, sheep, goats, and other ruminants [64,68]. Listeria monocytogenes is a microorganism that can be found in animal foods of cattle, sheep, goats, and poultry origin [64,69,70]. These microorganisms can cause foodborne illnesses and pose a risk to public health. To reduce the risk of foodborne illness, it is crucial to follow proper food safety practices when growing, processing, and preparing food.
Beneficial microorganisms that benefit human health and food production consist of another kind of microorganisms found in food. Numerous clinical studies have demonstrated the efficacy of probiotics in the treatment of conditions, such as type 2 diabetes, obesity, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, and insulin resistance syndrome. Probiotics’ beneficial benefits on human health have also been demonstrated by raising immunity (immunomodulation) [71]. For example, Bifidobacterium breve is commonly found in European fermented milk [72,73]. Enterococcus faecium is present in soybean, dairy, meat, and vegetables, and is used in probiotic foods to support gut health. Lactobacillus acidophilus is found in fermented milk and vegetables. Moreover, Lactobacillus delbrueckii is commonly found in yoghurt, fermented milk, and mozzarella cheese, and can improve digestion and promote overall health [72]. Lactobacillus kefiri is found in fermented milk and can reduce the bitter taste in citrus juice [72,74,75]. Pediococcus acidilactici is used in meat fermentation and biopreservation of meat as well as in cheese starters [72,76]. Lactococcus lactis is used as a dairy starter and can produce nisin that plays a role of a protective culture that helps to prevent the growth of harmful bacteria in food [72].
Given the high interest in organic food, little data on its microbiological quality has been found in the available literature as of 2017. The newest and most available data are listed in Table 1.
The study of Urkek et al. (2017) aimed to investigate the effects of production methods and milk collection periods on the somatic cell count and some microbiological properties in Turkey. Comparing organic milk to conventional milk, the general means of the total aerobic mesophilic bacteria, coliform, yeast, and mould counts were significantly lower, but the general means of the somatic cell count and the coagulase-positive S. aureus count was significantly higher [77].
Malissiova et al. (2017) studied the differences in the microbial profile and antimicrobial resistance of bacteria isolated from milk from organic and conventional sheep and goat farms. The study involved 25 organic and 25 conventional sheep and goat farms. It was found that milk from organic farms has a better microbiological profile compared to milk from conventional farms [78].
Another research regarding the dairy product was conducted by Selah et al. (2023). The goal of this study was to assess the microbiological quality of organic and conventional Minas Frescal cheese samples as well as the antimicrobial susceptibility of isolated cultures of Escherichia coli and coagulase-positive staphylococci to various antimicrobial agents. Listeria spp. and Salmonella spp. were not detected in any of the analysed samples. For coagulase-positive staphylococci, 43.4% conventional and 26.6% organic samples had a higher count than recommended by Brazilian regulations but with no significant difference between the systems. In determining the most likely E. coli count, a significant difference was observed between the systems, with a higher rate of contamination in cheeses from the organic system. Given the similarity of the acquired results, it is required to investigate other criteria, such as the production system, herd health, and appropriate production methods, to thoroughly compare the two systems [79].
Regarding plant organic foods, Szczech et al. [80] have found that the numbers of mesophilic bacteria, yeasts and moulds, coliforms, and Enterobacteriaceae for radishes and carrots were similar in organic and conventional farming systems. Organic lettuce contained significantly more bacteria than conventional lettuce. Organic beetroot contained higher amounts of yeasts and moulds and Enterobacteriaceae than conventional. Vegetables from organic farms were characterized by a significantly higher load of E. coli than vegetables from conventional farms. Furthermore, a farmer survey was conducted to gather information on farm management practices. An index (from 0—no risk to 4—high risk) of potential contamination of the product with human pathogens was developed related to the fertilization system. Its value increased with the increased share of manure and other animal waste used for fertilization. Organic products, therefore, had a higher contamination risk index (2–4) than conventional vegetables (1–2). High rates were associated with a higher amount of E. coli. It was discovered that the organic farm’s fertilizer strategy may degrade the hygienic quality of the products. [80].
Kuan et al. [81] compared the microbiological status of organic vs. conventional fresh produce at the retail level in Malaysia. The findings revealed that mesophilic aerobic bacteria, yeasts and moulds, and all coliforms were present in comparable amounts in most types of conventional and organic vegetables. None of the samples examined for this investigation included E. coli O157:H7 or S. Typhimurium. Vegetables cultivated either organically or conventionally did not generally provide a higher microbial risk. [81].
In terms of research on the presence or development of organic foods with the addition of beneficial microorganisms (defined as probiotics), no studies were found. The only example in this field is the study by Rzepkowska et al. [82] on the isolation of strains with potential probiotic properties. Thus, spontaneously fermented organic foods can be a source of beneficial microorganisms. This direction of research is supported by the results of Wassermann et al. [83] who compared the apple microbiota to find tissue-specific variations and the effects of organic vs. conventional management. Organic and conventional apples contained a similar quantity of microbiota. However, organically managed apples harbour a significantly more diverse, more even, and distinct microbiota compared to conventional ones.
In light of numerous studies on the positive impact of microorganisms on health, including gut microbiota, it is important to address this issue in organic food research. Many factors influence the composition of the gut microbiota and its functioning, but one of the main triggers is diet [84]. Therefore, one can expect additional benefits that may result from combining in one product the proven properties of organic food, e.g., antioxidants, dietary fibre content, and others [16,18,19], with the proven impact of food ingredients on the condition of the microbiota [85,86,87].
Table
Table 1. Examples of pathogens and beneficial organisms found in organic foods since 2017.
Table 1. Examples of pathogens and beneficial organisms found in organic foods since 2017.
PathogenAnimal FoodsCount [log10 cfu g/mL−1] or
Prevalence [%]		Reference
CampylobacterRaw chicken meat25%[88]
SalmonellaPigs
Eggs
Dairy farms
Poultry farms		8.3%
2.6%
20%
2.9%		[88,89]
Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coliBeef14.8%[88,89]
Listeria monocytogenesChicken meat
Eggs		25%
1.8%		[88]
Staphylococcus aureusChicken farms
Meat
Poultry farms
Dairy products
Milk		1.3%
16.7%
27.4%
31%
0.28–0.91		[79,88]
 
 
 
[77]
ColiformsMilk2.72–4,46[77]
Yeasts and mouldsMilk2.46–3.70[77]
PathogenPlant Foods
Mesophilic bacteriaOrganic vegetables6.6–7.2 [80,81]
EnterobacteriaceaeLettuce
High-protein bar		2.5 0
2.81–3.32 		[80,81]
ColiformsLettuce1.80[80,81]
Escherichia coliOrganic vegetables1.00[80,81]
Yeasts and mouldsOrganic vegetables5.10[80,81]
Beneficial BacteriaFood Product
Lactic acid bacteria with high potential for food applicationOrganic Whey-[82]

3.3. Factors Affecting the Microbial Quality of Organic Food

The main sources of microbial contamination and strategies for improving the microbial quality of organic food are summarized in Table 2.
The microbial safety of fresh produce is influenced significantly by various factors, with the conditions present at the growing site being particularly crucial. Both organic and conventional agriculture make substantial use of manure and other animal wastes. Concerns regarding the possibility of products being contaminated with microbiological organisms, particularly Escherichia coli O157, occur when manure is used as fertilizer in either conventional or organic agriculture [90]. Soil fertilized by animal manure is more likely to be contaminated with enteric pathogens because of their ability to survive in soil for months or years [91]. The content of E. coli and Salmonella spp. is between 102 and 105 CFU/g and between 102 and 107 CFU/g, respectively, in animal faeces. The manure of ruminants (cattle and sheep) and sewage are reputed to be the main sources of Salmonella spp. and E. coli O157:H7. Furthermore, C. jejuni is a typical member of the gastrointestinal microbiota of poultry, pigs, and cattle. Fresh produce’s microbiological safety is influenced by the quality of the irrigation water and the system type. The safety of fresh produce’s microbiology is influenced by harvesting and processing. These processes that can both contaminate products with hazardous microorganisms and encourage bacterial development include human and mechanical touch, immersion in water, and cutting or slicing [92].
Concerning manure usage in organic farming, the research conducted by Nazareth et al. [89] is quite interesting and relevant. The researchers examined models of integrated organic crop and livestock systems established in three US states. Organically reared cattle and their feed, faeces, skin, and meat were tested for two pathogens, Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Salmonella spp. The results confirmed that E. coli O157:H7 was not isolated from any skin or meat sample. Across all locations, the prevalence of E. coli O157:H7 in feed and faeces was 9.43 and 7.26%, respectively. Salmonella spp. were isolated from 1.89, 3.33, and 18.6% of feed, faeces, and skin samples, respectively. Salmonella spp. was not detected in any meat sample. From June to August, the feed was more likely to test positive for E. coli O157:H7, highlighting the necessity of stringent sanitation procedures to avoid feed contamination. These findings demonstrate the potential for reducing the risk of microbiological contamination in integrated agricultural and livestock systems through rigorous adherence to food safety management measures [89].
The effectiveness of composting chicken manure was demonstrated in the experiment of Begum et al. [93] The study investigated the current situation of small poultry farms and their waste management practices in selected areas of Bangladesh, and the presence of Escherichia coli and Salmonella in vegetables from farms using unprocessed poultry manure as fertilizer. E. coli or Salmonella or both have been confirmed in vegetables, soil and, pond water but only in untreated poultry waste used for fertilization.

3.4. Strategies for Improving Microbial Quality of Organic Food and Data Gaps

One of the essential components for sustaining life on Earth is soil. Almost half of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are linked to soil [94]. Numerous goals can be achieved by adopting sustainable land utilization and enhancing the quality of the soil. These objectives can be defined as the ability of soil to serve as an essential living system, supporting biological productivity, safeguarding environmental integrity, and preserving the well-being of plants, animals, and humans [94,95]. Pathogenic microorganisms originate from the environment in which plants grow as well as post-harvest movements, processing, and transport movements. One of the most important post-harvest practices for preventing food-borne illnesses and preserving the excellent quality of raw fruits and vegetables is post-harvest microbial control, for instance, utilizing suitable disinfection procedures [96].
Organic food processors need to implement rigorous food safety practices, including regular monitoring, testing, pest control, and training of personnel, to prevent or minimize microbial contamination during processing [97].
A range of food safety issues have been raised concerning organic primary production and processing, including mycotoxins, enteric pathogens, and heavy metal and agrochemical residues [98,99]. In the regulation on microbiological criteria of food products (No. 2073/2005), it is stated that food business operators at each step of food production, processing, and distribution, including retail, must implement precautions to assure that food safety and process hygiene criteria are met as part of their procedures based on Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) principles along with the implementation of good hygiene practices (GHP). Therefore, the HACCP plans for organic production are elaborated and brochures for consumers, retailers, and producers on the safety and contamination of organic food are written [97]. Documentation for apples, grapes, cereals, cabbage, and tomatoes as well as milk and egg production are included. These provide practical advice to improve the quality and safety of organic products [100].
Microbial contamination can be a major concern when it comes to the packaging of organic food. The packaging stage of the food production process is essential because it maintains the quality of the finished goods for use in storage, transit, and consumption. [101]. With packaging methods, the industry has designed modified atmosphere packaging (MAP), edible-film coating, and active packaging. Packaging methods need minimal human intervention over the properties of the food product, giving consumers a sense of an “unprocessed” and “natural” product [102,103,104].
The consumer of processed organic food expects a specific nutritional and sensory value. Particularly, processing techniques that do not significantly alter the nutritional and sensory qualities of food could provide goods that look appealing and fresh. Given that they are required to maintain the nutritional value of food, health-conscious consumers should prefer “minimally” processed food [102,105,106]. It is proved that even with restricted usage of chemical substances, simple combinations of water heated to 60 °C, acetic acid (0.2–5%), and H2O2 (3–4%) can reduce the count of all three species of bacterial pathogens on mung bean [107]. Therefore, a re-examination of known methods using permitted chemicals seems to be the right direction in the development of research on the safety of organic food.
To mitigate microbial contamination during wholesale storage of organic food, proper handling, storage, and transportation practices should be followed. This includes maintaining appropriate temperature and humidity levels, regular cleaning and sanitizing of equipment and facilities, avoiding cross-contamination between different food products, and implementing strict hygiene protocols for food handlers [108,109].
Comparing organic products to conventional foods on the same level, organic products appear to be more sensitive to microbial infection [110,111]. Therefore, additional research is required to assess the product’s safety and determine the appropriate storage times [110]. Proper storage of organic food can help prevent the growth of harmful bacteria. This can include refrigeration, proper packaging, and controlling the temperature and humidity. Food products’ moisture content can fluctuate even slightly due to changes in atmospheric humidity. The increase in air humidity caused the product under test to absorb moisture from air and also caused a change in the product’s mass. At 80% relative air humidity and 25 °C, the maximum mass gain and mass growth rate were noted [112]. All strategies for improving the microbial quality of organic food should be based on the requirements of the hygiene of foodstuffs and should contain rules and programs referring to Good Manufacturing Practices, Good Hygiene Practices, and Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) principles [113]. They are mandatory both for conventional and organic food producers and processors alike. The examples of the strategies for improving and managing the microbial quality of organic food at different stages are presented in Table 2.
Table
Table 2. Microbial contamination sources and main strategies for improving microbial quality of organic food production.
Table 2. Microbial contamination sources and main strategies for improving microbial quality of organic food production.
Production Stage/SourcesStrategies for Improving Microbial QualityReference
Farming
Soil, faeces, irrigation water, reconstituted fungicides and insecticides, dust, insects, inadequately composted manure, wild or domestic animals, and human handling.Good agricultural and handling practices relating to soil, faeces, manure, pests, and cleaning. Training of workers.
Post-harvest microbial control.		[53,92,108,114,115]
Harvesting
Harvesting equipment, transport containers, insects, dust, and human handling.Establishing rules of conduct for harvesting. Training of workers and using good agricultural and handling practices. Post-harvest microbial control.[53,92,108,116]
Processing
Rinse water, ice, transport vehicles, and human handling. Improper temperature control, cross-contamination with contaminated surfaces or equipment, and lack of proper packaging or sealing.Implementing effective washing and disinfection program refers to transporting vehicles, equipment, and production utensils to avoid cross-contamination with contaminated surfaces or equipment. Pest control. Applying proper personnel hygiene rules and training of personnel. Establishment of the right conditions for storage of raw materials and final product, daily temperature control, and processing methods. [108,113,117,118]
Wholesale storage
Storage temperature, containers, dust, insects, human handling, storage duration etc. Establishment of proper handling, storage, and transportation practices to maintain appropriate temperature and humidity levels. Regular cleaning and sanitizing of equipment and facilities to avoid cross-contamination between different food products, and implementing strict hygiene protocols for food handlers. [108,113,117,118]

4. Conclusions

In conclusion, the microbial quality of organic food is generally considered to be similar to that of conventionally produced food. However, some studies suggest that organic food may contain lower numbers of harmful bacteria, such as antibiotic-resistant strains, due to the absence of antibiotic use in organic farming practices. Therefore, it is important to note that while organic farming practices may reduce the risk of certain bacterial infections; however, they do not eliminate all potential risks associated with foodborne illness.
On the other hand, there is still little discussion and data regarding the importance of some methods used in organic farming and the risk of food pathogens presence. From the scientific point of view, additional studies are needed to fully assess the risk of using manure and free-range breeding and its influence on the transmission of foodborne pathogens along the food chain.
The application of proper food safety measures, such as appropriate cooking and handling techniques, should always be followed regardless of whether the food is organic or conventionally grown.
Concerning data gaps, it is necessary to plan and perform detailed studies of the microbiological safety of organic food, including factors related to this method of cultivation and specific food processing requirements. Among the missing data are those on the prevalence of foodborne viruses and parasites. Such knowledge is essential for more effective management of the safety of this food.
Bearing in mind that not all microorganisms are harmful, the use of beneficial ones in organic food production has not yet been widely addressed in the scientific literature. This is particularly desirable due to the properties of the separately researched probiotics and the organic food matrix. The expected mutually reinforcing effect must be supported by research results.
In conclusion, the microbiological quality of organic food and its potential impact on human health is worth further research. Both to confirm its safety and to assess the beneficial properties resulting from the addition of probiotics.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.T. and J.T.; methodology, A.P.M.; validation, M.T. and J.T.; investigation, A.P.M., M.T. and J.T.; data curation, A.P.M.; writing—original draft preparation, A.P.M.; writing—review and editing, M.T., J.T. and A.P.M.; visualization, A.P.M.; supervision, J.T. and M.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analysed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Alotaibi, B.A.; Yoder, E.; Brennan, M.A.; Kassem, H.S. Perception of Organic Farmers towards Organic Agriculture and Role of Extension. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2021, 28, 2980–2986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Mondelaers, K.; Aertsens, J.; Van Huylenbroeck, G. A Meta-Analysis of the Differences in Environmental Impacts between Organic and Conventional Farming. Br. Food J. 2009, 111, 1098–1119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Vigar, V.; Myers, S.; Oliver, C.; Arellano, J.; Robinson, S.; Leifert, C. A Systematic Review of Organic Versus Conventional Food Consumption: Is There a Measurable Benefit on Human Health? Nutrients 2019, 12, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Montgomery, D.R.; Biklé, A. Soil Health and Nutrient Density: Beyond Organic vs. Conventional Farming. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2021, 5, 417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Nechaev, V.; Mikhailushkin, P.; Alieva, A. Trends in Demand on the Organic Food Market in the European Countries. MATEC Web Conf. 2018, 212, 07008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Giampieri, F.; Mazzoni, L.; Cianciosi, D.; Alvarez-Suarez, J.M.; Regolo, L.; Sánchez-González, C.; Capocasa, F.; Xiao, J.; Mezzetti, B.; Battino, M. Organic vs Conventional Plant-Based Foods: A Review. Food Chem. 2022, 383, 132352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations, Organic Agriculture: What Is Organic Agriculture? Available online: https://www.fao.org/organicag/oa-faq/oa-faq1/en/ (accessed on 15 April 2023).
  8. Forman, J.; Silverstein, J.; Bhatia, J.J.S.; Abrams, S.A.; Corkins, M.R.; de Ferranti, S.D.; Golden, N.H.; Silverstein, J.; Paulson, J.A.; Brock-Utne, A.C.; et al. Organic Foods: Health and Environmental Advantages and Disadvantages. Pediatrics 2012, 130, e1406–e1415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Bostan, I.; Onofrei, M.; Gavriluţă (Vatamanu), A.F.; Toderașcu, C.; Lazăr, C.M. An Integrated Approach to Current Trends in Organic Food in the EU. Foods 2019, 8, 144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Willer, H.; Trávní, J. The World of Organic Agriculture Statistics and Emerging Trends 2021 FiBL & IFOAM—Organics International; Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL and IFOAM – Organics International Ackerstrasse113, 5070 Frick Switzerland 2021. Available online: https://www.organic-world.net/yearbook/yearbook-2021.html (accessed on 20 April 2023).
  11. Reisch, L.; Eberle, U.; Lorek, S. Sustainable Food Consumption: An Overview of Contemporary Issues and Policies. Sustain. Sci. Pract. Policy 2013, 9, 7–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Soroka, A.; Mazurek-Kusiak, A.K.; Trafialek, J. Organic Food in the Diet of Residents of the Visegrad Group (V4) Countries—Reasons for and Barriers to Its Purchasing. Nutrients 2021, 13, 4351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Brantsæter, A.L.; Ydersbond, T.A.; Hoppin, J.A.; Haugen, M.; Meltzer, H.M. Organic Food in the Diet: Exposure and Health Implications. Annu. Rev. Public Health 2017, 38, 295–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Statista Europe: Per Capita Spending of Organic Food by Country 2021. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/632792/per-capita-consumption-of-organic-food-european-union-eu/ (accessed on 15 April 2023).
  15. Organic Food in Asia-Pacific—Market Summary, Competitive Analysis and Forecast to 2025. Available online: https://www.marketresearch.com/MarketLine-v3883/Organic-Food-Asia-Pacific-Summary-14708584/ (accessed on 13 March 2023).
  16. Bhagavathula, A.S.; Vidyasagar, K.; Khubchandani, J. Organic Food Consumption and Risk of Obesity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Healthcare 2022, 10, 231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Hurtado-Barroso, S.; Tresserra-Rimbau, A.; Vallverdú-Queralt, A.; Lamuela-Raventós, R.M. Organic Food and the Impact on Human Health. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2019, 59, 704–714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Glibowski, P. Organic Food and Health. Rocz. Państw. Zakładu Hig. 2020, 71, 131–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Barański, M.; Średnicka-Tober, D.; Volakakis, N.; Seal, C.; Sanderson, R.; Stewart, G.B.; Benbrook, C.; Biavati, B.; Markellou, E.; Giotis, C.; et al. Higher Antioxidant and Lower Cadmium Concentrations and Lower Incidence of Pesticide Residues in Organically Grown Crops: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analyses. Br. J. Nutr. 2014, 112, 794–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Średnicka-Tober, D.; Barański, M.; Seal, C.J.; Sanderson, R.; Benbrook, C.; Steinshamn, H.; Gromadzka-Ostrowska, J.; Rembiałkowska, E.; Skwarło-Sońta, K.; Eyre, M.; et al. Higher PUFA and n -3 PUFA, Conjugated Linoleic Acid, α-Tocopherol and Iron, but Lower Iodine and Selenium Concentrations in Organic Milk: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta- and Redundancy Analyses. Br. J. Nutr. 2016, 115, 1043–1060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  21. Ribas-Agustí, A.; Díaz, I.; Sárraga, C.; García-Regueiro, J.A.; Castellari, M. Nutritional Properties of Organic and Conventional Beef Meat at Retail. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2019, 99, 4218–4225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Eyinade, G.A.; Mushunje, A.; Yusuf, S.F.G. The Willingness to Consume Organic Food: A Review. Food Agric. Immunol. 2021, 32, 78–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Aigner, A.; Wilken, R.; Geisendorf, S. The Effectiveness of Promotional Cues for Organic Products in the German Retail Market. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Grzybowska-Brzezinska, M.; Grzywinska-Rapca, M.; Zuchowski, I.; Borawski, P. Organic Food Attributes Determing Consumer Choices. Eur. Res. Stud. J. 2017, XX, 164–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Gruszecka-Kosowska, A.; Baran, A. Concentration and Health Risk Assessment of Nitrates in Vegetables from Conventional and Organic Farming. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. Int. J. 2017, 23, 727–740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Nuñez de González, M.T.; Osburn, W.N.; Hardin, M.D.; Longnecker, M.; Garg, H.K.; Bryan, N.S.; Keeton, J.T. A Survey of Nitrate and Nitrite Concentrations in Conventional and Organic-Labeled Raw Vegetables at Retail. J. Food Sci. 2015, 80, C942–C949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Baudry, J.; Assmann, K.E.; Touvier, M.; Allès, B.; Seconda, L.; Latino-Martel, P.; Ezzedine, K.; Galan, P.; Hercberg, S.; Lairon, D.; et al. Association of Frequency of Organic Food Consumption With Cancer Risk: Findings From the NutriNet-Santé Prospective Cohort Study. JAMA Intern. Med. 2018, 178, 1597–1606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Marco, M.L.; Sanders, M.E.; Gänzle, M.; Arrieta, M.C.; Cotter, P.D.; De Vuyst, L.; Hill, C.; Holzapfel, W.; Lebeer, S.; Merenstein, D.; et al. The International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics (ISAPP) Consensus Statement on Fermented Foods. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2021, 18, 196–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Hill, C.; Guarner, F.; Reid, G.; Gibson, G.R.; Merenstein, D.J.; Pot, B.; Morelli, L.; Canani, R.B.; Flint, H.J.; Salminen, S.; et al. The International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics Consensus Statement on the Scope and Appropriate Use of the Term Probiotic. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2014, 11, 506–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Küçükgöz, K.; Trząskowska, M. Nondairy Probiotic Products: Functional Foods That Require More Attention. Nutrients 2022, 14, 753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Sun, S.; Chang, G.; Zhang, L. The Prevention Effect of Probiotics against Eczema in Children: An Update Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J. Dermatol. Treat. 2022, 33, 1844–1854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Colquitt, A.S.; Miles, E.A.; Calder, P.C. Do Probiotics in Pregnancy Reduce Allergies and Asthma in Infancy and Childhood? A Systematic Review. Nutrients 2022, 14, 1852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Lorenzo, J.M.; Munekata, P.E.; Dominguez, R.; Pateiro, M.; Saraiva, J.A.; Franco, D. Chapter 3—Main Groups of Microorganisms of Relevance for Food Safety and Stability: General Aspects and Overall Description. In Innovative Technologies for Food Preservation; Barba, F.J., Sant’Ana, A.S., Orlien, V., Koubaa, M., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2018; pp. 53–107. ISBN 978-0-12-811031-7. [Google Scholar]
  34. Elbehiry, A.; Abalkhail, A.; Marzouk, E.; Elmanssury, A.E.; Almuzaini, A.M.; Alfheeaid, H.; Alshahrani, M.T.; Huraysh, N.; Ibrahem, M.; Alzaben, F.; et al. An Overview of the Public Health Challenges in Diagnosing and Controlling Human Foodborne Pathogens. Vaccines 2023, 11, 725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Garcia, J.M.; Teixeira, P. Organic versus Conventional Food: A Comparison Regarding Food Safety. Food Rev. Int. 2017, 33, 424–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. USDA Agricultural Marketing Service, Organic Regulations: US Department of Agriculture. Available online: https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/organic (accessed on 15 April 2023).
  37. Code of Federal Regulations—Organic Production and Handling Requirements. Available online: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-7/subtitle-B/chapter-I/subchapter-M/part-205/subpart-C (accessed on 15 April 2023).
  38. European Parliament, Council of the European Union. Regulation (EU) 2018/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on Organic Production and Labelling of Organic Products and Repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007; Publications Office of the European Union EUR-Lex & Legal Information Unit: Luxembourg, 2018; Volume 150. [Google Scholar]
  39. Maeder, P.; Fliessbach, A.; Dubois, D.; Gunst, L.; Fried, P.; Niggli, U. Soil Fertility and Biodiversity in Organic Farming. Science 2002, 296, 1694–1697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  40. Kuchler, F.; Bowman, M.; Sweitzer, M.; Greene, C. Evidence from Retail Food Markets That Consumers Are Confused by Natural and Organic Food Labels. J. Consum. Policy 2020, 43, 379–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Britwum, K.; Bernard, J.C.; Albrecht, S.E. Does Importance Influence Confidence in Organic Food Attributes? Food Qual. Prefer. 2021, 87, 104056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/464 of 26 March 2020 Laying down Certain Rules for the Application of Regulation (EU) 2018/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council as Regards the Documents Needed for the Retroactive Recognition of Periods for the Purpose of Conversion, the Production of Organic Products and Information to Be Provided by Member States. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2020/464/oj (accessed on 25 April 2023).
  43. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Asia Regional Organic Standards (AROS). Available online: https://www.fao.org/family-farming/detail/en/c/282204/ (accessed on 15 April 2023).
  44. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements; United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Asia Regional Organic Standard. Available online: https://profilpelajar.com/article/Asia_Regional_Organic_Standard (accessed on 15 April 2023).
  45. Tango, C.N.; Wei, S.; Khan, I.; Hussain, M.S.; Kounkeu, P.-F.N.; Park, J.; Kim, S.; Oh, D.H. Microbiological Quality and Safety of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables at Retail Levels in Korea. J. Food Sci. 2018, 83, 386–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Berthold-Pluta, A.; Garbowska, M.; Stefańska, I.; Pluta, A. Microbiological Quality of Selected Ready-to-Eat Leaf Vegetables, Sprouts and Non-Pasteurized Fresh Fruit-Vegetable Juices Including the Presence of Cronobacter Spp. Food Microbiol. 2017, 65, 221–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Lücke, F.-K. Microbiological Safety of Organic and Conventional Foods. In Food & Consumer Studies; Department of Nutritional, Fulda University of Applied Sciences: Foodbalt, Germany, 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Foodborne Illnesses and Germs. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/foodsafety/foodborne-germs.html (accessed on 15 April 2023).
  49. Scallan, E.; Hoekstra, R.M.; Angulo, F.J.; Tauxe, R.V.; Widdowson, M.-A.; Roy, S.L.; Jones, J.L.; Griffin, P.M. Foodborne Illness Acquired in the United States—Major Pathogens. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2011, 17, 7–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Fung, F.; Wang, H.-S.; Menon, S. Food Safety in the 21st Century. Biomed. J. 2018, 41, 88–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. European Parliament, Council of the European Union. Commission Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 of 15 November 2005 on Microbiological Criteria for Foodstuffs; Publications Office of the European Union EUR-Lex & Legal Information Unit: Luxembourg, 2005; Volume 338. [Google Scholar]
  52. European Parliament, Council of the European Union. Commission Regulation (EC) No 1441/2007 of 5 December 2007 Amending Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 on Microbiological Criteria for Foodstuffs; Publications Office of the European Union EUR-Lex & Legal Information Unit: Luxembourg, 2007; Volume 322. [Google Scholar]
  53. Wadamori, Y.; Gooneratne, R.; Hussain, M.A. Outbreaks and Factors Influencing Microbiological Contamination of Fresh Produce: Factors Affecting Microbiological Contamination. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2017, 97, 1396–1403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Nagy-Pércsi, K.; Fogarassy, C. Important Influencing and Decision Factors in Organic Food Purchasing in Hungary. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Martínez-Hernández, G.B.; Navarro-Rico, J.; Gómez, P.A.; Otón, M.; Artés, F.; Artés-Hernández, F. Combined Sustainable Sanitising Treatments to Reduce Escherichia coli and Salmonella enteritidis Growth on Fresh-Cut Kailan-Hybrid Broccoli. Food Control 2015, 47, 312–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Agriopoulou, S.; Stamatelopoulou, E.; Sachadyn-Król, M.; Varzakas, T. Lactic Acid Bacteria as Antibacterial Agents to Extend the Shelf Life of Fresh and Minimally Processed Fruits and Vegetables: Quality and Safety Aspects. Microorganisms 2020, 8, 952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Outbreak of Salmonella Infections Linked to Pre-Cut Melons | Outbreak of Salmonella Infections Linked to Pre-Cut Melon | April 2019 | Salmonella | CDC. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/carrau-04-19/index.html (accessed on 15 April 2023).
  58. Carstens, C.K.; Salazar, J.K.; Darkoh, C. Multistate Outbreaks of Foodborne Illness in the United States Associated with Fresh Produce from 2010 to 2017. Front. Microbiol. 2019, 10, 2667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  59. Dubreuil, J.D. Fruit Extracts to Control Pathogenic Escherichia coli: A Sweet Solution. Heliyon 2020, 6, e03410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Luna-Guevara, J.J.; Arenas-Hernandez, M.M.P.; Martínez de la Peña, C.; Silva, J.L.; Luna-Guevara, M.L. The Role of Pathogenic E. coli in Fresh Vegetables: Behavior, Contamination Factors, and Preventive Measures. Int. J. Microbiol. 2019, 2019, 2894328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  61. Ramos, B.; Brandão, T.R.S.; Teixeira, P.; Silva, C.L.M. Biopreservation Approaches to Reduce Listeria Monocytogenes in Fresh Vegetables. Food Microbiol. 2020, 85, 103282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Ukuku, D.O.; Niemira, B.A.; Ukanalis, J. Nisin-Based Antimircobial Combination with Cold Plasma Treatment Inactivate Listeria Monocytogenes on Granny Smith Apples. LWT 2019, 104, 120–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. EFSA European Food Safety Authority; ECDC European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. The European Union One Health 2018 Zoonoses Report. EFSA J. 2019, 17, 81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  64. Heredia, N.; García, S. Animals as Sources of Food-Borne Pathogens: A Review. Anim. Nutr. 2018, 4, 250–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Park, B.; Seo, Y.; Eady, M.; Yoon, S.-C.; Hinton, A., Jr.; Lawrence, K.C.; Gamble, G. Classification of Salmonella serotypes with hyperspectral microscope imagery. Ann. Clin. Pathol. 2017, 5, 1108. [Google Scholar]
  66. Lamas, A.; Miranda, J.M.; Regal, P.; Vázquez, B.; Franco, C.M.; Cepeda, A. A Comprehensive Review of Non-Enterica Subspecies of Salmonella Enterica. Microbiol. Res. 2018, 206, 60–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Kaakoush, N.O.; Castaño-Rodríguez, N.; Mitchell, H.M.; Man, S.M. Global Epidemiology of Campylobacter Infection. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2015, 28, 687–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Terajima, J.; Izumiya, H.; Hara-Kudo, Y.; Ohnishi, M. Shiga Toxin (Verotoxin)-Producing Escherichia coli and Foodborne Disease: A Review. Food Saf. 2017, 5, 35–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Orsi, R.H.; Wiedmann, M. Characteristics and Distribution of Listeria Spp., Including Listeria Species Newly Described since 2009. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2016, 100, 5273–5287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  70. Buchanan, R.L.; Gorris, L.G.M.; Hayman, M.M.; Jackson, T.C.; Whiting, R.C. A Review of Listeria Monocytogenes: An Update on Outbreaks, Virulence, Dose-Response, Ecology, and Risk Assessments. Food Control 2017, 75, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Markowiak, P.; Śliżewska, K. Effects of Probiotics, Prebiotics, and Synbiotics on Human Health. Nutrients 2017, 9, 1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Gholami-Shabani, M.; Shams-Ghahfarokhi, M.; Razzaghi-Abyaneh, M. Food Microbiology: Application of Microorganisms in Food Industry. In Health Risks of Food Additives—Recent Developments and Trends in Food Sector [Working Title]; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  73. Fontes, A.L.; Pimentel, L.; Rodríguez-Alcalá, L.M.; Gomes, A. Effect of Pufa Substrates on Fatty Acid Profile of Bifidobacterium Breve Ncimb 702258 and CLA/CLNA Production in Commercial Semi-Skimmed Milk. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 15591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  74. Mills, S.; Griffin, C.; O’Connor, P.M.; Serrano, L.M.; Meijer, W.C.; Hill, C.; Ross, R.P. A Multibacteriocin Cheese Starter System, Comprising Nisin and Lacticin 3147 in Lactococcus Lactis, in Combination with Plantaricin from Lactobacillus Plantarum. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2017, 83, e00799-17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  75. Pilevar, Z.; Hosseini, H. Effects of Starter Cultures on the Properties of Meat Products: A Review. Annu. Res. Rev. Biol. 2017, 17, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Ozyurt, V.H.; Ötles, S. Properties of Probiotics and Encapsulated Probiotics in Food. Acta Sci. Pol. Technol. Aliment. 2014, 13, 413–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  77. Urkek, B.; Sengul, M.; Erkaya, T.; Aksakal, V. Prevalence and Comparing of Some Microbiological Properties, Somatic Cell Count and Antibiotic Residue of Organic and Conventional Raw Milk Produced in Turkey. Korean J. Food Sci. Anim. Resour. 2017, 37, 264–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  78. Malissiova, E.; Papadopoulos, T.; Kyriazi, A.; Mparda, M.; Sakorafa, C.; Katsioulis, A.; Katsiaflaka, A.; Kyritsi, M.; Zdragas, A.; Hadjichristodoulou, C. Differences in Sheep and Goats Milk Microbiological Profile between Conventional and Organic Farming Systems in Greece. J. Dairy Res. 2017, 84, 206–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Saleh, M.M.; de Carvalho, A.M.; Andrade, N.M.d.; Fonseca, A.B.M.; Keller, L.A.M.; Duarte, M.C.K.H.; Franco, R.M. Bacteriological Quality and Antimicrobial Resistance of Staphylococcus Spp. and Escherichia coli Isolated from Organic and Conventional Fresh Cheese. Food Sci. Technol. 2023, 43, e54922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Szczech, M.; Kowalska, B.; Smolińska, U.; Maciorowski, R.; Oskiera, M.; Michalska, A. Microbial Quality of Organic and Conventional Vegetables from Polish Farms. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2018, 286, 155–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Kuan, C.-H.; Rukayadi, Y.; Ahmad, S.H.; Wan Mohamed Radzi, C.W.J.; Thung, T.-Y.; Premarathne, J.M.K.J.K.; Chang, W.-S.; Loo, Y.-Y.; Tan, C.-W.; Ramzi, O.B.; et al. Comparison of the Microbiological Quality and Safety between Conventional and Organic Vegetables Sold in Malaysia. Front. Microbiol. 2017, 8, 1433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  82. Rzepkowska, A.; Zielińska, D.; Ołdak, A.; Kołożyn-Krajewska, D. Organic Whey as a Source of Lactobacillus Strains with Selected Technological and Antimicrobial Properties. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 52, 1983–1994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Wassermann, B.; Müller, H.; Berg, G. An Apple a Day: Which Bacteria Do We Eat with Organic and Conventional Apples? Front. Microbiol. 2019, 10, 1629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  84. Moszak, M.; Szulińska, M.; Bogdański, P. You Are What You Eat—The Relationship between Diet, Microbiota, and Metabolic Disorders—A Review. Nutrients 2020, 12, 1096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  85. Kasprzak-Drozd, K.; Oniszczuk, T.; Stasiak, M.; Oniszczuk, A. Beneficial Effects of Phenolic Compounds on Gut Microbiota and Metabolic Syndrome. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 3715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Seo, Y.S.; Lee, H.-B.; Kim, Y.; Park, H.-Y. Dietary Carbohydrate Constituents Related to Gut Dysbiosis and Health. Microorganisms 2020, 8, 427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  87. Brodziak, A.; Król, J.; Litwińczuk, Z.; Barłowska, J. Differences in Bioactive Protein and Vitamin Status of Milk from Certified Organic and Conventional Farms. Int. J. Dairy Technol. 2018, 71, 321–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Sosnowski, M.; Osek, J. Microbiological Safety of Food of Animal Origin from Organic Farms. J. Vet. Res. 2021, 65, 87–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Nazareth, J.; Shaw, A.; Delate, K.; Turnbull, R. Food Safety Considerations in Integrated Organic Crop–Livestock Systems: Prevalence of Salmonella Spp. and E. coli O157:H7 in Organically Raised Cattle and Organic Feed. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 2021, 36, 8–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  90. Sagoo, S.K.; Little, C.L.; Mitchell, R.T. The Microbiological Examination of Ready-to-Eat Organic Vegetables from Retail Establishments in the United Kingdom. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2001, 33, 434–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  91. Doyle, M.P.; Erickson, M.C. Summer Meeting 2007 the Problems with Fresh Produce: An Overview. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2008, 105, 317–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Olaimat, A.N.; Holley, R.A. Factors Influencing the Microbial Safety of Fresh Produce: A Review. Food Microbiol. 2012, 32, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Begum, J.; Nooruzzaman, M.; Modak, M.; Khanam, D.; Hossain, I.; Hasnat, A.; Kabiraj, C.; Chowdhury, E. Poultry Waste Management Practices in Bangladesh: Farmer’s Perceptions, and Food and Environmental Hazards. J. Adv. Vet. Anim. Res. 2023, 10, 72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Doran, J.W.; Zeiss, M.R. Soil Health and Sustainability: Managing the Biotic Component of Soil Quality. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2000, 15, 3–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  95. Bouma, J.; Montanarella, L.; Evanylo, G. The Challenge for the Soil Science Community to Contribute to the Implementation of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Soil Use Manag. 2019, 35, 538–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Mostafidi, M.; Sanjabi, M.R.; Shirkhan, F.; Zahedi, M.T. A Review of Recent Trends in the Development of the Microbial Safety of Fruits and Vegetables. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 103, 321–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Allam, M.; Bazok, R.; Bordewick-Dell, U.; Czarniecka-Skubina, E.; Kazimierczak, R.; Laikoja, K.; Luik, A.; Fuka, M.M.; Muleo, R.; Peetsmann, E.; et al. Assistance Needed for Increasing Knowledge of HACCP Food Safety Principles for Organic Sector in Selected EU Countries. Sustainability 2023, 15, 6605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Pereira, N.; Franceschini, S.; Priore, S. Food Quality According to the Production System and Its Relationship with Food and Nutritional Security: A Systematic Review. Saúde E Soc. 2020, 29, e200031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Balali, G.I.; Yar, D.D.; Afua Dela, V.G.; Adjei-Kusi, P. Microbial Contamination, an Increasing Threat to the Consumption of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables in Today’s World. Int. J. Microbiol. 2020, 2020, 3029295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Bergamo, P.; Torjusen, H.; Wyss, G.S.; Brandt, K. Milk Production Control of Quality and Safety in Organic Production Chains; FiBL: Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Fadiji, T.; Rashvand, M.; Daramola, M.O.; Iwarere, S.A. A Review on Antimicrobial Packaging for Extending the Shelf Life of Food. Processes 2023, 11, 590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Kilic, B.; Cubero Dudinskaya, E.; Proi, M.; Naspetti, S.; Zanoli, R. Are They Careful Enough? Testing Consumers’ Perception of Alternative Processing Technologies on the Quality of Organic Food. Nutrients 2021, 13, 2922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Contreras, C.; Benlloch-Tinoco, M.; Rodrigo, D.; Martínez-Navarrete, N. Impact of Microwave Processing on Nutritional, Sensory, and Other Quality Attributes. In The Microwave Processing of Foods, 2nd ed.; Woodhead Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2017; pp. 65–99. ISBN 978-0-08-100528-6. [Google Scholar]
  104. The Importance of Food Naturalness for Consumers: Results of a Systematic Review—ScienceDirect. Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092422441730122X (accessed on 28 April 2023).
  105. Huang, H.-W.; Wu, S.-J.; Lu, J.-K.; Shyu, Y.-T.; Wang, C.-Y. Current Status and Future Trends of High-Pressure Processing in Food Industry. Food Control 2017, 72, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Priyadarshini, A.; Rajauria, G.; O’Donnell, C.P.; Tiwari, B.K. Emerging Food Processing Technologies and Factors Impacting Their Industrial Adoption. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2019, 59, 3082–3101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Trząskowska, M.; Dai, Y.; Delaquis, P.; Wang, S. Pathogen Reduction on Mung Bean Reduction of Escherichia coli O157:H7, Salmonella enterica and Listeria monocytogenes on Mung Bean Using Combined Thermal and Chemical Treatments with Acetic Acid and Hydrogen Peroxide. Food Microbiol. 2018, 76, 62–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Beuchat, L.R. Ecological Factors Influencing Survival and Growth of Human Pathogens on Raw Fruits and Vegetables. Microbes Infect. 2002, 4, 413–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Maffei, D.F.; Batalha, E.Y.; Landgraf, M.; Schaffner, D.W.; Franco, B.D.G.M. Microbiology of Organic and Conventionally Grown Fresh Produce. Braz. J. Microbiol. 2016, 47, 99–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  110. Trząskowska, M.; Neffe-Skocińska, K.; Okoń, A.; Zielińska, D.; Szydłowska, A.; Łepecka, A.; Kołożyn-Krajewska, D. Safety Assessment of Organic High-Protein Bars during Storage at Ambient and Refrigerated Temperatures. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Gomiero, T. Food Quality Assessment in Organic vs. Conventional Agricultural Produce: Findings and Issues. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2018, 123, 714–728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Szydłowska, A.; Zielińska, D.; Trząskowska, M.; Neffe-Skocińska, K.; Łepecka, A.; Okoń, A.; Kołożyn-Krajewska, D. Development of Ready-to-Eat Organic Protein Snack Bars: Assessment of Selected Changes of Physicochemical Quality Parameters and Antioxidant Activity Changes during Storage. Foods 2022, 11, 3631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. European Parliament, Council of the European Union. Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the Hygiene of Foodstuffs; Publications Office of the European Union EUR-Lex & Legal Information Unit: Luxembourg, 2004; Volume 139. [Google Scholar]
  114. Qadri, O.S.; Yousuf, B.; Srivastava, A.K. Fresh-Cut Fruits and Vegetables: Critical Factors Influencing Microbiology and Novel Approaches to Prevent Microbial Risks—A Review. Cogent Food Agric. 2015, 1, 1121606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Murray, K.; Wu, F.; Shi, J.; Jun Xue, S.; Warriner, K. Challenges in the Microbiological Food Safety of Fresh Produce: Limitations of Post-Harvest Washing and the Need for Alternative Interventions. Food Qual. Saf. 2017, 1, 289–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  116. Machado-Moreira, B.; Richards, K.; Brennan, F.; Abram, F.; Burgess, C.M. Microbial Contamination of Fresh Produce: What, Where, and How? Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2019, 18, 1727–1750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  117. Liu, H.; Whitehouse, C.A.; Li, B. Presence and Persistence of Salmonella in Water: The Impact on Microbial Quality of Water and Food Safety. Front. Public Health 2018, 6, 159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Yar, D.D.; Jimah Kwenin, W.K.; Kwame Zanu, W.; Iddrisu Balali, G.; Kwame Adepa, E.; Francis, G. Microbial Quality of Frozen Chicken Parts from Three Import Countries into the Kumasi Metropolis of Ghana. Microbiol. Res. J. Int. 2021, 31, 43–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
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

Murali, A.P.; Trząskowska, M.; Trafialek, J. Microorganisms in Organic Food-Issues to Be Addressed. Microorganisms 2023, 11, 1557. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms11061557

AMA Style

Murali AP, Trząskowska M, Trafialek J. Microorganisms in Organic Food-Issues to Be Addressed. Microorganisms. 2023; 11(6):1557. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms11061557

Chicago/Turabian Style

Murali, Aparna P., Monika Trząskowska, and Joanna Trafialek. 2023. "Microorganisms in Organic Food-Issues to Be Addressed" Microorganisms 11, no. 6: 1557. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms11061557

APA Style

Murali, A. P., Trząskowska, M., & Trafialek, J. (2023). Microorganisms in Organic Food-Issues to Be Addressed. Microorganisms, 11(6), 1557. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms11061557

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