1. Technical Field
The present disclosure represents devices, systems and methods for sanitary packaging of food items.
2. Background and Relevant Art
Recently, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) expanded its interpretation of products subject to recall in the event of a pathogenic contamination event. Prior to this time, a recall event in raw or ground beef trimmings would be limited to just those trimmings and grinds produced at the same time the contaminated product was also being produced. For example, the product that would be affected under the prior USDA interpretation would include only those trimmings and grinds produced between one complete sanitation event, and the next complete sanitation event, with no trimmings or grinds being allowed to carry over from one sanitation period to the next.
More recently, and with the USDA's expanded interpretation, the products subject to recall would include not only trimmings and grinds, but also all primal cuts (whole muscle cuts). This expansion in interpretation greatly increases the costs, and therefore, increases the loss in profits that may be associated with a recall event.
Under the current USDA interpretation, there is a consideration that may give meat producers the ability to use additional microbial interventions on primal cuts as a further process step that would differentiate primal cuts from trim and ground beef in an event of a recall: apply a scientifically proven pathogen reduction process uniformly to all beef primal cuts immediately prior to packaging. In order to satisfy the USDA standards for this consideration, a meat producer must demonstrate that the pathogen reduction process does indeed uniformly apply an accurate amount of an antimicrobial agent to the primal cuts immediately prior to packaging.
There are several conventional antimicrobial agents that have been documented and acknowledged by the USDA as providing the necessary pathogen reduction step. Some antimicrobial agents that have been acknowledged include lactic acid, peracetic acid, ammonia hydroxide, and chlorine dioxide/sodium hypochlorite.
Although several antimicrobial agents may have been approved, the application of the antimicrobial agent to the primal cuts presents various challenges. A primary difficulty in the application process deals with obtaining complete product coverage, i.e., coverage on all surfaces of the primal cut. A second concern is that the antimicrobial agent must be applied at a carefully metered rate so that any individual primal cut does not gain more than 0.49% by weight with the addition of the antimicrobial solution (another USDA requirement). Additionally, application of a antimicrobial agent that provides full coverage and accurate amounts may be cost prohibitive and subject to human error in product handling and application rate.
For example, conventional methods of applying an antimicrobial agent may employ multiple spray nozzles that aim at all sides of the product as it passes along a moving conveyor. The conventional method may employ a split in the conveyor, or a transition between two consecutive conveyors, to spray the underside of the primal cut. Frequently, however, multiple primal cuts may enter the spraying area simultaneously and may be touching, overlapping, or otherwise obstructing the spray nozzles ability to coat all surfaces of any given piece of product. Therefore, such an application method requires constant oversight to ensure proper pacing, spacing, and antimicrobial solution coverage, which in turn increases costs and decreases efficiency.
Other conventional methods may also have difficulty applying the correct amount of the antimicrobial agent, thus causing the weight of the food product to increase over the USDA standard set at 0.49%. For example, in a typical method that employs several spray nozzles, it is may be difficult to meter the actual amount of antimicrobial solution that is applied to an individual piece of product. For instance, although the amount of antimicrobial solution may be metered through a spray nozzle, many times there is over-spray and/or under-spray that unpredictably affects the total amount of antimicrobial solution deposited on the piece of product. Thus, in many conventional processes, it is difficult to apply the correct amount of antimicrobial solution.
Moreover, in an effort to provide an even application and correct amount of antimicrobial agent, other convention methods may use labor intensive processes that increase the cost of packaging the meat, and decrease the efficiency of the packaging process. For example, some conventional processes employ workers that individually apply the antimicrobial solution to each piece of product. This process, however, may be time consuming, produce non-uniform results, and be rather expensive when compared to automated processes. Accordingly, there are a number of disadvantages in the conventional art of sanitary packaging of food items.
Implementations of the present invention systems, methods and apparatus configured to package food items with an even coating of an antimicrobial agent. In particular, implementations of the present invention can be configured to efficiently and quickly provide such a coating in a rapid time period. This can enable packaging of a much more sanitary food product, including but not limited to meat primals, without hindering conventional packaging operations or speed.
For example, one exemplary implementation of packaging system includes a delivery portion with an entrance and an exit. The packaging system can further include a package that cooperates with the exit of the delivery portion to receive a food item that is moved through the delivery portion. The package has an interior surface such that an air dispenser positioned proximate to the exit of the delivery portion. The air dispenser can at least partially inflate the package with air. The packaging system further can include a liquid dispenser positioned proximate to the exit of the delivery portion. The liquid dispenser can at least partially coat the interior surface of the package with a sanitizing agent when the package is at least partially inflated.
Similarly, an exemplary packaging device for delivering a food item into a package can include a staging portion configured to accept and hold a food item that is prepared for packaging. The packaging device can further include a delivery portion that has an entrance and an exit. In general, the food item leaves delivery portion and is delivered to a package at or near the exit. The packaging device can also include a controller that controls the packaging device and is communicably connected to a ram, an air dispenser, and a liquid dispenser. The ram can be operatively associated with the staging portion and the delivery portion. The ram moves the food item from the staging portion through the delivery portion and into the package.
Moreover, the air dispenser can be positioned proximate to the exit of the delivery portion and configured to at least partially inflate the package with air; while the liquid dispenser can be positioned proximate to the exit of the delivery portion. The air dispenser and liquid dispenser can be operatively configured to spray the sanitizing agent in a plurality of directions onto an interior surface of the package. In one example, the controller is programmed to have the ram move the food item into the at least partially inflated package that has the interior surface at least partially coated with the sanitizing agent.
In addition to the foregoing, an exemplary method of packaging a food item in a sanitary package can involve inflating a package at least partially with air dispensed from an air dispenser. In addition, the method can involve coating an interior surface of a package at least partially with a sanitizing agent dispensed from a liquid dispenser. Also, the method can involve positioning a food item within the package by pushing the food item into the package with a ram. Furthermore, the method can involve vacuum sealing the package around the food item.
Additional features and advantages of exemplary implementations of the invention will be set forth in the description which follows, and in part will be obvious from the description, or may be learned by the practice of such exemplary implementations. The features and advantages of such implementations may be realized and obtained by means of the instruments and combinations particularly pointed out in the appended claims. These and other features will become more fully apparent from the following description and appended claims, or may be learned by the practice of such exemplary implementations as set forth hereinafter.
In order to describe the manner in which the above-recited and other advantages and features of the invention can be obtained, a more particular description of the invention briefly described above will be rendered by reference to specific embodiments thereof which are illustrated in the appended drawings. Understanding that these drawings depict only typical embodiments of the invention and are not therefore to be considered to be limiting of its scope, the invention will be described and explained with additional specificity and detail through the use of the accompanying drawings in which:
The present invention extends to systems, methods and apparatus configured to package food items with an even coating of an antimicrobial agent. In particular, implementations of the present invention can be configured to efficiently and quickly provide such a coating in a rapid time period. This can enable packaging of a much more sanitary food product, including but not limited to meat primals, without hindering conventional packaging operations or speed.
Accordingly, one will appreciate from the following description and claims that implementations of the present invention provide devices, systems, and methods that package a food item in accordance with conventional food safety standards. This allows the food items, for example primal cuts of meat, treated in accordance with the present invention to avoid recall in the event of a recall relating to trimmings and grinds. Specifically, the devices, systems and methods of packaging a food item provide a uniform coating of antimicrobial agent on the food item that coats the entire food item surface in a manner that effectively protects the food from food born microbial organisms that can be the reason for a recall event.
To provide such advantages, at least one implementation of the present invention provides even application of anti-microbial agent on all sides of the food item. In one implementation, for example, an inventive system/apparatus directly applies a measured, pre-determined amount of antimicrobial solution to an inside surface of a package. When the food item, in turn, enters the package, the agent attaches evenly about the food item inside the package. This type of application contrasts with certain conventional processes that involve coating all sides of a food item prior to packaging, and while resting on a conveyor.
An end-user can apply agent to a food item as described herein in an automated, efficient, and cost effective way. For instance, implementations of the present invention provide devices and systems that an end-user can operate to automatically control the amounts of applied anti-microbial agent. Such devices and systems can also control timing and actuation of spray nozzles, as well as timed delivery of food item into the package. Such automated controls can ensure that almost no additional time or labor is required to apply the antimicrobial solution, thus making the application of antimicrobial solution a cost effective way to increase the safety of packaged food.
In particular, one will appreciate that the overall size and configuration of the packaging system 100 can at least somewhat depend on the type and size of a food item 102. In at least one implementation, for example, the packaging system 100 is specifically configured to package primal cuts of beef. In other implementations, the packaging system 100 may be configured to package other cuts of beef, as well as (or alternatively) other meat products, such as chicken, pork, and fish. Moreover, packaging system 100 can be configured to package addition food items 102 that are not meat products. For example, dairy products, such as cheese, and any other food item 102 that may benefit from the application of an antimicrobial agent, can be packaged with the package system 100.
In addition to various overall configuration of the packaging system 100, the material of the packaging system 100 can also vary from one implementation to the next. For example, a manufacturer can make the packaging system 100 out of stainless steel (e.g., 314/316 grade stainless steel), or another food processing grade stainless steel that resists corrosion, and that is easy to sanitize after use. Other suitable materials may also be used depending on the nature of the food item 102 that a food manufacturer packages with the packaging system 100.
Regardless of the packaging system 100 material, and as mentioned above, the packaging system 100 can include the staging portion 110. A manufacturer, for example, can configure the staging portion 110 to accept and hold the food item 102 prior to packaging thereof. For example,
In one example implementation, a manufacturer can design the mounting bracket 118 such that the position of the staging portion 110 (and thus the position of the packaging system 100) is customizable. In one implementation, for example, the interface between the mounting bracket 118 and the staging portion 110 can include additional hardware (not shown) that can allow a operator of the packaging system 100 to raise or lower the packaging system 100. Such hardware can also allow for an incline and/or rotation of the packaging system 100. Thus, an operator can customize the position of the packaging system 100 to provide a safe and comfortable operating position of the packaging system 100 while in use.
In addition to having a customizable position, the configuration of the staging portion 110 can vary from one implementation to the next. For example,
Although the platform 112 and side wall 114 illustrated in
In addition to providing a staging area 110, the platform 112 can couple or rest upon a weighing device, such as a scale (not shown). The scale can communicate the weight of the food item 102 to a controller 210 (as will be discussed in greater detail with respect to
In order to move the food item 102 from the staging portion 110 and through the packaging system 100, a manufacturer can operatively associate a ram 116 with the staging portion 110.
In additional implementations, a manufacturer can employ other devices or means to move the food item 102 into delivery portion 130 (and into the package 160). For example, a manufacturer can incline or alternatively position platform 112 so that the food item slides, or otherwise “drops” into the package 160. Still further, the manufacturer can include a conveyor belt that conveys (rather than pushes with ram 116) the food item 112 into delivery portion 130/package 160.
Even when using the illustrated ram 116, one will appreciate that a manufacturer can employ several types and configurations thereof. For example, the ram 116 can have a substantially cylindrical configuration. Alternatively, the ram 116 may be square, rectangular, or even pyramidal in dimension. In one implementation, the ram 116 configuration, in combination with the configuration of the delivery portion 130, can at least partially shape the food item to a desired shape during delivery.
In addition to the various configurations of the ram 116, a manufacturer can actuate the ram 116 using a variety of different devices. In one example, the ram 116 is coupled to a pneumatic actuator. In this example, a manufacturer can configure the pneumatic actuator to move the ram 116 towards the food item 102 with sufficient force and velocity to effectively push the food item 102 in a matter of no more than about 1-2 seconds. In other implementations, the ram 116 can be associated with an electric actuator, hydraulic actuator, spring loaded actuator, or any other similar means to provide a similar effect.
Notwithstanding the configuration of the ram 116, example implementations of the packaging system 100 further include various configurations of the delivery portion 130. As illustrated in
One will appreciate that various aspects of the snout-like delivery portion 130 enable efficient coupling with package 160, and delivery of the food item 102. For example,
In alternative implementations of the delivery portion 130, for example, a manufacturer can couple both the top portion 136 and the bottom portion 138 to the base 140 with a hinged connection, such that both the top portion 136 and the bottom portion 138 can move with respect to one another. In yet an additional implementation, the manufacturer can configure the exit 134 of the delivery portion 130 to have a fixed cross-sectional dimension, such that the delivery portion 130 only allows a maximum sized food item 102 to pass through the exit 130. In one implementation, the exit 134 can further include trim blades (not shown) that can be used to cut away the portions of the food item 102 that exceed the maximum size.
Regardless of the specific delivery portion 130 and exit 134 configuration, a manufacturer generally can configure the delivery portion 130 to cooperate with one or more specific configurations of the package 160. For example
In one example implementation, the package 160 includes properties and features that allow a food manufacturer to vacuum seal the package after the packaging system 100 places the food item 102 within the package 160. During the vacuum sealing process, all or substantially all of the air is removed from the package 160 such that the package 160 collapses tightly around the food item 102. This in turn causes the package 160 to substantially take the form of the food item 102. A food manufacturer can then seal the opening 162 of the package such that the package 160 remains substantially formed around the food time 102 during shipment or until a consumer opens the package 160.
Regardless of the shape and configuration of the package 160, a manufacturer can configure the delivery portion 130 to deliver a predetermined, accurate, and substantially uniform amount of an antimicrobial agent to the interior surface of the package 160. This can be delivered just prior to, or at substantially the same time as, the food item 102 leaves the exit 134 of the delivery portion 130 and enters the package 160 (See
In order to achieve a substantially exposed interior surface of the package 160, the delivery portion 130 can include an air dispenser 150 that can fill or otherwise inflate the package 160 with air just prior to the food item 102 leaving the exit 134 of the delivery portion 130 and entering the package 160. For example,
In one example implementation, the air dispenser 150 comprises one or more nozzles. The one or more nozzles, in turn, can have the ability to provide a variety of air flow patterns into the package 160. For example, at least one air nozzle can provide a wide air flow pattern such that the package 160 quickly fills with air. In other implementations, the air flow pattern can be narrower, depending on the size and configuration of the package 160. In an alternative implementation, the air dispenser 150 can include a fixed nozzle, and/or a variable or rotatable nozzle.
Moreover, just as a nozzle on the air dispenser 150 can vary the air flow pattern, the nozzle can also vary the volume flow rate of the air. For example, a manufacturer can set a combination of air flow pattern and volume flow rate to inflate package 160 in a range of about 0.1 to about 1.5 seconds. The volume flow rate can also be adjusted according to the desired inflation rate of the package 160.
Another way in which the inflation rate of the package 160 can be adjusted is based on the number and/or location of the air dispenser(s). For example,
Once the package 160 is inflated with the air dispenser 150, the packaging system 100 can include liquid dispenser(s) 152 that apply the antimicrobial agent to the interior surface of the package 160. For example,
Of course, one can appreciate that
Similarly,
In addition to the location of the upper and lower liquid dispensers 152 and 154,
Notwithstanding the number of ports 156, a manufacturer can configure the ports 156 to have various sizes, directions, flow rates, and spray patterns. For example, each port 156 included on the upper or lower liquid dispensers 152 and 154 can be directed in a particular direction with a specific spray pattern and flow rate. The spray pattern and flow rate can be optimized provide uniform coverage of the interior surface of the package 160 with agent.
The following references
For example, another piece of food processing equipment, such as a conveyer system (not shown), may have automatically loaded the food item 102 onto the platform 112. Likewise, a machine or similar automated device can position the package 160 around the exit 134 of the delivery portion 130. In additional or alternative implementations, an operator simply can use their hands to slide the package 160 over the exit 134 of the delivery portion 130.
As discussed with respect to the air dispenser 150, the upper liquid dispenser 152 and the lower liquid dispenser 154 can spray a predetermined amount of liquid spray 166 to ensure uniform distribution. The amount of liquid, or antimicrobial agent, dispensed can be controlled by the flow rate, as well as the amount of time the upper liquid dispenser 152 and the lower liquid dispenser 154 dispense the liquid spray 166. The amount of liquid needed depends on the package 160 size as well as the size and type of the food item 102.
In addition,
Once the food item 102 begins to move through the exit 134 of the delivery portion 130, however, the liquid dispensers 152 and 154 cease dispensing additional liquid, shown in
In one implementation, an operator can vacuum seal the package 160 with the food item 102 inside the package 160. In this implementation, the vacuum sealing process collapses the package 160 tightly around the food item 102, such that the antimicrobial agent applied to the interior surface of the package 160 comes into contact with the food item 102. In particular, the vacuum sealing process causes further even distribution of the anti-bacterial agent around the food item 102 as the air is removed from the package 160 and the anti-bacterial agent is evenly pressed between the package 160 and all surfaces of the food item 102.
Each of the main liquid line 200 and main air line 202 can further include pressure transducers 204 that monitor the pressure in the main liquid line 200 and the main air line 202.
In addition to the pressure transducers 204, the main liquid line 200 and the main air line 202 can further include one or more pressure gauges 206. The one or more pressure gauges 206 can allow an operator can physically inspect the pressure at a certain point in the main liquid line 200 or the main air line 202. For example,
Additionally, the main liquid line 200 and the main air line 202 can include pressure regulators 212 to regulate the pressure that the will be supplied to the air dispenser 150 and liquid dispensers 152 and 154. In one implementation, the pressure regulators 212 can communicably connect to the controller 210. In such an implementation, the controller 210 can control the pressure that is supplied to the air dispenser 150 and the liquid dispensers 152 and 154.
Moreover, the main liquid line 200 and the main air line 202 can connect to a flow control manifold 216 that can control the flow rate through the main liquid line 200 and main air line 202. As with the pressure regulators 212, the flow control manifold 216 can communicably connect to the controller 210 (not shown), such that the controller can control the flow rate through the main liquid line 200 and the main air line 202. Alternatively, an operator can manually set the flow control manifold 216 to provide a constant flow rate through the main liquid line 200 and the main air line 202.
Notwithstanding the illustration in
As discussed above,
One will appreciate that the controller 210 can use a combination of timers, input and output signal monitoring, and signal generators that are controlled by computer-executable instructions to control the packaging system 100. For example,
In one example implementation, the controller can monitor for a cycle start input signal.
In addition (or as an alternative) to the button providing a cycle start input to the controller 210, a package detector 218 can detect the presence of the package 160 and signal to the controller 210 that the package 160 is in proper position. For example,
In one implementation, the package detector 218 can be a sensor that can detect the presence of the package 160 about the exit 134 of the delivery portion 130. The sensor may include a proximity sensor, a laser sensor, or any other similar sensory device that can provide an input signal based on the detection of the presence of the package 160.
After the controller 210 receives the cycle start input from the button 220 and/or the package detect input from the package detector 218, for example, then the controller 210 can signal to the electrical activated valve(s) 214 to dispense the air and/or liquid in a predetermined manner. Thereafter, the controller 210 can actuate a actuator 222 connected to the ram 116. Upon actuation, the ram 116 pushes the food item 102 into the package 160 that has the interior surface coated with the antimicrobial agent liquid. In other words, once an operator positions the package 160 around the exit 134 of the delivery portion 130 and presses the button 220, the packaging system 100 automatically inflates the package 160. The packaging system 100 then applies an even coat of antimicrobial agent to the interior surface of the package 160, and pushes the food item into the package 160.
The manner and timing in which the controller 210 controls the air dispenser 150 and the liquid dispensers 152 and 154 can vary from one implementation to the next. As
Continuing with the example illustrated in
In particular, in one implementation, an operator can program the controller 210 such that the air dispenser 150 and the liquid dispensers 152 and 154 activate during partially overlapping periods of time. For example, the operator can program the controller 210 such that the air dispenser 150 sprays air for a total period of about 0.5 seconds (i.e., the period between S and X), and the liquid dispensers 152 and 154 dispense the antimicrobial agent for a total period of about 0.5 seconds (i.e., the period between Y and Z). In addition, the operator may differentially activate air dispenser 150 and the liquid dispensers 152 and 154 at the same time for only about 0.25 seconds (i.e., the period between Y and X).
In particular, halfway through the 0.5 second air dispensing period, or after about 0.25 seconds of dispensing air, the liquid dispensers 152 and 154 can begin dispensing liquid. In this case, both the air dispenser 150 and the liquid dispensers 152 and 154 are activated for the last half of the air dispensing period (about 0.25 seconds). After the air dispenser 150 completes the total 0.5 second period, the liquid dispensers 152 and 154 can continue to dispense the antimicrobial agent for about another 0.25 seconds to complete the total liquid dispensing period.
The example time periods of X, Y, and Z can all vary such that the periods of overlap differ from one implementation to the next. This variance can be configured depending on the size of package 160, type of food item 102, size of food item 102, and other variables that may affect spray times and patterns. For example, in some implementations, there is no overlap between the air dispensing and the liquid dispensing. Additionally, the air and the liquid dispensing may completely overlap.
Accordingly,
For example,
In addition,
Furthermore,
Accordingly, the diagrams and text corresponding to
The present invention may be embodied in other specific forms without departing from its spirit or essential characteristics. The described implementations are to be considered in all respects only as illustrative and not restrictive. The scope of the invention is, therefore, indicated by the appended claims rather than by the foregoing description. All changes that come within the meaning and range of equivalency of the claims are to be embraced within their scope.
The present invention is a Divisional Application of U.S. National Stage application Ser. No. 12/918,304, filed on Aug. 18, 2010, entitled “Antimicrobial Packaging System,” which corresponds to PCT Application No. PCT/US10/45578, filed on Aug. 16, 2010, which claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/243,830, filed on Sep. 18, 2009. The entire content of each of the afore-mentioned patent applications is incorporated by reference herein.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1913828 | Brennan | Jun 1933 | A |
2887837 | Toby | May 1959 | A |
3645760 | O'Brien | Feb 1972 | A |
3741584 | Arai | Jun 1973 | A |
3935691 | Broch | Feb 1976 | A |
4021283 | Weikert | May 1977 | A |
4447887 | Imazeki | May 1984 | A |
4991633 | Wong | Feb 1991 | A |
5335479 | Lemke | Aug 1994 | A |
5402625 | Halstead | Apr 1995 | A |
5415997 | Atrache | May 1995 | A |
5433121 | Torra | Jul 1995 | A |
5483784 | Owensby | Jan 1996 | A |
5741177 | Roberts | Apr 1998 | A |
5987854 | Killinger | Nov 1999 | A |
6004766 | Atrache | Dec 1999 | A |
6094999 | DuBois | Aug 2000 | A |
6196960 | Owensby | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6207406 | Wilkins | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6440373 | Gomes | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6868299 | Chandra | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6868873 | Frisk | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6898539 | Tai | May 2005 | B2 |
6922646 | Robbins, III | Jul 2005 | B2 |
7021026 | Griggs | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7093508 | Harris | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7222469 | Griggs | May 2007 | B2 |
7247330 | Kuethe et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7531163 | Samadpour | May 2009 | B2 |
7534584 | Samadpour | May 2009 | B2 |
7703262 | Till | Apr 2010 | B2 |
8141329 | Zeedyk | Mar 2012 | B2 |
20010008887 | Choudary | Jul 2001 | A1 |
20030082797 | Rastorgoueff | May 2003 | A1 |
20030229293 | Hibner | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040018120 | Rappin | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040018575 | Rappin | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040137486 | Benson | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040241644 | Samadpour | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040241773 | Samadpour | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050034426 | Griggs et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050201904 | Stripling | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050257502 | Wild et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20060239113 | Harris | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060266131 | Graham | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070020364 | Burnett | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070020366 | Luchansky et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070172561 | Hirschey | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20080102442 | Samadpour | May 2008 | A1 |
20090104327 | Pulsfus et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090258359 | Samadpour | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090269760 | Samadpour | Oct 2009 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1171690 | Jul 1984 | CA |
1786920 | May 2010 | EP |
10151134 | Jun 1998 | JP |
2100793 | Dec 1997 | RU |
9834107 | Aug 1998 | WO |
2006017832 | Aug 2005 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Byers, Patricia A. and Herbert L. DuPont. “Pooling Method for Screening Large Numbers of Escherichia coli for Production of Heat-Stable Enterotoxin, and Its Application in Field Studies.” in: Journal of Clinical Microbiology, Apr. 1979, vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 541-543. |
Cousin, M.A, et al. “Psychrotrophic Microorganisms.” in: Compendium of Methods for the Microbiological Examination of Foods (Fourth Edition), (Washington D.C., American Public Health Association, 2009), pp. 159-166. |
Currie, Marian J. et al. “Pooling of Clinical Specimens Prior to Testing for Chlamydia trachomatis by PCR is Accurate and Cost Saving.” in: Journal of Clinical Microbiology, Oct. 2004, vol. 42, No. 10, pp. 4866-4867. |
Davies, R.H. et al. “Evaluation of the use of pooled serum, pooled muscle tissue fluid (meat juice) and pooled faeces for monitoring pig herds for Salmonella.” in: Journal of Applied Microbiology, 2003, No. 95, pp. 1016-1025. |
Entis, Phyllis, et al. “Rapid Methods for Detection, Identification, and Enumeration.” in: Compoendium of Methods for the Microbiological Examination of Foods (Fourth Edition), (Washington D.C., American Public Health Association, 2009), pp. 159-166. |
“Testing meat for E. coli 0157:H7 or H-.” in: Food Science Australia, Feb. 2002. |
Andrews, Wallace H. and Thomas S. Hammack. “BAM: Food Sampling/Preparation of Sample Homogenate.” in: Bacteriological Analytical Manual, Apr. 2003. Retrieved online on Apr. 24, 2012. |
“Microbiological testing program and other verification activities for Escherichia coli O157:H7 in raw ground beef products and raw ground beef components and beef patty components.” in: FSIS Directive, Exhibit 6, Mar. 31, 2004. |
Gabis, D.A. and J.H. Silliker. “ICMSF methods studies. II. Comparison of analytical schemes for detection of Salmonella in high-moisture foods.” in: Can. J. Microbiology, vol. 20, 1974, pp. 663-669. |
Gast, Richard K. “Detection of Salmonella enteritidis in experimentally infected laying hens by culturing pools of egg contents.” in: Poultry Science (1993), vol. 72, pp. 267-275. |
Gast, Richard K. and Peter S. Holt. “Incubation of egg contents pools at an elevated temperature (42 C) does not improve the rapid detection of Salmonella enteritidis phage type 14b.” in: Journal of Food Protection, vol. 67, No. 8, 2004, pp. 1751-1754. |
Hendriksen, Rene S. “Global Salm-Surv: A global Salmonella surveillance and laboratory support project of the World Health Organization.” in: Laboratory Protocols Level 4 Training Course, First Ed., Feb. 2003, pp. 1-18. |
Hughes, Denise et al. “Salmonella in foods: new enrichment procedure for TECRA Salmonella visual immunoassay using a single RV (R10) only, TT only, or dual RV (R10) and TT selective enrichment broths (AOAC official method 998.09): Collaborative study.” in: Journal of AOAC International, vol. 86, No. 4, 2003, pp. 775-790. |
Micro organisms in foods 2 sampling for microbiological analysis: principles and specific applications (Blackwell Scientific Publications, second edition). |
Jarvis, B. “Statistical aspects of the microbiological analysis of foods.” in Progress in Industrial Microbiology, (Elsevier, Amsterdam 1989) vol. 21, pp. 117-142. |
Kapala, J. et al. “Pooling cervical swabs and testing by ligase chain reaction are accurate and cost-saving strategies for diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis.” in: Journal of Clinical Microbiology, Jul. 2000, vol. 28, No. 7, p. 2480-2483. |
Merson, Michael H., et al. “Use of colony pools for diagnosis of enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli diarrhea.” in: Journal of Clinical Microbiology, Apr. 1979, vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 493-497. |
Midura, Thaddeus F. and Raymond G. Bryant. “Sampling plans, sample collection, shipment, and preparation for analysis.” in: Compendium of Methods for the Microbiological Examination of Foods (Fourth Edition) (Washington D.C., American Public Health Association, 2009), pp. 13-23. |
Monsur, K.A., et al. “An evaluation of the pooling method for detecting enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli.” in: J Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Dec. 1986, vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 211-215. |
Peeling, Rosanna W. et al. “Pooling of urine specimens for PCR testing: a cost saving strategy for Chlamydia trachomatis control programmes.” in: Sex Transm Inf (1998), vol. 74, pp. 66-70. |
Price, W.R. et al. “Salmonella testing of pooled pre-enrichment broth cultures for screening multiple food samples.” in: Applied Microbiology, Apr. 1972, vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 679-682. |
Pritchard, Todd J. and Catherine W. Donnelly. “Combined secondary enrichment of primary enrichment broths increases Listeria detection.” in: Journal of Food Protection, 1999, vol. 62, No. 5, pp. 532-535. |
Renter, David G. et al. “Diversity, frequency, and persistence of Escherichia coli O157 strains from range cattle environments.” in: Applied and Environmental Microbiology, Jan. 2003, vol. 69, No. 1, pp. 542-547. |
Rohlf, James F. et al. “Optimizing composite sampling protocols.” in: Environmental Science Technology, 1996, vol. 30, pp. 2899-2905. |
Shrift, A. and R.F. Boulette. “Form of selenium in selenite enrichment media for isolation of salmonellae.” in: Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 1974, vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 814-816. |
Silliker, J.H. and D.A. Gabis. “ICMSF methods studies. I. Comparison of analytical schemes for detection of Salmonella in dried foods.” in: Can. J. Microbiology, 1973, vol. 19, pp. 475-479. |
Thomas, R.J. et al. “Examination of stockfeeds for Salmonella.” in: Australian Veterinary Journal, Feb. 1981, vol. 57, pp. 69-71. |
“Comparison of assurance GDS for E. coli O157:H7 enrichment ratios with composite ground beef samples.” BioControl Systems, Inc. |
Rivas, M. et al. “An evaluation of the pooling culture method for the detection of Escherichia coli enterotoxins.” in: Rev Argent Microbiol. 1989, Jan.-Mar., vol. 21, No. 1: pp. 21-24. |
PCT Written Opinion & International Search Report for application No. PCT/US05/28161 mailed Sep. 27, 2007. |
PCT International Preliminary Report on Patentability for application No. PCT/US2005/028161 mailed Sep. 27, 2007. |
EPO Prosecution History for European patent application No. 05783958.1. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion on Application No. PCT/US2010/045578 (Mailed Mar. 29, 2012). |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20120231130 A1 | Sep 2012 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61243830 | Sep 2009 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12918304 | US | |
Child | 13475796 | US |