EVALUATION OF MICROORGANISMS ON GARRI MILLING MACHINE

ABSTRACT

Evaluation of microorganisms on garri milling machine was evaluated for the presence of bacteria in garri milling machine was evaluated. In the Total Viable Bacteria Count for samples from environment and swab samples (Site 1), Plate P3 for enviroment sample had the highest count of 5.6x104cfu/ml while plate P2 had least count of 3.9x104cfu/ml for morning.  Plate P2 for enviroment sample had the highest count of 4.7x104cfu/ml while plate P1 had least count of 4.0x104cfu/ml for evening Plate P3 for swab sample had the highest count of 4.3x104cfu/ml while plate P1 had least count of 3.0x104cfu/ml for morning.  Plate P3 for enviroment sample had the highest count of 2.9x104cfu/ml while plate P2 had least count of 1.6x104cfu/ml for evening.  Lactic Acid Bacteria Count for samples from environment and swab samples (Site 1), Plate P2 for enviroment sample had the highest count of 3.0x106cfu/ml while plate P1 had least count of 2.6x106cfu/ml for morning.  Plate P1 for enviroment sample had the highest count of 7.0x103cfu/ml while plate P2 had least count of 4.5x103cfu/ml for evening Plate P3 for swab sample had the highest count of 1.5x103cfu/ml while plate P1 had least count of 1.0x13cfu/ml for morning.) shows Plate P3 for enviroment sample had the highest count of 2.2x103cfu/ml while plate P1 had least count of 1.9x103cfu/ml for morning.  Plate P3 for enviroment sample had the highest count of 0.72x103cfu/ml while plate P2 had least count of 0.64x103cfu/ml for evening Plate P2 for swab sample had the highest count of 0.70x103cfu/ml while plate P3 had least count of 0.60x103cfu/ml for morning. Plate P2 for enviroment sample had the highest count of 4.0x104cfu/ml while plate P1 had least count of 2.8x104cfu/ml for evening Plate P3 for swab sample had the highest count of 5.5x104cfu/ml while plate P1 had least count of 4.7x104cfu/ml for morning.  Plate P1 for enviroment sample had the highest count of 0.91x104cfu/ml while plate P2 had least count of 0.61x104cfu/ml for evening. Lactic Acid Bacteria Count for samples from environment and swab samples (Site 2) shows that Plate P2 for enviroment sample had the highest count of 4.2x106cfu/ml while plate P3 had least count of 3.4x106cfu/ml for morning.  Plate P1 for enviroment sample had the highest count of 0.83x103cfu/ml while plate P3 had least count of 0.75x103cfu/ml for evening Plate P1 for swab sample had the highest count of 1.8x103cfu/ml while plate P3 had least count of 1.6x13cfu/ml for morning.  Plate P2 for enviroment sample had the highest count of 3.6x103cfu/ml while plate P1 had least count of 2.2x1063cfu/ml for evening. The Total Coliform Count for samples from environment and swab samples (Site 2) Plate P2 for enviroment sample had the highest count of 0.85x103cfu/ml while plate P3 had least count of 0.81x103cfu/ml for morning. Nine (9) bacteria species were isolated from this study and they includes, Bacillus sp., Micrococcus sp., Pseudomonas sp., Serratia sp., Klebsiella sp., Leuconostoc sp., Lactococcus sp.,S. aureus and Lactobacillus sp. Three (3) yeast species were isolated from this study and they includes, Saccharomyces cerevise, Candida sp and Pichia sp. One (1) mold specie, Fusarium sp., were isolated from this study. Occurrence of bacterial isolates from swab and environment samples Shows that Lactobacillus (15%) and Bacillus sp (15%) had the highest bacterial occurrence in this study. Serratia sp (8%), Pseudomonas sp (9%) and Klebsiella sp (9%), had the least occurrences. Other bacteria had percentage occurrence of Lactococcus sp (12%), Leuconostoc sp (12%), S. aureus (10%). Saccharomyces cerevisae (37.83%) had the highest percentage occurrence, while Fusarium sp (10.81%) had the least occurrences. Candida (27.02%), and Pichia sp (24.32%) had their own occurrences in this study.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Certification                                                                                                               i

Dedication                                                                                                                  ii

Acknowledgments                                                                                                     iii

Table of contents                                                                                                       iv

List of table                                                                                                                v

List of figures                                                                                                            vi

Abstract                                                                                                                     vii

CHAPTER ONE

1.0       Introduction                                                                                                    1

1.1              Aims and objectives                                                                                        3         

1.2              Statement of problem                                                                                     3

CHAPTER TWO

2.0       Literature reviews                                                                                           4

2.1       Food-borne diseases                                                                                       6         

2.2       How bacteria adhere to surfaces and form biofilms                                       9

2.3       Food-borne infections and adherent cells                                                       10

2.4       Parameters controlling biofilm formation                                                       12

2.5       Role of the physiochemical characteristics of the bacterial cell surface in

            biofilm Formation                                                                                           12

2.5.1    Role of bacterial cell surface structures                                                          12

2.5.2    Role of bacterial surface hydrophobicity in bacterial adhesion                      14

2.5.3    Role of bacterial surface charge in bacterial adhesion                                    15

2.5.4    Role of bacterial membrane potential in bacterial adhesion                           15

2.5.5    Role of the physiochemical characteristics of the abiotic surface in biofilm

            Formation                                                                                                        16

2.6       Health impact of microbiological contamination of food                               18

2.6.1    Foodborne diseases                                                                                         18

2.6.2    Death                                                                                                              20

2.7       Methods for recovering microorganisms from solid   surfaces                       21

2.7.1    Non-destructive recovery methods                                                                 21

2.7.2    Destructive recovery methods                                                                                    24

CHAPTER THREE

3.0       Materials and methods                                                                                    27

3.1       Sample collection                                                                                            27

3.2       Sterilization of materials                                                                                 27

3.3       Preparation of media                                                                                       27

3.4       Inoculation of samples                                                                                    28

3.5       Isolation of bacteria                                                                                        28

3.6       Isolation of fungal                                                                                          28

3.6       Gram Staining                                                                                                 29

3.7       Biochemical tests                                                                                            30

3.8       Identification of fungi isolates                                                                       32       

CHAPTER FOUR

4.0       Results                                                                                                            33

CHAPTER FIVE

5.0       Discussion, conclusion and recommendation                                                 50

5.2       Conclusion                                                                                                      52

5.3       Recommendation                                                                                            52

            References

LIST OF TABLES

Table                                                           Title of tables                                                    Page

Table4.1          The identification of bacteria from swab and environment samples              37

Table 4.2         Identification of yeast isolates from swab and environment samples                        38

Table 4.3         Identification of mold isolates from swab and environment samples                        39

Table 4.4         Occurrence of bacterial isolates from swab and environment samples           40

Table 4.5         Occurrence of fungal isolates from swab and environment samples              41

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure                                                          Title of figure                                                       Page

Fig 4.1: Total Viable Bacteria Count for samples from environment and swab samples (Site 1) 34

Fig 4.2: Lactic Acid Bacteria Count for samples from environment and swab samples (Site 1)  34

Fig 4.3: Total Fecal Count for samples from environment and swab samples (Site 1)                  34

Fig4. 4: Total Coliform Count for samples from environment and swab samples (Site 1)            35

Fig4. 5: Total Viable Bacteria Count for samples from environment and swab samples (Site 2) 35

Fig4. 6: Lactic Acid Bacteria Count for samples from environment and swab samples (Site 2)  35

Fig 4.7: Total Fecal Count for samples from environment and swab samples (Site 2)                  36

Fig 4.8: Total Coliform Count for samples from environment and swab samples (Site 2)          36

CHAPTER ONE

1.0       INTRODUCTION

Garri is the most popular fermented food product made from cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) and is widely consumed as processed by millions of people in West Africa where it forms a significant part of their diet (Edem et al., 2001; Kostinek et al., 2005; Oduro et al., 2000; Ogiehor et al., 2007).

 Cassava is extremely perishable, harvested tubers must be processed to curb post harvest losses (Davies, 1991). Allocation of resources by federal, state and localgovernments to the development of cassava productionand processing be taken seriously because of itsimportance for national and household food security. The large untapped domestic market for cassava as raw material in the industrial sector, income generation through diversification and expansion of cassava development into new growth market for ethanol, starch, livestock feed and flour as substitute for various imported items (Shetto, 2005).

Different types of cassava processing machines are produced locally such as cassava grater, sifter, watering press, garri fryers, cassava chippers, batch dryer, pelleting machines and cassava starch mill. These machines are used to produce garri, cassava flour, chip, tapioca, chink-wange, cassava beer, pellet for livestock, bread and industrial gum. The products such as cassava chips, pellets, fresh tubers, and cassava gum have considerably export potentials (FAO, 2001).

Mechanization of cassava processing operations will enhance human capacity, leading to intensification and increase in production. The cassava processing operations have been reported by many authors as labors intensity. The women and children are the major producers (Osunbitan, et al., 2000). Poor quality of locally produced cassava products has been traced to problem associated with peeling, grating, milling, dewatering, toasting, sifting etc which are labour intensive.

            Traditional tools used in Gari processing includes: Millstone, grinding stone, pestle and mortar. These methods have low productivities and low hygienic. These problems led to the designing and construction of machines that can grate the cassava of high quality in a short period of time and reduce human drudgery. Some of the machines include: roller crushing mill, hammer mill, bar mill, grater etc. The quality of product differs from one operator to another and sometimes from one batch to another (Igbeka et al., 1992). New technology and different types of equipment have been designed and manufactured to improve the processing of cassava into gari and other products. These processing machines include: cassava harvesters, cassava graters, cassava pressing machines, mill, sifter and fryers. The processing machines can pose a problem to the contamination of the garri processing machine (Odighoh,  1983).

            The relevance of food safety is a vital consideration in choosing any garri processing equipment. Contamination may occur as a result of intimate contact of food stuff with processing metals, chemicals, rancid oil, micro-organisms etc. Processing equipment is a potential source of food contamination because from harvest to consumption, the foodstuff is in one equipment or the other. However, the use of machines is very necessary as they make for an economy of 20% in terms of labour required for turning and drying especially with high wind speed (Than, Pescod and Muttamara, 1976).

During the design stage of the garri processing equipment, the materials to be selected should be such that they will be able to withstand mechanical and temperature stresses; and resists abrasive force that may wear and corrode it. Products of wear and corrosion in good processing constitute a major factor of metal contamination to foodstuff. Stainless steel, ceramic, aluminum, clay etc are generally accepted for machines selections that are in contact with food materials.

Nwachukwu (2005) sees a good processing equipment design as that which is either easy to clean or self cleaned and designed in such a way that some corners that retain food materials are not difficult to reach. As a result, pathogenic microbial organisms from left over residues of previous operations cannot contaminate the fresh food during processing. Protruding and sharp edges should be avoided at the design stage of the processing equipment because of the potential danger to the operator(s) as well as abrasion contamination.

1.3              Aims and Objectives

i.                    To evaluate microorganism from the garri processing environment.

ii.                   To isolate, identify and characterize bacteria from the garri processing environment.

iii.                To isolate, identify and characterize fungi from the garri processing environment

1.4              Statement of problem

It was observed that people involved in garri processing do  not observe high level of hygiene and thorough washing of machines after each days work. as a result, microorganism colonize the machines and this may lead to public health problem.

Buyers has the right to create dispute within seven (7) days of purchase for 100% refund request when you experience issue with the file received. 

Dispute can only be created when you receive a corrupt file, a wrong file or irregularities in the table of contents and content of the file you received. 

ProjectShelve.com shall either provide the appropriate file within 48hrs or send refund excluding your bank transaction charges. Term and Conditions are applied.

Buyers are expected to confirm that the material you are paying for is available on our website ProjectShelve.com and you have selected the right material, you have also gone through the preliminary pages and it interests you before payment. DO NOT MAKE BANK PAYMENT IF YOUR TOPIC IS NOT ON THE WEBSITE.

In case of payment for a material not available on ProjectShelve.com, the management of ProjectShelve.com has the right to keep your money until you send a topic that is available on our website within 48 hours.

You cannot change topic after receiving material of the topic you ordered and paid for.