{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017158544955387784, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00549073438572409, 'mean_word_length': 5.126050420168068, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparison of two commercial preparations of buffered peptone water for the recovery and growth of Salmonella bacteria from foods

This study compared the performance of two commercial preparations of buffered peptone water. Performance was assessed in terms of ability to resuscitate and recover low numbers of stressed cells, buffering capacity, growth of Salmonella bacteria in pure culture and growth of Salmonella in food pre‐enrichments. Although both the preparations of BPW had similar chemical compositions, differences in their recovery performance were found. Brand A recovered significantly higher numbers of heat‐injured Salmonella (mean = 0·57 log10 cfu ml−1 difference) in pure culture compared with brand B when dealing with very low inoculum levels. Although brand B had higher buffering capacity, the pH at the end of the pre‐enrichment was found to be similar in both media, even in foods such as milk powder which showed the greatest decline in pH. Both brands were comparable in their ability to grow unstressed Salmonella from different food types. In unstressed cell studies, similar cell numbers were recovered at the end of a 24 h incubation period from both media, although brand B yielded a higher biomass. In the food study with unstressed cells, performance was related more to the food type and the likely association between this and the level and type of competitor organisms present, rather than to the brand of medium used.