Listeria monocytogenes dry surface biofilms: a comparative study of mono- and coculture with Enterococcus faecium.

Authors

Raul Fernando Pereira, Joana Rodrigues Cerqueira Zioli Fernandes, Thais Helena de Camargo, Jéssica Aragão F F Finger, Maristela S Nascimento

Published in

Food research international (Ottawa, Ont.). Volume 242. Issue Pt 1. Pages 119870. Oct 31, 2026. Epub Jun 27, 2026.

Abstract

Dry surface biofilms (DSB) represent a challenge for microbial control in the food industry, since they show high desiccation resistance. This study evaluated the formation, viability, and composition of Listeria monocytogenes DSB in mono- and coculture with Enterococcus faecium. DSB were formed on polypropylene (PP) and stainless steel (SS) coupons using two hydrated-dry cycling protocols: P1 (48/48 h) and P2 (24/120 h), followed by storage (25 °C) for 42 days. At the forming endpoint (day 0), in DSB mono-species, Listeria monocytogenes was ca. 2 log CFU/cm² higher on PP than on SS (p = 5.1 e-05). The pathogen remained viable for up to 42 days, but with reductions of ≥1.7 log CFU/cm², compared to day 0. In dual-species DSB, Enterococcus faecium inhibited Listeria monocytogenes regardless of surface or protocol, maintaining pathogen levels at or below the detection limit (1.4 log CFU/cm²) throughout storage. Meanwhile, Enterococcus faecium achieved 5 log CFU/cm² on day 0 and 3.4 log CFU/cm² after 42 days. In addition, catalase treatment resuscitated VBNC Listeria monocytogenes cells on day 0 and within 14 days of storage, increasing culturability by up to 1.0 log CFU/cm². In general, DSB matrices contained higher protein levels than carbohydrates and eDNA, and Listeria monocytogenes exhibited morphological alterations, including elongation and L-form-like cells. Overall, these findings highlight the need for strict hygiene measures to control DSB and suggest that Enterococcus faecium may be an effective strategy to inhibit the Listeria monocytogenes DSB formation.

PMID:
42629091
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 22 Aug 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.