
orange juice. The Los Angeles County (Calif.) Health Department detected coliforms in frozen single-strength orange juice delivered on milk wagons in 1930. About two years later shipments of frozen juice from California to a midwestern city were seized because the coliform content of the product was found to be greater than that tolerated in potable drinking water. Interest in frozen orange juice waned during the 1930's and was not revived until the last years of World War II, when a number of short-lived attempts were made to market single-strength juice. In 1940 Nolte and Von Loesecke2 found that freshly reamed juice contained from 0 to 1,000 coliforms per ml, but that none survived pasteurization. Schrader and Johnson 3 ran some limited tests on frozen single-strength juice and concluded that coliforms could not survive in the frozen product for more than two weeks. Teunisson and Hall,4 Patrick,5 and Wolford and Berry 6 studied bacteria isolated from machinery in fruit-handling lines of citrus plants and found Aerobacter aerogenes to be a commonly occurring organism. There were a few intermediates, but no Escherichia coli were found. Wolford and Berry 7 also found that juice produced from fruit infested with soft rot contained many times the total bacterial numbers and coliform bacteria found in juice of sound fruit. These differences persisted through eight months at 00 F. The coliforms isolated were largely members of the Aerobacter genus. In a personal communication J. W. Stevens of the Research Department, Sunkist Growers, Inc., reported the observation that, in the production of frozen citrus hearts, E. coli could be found whenever fruit with soft-rot spots
Citrus, Bacteria, Fruit, Humans, Bacteriology, Citrus sinensis
Citrus, Bacteria, Fruit, Humans, Bacteriology, Citrus sinensis
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 9 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
