Food Safety
search
cart
facebook twitter linkedin
  • Sign In
  • Create Account
  • Sign Out
  • My Account
Food Safety
  • NEWS
    • Latest News
    • White Papers
  • PRODUCTS
  • TOPICS
    • Contamination Control
    • Food Types
    • Management
    • Process Control
    • Regulatory
    • Sanitation
    • Supply Chain
    • Testing and Analysis
  • PODCAST
  • EXCLUSIVES
    • Food Safety Five Newsreel
    • eBooks
    • FSM Distinguished Service Award
    • Interactive Product Spotlights
    • Videos
  • BUYER'S GUIDE
  • MORE
    • ENEWSLETTER >
      • Archive Issues
      • Subscribe to eNews
    • Store
    • Sponsor Insights
  • WEBINARS
  • FOOD SAFETY SUMMIT
  • EMAG
    • eMagazine
    • Archive Issues
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Contact
    • Advertise
  • SIGN UP!
Contamination ControlSanitationTesting & AnalysisEnvironmental MonitoringMethodsMicrobiological

The False Security of the CFU in Environmental Monitoring Programs

February 1, 2017

 

In this article, we’ll take a fresh look at microbiological testing, particularly the colony-forming unit (CFU), as part of an environmental monitoring program. Since the pioneering days of Louis Pasteur and Robert Koch (mid-1800s), the gold standard for microbiology testing has been the culture method, the principles of which have remained largely unchanged. Professional opinion acknowledges that the CFU is defined as “at best, an estimate and should not be reported as absolute.” (From Compendium of Methods for the Microbiological Examination of Foods, 1992.)

The CFU is fundamentally flawed by the incorrect assumption that a single colony is derived from a single bacterium. Each replicate will yield a result with a different colony count. Several replicates for different dilutions of each sample are required to obtain a reasonable approximation, but this is seldom done in routine testing. Even in the best-run laboratories, the uncertainty of measurement can be ± 40%. This means that the actual value is not known for certain, and for a sample expected to contain 10,000 CFU, the true value lies somewhere within the range of 6,000 to 14,000 on 95% of occasions but can also be outside this range 5% of the time. Plate counts should have a minimum of 25 colonies to give a reasonable probability of enumeration. As the number of colonies per plate decreases, the standard error of the result increases to 50% for five colonies and 100% for one colony, so the enumeration in the range of 1–10 colonies per plate is very unreliable. In an environmental sampling program, the closer the environmental sample test location is to a food contact surface, the tighter the specification. Low sample numbers and the use of single replicates generate poor-quality data that are mistakenly considered to be absolute, reliable and definitive.  

All of the above drives the questions: What information do we require, how can we achieve it and what are reasonable expectations within the limits of existing or alternative methods?

The Challenge of Validating Alternative Methods
Several alternative and rapid methods exist, yet their adoption has been limited by the requirement to validate their performance against culture plate count methods, creating a problem for validation due to the variability of enumeration from the CFU. Validation studies for surface contamination typically use factorial design, where 20 replicates are used and the percentage of positive samples are recorded, not the number of colonies. In an environmental program, most samples yield results of 1–10 colonies or fewer. The enumeration has a high inherent variability and begs the question as to the value of the information generated. Trying to enumerate with fewer than 25 colonies on a plate gives a meaningless result that should be considered semiquantitative at best. Certification bodies typically compare methods over a 3-log cycle within a range of 1,000 to 10 million CFU/g foodstuff and define equivalence as less than a 0.5-log CFU difference. Validation of enumeration methods for environmental samples is much more difficult, because the samples contain fewer organisms and the variation from all sources above is even greater. You can get a better understanding of surface contamination and risk if you change the perspective and the yardstick.

A Fresh Look at Microbiology Test Results
Since the CFU is highly variable, it may be unreasonable to seek correlation but better to seek a more meaningful metric such as microbial activity. Expressing results within ranges of time to detection and ranges of CFU using a statistical binning technique is a more pragmatic and meaningful way to compare two variable methods. This is particularly useful at low contamination levels and a narrow dynamic range, such as in environmental samples for cleaning verification. Grouping contamination levels as bands (or in bins) is a more statistically relevant approach that yields a better representation and correlation of low numbers of microorganisms on surfaces. Under these circumstances, the concept of pass/caution/fail is more meaningful and easier to understand where pass is less than X and fail is greater than Y. This smooths out the variation due to sample distribution and within the method itself to improve the correlation from less than 60% to greater than 90% and provides a greater confidence in the results.

An ideal solution would be a detection system that collected a representative sample to allow maximum recovery from the surface without losses due to resuspension, dilution or time to initiate the test, and delivered results in the shortest possible time for trend analysis. This can be achieved if the sample collection device is also the detection device. As with all modern rapid methods relying on metabolic activity, the challenge is how to compare these different approaches to the colony count method, particularly at very low contamination levels.

It is time to accept the limitations of plate counts and the CFU and to seek a more meaningful metric for data analysis of microbial contamination. Adenosine triphosphate surface testing for product residues has changed the way that cleaning is monitored and verified, and it is now widely accepted. Surely we can adopt a similar approach for measuring microbial activity and contamination with existing and alternative methods.


Author(s): Hygiena

Share This Story

Looking for a reprint of this article?
From high-res PDFs to custom plaques, order your copy today!

Recommended Content

JOIN TODAY
to unlock your recommendations.

Already have an account? Sign In

  • people holding baby chicks

    Serovar Differences Matter: Utility of Deep Serotyping in Broiler Production and Processing

    This article discusses the significance of Salmonella in...
    Testing & Analysis
    By: Nikki Shariat Ph.D.
  • woman washing hands

    Building a Culture of Hygiene in the Food Processing Plant

    Everyone entering a food processing facility needs to...
    Personal Hygiene/Handwashing
    By: Richard F. Stier, M.S.
  • graphical representation of earth over dirt

    Climate Change and Emerging Risks to Food Safety: Building Climate Resilience

    This article examines the multifaceted threats to food...
    International
    By: Maria Cristina Tirado Ph.D., D.V.M. and Shamini Albert Raj M.A.
Manage My Account
  • eMagazine Subscription
  • Subscribe to eNewsletter
  • Manage My Preferences
  • Website Registration
  • Subscription Customer Service

More Videos

Sponsored Content

Sponsored Content is a special paid section where industry companies provide high quality, objective, non-commercial content around topics of interest to the Food Safety Magazine audience. All Sponsored Content is supplied by the advertising company and any opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily reflect the views of Food Safety Magazine or its parent company, BNP Media. Interested in participating in our Sponsored Content section? Contact your local rep!

close
  • Two men standing in a produce storage facility having a discussion.
    Sponsored byOrkin Commercial

    Staying Compliant With FSMA

  • Deli Salads
    Sponsored byCorbion

    How Food Safety is Becoming the Ultimate Differentiator in Refrigerated and Prepared Foods

Popular Stories

FoodSafetyMattersFinal-900x550-(002).jpg

Ep. 195. Dr. Christopher Daubert: The Value of a Food Science Education

Students returning their lunch trays in a cafeteria

California Bill Would Remove Ultra-Processed Foods from School Lunches

Map of part of the African continent

Africa Food Safety Agency Could Be Fully Functional by 2026

Events

June 26, 2025

How to Design and Conduct Challenge Studies for Safer Products and Longer Shelf Life

Live: June 26, 2025 at 2:00 pm EDT: During this webinar, attendees will learn how to conduct challenge studies for microbial spoilage and pathogen growth, including the common challenges encountered, laboratory selection, and use of predictive models.

May 11, 2026

The Food Safety Summit

Stay informed on the latest food safety trends, innovations, emerging challenges, and expert analysis. Leave the Summit with actionable insights ready to drive measurable improvements in your organization. Do not miss this opportunity to learn from experts about contamination control, food safety culture, regulations, sanitation, supply chain traceability, and so much more.

View All

Products

Global Food Safety Microbial Interventions and Molecular Advancements

Global Food Safety Microbial Interventions and Molecular Advancements

See More Products
Environmental Monitoring Excellence eBook

Related Articles

  • food factory

    How and Why Environmental Monitoring Programs Add to the Bottom Line

    See More
  • Environmental Monitoring in the Era of Whole-Genome Sequencing

    See More

Related Products

See More Products
  • 9781138070912.jpg

    Trends in Food Safety and Protection

  • 9781498721776.jpg

    Handbook of Food Processing: Food Safety, Quality, and Manufacturing Processes

  • 9781498762878.jpg

    Food Safety and Protection

See More Products

Events

View AllSubmit An Event
  • May 1, 2025

    Avoiding Sanitation Pitfalls: Challenges and Opportunities for Your Environmental Monitoring Program

    On Demand: During this webinar, attendees will learn environmental sanitation pitfalls to avoid, and how to ensure biological safety inside your plant
  • October 24, 2024

    The Future of Metal and X-Ray Detection in Plastics

    On Demand: From this webinar, attendees will learn how to enhance safety and compliance in their F&B operations.
View AllSubmit An Event

Related Directories

  • Control Instruments Corp.

    Manufacture advanced detection systems for hazardous gases & vapors.
  • TAAG Labs

    TAAG has 20 years of experience delivering next-generation, preventive, data-driven food safety programs. Our offerings include AI-powered predictive environmental monitoring, custom-made, high-multiplex PCR kits, and state-of-the-art laboratory services for microorganism detection and identification. Learn more at www.taag-labs.com
  • Anritsu - Product Inspection & Detection

    Anritsu manufactures product inspection and detection equipment for food and pharma industries. Part of the Product Quality Assurance division of Anritsu Corp., we advance quality control programs with high-performing and reliable solutions. Our X-Ray Systems, Checkweighers, Metal Detectors, Combo Systems, Rejectors, and QuiCCA Software provide a superior ROI and ensure compliance with stringent quality control programs while protecting your brand. Our local branches in the US, Europe, Brazil, and Mexico are equipped with in-house service & parts dept., we deliver, install, and maintain in record time. With over 200,000 installations, we are the brand that is trusted to protect the safety and security of your customers.
×

Never miss the latest news and trends driving the food safety industry

eNewsletter | Website | eMagazine

JOIN TODAY!
  • RESOURCES
    • Advertise
    • Contact Us
    • Directories
    • Store
    • Want More
  • SIGN UP TODAY
    • Create Account
    • eMagazine
    • eNewsletter
    • Customer Service
    • Manage Preferences
  • SERVICES
    • Marketing Services
    • Reprints
    • Market Research
    • List Rental
    • Survey/Respondent Access
  • STAY CONNECTED
    • LinkedIn
    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • X (Twitter)
  • PRIVACY
    • PRIVACY POLICY
    • TERMS & CONDITIONS
    • DO NOT SELL MY PERSONAL INFORMATION
    • PRIVACY REQUEST
    • ACCESSIBILITY

Copyright ©2025. All Rights Reserved BNP Media.

Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing