Demonstration of Inappropriate Validation Method for a Cracker Baking Process Using Predictive Modeling
Ian M Hildebrandt1, Linnea M Riddell1, Nicole O Hall1
1Department of Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA.
Abstract:
Validation of baking processes for the inactivation of Salmonella is complicated by the combined effects of product heating and drying. The goal of this study was to quantitatively evaluate a previously disseminated approach to validating baking processes utilizing a predictive model developed using only isothermal and single-moisture inactivation data for the initially formulated dough. A simple cracker dough was formulated using flour inoculated with a five-strain cocktail of Salmonella. Side-by-side isothermal and baking experiments were performed to estimate Salmonella inactivation kinetics and to quantify survivors in a dynamic environment, respectively. Isothermal, single-moisture inactivation experiments were performed with cracker dough (water activity, aw = 0.956 ± 0.002; moisture content = 0.50 ± 0.01 dry basis) at three temperatures (56, 60, or 63°C) with ≥6 time intervals. Baking experiments were performed in a convection oven at 177°C with samples pulled every 30 s up to 360 s, with an endpoint product aw (25°C) of 0.45. The Salmonella isothermal, single-moisture inactivation kinetics in cracker dough resulted in D60°C and z-values of 4.6 min and 4.9°C, respectively; this model was then integrated over the dynamic product temperature profiles from the baking experiments. In the baking experiments, an average of 5-log reductions of Salmonella was achieved by 150 s of treatment; however, >100-log reductions were predicted by the dough-based models at that time point. This fail-dangerous overestimation of Salmonella lethality in crackers explicitly demonstrated that single-level moisture-based prediction models are inappropriate for describing inactivation in a process with both dynamic temperature and moisture, and that model-based validations must incorporate moisture/aw. Furthermore, end-users should exercise caution when utilizing unvalidated models to validate preventive control processes.
Related Concept Videos
Data Validation
Key parameters for method validation include:
Quantifying and Rejecting Outliers: The Grubbs Test
Prediction Intervals
However, the point estimate is most likely not the exact value of the population parameter, but close to it. After calculating point estimates, we construct interval estimates, called confidence intervals or prediction intervals. This prediction interval comprises a range of values unlike the point estimate and is a better predictor of the observed sample value, y.
Testing a Claim about Standard Deviation
The hypothesis testing for the claim of population standard deviation (or variance) requires the data and samples to be random and unbiased. The population distribution also must be normal. There is no specific requirement on the sample size as the estimation is based on the chi-square distribution.
As a first step, the hypothesis (null and alternative) concerning the claim about...
Regression Analysis
In regression analysis, a regression equation is determined based on the line of best fit– a line that best fits the data points plotted in a graph. This line is also called the regression line. The algebraic equation for the regression line is called the regression equation. It is represented as:
Microcracking in Concrete


