Skip to main content
. 2023 Apr 26;14:1154508. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1154508

Table 2.

Viable microbial counts results (mean ± SD).

Sample (n = 3) Aerobic mesophile Streptococci Lactobacilli FH lactobacilli Enterococci Yeasts and molds Staphylococci Enterobacteriaceae
A
RM 4.9 ± 0.9 4.3 ± 0.9 3.1 ± 0.6 1 ± 0.1 2.3 ± 0.3 1.1 ± 0.3 4.3 ± 0.3 1.7 ± 0.3
RM.H 2.1 ± 0.2 1.4 ± 0.2 0.8 ± 0.3 0 ± 0 0.7 ± 0.3 0 ± 0 1 ± 0 0.3 ± 0.3
eRM 9.2 ± 0*a 9.1 ± 0.2*a 9.1 ± 0.2*a 3.6 ± 0.6*a 6.8 ± 1.3*a 4.6 ± 0.4*a 6.8 ± 0.5*a 6.5 ± 0.8*a
eRM.H 7.9 ± 0.4*b 7.7 ± 0.6*ab 7.6 ± 1.2*a 3.1 ± 0.7*a 7 ± 0.7*a 3.8 ± 1.4*ab 6.6 ± 1*a 6.8 ± 1*a
eRM.HS 6.6 ± 0.4*c 6.1 ± 1.2*b 4.5 ± 0.8*b 0.4 ± 0.6b 4.7 ± 0.7*a 1.3 ± 1.5b 6 ± 1.1*a 3.7 ± 0.4*b
B
NWC 8.5 ± 0.7 7.8 ± 1.1 7.7 ± 1.3 2.3 ± 1.2 2.8 ± 0.6 b 1.2 ± 2b 2.3 ± 0.4b 0.4 ± 0.7b
eRWC.y 8 ± 0.7 7.5 ± 0.7 7.9 ± 0.2 2.1 ± 0.4 5.8 ± 1.9 ab 4.1 ± 0.8ab 4 ± 0.6ab 3.2 ± 1.1ab
eRWC.o 7.3 ± 1 6.5 ± 0.2 7.4 ± 1.2 1.7 ± 0.5 5.5 ± 0.8ab 5.7 ± 1.2a 3.2 ± 1.3ab 4.8 ± 1.8a
eRWC.H.y 8.3 ± 0.8 7.7 ± 1.1 7.8 ± 0.9 2.3 ± 1.2 5.9 ± 0.9ab 4.4 ± 1.1ab 5.5 ± 1.2a 4.9 ± 1.2a
eRWC.H.o 7.2 ± 0.7 7.2 ± 0.8 7.1 ± 0.8 1.8 ± 0.7 6.1 ± 0.3a 5.7 ± 0.3a 3.3 ± 1.9ab 3.6 ± 2.3ab
eRWC.HS.y 8.4 ± 1 7.7 ± 1.4 7.1 ± 1.8 1.2 ± 1.6 3.3 ± 0.3ab 2.6 ± 2.3ab 3 ± 0.4ab 1.6 ± 1.4ab
eRWC.HS.o 7.2 ± 0.7 7 ± 0.5 7.2 ± 1.1 1.1 ± 1.2 4.1 ± 1.9ab 4.3 ± 2.1ab 1.5 ± 1.1b 2.1 ± 1.9ab

(A) RM, RM.H and eRMs produced. Within each microbial group, significant differences (α = 0.05) are marked with * for the comparisons RH-eRM, RM.H-eRM.H and RM.H-eRM.HS. The significant difference between the three eRMs is instead reported using different letters. (B) NWC and eRWCs: within each microbial group, values with different letters are significantly different. Refer to Figure 1 for samples’ abbreviation.