Table 2.
Growth of the tested microorganisms in milk with different percentages of propolis ethanolic extract and ethanol.
| P2 | P5 | E2 | E5 | C | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Skim milk | |||||
| L.m. 7644 | 6.40±0.48b | 3.92±0.14c | 8.04±0.19a | 7.50±0.34aa | 8.27±0.07a |
| (-1.87) | (-4.35) | (-0.23) | (-0.77) | ||
| S.a. 25923 | 5.98±0.50b | 5.31±0.26b | 7.84±0.16a | 7.46±0.07a | 7.96±0.08a |
| (-1.98) | (-2.65) | (-0.12) | (-0.50) | ||
| S.a. 35556 | 5.74±0.33b | 5.33±0.42b | 8.19±0.05a | 8.09±0.13a | 8.37±0.08a |
| (-2.63) | (-3.04) | (-0.18) | (-0.28) | ||
| B.c. DSV12 | 3.31±0.35b | 2.94±0.32b | 6.57±0.92a | 6.86±0.24a | 6.03±0.44a |
| (-2.72) | (-3.09) | (+0.54) | (+0.83) | ||
| P.f. 13525 | 6.78±0.11c | 6.55±0.07c | 7.45±0.41ab | 6.95±0.20bc | 7.87±0.18a |
| (-1.09) | (-1.32) | (-0.42) | (-0.92) | ||
| Pasteurized cow’s milk | |||||
| L.m. 7644 | 5.59±0.31a | 4.66±0.22b | 5.79±0.45a | 5.82±0.14a | 6.06±0.31a |
| (-0.47) | (-1.40) | (-0.27) | (-0.24) | ||
| S.a. 25923 | 6.30±0.16c | 5.09±0.13d | 7.10±0.31ab | 6.62±0.27bc | 7.42±0.21a |
| (-1.12) | (-2.33) | (-0.32) | (-0.80) | ||
| S.a. 35556 | 7.04±0.35a | 4.49±0.09b | 7.44±0.43a | 7.13±0.36a | 7.71±0.32a |
| (-0.67) | (-3.22) | (-0.27) | (-0.58) | ||
| B.c. DSV12 | 6.21±0.27aa | 3.12±0.56b | 5.75±0.28aa | 6.25±0.21aa | 5.97±0.47a |
| (0.24) | (-2.85) | (-0.22) | (0.28) | ||
| P.f. 13525 | 7.32±0.20 | 6.98±0.24 | 7.18±0.36 | 6.89±0.42 | 7.15±0.16 |
| (0.17) | (-0.17) | (0.03) | (-0.26) | ||
P2: milk with 2% propolis ethanolic extract; P5: milk with 5% propolis ethanolic extract; E2: milk with 2% ethanol (70%); E5: milk with 5% ethanol (70%); C: control (milk). L.m.: Listeria monocytogenes; S.a.: Staphylococcus aureus; B.c.: Bacillus cereus; P.f.: Pseudomonas fluorescens. Results are mean values of three independent trials ± standard deviation. In brackets: difference in bacterial counts in comparison with the corresponding control. Values are expressed in log cfu/mL.
abcDifferent letters in the same row denote significant differences (P<0.05).