Table 3.
Microbiological analysis of freshly produced extra virgin olive oil from two monocultivars subjected to filtration.
| Cultivar | Yeasts (Log CFU mL−1) 1 | Δ (%) 2 | Bacteria (Log CFU mL−1) | Δ (%) | Moulds (Log CFU mL−1) | Δ (%) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Original EVOO | Filtration with | Original EVOO | Filtration with | Original EVOO | Filtration with | ||||||||||
| Cotton | Cellulose | Cotton | Cellulose | Cotton | Cellulose | Cotton | Cellulose | Cotton | Cellulose | Cotton | Cellulose | ||||
| Coratina | 2.45 ± 0.09 a | 1.55 ± 0.26 a,b | 1.41 ± 0.22 b | 37 | 42 | 1.04 ± 0.34 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 100 | 1.72 ± 0.08 a | 0.97 ± 0.24 b | 0 | 44 | 100 |
| Nera di Colletorto | 2.20 ± 0.21 a | 1.96 ± 0.15 a | 1.89 ± 0.20 b | 11 | 16 | 3.66 ± 0.20 a | 2.63 ± 0.11 b | 1.67 ± 0.19 c | 28 | 54 | 2.83 ± 0.21 a | 1.08 ± 0.33 b | 0 | 62 | 100 |
1 Mean ± standard deviation (n = 3); 2 Δ, % of microbial cells decayed due to filtration accomplished with cotton or cellulose filter press; different letters in the same line indicate significant difference calculated using Duncan’s multiple-range test (p < 0.05); EVOO, extra virgin olive oil.