ABSTRACT

The assessment of a hygienic state or cleanliness of contact surfaces has significant implications for food and medical industries seeking to monitor sanitation and exert improved control over a host of operations affecting human health. Methods used to make such assessments commonly involve visual inspections, standard microbial plating practices, and the application of ATP-based assays. Visual methods for inspection of hygienic states are inherently subjective and limited in efficacy by the accuracy of human senses, the degree of task-specific work experience, and various sources of human bias. Standard microbial swabbing and plating techniques are limited in that they require hours or even days of incubation to generate results, with such steps as enrichment and colony outgrowth resulting in delays that are often incompatible with manufacturing or usage schedules. Rapid in conduct and considered more objective in operation than visual or tactile inspection techniques, swabbing surfaces using ATP-based assessments are relied on as routine, even standard, methods of hygienic assessment alone or in complement with microbial and visual inspection methods. Still, current ATP methods remain indirect methods of total hygiene assessment and have limitations that must be understood and considered if such methods are to be applied judiciously, especially under increasingly strict demands for the verification of hygiene state. Here, we present current methods of ATP-based bioluminescence assays and describe the limitations of such methods when applied to general food manufacturing or health care facilities.

The assessment of the hygienic state or cleanliness of contact surfaces in the food and medical industries is a major task requiring significant diligence, time, and expense. Traditionally, visual and tactile inspections, complemented by standard microbial swabbing or plating practices, were the sole means of making such assessments. However, beginning in the 1990s, bioluminescence assays based on ATP have been increasingly used in food industries and more recently in medical industries as key methods of hygienic assessment alone or in complement with conventional microbial and inspection methods. Initially adopted in the 1960s both by scientists at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) looking to determine levels of biological material (27, 62, 63, 70) and marine biologists looking at ocean biomass (51), the basis of the ATP bioluminescence assay has been studied over several decades (4, 33, 37, 7476, 112, 114, 115). ATP bioluminescence is centered on the firefly luciferin-luciferase enzyme reaction, in which the luciferase enzyme is exposed to ATP and oxygen, converting luciferin to oxyluciferin with the emission of light. This resulting light can be detected using a luminometer, and its intensity corresponds to the amount of ATP present in the sample. A nearly ubiquitous energy-bearing molecule in biology, the resulting light intensity is interpreted as a measure of the degree of biological surface contamination. Rapid in conduct and considered more objective in operation, ATP-based assessments measure ATP levels of a surface, liquid or substance, that are indicative of the presence of biological matter, including food residues, bodily fluids, and microorganisms.

ATP-BASED ASSAYS IN APPLICATION

ATP-based assessments were first used to test concentrations of ATP in food products in the 1970s (99) and on surfaces in the 1980s (73, 100, 114); however, reagents were still expensive and testing was still lengthy (114). Over time, the introduction of rapid handheld luminometers and less expensive and better reagents that could go longer before decay postreaction improved the time, reproducibility, and cost efficiency. By the 1990s, ATP bioluminescence-based assays became more commonplace as a key component in response to regulatory and industry demands to better assure surface sanitation in the food industry (13, 15, 40, 42, 43, 89). ATP-based assessments allowed rapid assessment of hygienic state or cleanliness of contact surfaces, including as a means of process verification in the greater context of food manufacturing systems based on hazard analysis and critical control point (32). Since the early 1990s, ATP bioluminescence assays have gained substantial value in the food industry for dairy (13, 15, 43), meat (14, 89), brewing (103), and other processed food production as a means of hygiene monitoring. Currently, ATP-based assays are typically conducted using a specialized swab applied to the desired test area and read using a handheld luminometer, which provides results in relative light units (RLUs). Surfaces such as stainless steel, Teflon, tiles, plastics and polymers, gaskets, and milk processing machinery are commonly tested for various nonvisual soils, such as processing residues, microbiological matter, allergens, and other bioburdens (89, 124). The rapid assessment of surface contamination by microorganisms, both culturable and nonculturable; residual allergens; or biological material that can support growth of microorganisms is a key goal for manufacturing industries.

In more recent years, medical industries have adopted ATP bioluminescence testing, first to test the cleanliness of various surfaces in hospital kitchens or canteens (10, 39, 96), testing sinks, cutting boards (60), meat cutters, and knives for biological matter, especially where pathogen control was critical. Starting in the early 2000s, several initiatives were launched in the United Kingdom to combat nosocomial or hospital-acquired infections within the National Health System, which saw the introduction over the next decade of ATP bioluminescence hygiene testing of surgical equipment, intensive care areas, surgical operating theaters, nurse stations, and patient areas, especially high-touch objects such as bed controls, phones, call buttons, light switches, intravenous (i.v.) poles, doorknobs, and other machine buttons for microbial contamination or contamination from bodily fluids and other biological soils (10, 29, 39). However, although some surfaces tend to be hygienically designed, many surfaces in either food manufacturing or hospital settings are often porous or otherwise improperly designed with regard to sanitation (98). In addition, because immediate recontamination is all but guaranteed in most food manufacturing and medical areas due to constant use, ATP bioluminescence is often used more as an indicator of effective cleaning and sanitization or to validate new cleaning methods (65).

CURRENT KNOWLEDGE OF ADENYLATE METABOLISM

The underlying basis of the ATP-based bioluminescence assay is rooted in the understanding that all living organisms generate and maintain a pool of ATP, which in general is used as an energy-imparting molecule for a host of metabolic reactions (9, 26, 67). It is acknowledged that there are exceptions, such as bacterial spores that have shown to have little to no ATP levels (approximately 10−21 mol ATP per spore versus 10−17 mol ATP per bacterium (58, 120)) and thus may not display sufficient ATP for ATP-based hygiene assays (97). However, studies by NASA scientists on the degradation of both intracellular and extracellular ATP on the surface of spacecraft have contradicted the typically accepted idea of immediate degradation of ATP at time of cell death and indicated that free ATP from lysed cells may remain present longer than previously thought (94, 120). The ability of some residual ATP to remain present, as well as trends demonstrating that most ATP decays into ADP and AMP, are supported by subsequent work on adenylate homologue profiles over the course of significant metabolic changes in various organisms (105, 106).

A basis of ATP bioluminescence carries assumptions of reasonably high and stable ATP concentrations from a cell, tissue, or biological material so as to allow a correlation between the ATP concentration levels and the bioburden on a particular surface. Although some studies have demonstrated that the concentrations of ATP within a given organism are reasonably constant under a given condition (42, 111, 112), different bacterial species have been shown to have as much as a 30-fold difference among ATP concentrations per cell of bacterial species, ranging from 0.28 to 8.90 μg of ATP per bacterial cell (27), with differences in cellular mass serving as a significant source of variation. ATP concentrations in yeast and mammalian cells are around 100-fold higher than in bacterial cells (99). On the average, there are 10−15 g of ATP per bacterial cell compared with 10−12 g of ATP per yeast or mammalian cell (112) or, as reported in moles, an average of 10−18 mol of ATP per bacterial cell and 10−15 mol of ATP per mammalian cell (67). It has also been shown that the age of the cells, stage in the growth cycle (61, 106), nutritional status, oxygen levels (72), pH (6, 44, 104), temperature (80), and even specific organism can influence ATP content (9, 44, 104, 111, 131) through ATP synthesis, utilization, or decay.

LIMITATIONS OF ATP-BASED ASSAYS

Although ATP bioluminescence has many uses and benefits, it is important to recognize and consider the limitations of current ATP-based methods. One of the major limitations is the inability to directly compare RLU values or results from different methods or ATP test systems. Brands of luminometers can read differently when compared, even differing sometimes from model to model of same manufacturer (5, 79). RLUs cannot be used in direct cross-comparison; instead, the luminometer values must be converted back to ATP concentration from a standard curve or some other internal comparison. Even then, comparisons of different luminometers (5, 86, 95, 127, 128) have been shown to have differing minimum detection limits, differing levels of quenching or enhancement effects from disinfectants, or differing abilities to detect ATP from various environments. Furthermore, various surfaces swab differently; smooth surfaces may be more easily swabbed than rough ones (19), and various surfaces can be difficult to accurately swab because of surface porosity (88) or accessibility. Differing brands of luminometers have variations in swab tips or swabbing methods, which could also contribute to these brand-to-brand effects (95). Collectively, these variables place a responsibility on the user to carefully select the best luminometer for the application.

Although ATP bioluminescence methods are valuable tools for real-time detection, bioluminescence methods are generally less suited to applications in which an especially low bioburden is present or spore contamination is the specific target for assessment. Furthermore, ATP-based assays cannot differentiate ATP-generating microorganisms from organic debris containing ATP and thus should not be considered replacements for routine, microbiological testing as a means of verification. Similarly, RLUs do not correspond directly with CFUs, although the trends are similar (i.e., high CFUs usually have high RLUs, but not necessarily vice versa).

Although many of these problems are minimized or eliminated with proper internal controls, most assay methods do not seem to routinely incorporate sufficient internal controls or when developing or adjusting testing methods, including controls to verify upper and lower limits of the luminometer for each protocol, which are necessary for proper use. This partly results from the current lack of a generally accepted standard for internal controls, because the bioluminescence reaction of a luminometer does not process and detect purified stock ATP applied directly onto a swab in the same manner as free ATP found on a swabbed surface or even ATP from bacteria swabbed from a surface. It has been shown that there is some difference in certain studies between detection of gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria, theoretically because of difficultly lysing of the cell in the reaction (118). One recommendation established upper limits based on swabs before cleaning and sanitation and established lower limits from swabs after proper cleaning and sanitation (48) for every tested environment, with the additional recommendation of completion of 10 consecutive cleaning and sanitation cycles to establish an obtainable lower limit (50).

Lastly, specific chemicals, sanitizers, disinfectants, or even residual chemicals found in cleaning cloths can quench results or create errors if residual chemicals come in contact with the proprietary ATP test reagents. Chemicals shown to exhibit this quenching effect include trisodium phosphate, lactic acid, hydrogen peroxide, triclosan, and sodium hypochlorite (22, 38, 59, 119). Although beyond the scope of this article, additional factors within luminometer design, such as system software or selection of photodiode versus photomultiplier tubes, may manifest variations in performance parameters including test sensitivity, initial and maintenance costs, and unit longevity.

BENCHMARKS IN ATP BIOLUMINESCENCE

Another major limiting factor of ATP-based assays is the lack of a recognized standard of cleanliness, both in method of testing and in standards for pass-or-fail indicators. Although it seems to be generally accepted that an area 10 by 10 cm (or 100 cm2) is appropriate for swabbing (18, 32), other test sizes are often seen (Table 1), especially with irregularly shaped objects, smaller buttons, and touchpads.

TABLE 1

Literature survey of basic methods used for surface ATP bioluminescence testing in various industries

Literature survey of basic methods used for surface ATP bioluminescence testing in various industries
Literature survey of basic methods used for surface ATP bioluminescence testing in various industries

A benchmark of what is considered clean varies with the industry and instrument and can range anywhere from <100 to <500 RLU (Table 1). The food industry seems to generally adhere to more stringent levels of cleanliness, partly because surfaces can be more contained when not in use or even during use, whereas the medical industry tends to accept higher pass levels, with the exception of surgical equipment. ATP testing methods for medical settings proposed by Griffith et al. (39), seem to be the most cited reference standard with a target level of cleanliness of <500 RLU, although these recommendations were later modified to a target level of <250 RLU with the proviso that this target RLU was specifically for the luminometer used in the study (65). This RLU-based circumstance was noted by Boyce et al. (18) when they observed lower median RLU values than those previously reported (39, 65) using the same brand of luminometer. For all these reasons, the establishment of a user-based, validated protocol for establishing a pass-or-fail benchmark may be more appropriate than having a universal benchmark RLU benchmark.

In addition, differing assay protocols can potentially minimize or maximize the results, leading Ho et al. (49) to recommend the use of RLU per square centimeter as the standard unit, similar to units used in microbial swabbing. As they discussed (49), and as shown more fully in Table 1, a lower RLU benchmark will seem more stringent, but differing the surface area tested can make a higher RLU benchmark more stringent (i.e., 500 RLU from 100 cm2 is 5 RLU/cm2 versus 100 RLU from 10 cm2 is 10 RLU/cm2). Accordingly, common brands of luminometers have different settings for pass or fail and even have various settings for a machine for different methods or testing conditions. Recommended pass or clean RLUs given for common brands of luminometers are as follows: The Clean-Trace/Bio trace (3M, St. Paul, MN) recommends cleanliness with ≤250 RLU for environmental surfaces with 100-cm2 test areas (1), with ≤200 RLU for surgical endoscopes (before final sterilization) (2), and with ≤150 RLU for surgical equipment (3). The AccuPoint Advanced ATP Reader (Neogen, Lansing, MI) also suggests a test area of 10 by 10 cm with preprogrammed default threshold settings of ≤149 RLU as pass or clean and ≥300 RLU as fail (84). The Lumitester PD-30 (Kikkoman, Tokyo, Japan) has three preprogrammed modes with pass-or-fail limits set as pass or clean with RLU ≤ 1,500, 500, and 200 and corresponding failure with RLU > 3,000, 1,000, and 400 (57). The SystemSURE Plus (Hygiena, Camarillo, CA) defaults to 10 and 30 RLU for pass and fail thresholds, respectively (54).

ALTERNATIVE ADENYLATE ASSAYS

Although the sensitivity of the traditional ATP-based bioluminescence assays is generally accepted for many assessment applications, greater sensitivity or additional consideration may be advised, including the need to detect low microbial contamination levels or testing for the presence of especially immunogenic ATP-containing allergens (124). To that end, various alternative methods of adenylate testing have been proposed. Cumulative adenylate levels (total adenylate [AXP]) tend to undergo less of an overall concentration change in comparison to ATP concentrations alone as dictated by growth or environmental changes (113); such changes would most likely influence the accuracy and precision of bioluminescence testing.

Squirrell and Murphy (109, 110) proposed the use of the intracellular enzyme adenylate kinase as a bacterial cell marker in place of ATP, as depicted in Figure 1. Using ADP as the substrate to drive the reaction in the direction of ATP synthesis, the standard firefly luciferase-luciferin reaction was then used to detect the ATP generated from adenylate kinase activity. In theory, this would make 40 to 50 times as much ATP available for bioluminescence. Further experimentation demonstrated a lower limit detection of 101 to 102 cells versus 104 cells with standard methodology (109, 110). In 2000, Corbitt et al. (30) compared the Squirrell and Murphy method with standard ATP bioluminescence and found that adenylate kinase bioluminescence was more sensitive than traditional ATP bioluminescence for certain foods, especially meat tissues because of the high levels of adenylate kinase in muscle tissue. However, no advantage in sensitivity was seen in testing of pure bacterial cultures with the Squirrell and Murphy adenylate kinase bioluminescence method over standard ATP bioluminescence (30).

FIGURE 1

Alternate adenylate assays. (A) Squirrell and Murphy (109) used adenylate kinase (ADK), along with ADP as the substrate to drive the reaction to ATP. (B) That same year, Hawronskyj et al. (47) proposed an ATP recycling system that in theory would amplify all AMP into ATP and allow detection of low levels of microbes using both ADK and pyruvate kinase (PK). (C) Sakakibara et al. (91) used pyruvate orthophosphate dikinase (PPDK) in an alternative ATP recycling method. (D) Bakke et al. (12) used a combination of previous methods to obtain an updated ATP recycling system that could measure AXP. For each panel, coefficients involving stoichiometry have been removed for simplicity.

FIGURE 1

Alternate adenylate assays. (A) Squirrell and Murphy (109) used adenylate kinase (ADK), along with ADP as the substrate to drive the reaction to ATP. (B) That same year, Hawronskyj et al. (47) proposed an ATP recycling system that in theory would amplify all AMP into ATP and allow detection of low levels of microbes using both ADK and pyruvate kinase (PK). (C) Sakakibara et al. (91) used pyruvate orthophosphate dikinase (PPDK) in an alternative ATP recycling method. (D) Bakke et al. (12) used a combination of previous methods to obtain an updated ATP recycling system that could measure AXP. For each panel, coefficients involving stoichiometry have been removed for simplicity.

In 1994, Hawronskyj et al. (47, 48) used an ATP recycling system to amplify all AMP into ATP with the use of adenylate kinase and pyruvate kinase (Fig. 1), where the ATP concentration was the rate-limiting factor for adenylate kinase. This system used updated bioluminescence technology but was related to methods proposed in prior years (52, 56, 68, 108). In 1978, Holm-Hansen and Karl (52) used the luciferase-luciferin reaction to determine ATP concentrations, using adenylate kinase, pyruvate kinase, and phosphoenolpyruvate (PEP) to measure AXP levels. ATP+ADP levels were determined with just pyruvate kinase and PEP, and AMP levels were calculated from calculations of the differences (52). In 1986, Lundin et al. (68) measured AXP levels in a single aliquot using adenylate kinase, pyruvate kinase, and PEP to convert all AMP and ADP into ATP and measured with luciferase reaction, although cytidine triphosphate was also used to help the reaction to an endpoint.

More recently, another ATP recycling method was proposed that used ATP+AMP monitoring in which the AMP and pyrophosphate produced from ATP by firefly luciferase were converted back into ATP by pyruvate orthophosphate dikinase (PPDK) (91, 92) (see Fig. 1). The signal strength was ATP dependent, but the system allowed long-lived RLU signals even with low numbers of swabbed ATP molecules. Later, Bakke and Suzuki (11) suggested a combination of this PPDK recycling method and pyruvate kinase recycling to allow measurement of AXP, eliminating changes from ATP degradation by measuring the AXP pool. This difference was seen recently in studies that used this method to test ATP, AMP, ADP, and AXP levels of animal carcasses postslaughter (106), test bacterial growth over extended periods (106), and assess the hygienic state in health care settings (12).

Although rapid in conduct and considered more objective in application than previous methods of hygiene assessment, ATP-based assessments are relied on as a routine method of choice. Under the ever-increasing regulatory need to use validated methods for analyses affecting health and safety, several technologies considered in this report have obtained certification under AOAC International's Performance Tested Methods Program. Yet current ATP methods remain indirect methods of total hygiene assessment and have limitations that must be understood if such methods are to be applied judiciously. In our attempt to survey current methods of ATP-based bioluminescence assays and the limitations of such methods, it has become readily apparent that the benefits of these ATP-based assays may not be yet fully realized or fully refined as a technology. A better use of positive and negative controls, standardization of units compared with areas swabbed, calibration with ATP standards, and more concrete definitions of what is clean in various industries or medical settings would allow better utilization of the full advantages of these ATP-based bioluminescence assays, including increased sensitivity and lower rates of false-negative outcomes. In addition, to accurately apply ATP-based technologies, an understanding of the reality of ATP variations over time and environment is necessary. Alternative or refined methods of ATP-based assays may advance ATP-based technologies and improve rapid surface hygiene assessments.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors acknowledge funding and technical assistance for this work from the Kikkoman USA R&D Laboratory (Madison, WI).

REFERENCES

REFERENCES
1.
3M
.
2017
.
Pass/fail threshold
.
In
3M™ Clean-Trace™ ATP monitoring system: environmental surfaces implementation guide for routine cleaning monitoring
.
3M Health Care Infection Prevention Division
,
St. Paul, MN
.
2.
3M
.
2017
.
Pass/fail threshold
.
In
3M™ Clean-Trace™ ATP monitoring system: flexible endoscope implementation guide for routine cleaning monitoring
.
3M Health Care Infection Prevention Division
,
St. Paul, MN
.
3.
3M
.
2017
.
Pass/fail threshold
.
In
3M™ Clean-Trace™ ATP monitoring system: surgical instrument implementation guide for routine cleaning monitoring
.
3M Health Care Infection Prevention Division
,
St. Paul, MN
.
4.
Addanki,
S.,
Sotos
J. F.,
and
Rearick
P. D.
1966
.
Rapid determination of picomole quantities of ATP with a liquid scintillation counter
.
Anal. Biochem
.
14
:
261
264
.
5.
Aiken,
Z. A.,
Wilson
M.,
and
Pratten
J.
2011
.
Evaluation of ATP bioluminescence assays for potential use in a hospital setting
.
Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol
.
32
:
507
509
.
6.
Albert,
L. S.,
and
Brown
D. G.
2015
.
Variation in bacterial ATP concentration during rapid changes in extracellular pH and implications for the activity of attached bacteria
.
Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces
132
:
111
116
.
7.
Alfa,
M. J.,
Fatima
I.,
and
Olson
N.
2013
.
Validation of adenosine triphosphate to audit manual cleaning of flexible endoscope channels
.
Am. J. Infect. Control
41
:
245
248
.
8.
Anderson,
R. E.,
Young
V.,
Stewart
M.,
Robertson
C.,
and
Dancer
S. J.
2011
.
Cleanliness audit of clinical surfaces and equipment: who cleans what?
J. Hosp. Infect
.
78
:
178
181
.
9.
Ataullakhanov,
F.,
and
Vitvitsky
V.
2002
.
What determines the intracellular ATP concentration
.
Biosci. Rep
.
22
:
501
511
.
10.
Aycicek,
H.,
Oguz
U.,
and
Karci
K.
2006
.
Comparison of results of ATP bioluminescence and traditional hygiene swabbing methods for the determination of surface cleanliness at a hospital kitchen
.
Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health
209
:
203
206
.
11.
Bakke,
M.,
and
Suzuki
S.
2018
.
Development of a novel hygiene monitoring system based on the detection of total adenylate (ATP+ADP+AMP)
.
J. Food Prot
.
81
:
729
737
.
12.
Bakke,
M.,
Suzuki
S.,
Kirihara
E.,
and
Mikami
S.
2019
.
Evaluation of the total adenylate (ATP+ADP+AMP) hygiene monitoring test in healthcare settings
.
J. Prev. Med. Hyg
.
60
:
E140
E144
.
13.
Bautista,
D. A.,
McIntyre
L.,
Laleye
L.,
and
Griffiths
M. W.
1992
.
The application of ATP bioluminescence for the assessment of milk quality and factory hygiene
.
J. Rapid Methods Autom. Microbiol
.
1
:
179
193
.
14.
Bautista,
D. A.,
Vaillancourt
J. P.,
Clarke
R. A.,
Renwick
S.,
and
Griffiths
M. W.
1995
.
Rapid assessment of the microbiological quality of poultry carcasses using ATP bioluminescence
.
J. Food Prot
.
58
:
551
554
.
15.
Bell,
C.,
Stallard
P. A.,
Brown
S. E.,
and
Standley
J. T. E.
1994
.
ATP-bioluminescence techniques for assessing the hygienic condition of milk transport tankers
.
Int. Dairy J
.
4
:
629
640
.
16.
Bellamy,
E.
2012
.
An audit of cleaning effectiveness using adenosine triphosphate (ATP) bioluminescence assay following outbreaks of infection
.
J. Infect. Prev
.
13
:
154
157
.
17.
Bilici,
S.,
Mortas
H.,
Köse
S.,
Varli
S. N.,
and
Büsra
A.
2017
.
Are restaurant menus vectors of bacterial cross-contamination? A pilot study in Turkey
.
Br. Food J
.
119
:
401
410
.
18.
Boyce,
J. M.,
Havill
N. L.,
Dumigan
D. G.,
Golebiewski
M.,
Balogun
O.,
and
Rizvani
R.
2009
.
Monitoring the effectiveness of hospital cleaning practices by use of an adenosine triphosphate bioluminescence assay
.
Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol
.
30
:
678
684
.
19.
Boyce,
J. M.,
Havill
N. L.,
Havill
H. L.,
Mangione
E.,
Dumigan
D. G.,
and
Moore
B. A.
2011
.
Comparison of fluorescent marker systems with 2 quantitative methods of assessing terminal cleaning practices
.
Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol
.
32
:
1187
1193
.
20.
Boyce,
J. M.,
Havill
N. L.,
Lipka
A.,
Havill
H.,
and
Rizvani
R.
2010
.
Variations in hospital daily cleaning practices
.
Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol
.
31
:
99
101
.
21.
Branch-Elliman,
W.,
Robillard
E.,
McCarthy
G.,
and
Gupta
K.
2014
.
Direct feedback with the ATP luminometer as a process improvement tool for terminal cleaning of patient rooms
.
Am. J. Infect. Control
42
:
195
197
.
22.
Brown,
E.,
Eder
A. R.,
and
Thompson
K. M.
2010
.
Do surface and cleaning chemistries interfere with ATP measurement systems for monitoring patient room hygiene?
J. Hosp. Infect
.
74
:
193
195
.
23.
BSI
.
1991
.
British standards 4285: microbiological examination for dairy purposes. Methods for assessment of hygienic conditions
.
BSI
,
London
.
24.
Carrascosa,
C.,
Saavedra
P.,
Millán
R.,
Jaber
J. R.,
Pérez
E.,
Grau
R.,
Raposo
A.,
Mauricio
C.,
and
Sanjuán
E.
2012
.
Monitoring of cleanliness and disinfection in dairies: comparison of traditional microbiological and ATP bioluminescence methods
.
Food Control
28
:
368
373
.
25.
Chan,
M. C.,
Lin
T. Y.,
Chiu
Y. H.,
Huang
T. F.,
Chiu
S. K.,
Liu
T. L.,
Hung
P. S.,
Chang
C. M.,
and
Lin
J. C.
2015
.
Applying ATP bioluminescence to design and evaluate a successful new intensive care unit cleaning programme
.
J. Hosp. Infect
.
90
:
344
346
.
26.
Chapman,
A. G.,
and
Atkinson
D. E.
1977
.
Adenine nucleotide concentrations and turnover rates. Their correlation with biological activity in bacteria and yeast
.
Adv. Microb. Physiol
.
15
:
253
306
.
27.
Chappelle,
E. W.,
and
Levin
G. V.
1968
.
Use of the firefly bioluminescent reaction for rapid detection and counting of bacteria
.
Biochem. Med
.
2
:
41
52
.
28.
Choi,
J.,
Almanza
B.,
Nelson
D.,
Neal
J.,
and
Sirsat
S.
2014
.
A strategic cleaning assessment program: menu cleanliness at restaurants
.
J. Environ. Health
76
:
18
24
.
29.
Cooper,
R. A.,
Griffith
C. J.,
Malik
R. E.,
Obee
P.,
and
Looker
N.
2007
.
Monitoring the effectiveness of cleaning in four British hospitals
.
Am. J. Infect. Control
35
:
338
341
.
30.
Corbitt,
A. J.,
Bennion
N.,
and
Forsythe
S. J.
2000
.
Adenylate kinase amplification of ATP bioluminescence for hygiene monitoring in the food and beverage industry
.
Lett. Appl. Microbiol
.
30
:
443
447
.
31.
Cunningham,
A. E.,
Rajagopal
R.,
Lauer
J.,
and
Allwood
P.
2011
.
Assessment of hygienic quality of surfaces in retail food service establishments based on microbial counts and real-time detection of ATP
.
J. Food Prot
.
74
:
686
690
.
32.
Davidson,
C. A.,
Griffith
C. J.,
Peters
A. C.,
and
Fielding
L. M.
1999
.
Evaluation of two methods for monitoring surface cleanliness—ATP bioluminescence and traditional hygiene swabbing
.
Luminescence
14
:
33
38
.
33.
Deluca,
M.
1976
.
Firefly luciferase
.
Adv. Enzymol. Relat. Areas Mol. Biol
.
44
:
37
.
34.
Edmiston,
C. E.,
Krepel
C.,
Spencer
M. P.,
Rossi
P.,
Lee
C.,
Brown
K.,
Malinowski
M.,
Lewis
B.,
and
Seabrook
G.
2014
.
Assessment of innovative antimicrobial surface disinfectant within the operating room environment using ATP-bioluminescence assay
.
Am. J. Infect. Control
42
:
S38
.
35.
Ferreira,
A. M.,
de Andrade
D.,
Rigotti
M. A.,
and
Ferreira
M. V. F.
2011
.
Condition of cleanliness of surfaces close to patients in an intensive care unit
.
Rev. Latino—Am. Enfermagem
.
19
:
557
564
.
36.
Gibbs,
S. G.,
Sayles
H.,
Colbert
E. M.,
Hewlett
A.,
Chaika
O.,
and
Smith
P. W.
2014
.
Evaluation of the relationship between the adenosine triphosphate (ATP) bioluminescence assay and the presence of Bacillus anthracis spores and vegetative cells
.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
11
:
5708
5719
.
37.
Green,
A. A.,
and
McElroy
W. D.
1956
.
Crystalline firefly luciferase
.
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
20
:
170
176
.
38.
Green,
T. A.,
Russell
S. M.,
and
Fletcher
D. L.
1998
.
Effect of chemical sanitizing agents on ATP bioluminescence measurements
.
J. Food Prot
.
61
:
1013
1017
.
39.
Griffith,
C. J.,
Cooper
R. A.,
Gilmore
J.,
Davies
C.,
and
Lewis
M.
2000
.
An evaluation of hospital cleaning regimes and standards
.
J. Hosp. Infect
.
45
:
19
28
.
40.
Griffith,
C. J.,
Davidson
C. A.,
Peters
A. C.,
and
Fielding
L. M.
1997
.
Towards a strategic cleaning assessment programme: hygiene monitoring and ATP luminometry, an options appraisal
.
Food Sci. Technol. Today
11
:
15
24
.
41.
Griffith,
C. J.,
Obee
P.,
Cooper
R. A.,
Burton
N. F.,
and
Lewis
M.
2007
.
The effectiveness of existing and modified cleaning regimens in a Welsh hospital
.
J. Hosp. Infect
.
66
:
352
359
.
42.
Griffiths,
M.
1996
.
Role of ATP bioluminescence in the food industry: new light on old problems
.
Food Technol
.
50
:
5
.
43.
Griffiths,
M. W.
1993
.
Applications of bioluminescence in the dairy industry
.
J. Dairy Sci
.
76
:
3118
3125
.
44.
Grinius,
L.,
Slusnyte
R.,
and
Griniuviene
B.
1975
.
ATP synthesis driven by protonmotive force imposed across Escherichia coli cell membranes
.
FEBS Lett
.
57
:
290
293
.
45.
Hammons,
S. R.,
Stasiewicz
M. J.,
Roof
S.,
and
Oliver
H. F.
2015
.
Aerobic plate counts and ATP levels correlate with Listeria monocytogenes detection in retail delis
.
J. Food Prot
.
78
:
825
830
.
46.
Hansen,
D.,
Benner
D.,
Hilgenhöner
M.,
Leisebein
T.,
Brauksiepe
A.,
and
Popp
W.
2004
.
ATP measurement as method to monitor the quality of reprocessing flexible endoscopes
.
Ger. Med. Sci.
2
:
Doc04.
47.
Hawronskyj,
J.-M.,
Chittock
R. S.,
Wharton
C. W.,
and
Holah
J. T.
1994
.
Low level bacterial contamination measured using a novel bioluminescent assay
,
p.
411
414
.
In
Campbell
A. K.,
Kricka
L. J.,
and
Stanley
P. E.
(ed.),
Bioluminescence and chemiluminescence: fundamentals and applied aspects
.
Wiley
,
New York
.
48.
Hawronskyj,
J.-M.,
and
Holah
J.
1997
.
ATP: a universal hygiene monitor
.
Trends Food Sci. Technol
.
8
:
79
84
.
49.
Ho,
Y.-H.,
Wang
L.-S.,
Jiang
H.-L.,
Chang
C.-H.,
Hsieh
C.-J.,
Chang
D.-C.,
Tu
H.-Y.,
Chiu
T.-Y.,
Chao
H.-J.,
and
Tseng
C.-C.
2016
.
Use of a sampling area-adjusted adenosine triphosphate bioluminescence assay based on digital image quantification to assess the cleanliness of hospital surfaces
.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
13
:
576
.
50.
Holah,
J.
2003
.
13-Cleaning and disinfection
,
p.
235
278
.
In
Lelieveld
H. L. M.,
Mostert
M. A.,
White
B.,
and
Holah
J.
(ed.),
Hygiene in food processing
.
Woodhead Publishing
,
Cambridge, UK
.
51.
Holm-Hansen,
O.,
and
Booth
C. R.
1966
.
The measurement of adenosine triphosphate in the ocean and its ecological significance
.
Limnol. Oceanogr
.
11
:
510
519
.
52.
Holm-Hansen,
O.,
and
Karl
D. M.
1978
.
Biomass and adenylate energy charge determination in microbial cell extracts and environmental samples
.
Methods Enzymol
.
57
:
73
85
.
53.
Huang,
Y.-S.,
Chen
Y.-C.,
Chen
M.-L.,
Cheng
A.,
Hung
I. C.,
Wang
J.-T.,
Sheng
W.-H.,
and
Chang
S.-C.
2015
.
Comparing visual inspection, aerobic colony counts, and adenosine triphosphate bioluminescence assay for evaluating surface cleanliness at a medical center
.
Am. J. Infect. Control
43
:
882
886
.
54.
Hygiena
.
2012
.
3.2 Setting up program test points and pass/fail limits
.
In
SystemSURE Operators Manual V3.0
.
Hygiena
,
Camarillo, CA
.
55.
Kajigaya,
N.,
Hirose
Y.,
Koike
S.,
Fujita
T.,
Yokota
N.,
Hata
S.,
Ikenaga
M.,
Kobayashi
N.,
and
Takahashi
T.
2015
.
Assessment of contamination using an ATP bioluminescence assay on doorknobs in a university-affiliated hospital in Japan
.
BMC Res. Notes
8
:
352
.
56.
Karl,
D. M.,
and
Holm-Hansen
O.
1978
.
Methodology and measurement of adenylate energy charge ratios in environmental samples
.
Mar. Biol
.
48
:
185
197
.
57.
Kikkoman
.
2014
.
5.2.2 level set. In PD-30 instruction manual
.
Kikkoman Biochemifa
,
Tokyo
.
58.
Kodaka,
H.,
Fukuda
K.,
Mizuochi
S.,
and
Horigome
K.
1996
.
Adenosine triphosphate content of microorganisms related with food spoilage
.
Jpn. J. Food Microbiol
.
13
:
29
34
.
59.
Lappalainen,
J.,
Loikkanen
S.,
Havana
M.,
Karp
M.,
Sjoeberg
A. M.,
and
Wirtanen
G.
2000
.
Microbial testing methods for detection of residual cleaning agents and disinfectants— prevention of ATP bioluminescence measurement errors in the food industry
.
J. Food Prot
.
53
:
210
215
.
60.
Leon,
M. B.,
and
Albrecht
J. A.
2007
.
Comparison of adenosine triphosphate (ATP) bioluminescence and aerobic plate counts (APC) on plastic cutting boards
.
J. Foodservice
18
:
145
152
.
61.
Leps,
W. T.,
and
Ensign
J. C.
1979
.
Adenosine triphosphate pool levels and endogenous metabolism in Arthrobacter crystallopoietes during growth and starvation
.
Arch. Microbiol
.
122
:
61
67
.
62.
Levin,
G. V.
1968
.
Experiments and instrumentation for extraterrestrial life detection
.
Adv. Appl. Microbiol
.
10
:
55
71
.
63.
Levin,
G. V.,
Usdin
E.,
and
Slonim
A. R.
1968
.
Rapid detection of microorganisms in aerospace water systems
.
Aerosp. Med
.
39
:
14
16
.
64.
Lewis,
B. D.,
Spencer
M.,
Rossi
P. J.,
Lee
C. J.,
Brown
K. R.,
Malinowski
M.,
Seabrook
G. R.,
and
Edmiston
C. E.
2015
.
Assessment of an innovative antimicrobial surface disinfectant in the operating room environment using adenosine triphosphate bioluminescence assay
.
Am. J. Infect. Control
43
:
283
285
.
65.
Lewis,
T.,
Griffith
C.,
Gallo
M.,
and
Weinbren
M.
2008
.
A modified ATP benchmark for evaluating the cleaning of some hospital environmental surfaces
.
J. Hosp. Infect
.
69
:
156
163
.
66.
Lindell,
I. C.,
Lundh
Å.,
Sjaunja
K. S.,
and
Cederholm
M.
2018
.
Adenosine triphosphate bioluminescence for hygiene testing of rubber liners and tubes on dairy farms
.
J. Dairy Sci
.
101
:
2438
2447
.
67.
Lundin,
A.
1989
.
ATP Assays in routine microbiology: from visions to realities in the 1980s
,
p.
11
27
.
In
Stanley
P. E.,
McCarthy
B. J.,
and
Smither
R.
(ed.),
ATP luminescence: rapid methods in microbiology
.
Blackwell
,
Oxford, UK
.
68.
Lundin,
A.,
Hasenson
M.,
Persson
J.,
and
Pousette
Å.
1986
.
Estimation of biomass in growing cell lines by adenosine triphosphate assay
.
Methods Enzymol
.
133
:
27
42
.
69.
Machado,
R. A. M.,
and
Cutter
C. N.
2017
.
Sanitation indicators as a tool to evaluate a food safety and sanitation training program for farmstead cheese processors
.
Food Control
78
:
264
269
.
70.
MacLeod,
N. H.,
Chappelle
E. W.,
and
Crawford
A. M.
1969
.
ATP assay of terrestrial soils: a test of an exobiological experiment
.
Nature
223
:
267
268
.
71.
Malik,
R. E.,
Cooper
R. A.,
and
Griffith
C. J.
2003
.
Use of audit tools to evaluate the efficacy of cleaning systems in hospitals
.
Am. J. Infect. Control
31
:
181
187
.
72.
Mathis,
R. R.,
and
Brown
O. R.
1976
.
ATP concentration in Escherichia coli during oxygen toxicity
.
Biochim. Biophys. Acta Bioenerg
.
440
:
723
732
.
73.
McCarthy,
B. J.
1989
.
Detection and ennumeration of micro-organisms on textiles using ATP luminescence
,
p.
81
86
.
In
Stanley
P. E.,
McCarthy
B. J.,
and
Smither
R.
(ed.),
ATP luminescence: rapid methods in microbiology
.
Blackwell
,
Oxford, UK
.
74.
McElroy,
W. D.
1947
.
The energy source for bioluminescence in an isolated system
.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
33
:
342
345
.
75.
McElroy,
W. D.,
and
Seliger
H. E.
1963
.
The chemistry of light emission
.
Adv. Enzymol. Relat. Areas Mol. Biol
.
25
:
119
166
.
76.
McElroy,
W. D.,
Seliger
H. H.,
and
White
E. H.
1969
.
Mechanism of bioluminescence, chemiluminescence and enzyme function in the oxidation of firefly luciferin
.
Photochem. Photobiol
.
10
:
153
170
.
77.
Miettinen,
H.,
Aarnisalo
K.,
Salo
S.,
and
Sjoberg
A. M.
2001
.
Evaluation of surface contamination and the presence of Listeria monocytogenes in fish processing factories
.
J. Food Prot
.
64
:
635
639
.
78.
Moore,
G.,
and
Griffith
C.
2002
.
A comparison of traditional and recently developed methods for monitoring surface hygiene within the food industry: an industry trial
.
Int. J. Environ. Health Res
.
12
:
317
329
.
79.
Moore,
G.,
Smyth
D.,
Singleton
J.,
and
Wilson
P.
2010
.
The use of adenosine triphosphate bioluminescence to assess the efficacy of a modified cleaning program implemented within an intensive care setting
.
Am. J. Infect. Control
38
:
617
622
.
80.
Morrison,
B. A.,
and
Shain
D. H.
2008
.
An AMP nucleosidase gene knockout in Escherichia coli elevates intracellular ATP levels and increases cold tolerance
.
Biol. Lett
.
4
:
53
56
.
81.
Mulvey,
D.,
Redding
P.,
Robertson
C.,
Woodall
C.,
Kingsmore
P.,
Bedwell
D.,
and
Dancer
S. J.
2011
.
Finding a benchmark for monitoring hospital cleanliness
.
J. Hosp. Infect
.
77
:
25
30
.
82.
Murphy,
S. C.,
Kozlowski
S. M.,
Bandler
D. K.,
and
Boor
K. J.
1998
.
Evaluation of adenosine triphosphate–bioluminescence hygiene monitoring for trouble-shooting fluid milk shelf-life problems
.
J. Dairy Sci
.
81
:
817
820
.
83.
Neal,
J. A.
2013
.
Comparative analysis of training delivery methods for new employees cleaning and sanitizing retail deli slicers: an exploratory study
.
Food Control
29
:
149
155
.
84.
Neogene
.
2017
.
Setting thresholds in the reader
.
In
AccuPoint advanced HC user's guide release 3.1
.
Neogene
,
Lansing, MI
.
85.
Obee,
P. C.,
Griffith
C. J.,
Cooper
R. A.,
Cooke
R. P.,
Bennion
N. E.,
and
Lewis
M.
2005
.
Real-time monitoring in managing the decontamination of flexible gastrointestinal endoscopes
.
Am. J. Infect. Control
33
:
202
206
.
86.
Omidbakhsh,
N.,
Ahmadpour
F.,
and
Kenny
N.
2014
.
How reliable are ATP bioluminescence meters in assessing decontamination of environmental surfaces in healthcare settings?
PLoS One
9
:
e99951
.
87.
Osimani,
A.,
Garofalo
C.,
Clementi
F.,
Tavoletti
S.,
and
Aquilanti
L.
2014
.
Bioluminescence ATP monitoring for the routine assessment of food contact surface cleanliness in a university canteen
.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
11
:
10824
10837
.
88.
Oulahal-Lagsir,
N.,
Martial-Gros
A.,
Bonneau
M.,
and
Blum
L. J.
2001
.
Ultrasonic methodology coupled to ATP bioluminescence for the non-invasive detection of fouling in food processing equipment—validation and application to a dairy factory
.
J. Appl. Microbiol
.
89
:
433
441
.
89.
Poulis,
J. A.,
de Pijper
M.,
Mossel
D. A. A.,
and
Dekkers
P. P. A.
1993
.
Assessment of cleaning and disinfection in the food industry with the rapid ATP-bioluminescence technique combined with the tissue fluid contamination test and a conventional microbiological method
.
Int. J. Food Microbiol
.
20
:
109
116
.
90.
Richard,
R. D.,
and
Bowen
T. R.
2017
.
What orthopaedic operating room surfaces are contaminated with bioburden? A study using the ATP bioluminescence assay
.
Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res
.
475
:
1819
1824
.
91.
Sakakibara,
T.,
Murakami
S.,
Eisaki
N.,
Nakajima
M.,
and
Imai
K.
1999
.
An enzymatic cycling method using pyruvate orthophosphate dikinase and firefly luciferase for the simultaneous determination of ATP and AMP (RNA)
.
Anal. Biochem
.
268
:
94
101
.
92.
Sakakibara,
T.,
Murakami
S.,
and
Imai
K.
2003
.
Enumeration of bacterial cell numbers by amplified firefly bioluminescence without cultivation
.
Anal. Biochem
.
312
:
48
56
.
93.
Salsgiver,
E.,
Bernstein
D.,
Simon
M. S.,
Greendyke
W.,
Jia
H.,
Robertson
A.,
Salter
S.,
Schuetz
A. N.,
Saiman
L.,
Furuya
E. Y.,
and
Calfee
D. P.
2018
.
Comparing the bioburden measured by adenosine triphosphate (ATP) luminescence technology to contact plate-based microbiologic sampling to assess the cleanliness of the patient care environment
.
Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol
.
39
:
622
624
.
94.
Schuerger,
A. C.,
Fajardo-Cavazos
P.,
Clausen
C. A.,
Moores
J. E.,
Smith
P. H.,
and
Nicholson
W. L.
2008
.
Slow degradation of ATP in simulated Martian environments suggests long residence times for the biosignature molecule on spacecraft surfaces on Mars
.
Icarus
194
:
86
100
.
95.
Sciortino,
C. V.,
and
Giles
R. A.
2012
.
Validation and comparison of three adenosine triphosphate luminometers for monitoring hospital surface sanitization: a Rosetta Stone for adenosine triphosphate testing
.
Am. J. Infect. Control
40
:
e233
e239
.
96.
Seeger,
K.,
and
Griffiths
M. W.
1994
.
Adenosine triphosphate bioluminescence for hygiene monitoring in health care institutions
.
J. Food Prot
.
57
:
509
513
.
97.
Setlow,
P.,
and
Kornberg
A.
1970
.
Biochemical studies of bacterial sporulation and germination. XXII. Energy metabolism in early stages of germination of Bacillus megaterium spores
.
J. Biol. Chem
.
245
:
3637
3644
.
98.
Shama,
G.,
and
Malik
D. J.
2013
.
The uses and abuses of rapid bioluminescence-based ATP assays
.
Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health
216
:
115
125
.
99.
Sharpe,
A. N.,
Woodrow
M. N.,
and
Jackson
A. K.
1970
.
Adenosinetriphosphate (ATP) levels in foods contaminated by bacteria
.
J. Appl. Bacteriol
.
33
:
758
767
.
100.
Shaw,
S.
1983
.
Rapid methods of estimating numbers of organisms on surface swabs
,
p.
29
30
.
In
Rapid microbiological methods in the food industry: abstracts of a meeting held at Leatherhead Food Research, 19 November 1981, Tech. Note 4
.
Leatherhead Food Research
,
Epsom, UK
.
101.
Sherlock,
O.,
O'Connell
N.,
Creamer
E.,
and
Humphreys
H.
2009
.
Is it really clean? An evaluation of the efficacy of four methods for determining hospital cleanliness
.
J. Hosp. Infect
.
72
:
140
146
.
102.
Shimoda,
T.,
Yano
R.,
Nakamura
S.,
Yoshida
M.,
Matsuo
J.,
Yoshimura
S.,
and
Yamaguchi
H.
2015
.
ATP bioluminescence values are significantly different depending upon material surface properties of the sampling location in hospitals
.
BMC Res. Notes
8
:
807
.
103.
Simpson,
W. J.
1989
.
“Instant” assessment of brewery hygiene analysis using ATP bioluminescence
.
Brewers Guardian
188
:
20
22
.
104.
Singh,
A. P.,
and
Bragg
P. D.
1979
.
ATP synthesis driven by a pH gradient imposed across the cell membranes of lipoic acid and unsaturated fatty acid auxotrophs of Escherichia coli
.
FEBS Lett
.
98
:
21
24
.
105.
Smith,
N. W.,
Sindelar
J. J.,
and
Rankin
S. A.
2019
.
Changes in AMP, ADP, and ATP over extended growth curves for bacterial species significant to food hygiene
.
Presented at the International Association for Food Protection Annual Meeting, Louisville, KY, 21 to 24 July 2019.
106.
Smith,
N. W.,
Sindelar
J. J.,
and
Rankin
S. A.
2019
.
Quantities of adenylate homologues (ATP+ADP+AMP) change over time in prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells
.
J. Food Prot
.
82
:
2088
2093
.
107.
Snyder,
G. M.,
Holyoak
A. D.,
Leary
K. E.,
Sullivan
B. F.,
Davis
R. B.,
and
Wright
S. B.
2013
.
Effectiveness of visual inspection compared with non-microbiologic methods to determine the thoroughness of post-discharge cleaning
.
Antimicrob. Resist. Infect. Control
2
:
26
.
108.
Spielmann,
H.,
Jacob-Müller
U.,
and
Schulz
P.
1981
.
Simple assay of 0.1–1.0 pmol of ATP, ADP, and AMP in single somatic cells using purified luciferin luciferase
.
Anal. Biochem
.
113
:
172
178
.
109.
Squirrell,
D. J.,
and
Murphy
M. J.
1994
.
Adenylate kinase as a cell marker in bioluminescent assays
,
p.
486
489
.
In
Campbell
A. K.,
Krika
L. J.,
and
Stanley
P. E.
(ed.),
Bioluminescence and chemiluminescence: fundamentals and applied aspects
.
In
Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Bioluminescence and Chemiluminescence
.
Wiley
,
New York
.
110.
Squirrell,
D. J.,
Price
R. L.,
and
Murphy
M. J.
2002
.
Rapid and specific detection of bacteria using bioluminescence
.
Anal. Chim. Acta
457
:
109
114
.
111.
Stanley,
P. E.
1986
.
Extraction of adenosine triphosphate from microbial and somatic cells
.
Methods Enzymol
.
133
:
14
22
.
112.
Stanley,
P. E.
1989
.
A concise beginner's guide to rapid microbiology using adenosine triphosphate (ATP) and luminescence
,
p.
1
10
.
In
Stanley
P. E.,
McCarthy
B. J.,
and
Smither
R.
(ed.),
ATP luminescence: rapid methods in microbiology
.
Blackwell
,
Oxford, UK
.
113.
Stanley,
P. E.,
Lundin
A.,
Fenton
S.,
Simpson
W.,
Schram
E.,
and
Berthold
F.
1989
.
Transcript of the expert panel question and answer session held on 15 April 1988 at ATP ‘88 symposium
,
p.
289
295
.
In
Stanley
P. E.,
McCarthy
B. J.,
and
Smither
R.
(ed.),
ATP luminescence: rapid methods in microbiology
.
Blackwell
,
Oxford, UK
.
114.
Stannard,
C. J.,
and
Gibbs
P. A.
1986
.
Rapid microbiology: applications of bioluminescence in the food industry—a review
.
J. Biolumin. Chemilumin
.
1
:
3
10
.
115.
Strehler,
B. L.,
and
Totter
J. R.
1952
.
Firefly luminescence in the study of energy transfer mechanisms. I. Substrate and enzyme determination
.
Arch. Biochem. Biophys
.
40
:
28
41
.
116.
Tebbutt,
G.
1999
.
Comparison of traditional and rapid methods for assessing the risk of bacterial cross-contamination from cutting boards
.
Int. J. Environ. Health Res
.
9
:
67
74
.
117.
Tebbutt,
G.,
Bell
V.,
and
Aislabie
J.
2007
.
Verification of cleaning efficiency and its possible role in programmed hygiene inspections of food businesses undertaken by local authority officers
.
J. Appl. Microbiol
.
102
:
1010
1017
.
118.
Turner,
D. E.,
Daugherity
E. K.,
Altier
C.,
and
Maurer
K. J.
2010
.
Efficacy and limitations of an ATP-based monitoring system
.
J. Am. Assoc. Lab. Anim. Sci
.
49
:
190
195
.
119.
Velazquez,
M.,
and
Feirtag
J. M.
1997
.
Quenching and enhancement effects of ATP extractants, cleansers, and sanitizers on the detection of the ATP bioluminescence signal
.
J. Food Prot
.
60
:
799
803
.
120.
Venkateswaran,
K.,
Hattori
N.,
La Duc
M. T.,
and
Kern
R.
2003
.
ATP as a biomarker of viable microorganisms in clean-room facilities
.
J. Microbiol. Methods
52
:
367
377
.
121.
Viator,
R.,
Gray
R. L.,
Sarver
R. O. N.,
Steiner
B.,
Mozola
M.,
and
Rice
J.
2017
.
Validation of the AccuPoint advanced ATP hygiene monitoring system for sanitation monitoring through detection of ATP from stainless steel surfaces
.
J. AOAC Int
.
100
:
537
547
.
122.
Vilar,
M. J.,
Rodríguez-Otero
J. L.,
Diéguez
F. J.,
Sanjuán
M. L.,
and
Yus
E.
2008
.
Application of ATP bioluminescence for evaluation of surface cleanliness of milking equipment
.
Int. J. Food Microbiol
.
125
:
357
361
.
123.
Villanueva,
A.,
and
Guanche
H.
2016
.
Improving environmental cleaning in clinical areas: staff education based on adenosine triphosphate readings
.
Nurs. Manag
.
23
:
24
.
124.
Wang,
X.,
Young
O. A.,
and
Karl
D. P.
2010
.
Evaluation of cleaning procedures for allergen control in a food industry environment
.
J. Food Sci
.
75
:
T149
T155
.
125.
Watanabe,
R.,
Shimoda
T.,
Yano
R.,
Hayashi
Y.,
Nakamura
S.,
Matsuo
J.,
and
Yamaguchi
H.
2014
.
Visualization of hospital cleanliness in three Japanese hospitals with a tendency toward long-term care
.
BMC Res. Notes
7
:
121
.
126.
Whitehead,
K. A.,
Smith
L. A.,
and
Verran
J.
2008
.
The detection of food soils and cells on stainless steel using industrial methods: UV illumination and ATP bioluminescence
.
Int. J. Food Microbiol
.
127
:
121
128
.
127.
Whiteley,
G. S.,
Derry
C.,
and
Glasbey
T.
2012
.
The comparative performance of three brands of portable ATP-bioluminometer intended for use in hospital infection control
.
Healthc. Infect
.
17
:
91
97
.
128.
Whiteley,
G. S.,
Derry
C.,
Glasbey
T.,
and
Fahey
P.
2015
.
The perennial problem of variability in adenosine triphosphate (ATP) tests for hygiene monitoring within healthcare settings
.
Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol
.
36
:
658
663
.
129.
Whiteley,
G. S.,
Nolan
M.,
and
Fahey
P. P.
2018
.
Improving the reliability of adenosine triphosphate (ATP) testing in surveillance of food premises: a pilot study
.
J. Environ. Health
81
:
E1
E8
.
130.
Willis,
C.,
Morley
R.,
Westbury
J.,
Greenwood
M.,
and
Pallett
A.
2007
.
Evaluation of ATP bioluminescence swabbing as a monitoring and training tool for effective hospital cleaning
.
Br. J. Infect. Control
8
:
17
21
.
131.
Wilson,
D. M.,
Alderette
J. F.,
Maloney
P. C.,
and
Wilson
T. H.
1976
.
Proton motive force as the source of energy for adenosine-triphosphate synthesis in Escherichia coli
.
J. Bacteriol
.
126
:
327
.
132.
Zambrano,
A. A.,
Jones
A.,
Otero
P.,
Ajenjo
M. C.,
and
Labarca
J. A.
2014
.
Assessment of hospital daily cleaning practices using ATP bioluminescence in a developing country
.
Braz. J. Infect. Dis
.
18
:
675
677
.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)