## 3 Results
### \"Control Units\"
Gradually, advancing towards the 24 th day with a storage temperature of 5 \({}^{\circ}\)C (the storage conditions at the production and transportation levels), the measured \(Lm\) values decreased to the following values: in Batch  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Batch 1 Control Units**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Batch 2 Control Units**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Batch 3 Control Units**} \\  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**(Injected with Physiological Water)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**(Injected with Physiological Water)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**(Injected with Physiological Water)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**(Injected with Physiological Water)**} \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Day 0**} & \multirow{3}{*}{pH} & \multirow{3}{*}{\(\mathrm{a_{w}}\)} & \multirow{3}{*}{\(\mathrm{\text{\text{\text{\text{\text{\text{\text{\text{\text{\text{\text{\text{\text{\text{\text{\text{\text{\text{\  
\(1\), 8.5 \(\times\) 10 CFU/g (1.93 log\({}_{10}\) CFU/g); in Batch 2, 5.5 \(\times\) 10 CFU/g (1.74 log\({}_{10}\) CFU/g); and in Batch 3, \"microorganisms are present but <4.0 \(\times\) 10 CFU/g\" (\"microorganisms are present \(<\)1.60 log\({}_{10}\) CFU/g\"). On the 108 th day of measurement, with a storage temperature of 7 \({}^{\circ}\)C (the conditions at the retail level), the values of \(Lm\) did not decrease, but they remained at the same levels as the measurements on day 24 and day 59, and they were as follows: in Batch 1, 6.0 \(\times\) 10 CFU/g (1.78 log\({}_{10}\) CFU/g); in Batch 2, 6.0 \(\times\) 10 CFU/g (1.78 log\({}_{10}\) CFU/g); and in Batch 3, \"microorganisms are present but \(<\)4.0 \(\times\) 10 CFU/g\" (\"microorganisms are present \(<\)1.60 log\({}_{10}\) CFU/g\"). On the 164 th day of measurement, the \(Lm\) values decreased and were as follows: in Batch 1, the \"estimated number\" of microorganisms was 4.0 \(\times\) 10 CFU/g (\"estimated number\" of microorganisms was 1.60 log\({}_{10}\) CFU/g); in Batch 2, the \"estimated number\" of microorganisms was 4.0 \(\times\) 10 CFU/g (\"estimated number\" of microorganisms was 1.60 log\({}_{10}\) CFU/g); and in Batch 3, the measurement result was negative, and the level of \(Lm\) was \(<\)10 CFU/g (\(<\)1.00 log\({}_{10}\) CFU/g). On the last day of measurement, the 181 st day, which is also the expiration date of the cheese (end of shelf life, \"Day End\"), with a storage temperature of 10 \({}^{\circ}\)C (the storage conditions at the consumer level), the measurement results in all three Batches were as follows: \"microorganisms are present but \(<\)4.0 \(\times\) 10 CFU/g (\"microorganisms are present but \(<\)4.0 \(\times\) 10 CFU/g (\"microorganisms are present but \(<\)1.60 log\({}_{10}\) CFU/g\"). In conclusion, the \(Lm\) values in all three Batches of light semi-hard sliced cheese from \"Day 0\" to \"Day End\" decrease but do not reach zero, and \(Lm\) was present in all three Batches but less than \(<\)4.0 \(\times\) 10 CFU/g (Table 6). Evaluation of \(Lm\) Growth in Full-Fat Semi-Hard Sliced Cheeses, Packed Under Modified Atmosphere (MAP)  
On \"Day 0\", which is the day of the inoculation of the cheeses with the \(Lm\) target inoculum (150 CFU/g), the measured \(Lm\) values in full-fat cheese were as follows: in Batch 1, 1.6 \(\times\) 10\({}^{2}\) CFU/g (2.20 log\({}_{10}\) CFU/g); in Batch 2, 1.1 \(\times\) 10\({}^{2}\) CFU/g (2.02 log\({}_{10}\) CFU/g); and in Batch 3, 1.2 \(\times\) 10\({}^{2}\) CFU/g (2.08 log\({}_{10}\) CFU/g). Gradually, advancing towards the 24 th day with a storage temperature of 5 \({}^{\circ}\)C (the storage conditions at the production and transportation levels), the measured \(Lm\) values decreased to the following values: for Batch 1 and Batch 2, the \"estimated number\" of microorganisms was 6.0 \(\times\) 10 CFU/g (\"estimated number\" of microorganisms was 1.78 log\({}_{10}\) CFU/g), while in Batch 3, the level of \(Lm\) was 7.5 \(\times\) 10 CFU/g (1.88 log\({}_{10}\) CFU/g). On the 59 th day, with a storage