## 4 Discussion  
_C. estertheticum_ and _C. gasigenes_ spores are commonly found in the meat processing environment [6; 12; 39] with inevitable cross-contamination of carcass and primal cuts [40]. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Sporicidal Product** & **Treatment Conditions** & **D-Value (Minutes)** & **SE 1** \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{4}{c}{_Clostridium estertheticum_} \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{1} & SDW & 26.8 A/B & 0.009 \\ \cline{2-4}  & BSA & 20.0 B/A & 0.006 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{2} & SDW & 39.4 A/C & 0.012 \\ \cline{2-4}  & BSA & 18.5 B/A & 0.018 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{3} & SDW & 12.7 A/A & 0.009 \\ \cline{2-4}  & BSA & 25.9 B/B & 0.003 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{4} & SDW & 23.3 A/B & 0.006 \\ \cline{2-4}  & BSA & 33.3 B/C & 0.004 \\ \hline \multicolumn{4}{c}{_Clostridium gasigenes_} \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{1} & SDW & 20.5 A/B & 0.006 \\ \cline{2-4}  & BSA & 22.6 B/B & 0.006 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{2} & SDW & 30.4 A/C & 0.009 \\ \cline{2-4}  & BSA & 17.1 B/A & 0.013 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{3} & SDW & 16.1 A/A & 0.007 \\ \cline{2-4}  & BSA & 24.8 B/B & 0.006 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{4} & SDW & 19.9 A/B & 0.007 \\ \cline{2-4}  & BSA & 31.5 B/C & 0.003 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{\text{A/A}}\) First letter (\(\Delta\)/A) denotes statistical differences observed between soricidal products in SDW and BSA for a given target bacteria. The second letter (A/\(\Delta\)/\(\Delta\)) denotes statistically significant differences between the soricidal treatments with the bacterium and solution (SDW and BSA) being held constant. Statistical differences were analyzed at the 5% level (\(p<0.05\)). 1 SE, standard error.  
\end{table} 
Table 2: The D-values for _C. estertheticum_ and _C. gasigenes_ treated with the different soricidal products. Figure 5: The concentration of DPA (\(\mu\)m) released from the spores of _C. estertheticum_ in SDW (\(\blacksquare\)), _C. gasigenes_ in SDW (\(\square\)), _C. estertheticum_ in BSA (\(\bullet\)), _C. gasigenes_ in BSA (\(\Circuit\)) during treatment with soricidal product 1. This study investigated the efficacy of four sporicidal formulations in eliminating _C. esterheticum_ and _C. gasigenes_ spores in clean (SDW) and dirty (BSA) conditions in suspension tests. In SDW all treatments were equally effective. Treatment 1 was a mixture of hydrogen peroxide, acetic acid, and peracetic acid. Hydrogen peroxide is a strong oxidizing agent and more active in the presence of acetic acid. Peracetic acid decomposes to hydrogen peroxide and acetic acid and is more potent than hydrogen peroxide alone in the presence of organic matter [14]. A recent study has demonstrated sporicidal formulations containing hydrogen peroxide, peracetic acid and acetic acid are effective against _C. sporogenes_ and _C. difficile_ spores with D values as low as 2.1 and 5.3 min, respectively [41]. This formulation has strong antimicrobial activity [17; 21; 42], including against Clostridial spores [42; 43; 44; 45] and has been recommended for the control of BPS _Clostidium_ spores [10; 13]. Our data suggests that treatment 2, a mixture of sodium hypochlorite, sodium hydroxide and alkylamine oxide, was more effective against _C. gasigenes_ spores when tested in BSA. Sodium hypochlorite is a strong basic disinfect that inactivates _Clostidium_ spores [29; 30]. Sodium hydroxide enhances this activity and dissolves or precipitates organic matter thereby preventing any inhibition of the hypochlorite [46; 47; 48; 49]. Hence, this formulation has been recommended for disinfecting food processing environments [28]. Treatment 3 (peroxymonosulphate, sulphamic acid and troclosene sodium) was not as effective as treatments 1 and 2. This was unexpected as previous studies have suggested that peroxymonosulphate, an oxidizing agent, has sporicidal activity [17; 41] even in the presence of moderate organic debris [50]. Treatment 4 (alcohols, ethoxylate, orthophosphoric acid, sulphuric acid and iodine) was the least effective sporicidal agent.