Review highlights mechanisms of biofilm resilience in Clostridium perfringens and implications for control strategies.
Clostridium perfringens ( C. perfringens ) biofilms pose a persistent challenge in meat and poultry processing environments due to their structural resilience, spore‐mediated survival and toxin‐associated virulence. These biofilms readily develop on food‐contact surfaces under typical processing conditions including organic residue accumulation, temperature fluctuations, and localized anaerobic niches, leading to increased tolerance to sanitation and thermal treatments. Mechanistically, biofilm resilience in C. perfringens is governed by the integration of sporulation processes, quorum sensing–regulated gene expression and extracellular polymeric substance (EPS) matrix formation, which collectively enhance stress tolerance, limit antimicrobial penetration, and facilitate persistence under fluctuating environmental conditions. The interaction between spore formation and EPS architecture further promotes survival during thermal processing and enables rapid re‐establishment of biofilms following sanitation. This review synthesizes current knowledge on the formation and persistence of C. perfringens biofilms, key environmental drivers in meat and poultry processing systems and the mechanistic basis of their stress resistance and survival strategies. It also critically examines how these mechanisms influence the efficacy of existing intervention strategies. It further evaluates the limitations of conventional control strategies and highlights emerging approaches for biofilm prevention and control, including food‐grade antimicrobials, surface engineering, enzymatic disruption, and microbiome‐based interventions, with emphasis on their modes of action and applicability in industrial settings. Overall, this review provides a mechanistic and systems‐level perspective to support the development of more effective biofilm control strategies in meat processing environments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chowdhury et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: