Hostname: page-component-7d684dbfc8-mqbnt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-09-25T10:09:27.724Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "corePageComponentGetUserInfoFromSharedSession": true, "coreDisableEcommerce": false, "coreDisableSocialShare": false, "coreDisableEcommerceForArticlePurchase": false, "coreDisableEcommerceForBookPurchase": false, "coreDisableEcommerceForElementPurchase": false, "coreUseNewShare": true, "useRatesEcommerce": true } hasContentIssue false

Washing table eggs: a review of the scientific and engineering issues

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2007

M.L. Hutchison
ADAS Microbiology Department, Woodthorne, Wergs Road, Wolverhampton. WV6 8QT
J. Gittins
ADAS Poultry Team, Woodthorne, Wergs Road, Wolverhampton, WV6 8QT
A. Walker
ADAS Gleadthorpe, Meden Vale, Mansfield, Notts. NG20 9PD
A. Moore
ADAS Microbiology Department, Woodthorne, Wergs Road, Wolverhampton. WV6 8QT
C. Burton
Silsoe Research Institute, Wrest Park, Silsoe MK45 4HS
N. Sparks*
Avian Science Research CentreSAC, Ayr, KA6 5HW, United Kingdom
*Corresponding author: e-mail:
Get access


Current European Union legislation prohibits the washing of Class A eggs. This is in stark contrast to countries such as the United States of America and, more recently Japan, which have embraced egg-washing technology. The emergence in the UK of egg associated Salmonella enteritidis as a significant cause of food poisoning has, combined with the increase in non-cage egg production systems, increased interest in technologies that might improve the microbial quality of the egg. This paper reviews the history of egg washing in the European Union and more specifically its restricted use in the UK and contrasts this with its uptake in the United States among other countries. Similarly the technological advances in egg washing are reviewed, in the context of the underpinning science.

Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)


Aasa, R., Malstrom, B.G., Saltman, P. and Vanngard, T. (1963) The specific binding of iron (III) and copper (ii) to transferrin and conalbumin. Biochim biophys Acta 75: 203222.Google Scholar
ADAS (1974) Commercial Egg Washing – report of a study tour undertaken in Sweden.Google Scholar
ADAS (1994) Egg washing trials ADAS Gleadthorpe Research Centre, ADAS workshop notes.Google Scholar
Anon (undated) Reports on egg washing. Published by the New Zealand Poultry Board circa 1980.Google Scholar
Ball, R.F., Hill, J.F., Logan, V. and Lyman, J. (1976) The effect of washing, oiling, holding and temperature of eggs on shell strength. Poultry Science 55: 335340.Google Scholar
Bartlett, F.M., Laird, J.M., Addison, C.L. and Mckellar, R.C. (1993) The analysis of egg wash water for the rapid assessment of microbiological quality. Poultry Science 72: 15841591.Google Scholar
Berrang, M.E., Cox, N.A., Frank, J.F. and Buhr, R.J. (1999) Bacterial penetration of the eggshell and shell membranes of the chicken hatching egg: A review. Journal of Applied Poultry Science 8: 499504.Google Scholar
Board, R.G. (1966) The course of microbial infection of the hen's egg. Journal of Applied Bacteriology 29: 319341.Google Scholar
Board, R.G. (1977) The Microbiology of eggs. Egg Science and Tcchnology (Stadelman, W.J. and Cotterill, O.J., Eds.) AVI Publishing Company Inc Westport Connecticut pp. 4964.Google Scholar
Board, R.G., Tullett, S.G. and Perrott, H.R. (1977) An arbitrary classification of the pore system in avian eggshells. Journal of Zoology (London) 182: 251–65.Google Scholar
Board, R.G., Loseby, S. and Miles, V.R. (1979) A note on microbial growth on hen eggshells. British Poultry Science 20: 413420.Google Scholar
Board, R.G., Sparks, N.H.C. and Tranter, H.S. (1986) Antimicrobial defence of avian eggs. In: Natural antimicrobial systems. (Gould, G.W., Rhodes Roberts, M.E. and Charnley, A K, Eds.) Bath University Press, Bath, UK pp. 8296.Google Scholar
Board, R.G., Clay, C.E., Lock, J. and Dolman, J. (1994) The egg: a compartmentalized, aseptically packaged food. (Board, R.G, Fuller, R. Eds). Microbiology of the Avian Egg. London, Chapman and Hall, pp. 4361.Google Scholar
Brant, A.W. and Starr, P.B. (1962) Some physical factors related to egg spoilage. Poultry Science 41: 14681473.Google Scholar
Brooks, J. (1951) The washing of eggs. Food Science Abstract 23: 545–54.Google Scholar
Bruce, J. and Drysdale, L. (1994) Trans-shell transmission. In: Microbiology of the Avian Egg. (Board, R.G. and Fuller, R. Eds.). London, Chapman and Hall, pp. 6391.Google Scholar
Cantor, A. and Mcfarlane, V.H. (1948) Salmonella organisms on anin chicken eggs. Poultry Science 27: 350355.Google Scholar
Chinglee, M.R., Katz, A.R., Sasaki, D.M. and Miette, H.P. (1991) Salmonella egg survey in Hawaii – evidence for routine bacterial surveillance. American Journal of Public Health 81(6): 764766.Google Scholar
European Union (1991) Commission regulation (EEC) No 1274/91 “Introducing detailed rules for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 1907/90 on certain marketing standards for eggs”.Google Scholar
Favler, G.I., Escudero, M.E., Mattar, M.A. and Guzman, A.M.S. (2000a) Survival of Yersinia enterocoliticu and mesophilic aerobic bacteria on eggshell after washing and hypochlorite and organic acid solutions. Journal of Food Protection 63: 10531057.Google Scholar
Favier, G.I., Escudero, M.E., Velaquez, L. and De Guzman, A.M. (2000b) Reduction of Yersinia enterocoliticu and mesophilic aerobic bacteria in egg-shell by washing with surfactants and their effect on the shell microstructure. Food Microbiology 17: 7381.Google Scholar
Garibaldi, J.A. and Bayne, H.G. (1960) The effect of iron on Pseudomonas spoilage of experimentally infected eggs. Poultry Science 39: 5171520.Google Scholar
Garibaldi, J.A. and Bayne, H.G. (1962) The effect of iron on the Pseudomonas spoilage of farm-washed eggs. Poultry Science 41: 850853.Google Scholar
Gittins, J. (1996) UK Egg washing update: An ADAS perspective. PE5313, 1–20, London, MAFF.Google Scholar
Haines, R.B. and Moran, T. (1940) Porosity of, and bacterial invasion through, the shell of the hen's egg. Journal of Hygiene, Cambridge 40: 453461.Google Scholar
Henzler, D.J., Kradel, D.C. and Sischo, W.M. (1998) Management and environmental risk factors for Salmonella enteritidis contamination of eggs. American Journal of Veterinary Research 59: 824829.Google Scholar
HMSO (1968) Report of the Reorganisation Commission for Eggs.Google Scholar
HMSO (1995) Egg (Marketing Standards) Regulations 1995 (Statutory Instrument 1995 No. 1544).Google Scholar
Humphrey, T. (1994a) Contamination of egg shell and contents with Sulmonellu enteritidis: a review. International Journal of Food Microbiology 21: 3140.Google Scholar
Humphrey, T. (1994b) Contamination of eggs with potential human pathogens. In: Microbiology of the Aviun Egg. (Board, R.G. and Fuller, R. Eds.). London, Chapman and Hall, pp. 93116.Google Scholar
Humphrey, T., Baskerville, A., Mawer, S.L., Rowe, B. and Hopper, S. (1989) Salmonella enteritidis PT4 from the contents of intact eggs: a study involving naturally infected hens. Epidemiology and Infection 103: 415423.Google Scholar
Humphrey, T., Chart, H., Baskerville, A. and Rowe, B. (1991) The influence of age on the response of SPF hens to infection with Salmonellu enteritidis PT4. Epidemiology and Infection 106: 3343.Google Scholar
Jenkins, M.K. (1919) USDA Bulletin No 775.Google Scholar
Jones, F.T., Rives, D.V. and Carey, J.B. (1995) Salmonella contamination in commercial eggs and an egg production facility. Poultry Science 74(4): 753757.Google Scholar
Kim, J.W. and Slavik, M.F. (1996) Changes in eggshell surface microstructure after washing with cetylpyridinium chloride or trisodium phosphate. Journal of Food Protection 59: 859863.Google Scholar
Kuhl, H. (1987) Washing and sanitising hatching eggs. International Hatchery Practice 2(3): 20–1.Google Scholar
Leclair, K., Heggart, H., Oggel, M., et al. (1994) Modelling the inactivation of Listerin monocytogenes and Salmonellu typhimurium in simulated egg wash water. Food Microbiology 11: 345353.Google Scholar
Lucore, L., Jones, F.T., Anderson, K.E. and Curtis, P.A. (1997) Internal and external bacterial counts from shells of eggs washed in a commercial-type processor at various wash-water temperatures. Journal of Food Protection 60: 13241328.Google Scholar
Mawer, S.L., Spain, G.E. and Rowe, B. (1989) Salmonellu enteritidis PT4 and hen's eggs. Lancet i: 280281.Google Scholar
Mayes, and Takeballi, (1983) Microbial contamination of the hen's egg: A review. Journal of Food Protection 46: 10921098.Google Scholar
Mayhew, Y.R. and Rogers, G.F.C. (1976) Thermodynamic and Transport Properties of Fluids. Second edition. Oxford, Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Moats, W.A. (1978) Egg washing – a review. Journal of Food Protection 41(11): 919925.Google Scholar
Nield, J.M. (1992) American approach to egg washing. Conference Proceeding.Google Scholar
Overfield, N. (1989) Egg washing – time for re-assessment. ADAS Report.Google Scholar
Padron, M. (1990) Salmonella typhimurium penetration through the eggshell of hatching eggs. Avian Diseases 34(2): 463465.Google Scholar
Pearson, J., Southam, G.G. and Holley, R.A. (1987) Survival and transport of bacteria in egg washwater. Applied Environmental Microbiology 53: 20602065.Google Scholar
Sauter, E.A., Peterson, C.R., Parkinson, J.F. and Steele, E.F. (1978) Effect of pH on eggshell penetration by Salmonellae. poultry Science 58: 135–38.Google Scholar
Simons, P.C.M. (1971) Ultrastructure of the hen eggshell and its physiological interpretation. Communication No. 175. Central Institute Poultry Research, Beekbergen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Sparks, N.H.C. (1985) The hen's eggshell: a resistance network. PhD Thesis, University of Bath.Google Scholar
Sparks, N.H.C. (1994) Shell accessory materials: structure and function. In: Microbiology of the Avian Egg.(Board, R.G. and Fuller, R. Eds.). London, Chapman and Hall, pp. 2542.Google Scholar
Sparks, N.H.C. and Board, R.G. (1984) Cuticle, shell porosity and water uptake through hens' eggshells. British Poultry Science 25: 267276.Google Scholar
Sparks, N.H.C. and Burgess, D. (1993) Effect of spray sanitising on hatching egg cuticle efficacy and hatchability. British Poultry Science 34: 655662.Google Scholar
Tranter, H.S and Board, R.G. (1982) The antimicrobial defence of avian eggs; Biological perspective and chemical basis. Journal of Applied Biochemistry 4: 295338.Google Scholar
Treybal, R.E. (1968) Mass Transfer Operations. Second edition. McGraw-Hill, Kogakusha.Google Scholar
USDA (1966) Improved Methods, Techniques and Equipment for Cleaning Eggs. Marketing Research Report No. 757 (in co-operation with the University of California).Google Scholar
USDA (2001) Agricultural Marketing Service (Standards, Inspections, Marketing Practices) Part 56 - Voluntary Grading of Shell Eggs, Code of Federal Regulations Title 7, Volume 3, US. Government Printing Office, pp. 4868.Google Scholar
Wang, H. and Slavik, M.F. (1998) Bacterial penetration into eggs washed with various chemicals and stored at different temperatures and times. Journal of Food Protection 61: 276279.Google Scholar
Wesley, R.L. and Beane, W.L. (1967) The effect of various wash water and internal egg temperatures on the number of thermal checks of oiled and un-oiled eggs. Poultry Science 46: 13361338.Google Scholar