Exploring the chopping board microbiome – lessons learned.

Background Household surfaces are a well-known source of bacterial contamination, with ~40% of outbreaks of foodborne infections in Europe occurring at home. Whilst disease-causing bacteria may arrive in the home in contaminated food, it is also likely that many disease outbreaks are caused by poor hygiene and cross-contamination from raw food. A key site of such microbial contamination is chopping boards. Methodology Participants were invited to cocreate sampling and analysis through workshops. Sampling was mainly designed with ambassadors (Aston students with an interest in the project) with input from their contacts and analysis through ambassadors and participants who attended the laboratory sessions. A sampling kit was developed for ease of use by untrained participants, including swabs (sponges), templates to ensure consistency of sampling and a secure bag in which to return the samples. Once samples were returned to the lab, ambassadors and participants tested them for growth on various agars using cocreated approaches. We had interest from 45 student ambassadors and ~30 of these were actively engaged with aspects of the project. Ambassadors undertook further participant recruitment from their personal contacts and households. Due to attrition during the project, we ended up with 25 samples that were tested. Key Findings A total of 25 chopping boards were sampled to evaluate the presence of key foodborne disease-causing bacteria and bacteria originating from the human gut or skin. Out of all chopping boards included in this study, gut bacteria were present on 44% and skin bacteria were present on 52%. Both gut and skin bacteria were isolated from 24% of chopping boards, and 28% of chopping boards harboured neither skin nor gut bacteria. Outcomes of and Reflections on Citizen Science Reflecting on the goals we set in our evaluation framework, we can say that we partially achieved our aims. Our success was primarily hindered by the timeline for the project slipping with cyclical ethical approval due to co-creation taking longer than expected. This meant that the bulk of collection slipped to the summer where fewer students were around and reduced participation levels. It would be good to consider wider sector approaches to dealing with such ethical approvals, and to consider the funding duration of such projects to build in time for true cocreation. The participants certainly benefited from the project, but the breadth and depth of involvement was hindered. Conclusions Microbiologcial sampling appears to be an area ripe for citizen science and this project will pave the way to a model of cocreated projects where citizens are involved at all stages and get maximal benefit from this approach.