Sharing what we've learned about wood
Disclaimer: None of the research highlighted in this section is done directly on our cutting boards, so we do not claim that our cutting boards are antibacterial or have any tested/proveable antibacterial effect, or other health effect. Rather, the information included here helped guide us to choose the materials and design we did
Studies on Wooden Cutting Boards
"These results do not support the often-heard assertion that plastic cutting boards are more sanitary than wood."
The studies below are foundational to the debate between wood and plastic cutting boards. It was primarily Cliver at UC Davis and his lab of researchers that accidentally encountered wood is more hygienic than plastic in a study, then conducted further studies throughout the 90s that repeatedly showed, in their own words "plastic has some disadvantages".
Included below are his lab's foundational studies, as well as later research following in their footsteps.
Cutting Boards of Plastic and Wood Contaminated Experimentally with Bacteria, 1994
Citation: Ak, N., & Cliver, D. O. (1994). Cutting boards of plastic and wood contaminated experimentally with bacteria. Journal of Food Protection, 57(1), 16–22. https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-57.1.16
Summary: This study tested bacteria from raw meat and poultry on plastic and wooden cutting board samples. Bacteria survived and multiplied for hours on plastic, but were absorbed into clean wood within minutes and often became unrecoverable. Even with high contamination, wood reduced bacterial numbers by at least 98%, and often over 99.9%.
Disinfection of Household Cutting Boards with a Microwave Oven (Park & Cliver, 1996)
Citation:
Park, P., & Cliver, D. O. (1996). Disinfection of household cutting boards with a microwave oven. Journal of Food Protection, 59(10), 1049–1054. https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-59.10.1049
Summary:
This study evaluated microwave disinfection of used wooden and plastic cutting boards heavily scarred from use. Boards were inoculated with up to 10⁹ CFU of E. coli or other bacteria. Microwaving wooden boards for 3–4 minutes at a high setting eliminated nearly all vegetative bacteria, with surface temperatures reaching ~95°C. Plastic boards, in contrast, showed almost no bacterial reduction even after 12 minutes, with surface temperatures staying below 40°C. Moisture enhanced the killing effect on wood but had negligible impact on plastic.
Decontamination of Plastic and Wooden Cutting Boards for Kitchen Use (Ak et al., 1994)
Citation:
Ak, N., Cliver, D. O., & Kaspari, C. (1994). Decontamination of plastic and wooden cutting boards for kitchen use. Journal of Food Protection, 57(1), 23–30. https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-57.1.23
Summary:
This study tested new and used cutting boards made from four types of plastic, hard rubber, and nine hardwoods to assess bacterial survival and cleaning effectiveness. E. coli (including O157:H7), Listeria spp., and Salmonella typhimuriumwere applied in nutrient broth or chicken juice. On clean wood, liquid inoculum was absorbed within 3–10 minutes and bacteria could not be recovered. In contrast, bacteria persisted and sometimes multiplied on plastic surfaces, particularly if knife-scarred and contaminated with chicken fat. Coating wood with chicken fat allowed some bacterial survival up to 12 hours, but cleaning with hot water and detergent effectively removed contamination from both materials.
Cutting Boards and Bacteria — Oak vs. Salmonella (Galluzzo & Cliver, 1996)
Citation:
Galluzzo, L., & Cliver, D. O. (1996). Cutting boards and bacteria — oak vs. Salmonella. Dairy, Food and Environmental Sanitation, 16(5), 290–293.
Summary:
This study tested Salmonella enteritidis survival on oak cutting boards and related wood forms (chips, dust, pressed dust). In all cases, bacteria rapidly became unrecoverable after inoculation. The effect appeared to be physical—possibly due to adhesion and drying—rather than chemical, since solvent extraction of wood did not reduce the effect. Pure cellulose filter paper was similarly effective.
Microbial Safety of Wood in Contact with Food: A Review (Aviat et al., 2016)
Citation:
Aviat, F., Gerhards, C., Rodriguez-Jerez, J.-j., Michel, V., Bayon, I. L., Ismail, R., & Federighi, M. (2016). Microbial safety of wood in contact with food: A review. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 15(3), 491–505. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12199
Summary:
This review analyzed 20 years of scientific research on the microbiological behavior of wood used for direct food contact. Despite common concerns about its porous surface, studies show that wood can create unfavorable conditions for microorganisms and may even inhibit their growth. Natural wood produces antimicrobial compounds and, in many cases, outperforms smoother materials like plastic in limiting microbial survival. The authors also discuss European regulations, noting that while wood has been safely used for centuries, specific rules vary by country.
Cutting boards in Salmonella cross-contamination (Cliver, 2006)
Citation:
Cliver, D. O. (2006). Cutting boards in Salmonella cross-contamination. Journal of AOAC International, 89(2), 538–542. PMID: 16640304
Summary:
This review examined how wood and plastic cutting boards contribute to cross-contamination with Salmonella. Knife-scarred plastic surfaces—especially high-density polyethylene—can be difficult to clean and may delaminate. Wood’s porosity allows juices and bacteria to enter, but once absorbed, bacteria generally do not return to the surface. Destructive sampling can recover bacteria from within the wood, but there is no evidence they re-emerge during cutting. Two epidemiological studies found that cleaning habits had little impact on sporadic salmonellosis rates, and one indicated that plastic board use in home kitchens was associated with higher risk, while wood use was not.
Hygienic aspects of using wooden and plastic cutting boards, assessed in laboratory and small gastronomy units (Lücke & Skowyrska, 2015)
Citation:
Lücke, F. K., & Skowyrska, A. (2015). Hygienic aspects of using wooden and plastic cutting boards, assessed in laboratory and small gastronomy units. Journal of Consumer Protection and Food Safety, 10, 317–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00003-015-0949-5
Summary:
This study compared maple, beech, and polyethylene cutting boards in both a controlled laboratory setting and a small commercial kitchen. Surfaces were contaminated with a meat–egg mixture and cleaned according to manufacturer instructions before being swabbed for microbiological analysis. No significant differences were found in hygienic status among the three board types, and all were deemed acceptable. In practical use, a maple board used in a small gastronomic unit for two months did not present cleaning issues.
Transmission of Listeria monocytogenes from raw chicken meat to cooked chicken meat through cutting boards (Puspanadan et al., 2014)
Citation:
Puspanadan, S., Mohd. Shahril, N., Tang, J. Y. H., Rukayadi, Y., Nishibuchi, M., Nakaguchi, Y., & Radu, S. (2014). Transmission of Listeria monocytogenes from raw chicken meat to cooked chicken meat through cutting boards. Food Control, 37, 51–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2013.08.030
Summary:
This study tested how Listeria monocytogenes transfers from contaminated raw chicken to cooked chicken via polyethylene and wooden cutting boards. Both materials allowed bacterial attachment and survival for up to one hour. Transfer to cooled cooked chicken was higher than to hot cooked chicken for both board types. At the one-hour mark, wooden boards showed lower transfer rates to both cooled and hot cooked samples compared to polyethylene boards.
Effectiveness of domestic antibacterial products in decontaminating food contact surfaces (DeVere & Purchase, 2007)
Citation:
DeVere, E., & Purchase, D. (2007). Effectiveness of domestic antibacterial products in decontaminating food contact surfaces. Food Microbiology, 24(4), 425–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fm.2006.07.013
Summary:
This study tested two antibacterial wipes and two sprays on wood, glass, plastic, and Microban®-treated plastic surfaces contaminated with E. coli and S. aureus. Without any cleaning products, bacteria survived up to 120 minutes on all surfaces, with glass and plastic showing no reduction, while wood retained fewer than 8% of the original bacteria. Drying time had little effect on glass and plastic but further reduced bacterial survival on wood and Microban® plastic. Antibacterial products were generally effective when used according to instructions, though their efficacy was slightly lower on plastic compared to other surfaces.
Antimicrobial Characteristics of Untreated Wood: Towards a Hygienic Environment (Munir et al., 2019)
Citation:
Munir, M., Pailhories, H., Eveillard, M., Aviat, F., Lepelletier, D., Belloncle, C., & Federighi, M. (2019). Antimicrobial characteristics of untreated wood: Towards a hygienic environment. Health, 11(2), 152–170. https://doi.org/10.4236/health.2019.112014
Summary:
This review examined the natural antimicrobial properties of untreated wood in contexts such as healthcare and food production. It explored how characteristics like hygroscopicity, porosity, roughness, chemical composition, wood species, age, and cut type influence wood’s hygienic performance. The authors found that, despite concerns about its porous nature, untreated wood can compare favorably to materials like plastic, glass, and steel, often inhibiting microbial survival. They highlight its potential as a safe, renewable resource and call for further research into its use in critical hygiene environments.
Studies on Other Applications of Wood in the Food Industry, Healthcare (Pasta Drying Racks, Containers for Fish, Cheese Shelves, etc)
These studies arrive at similar conclusions to the wood cutting boards vs plastic cutting boards research above, but instead compare other applications of wood to their plastic alternatives. For example, older wooden pasta drying racks seem to be more hygienic than their new plastic counterparts!
Behavior of Escherichia coli Cells and Bacillus cereus Spores on Poplar Wood Crates by Impedance Measurements (Revol-Junelles et al., 2005)
Citation:
Revol-Junelles, A.-M., Miguindou-Mabiala, R., Roger-Maigné, D., & Millière, J.-B. (2005). Behavior of Escherichia colicells and Bacillus cereus spores on poplar wood crates by impedance measurements. Journal of Food Protection, 68(1), 80–84. https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-68.1.80
Summary:
This study tested the survival of E. coli and B. cereus spores on dry poplar wood crates compared to glass surfaces. On wood, bacterial activity dropped rapidly—B. cereus activity fell to <10% within 4 hours, and low-level E. colicontamination became undetectable within 24 hours. Even with a high E. coli inoculum, only a few viable cells remained after 145 hours. In contrast, glass surfaces supported bacterial growth, reaching ~10⁹ cells for E. coli after 24 hours.
Hygienic properties exhibited by single-use wood and plastic packaging on the microbial stability for fish (Ripolles-Avila et al., 2019)
Citation:
Ripolles-Avila, C., Hascoët, A. S., Ríos-Castillo, A. G., & Rodríguez-Jerez, J. J. (2019). Hygienic properties exhibited by single-use wood and plastic packaging on the microbial stability for fish. LWT, 113, 108309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2019.108309
Summary:
This study evaluated pine and poplar wood versus high-density polyethylene (HDPE) and expanded polystyrene (EPS) packaging for fish. While plastic materials showed bacterial growth (S. aureus counts increased by 0.7–1.2 log CFU/cm²), poplar slightly reduced bacteria (−0.1 log) and pine significantly reduced bacterial load by 2.84 log CFU/cm². Cross-contamination tests showed that wood packaging did not compromise fish quality or safety, with microbial counts decreasing after seven days in contact with fish.
Wood-based litter in poultry production: a review (Munir et al., 2019)
Citation:
Munir, M. T., Belloncle, C., & Irle, M. (2019). Wood-based litter in poultry production: a review. World’s Poultry Science Journal, 75(1), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933918000909
Summary:
This review examined the use of wood-based bedding in poultry production, focusing on its physical, chemical, and antimicrobial properties. In France, 80% of turkey production uses wood-based litter, which produces roughly 50% less ammonia than alternatives like sand or hulls. Wood litter supports bird welfare, reduces locomotion injuries, and promotes natural behaviors. Studies show potential improvements of 5–7% in weight gain, feed conversion, and survivability. The antimicrobial nature of wood may also help reduce certain pathogens in the poultry environment.
An assessment of Listeria monocytogenes transfer from wooden ripening shelves to cheeses: Comparison with glass and plastic surfaces (2017)
Citation:
[Authors not listed in abstract]. (2017). An assessment of L. monocytogenes transfer from wooden ripening shelves to cheeses: Comparison with glass and plastic surfaces. Food Control, 73(B), 273–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2016.08.014
Summary:
This study compared the transfer of Listeria monocytogenes from spruce cheese-ripening shelves, glass plates, and plastic sheets to pressed non-cooked cheeses. Boards were inoculated with ~10⁵ CFU/cm² L. monocytogenes, and transfer was measured over varying cheese contact times and moisture levels. Within the first hour, transfer rates were below 3% for all surfaces, with wooden boards showing the lowest rate at 0.55%. Wood moisture content and cheese dryness did not significantly affect transfer.
Hygienic acceptance of wood in food industry (Filip et al., 2012)
Citation:
Filip, S., Fink, R., Oder, M., & others. (2012). Hygienic acceptance of wood in food industry. Wood Science and Technology, 46, 657–665. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00226-011-0440-0
Summary:
This study compared wooden and plastic trays used in dried egg pasta production by swabbing 210 samples for total aerobic counts, Enterobacteriaceae, E. coli, moulds, yeasts, and Staphylococcus aureus. E. coli was not detected on either material. For all other microbial measurements, results showed statistical differences in colony counts between materials, but both met acceptable hygiene standards. The authors concluded that wood is suitable for use in the food industry from both hygienic and technological perspectives.
Other studies on the Antibacterial Activity of Wood
Wood and Its Impact on Humans and Environment Quality in Health Care Facilities (Kotradyova et al., 2019)
Citation:
Kotradyova, V., Vavrinsky, E., Kalinakova, B., Petro, D., Jansakova, K., Boles, M., & Svobodova, H. (2019). Wood and its impact on humans and environment quality in health care facilities. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(18), 3496. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16183496
Summary:
This case study explored the effects of wood in a healthcare environment by measuring physiological and emotional responses of 50 volunteers in a wooden waiting room at the National Oncology Institute in Bratislava. Over a 20-minute stay, measures included EEG, ECG, heart rate, respiration, blood pressure, and cortisol levels, as well as facial emotion analysis. Results suggested wood’s positive impact on the human nervous system, linked to its aesthetics, tactile comfort, scent, humidity regulation, low VOC emissions, and acoustic qualities.
Pine heartwood and glass surfaces: easy method to test the fate of bacterial contamination (Vainio-Kaila et al., 2011)
Citation:
Vainio-Kaila, T., Kyyhkynen, A., Viitaniemi, P., & others. (2011). Pine heartwood and glass surfaces: easy method to test the fate of bacterial contamination. European Journal of Wood and Wood Products, 69, 391–395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00107-010-0453-7
Summary:
This study compared the survival of Escherichia coli and Listeria monocytogenes on pine heartwood and glass surfaces. Bacterial counts decreased significantly faster on pine than on glass, a result confirmed by follow-up tests the next day to rule out simple adhesion effects. The findings support previous research suggesting that wood can have natural antibacterial properties.
An Evaluation of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Survival on Five Environmental Surfaces (Coughenour et al., 2011)
Citation:
Coughenour, C., Stevens, V., & Stetzenbach, L. D. (2011). An evaluation of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureussurvival on five environmental surfaces. Microbial Drug Resistance, 17(3), 457–464. https://doi.org/10.1089/mdr.2011.0007
Summary:
This study examined MRSA survival on glass, wood, vinyl, plastic, and cloth under two humidity levels (45–55% and 16%) and in the presence or absence of bovine serum albumin (BSA). MRSA survived the longest on plastic and vinyl and the shortest on wood (p < 0.001). The presence of BSA significantly extended survival time, while higher humidity shortened it. Even under less favorable conditions, MRSA remained viable for days on most surfaces.
Effects of Coatings on Wood's Antibacterial Properties
Wood Cutting Board Finishes and Their Effect on Bacterial Growth (Vega Gutierrez et al., 2023)
Citation:
Vega Gutierrez, S. M., Vega Gutierrez, P. T., Waite-Cusic, J., & Robinson, S. C. (2023). Wood cutting board finishes and their effect on bacterial growth. Coatings, 13(4), 752. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings13040752
Summary:
This study tested how applying coatings (hardening or non-hardening oils) to four wood species affected bacterial survival. Boards were inoculated with Listeria or Salmonella and then “stamped” onto sterile agar at set intervals to measure recoverable bacteria. Coated boards had significantly more recoverable bacteria on the surface than uncoated boards, with no significant difference between oil types. Species mattered: European beech had the lowest surface bacteria with Salmonella, and oak species had the lowest with Listeria. The results suggest that coatings can hinder wood’s natural ability to draw bacteria into its interior, where they are less likely to survive.
Adhesion of Bacteria to Wood Coatings (Bohinic et al., 2019)
Citation: Bohinc, K., Kekec, D., & Petrič, M. (2019).Adhesion of bacteria to wood coatings(Adhezija bakterij na lesne premaze).Les/Wood, 68(2), 45–58. URN: NBN:SI:doc‑CPZALCBL https://doi.org/10.26614/les-wood.2019.v68n02a04
Summary: The study evaluated how different coatings on beech plywood—linseed oil,water-borne stain,nitrocellulose varnish, andnano-coating—affect bacterial adhesion, usingPseudomonas aeruginosaas the test microbe. Surface textures and bacterial attachment were analyzed throughSEM micrographs. Among all tested coatings,linseed oil showed the highest bacterial adhesion. Surfaces treated with nano-coating (and potentially uncoated control) had the lowest adhesion. The authors note that these are preliminary findings and recommend further, more comprehensive research.