Detergent formulation for dishwashing machine

Abstract

The objective of the present invention is in the field of cleaning agent in particular detergents. In particular, it relates to a novel detergent formulation for an automatic dishwashing. The formulation provides excellent cleaning and finishing; it is environmentally friendlier than traditional compositions and allows for a more energy efficient automatic dishwashing process.

Claims

1. A detergent formulation for a dishwashing machine, wherein the formulation improves tableware or dishware cleaning, sanitizing, and/or stain removal, and said formulation comprises: a. a nonionic surfactant, wherein the nonionic surfactant is an alkyl polyglucoside having a concentration between 5% and 10% by weight, b. a dispersing agent that is sodium polyacrylate, sodium carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC), or sodium carboxymethyl inulin (CMI), wherein the dispersing agent has a concentration between 2% and 5% by weight, c. a builder agent, wherein the builder agent is carbonate and has a concentration between 3% and 10% by weight, d. an enzyme stabilizer that is glycine, wherein the enzyme stabilizer has a concentration between 7% and 20% by weight, e. an enzyme, wherein the enzyme is a purified thermostable T1 lipase enzyme stable at temperatures between 55 C. and 80 C., f. a filler that is sodium or potassium sulfate, wherein the filler has a concentration between 20% and 50% by weight, and g. water, wherein carbonate and glycine are present at a ratio of 30:70, and wherein the formulation has a pH of at least 9.0 at a concentration of 1.5 grams per liter in water.

2. The formulation according to claim 1, wherein the builder agent comprises sodium or potassium carbonate.

3. The formulation according to claim 1, wherein the purified thermostable T1 lipase enzyme has a concentration between 3% and 10% by weight.

4. The formulation according to claim 1, wherein said formulation is housed in a permeable container such that it can be placed inside an automatic dishwasher without interfering with said dishwasher's normal usage; and wherein said container comprises a material selected from the group consisting of glass, plastic, ceramic, metal, and combinations thereof.

5. The formulation according to claim 1, wherein said formulation is in a form selected from the group consisting of liquid, gel, tablet, powder, water-soluble pouch, and mixtures thereof.

6. A method for washing tableware or dishware in a dishwashing machine, comprising washing the said tableware or dishware at an operating temperature of 40 C. to 65 C. with the formulation as defined in claim 1.

7. The formulation according to claim 1, further comprising one or more enzymes for the breakdown of proteins and/or carbohydrates.

8. The formulation according to claim 1, wherein the formulation has a pH of 9.25.

Description

DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

(1) The accompanied drawings constitute part of this specification and include an exemplary or preferred embodiment of the invention, which may be embodied in various forms. It should be understood, however, the disclosed preferred embodiments are merely exemplary of the invention. Therefore, the figures disclosed herein are not to be interpreted as limiting, but merely as the basis for the claims and for teaching one skilled in the art of the invention.

(2) FIG. 1 shows: Dishwashing performance of detergent A containing 10% surfactant, 2.5% dispersing agent, and 50 mg T1 lipase in water of 0 ppm CaCO.sub.3 (soft water) buffered with glycine-NaOH (pH 9.0) at 40 C., 50 C., and 60 C.

(3) FIG. 2 shows: Dishwashing performance of detergent B containing 10% surfactant, 2.5% dispersing agent, and 50 mg T1 lipase in hard water of 350 ppm CaCO.sub.3 buffered with glycine-NaOH (pH 9.0) at 40 C., 50 C., and 60 C.

(4) FIG. 3 shows Dishwashing performance of detergent C containing 10% surfactant, 50 mg T1 lipase, and 0-10% dispersing agent in hard water of 350 ppm at CaCO.sub.3 buffered with glycine-NaOH (pH 9.0) at 50 C.

(5) Error! Reference source not found. FIG. 4 shows Dishwashing performance of detergent D containing 5-10% surfactant, 2.5% dispersing agent, 10% alkalinity agent, and 50 mg T1 lipase in hard water of 350 ppm CaCO.sub.3 at 60 C.

(6) FIG. 5 shows Dishwashing performance of detergent E containing 10% surfactant, 2.5% dispersing agent, 10% alkalinity agent, and 0-100 mg of T1 lipase in hard water of 350 CaCO.sub.3 at 60 C.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

(7) Where a range of values is provided, it is understood that each intervening value, to the tenth of the unit of the lower limit unless the context clearly dictates otherwise, between the upper and lower limit of that range and any other stated or intervening value in that stated range, is encompassed within the invention. The upper and lower limits of these smaller ranges may independently be included in the smaller ranges, and are also encompassed within the invention, subject to any specifically excluded limit in the stated range. Where the stated range includes one or both of the limits, ranges excluding either or both of those included limits are also included in the invention.

(8) Unless defined otherwise, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to which this invention belongs. Although any methods and materials similar or equivalent to those described herein can also be used in the practice or testing of the present invention, the preferred methods and materials are now described. All publications mentioned herein are incorporated herein by reference to disclose and describe the methods and/or materials in connection with which the publications are cited. It must be noted that as used herein and in the appended claims, the singular forms a, an, and the include plural referents unless the context clearly dictates otherwise.

(9) As used herein, the terms detergent formulation refer to mixtures of chemical ingredients intended for use in a wash medium for the cleaning of soiled objects. Detergent compositions/formulations generally include at least one surfactant, and may optionally include hydrolytic enzymes, oxido-reductases, builders, bleaching agents, bleach activators, bluing agents and fluorescent dyes, caking inhibitors, masking agents, enzyme activators, antioxidants, and solubilizers.

(10) Since this research focuses on automatic dishwashing, the enzyme of interest should be able to remove the main components of food stains, i.e., proteins, carbohydrates, and fats. Preferred in the context of the present invention is further described by thermostable T1 lipase (E.C. 3.1.1.3) (which is locally (Malaysia) produced) having potential as a detergent enzyme. Like most lipases, T1 lipase cuts the insoluble triglycerides at the ester bond into glycerol and free fatty acids. It is relatively stable at temperature of 55 C. up to 80 C. and between pH 6.0 and 11.0. The wide range of working temperature makes T1 lipase suitable for detergent formulation(s), especially in automatic dishwashing where washing temperature can reach 100 C. In addition, the T1 lipase showed high activity with nonionic surfactants and many cooking oils, especially soybean and olive oil [Leow, T. C., Rahman, R. N. Z. R. A., Basri, M., and Salleh, A. B. (2007) A thermoalkaliphilic lipase of Geobacillus sp. T1. Extremophiles. 11(3): p. 527-535.], which were also the constituting oils of the soil (peanut butter) being used. The other main components in detergent formulation(s) such as surfactants, bleaches, alkalinity agents, and dispersing agents were also evaluated for compatibilities with T1 lipase and dishwashing performance. The T1 lipase is alkalophilic, detergent builder-stable, and has high activity. In addition, the T lipase having the means of improving its performance by the addition of calcium ions; thus, the enzyme is suitable and works well in hard water, which contains mostly calcium and magnesium ions. The presence of these ions normally prevents surfactants from performing properly; thus, the enzyme will give a synergistic effect when it is being added together with the surfactant. The surfactant helps in increasing enzyme digestion through emulsification of the fatty soil.

EXAMPLES OF CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION

(11) While the present invention has been described with specificity in accordance with certain of its preferred embodiments, the following examples serve only to illustrate the invention and are not intended to limit the invention within the principles and scope of the broadest interpretations and equivalent configurations thereof.

(12) Materials

(13) All materials used in the experiments were obtained from the stated suppliers and used without any further modification. Oil Red (Sudan III) CI 26100, Polyethylene glycol 300 PEG 300 (nonionic), polysorbate 80 (Tween 80, nonionic), sodium dodecyl sulfate SDS (anionic), cetyl trimethylammonium bromide CTAB (cationic), sodium carboxymethyl cellulose CMC (M.sub.w=90,000 g/mol) and sodium polyacrylate NaPA (M.sub.w=2100 g/mol) were all obtained from Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, Mo.; sodium carboxymethyl inulin CMI (Carboxyline) was obtained from Royal Cosun, Netherland; alkyl polyglucoside APG (Glucopon 600 CS UP, nonionic) was obtained from Henkel KgaA, Dsseldorf, Germany; APG (Triton CG-600) was obtained from Dow, Midland, Mich.; acetone, calcium chloride dihydrate, copper (II) acetate monohydrate, magnesium sulfate heptahydrate, glycine, sodium bicarbonate, sodium carbonate, sodium citrate, sodium hydroxide, sodium perborate, sodium percarbonate, and sodium tripolyphosphate were all obtained from Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany; olive oil (Bertolli, Italy) and Skippy creamy peanut butter (Unilever, Malaysia) were obtained from a local supermarket; The peanut butter consisted of approximately 50% triglycerides from different sources (i.e. peanut, rapeseed, cottonseed, and soybean oil).

(14) Methods

(15) Enzyme Production

(16) The T1 lipase protein was expressed in E. coli BL21 containing the heterologous protein from Geobacillus zalihae strain T1. The E. coli BL21 bacteria were grown in a 200 ml LB containing 35 mg/ml chloramphenicol and 50 mg/ml ampicillin at 37 C. and 200 rpm of agitation rate. The culture was then induced with 0.025 mM isopropyl -D-thiogalactopyranosidase (IPTG) when the optical density (OD) at 600 nm of the cell culture reached 0.75. After 12 hours, the culture was centrifuged at 10,000 rpm, 4 C. for 10 min, and the pellet was kept in 80 C. freezer. The pellet was resuspended in 50 mM Glycine-NaOH buffer (pH 9.0), and the solution was sonicated (Branson, USA) for 4 min (inclusive of 30 s rest for every 30 s sonication interval). The solution was then centrifuged at 12,000g, and the resulting supernatant containing the crude enzyme was kept in 80 C. freezer and thawed upon use.

(17) Lipase Stability Tests

(18) The compatibility of the T1 lipase with the other components of the formulated detergent was evaluated by incubating the enzyme in 0.2% (w/v) of those components, i.e., surfactants, bleaches, and alkalinity agents in a water bath (Protech, Malaysia) at 60 C. for 30 min. After 30 min, the enzyme was assayed for its residual activity.

(19) Lipase Assay

(20) The residual activity of the T1 lipase was assayed colorimetrically using a method previously described with slight modifications [Kwon, D. and Rhee, J. (1986) A simple and rapid colorimetric method for determination of free fatty acids for lipase assay. J Am Oil Chem Soc. 63(1): p. 89-92]. A cupric acetate pyridine reagent was prepared by mixing 5% (w/v) copper (II) acetate with DI water and adjusting the solution pH to 6.1 with pyridine. The substrate emulsion used consisted of olive oil/50 mM of Glycine-NaOH buffer at pH 9.0 (1:1), which was homogenized using a homogenizer (Heidolph, Germany). The reaction mixture, which consisted of 2.5 ml substrate emulsion, 0.01 ml T1 lipase (29.8 U/mg), 0.99 ml 50 mM Glycine-NaOH buffer (pH 9.0), and 20 l 20 mM CaCl.sub.2, was incubated in the same water bath at the enzyme optimum temperature of 70 C. for 30 min at 200 rpm. After 30 min, the reaction was stopped by adding 5 ml isooctane and 1 ml 6 N HCl, and the mixture was vortexed for 30 s and left for 15 min. 4 ml of the upper layer of the mixture, which contained the fatty acids, was transferred to a test tube containing 1 ml of the cupric acetate pyridine reagent, and the mixture was vortexed for 30 s and left for 1 hour. The color of the solution was then evaluated colorimetrically by reading the OD using the Ultraspec 2100 Pro spectrophotometer (Amersham Bioscience, Sweden) at 715 nm. All assays were done in triplicates. 1 unit (U) of lipase activity was defined as the rate of 1 mol of fatty acid released per minute under standard assay conditions.

(21) Detergent Formulation

(22) The detergent formulation was prepared by adding components that have shown stability towards T1 lipase. The detergent formulation and their quantities were summarized below: 1. Alkyl polyglucoside (nonionic surfactant) E.g. Glucopon, Triton (5-10%) 2. Polyacrylate (dispersing agent) E.g. sodium polyacrylate, sodium carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC), or sodium carboxymethyl inuline (CMI) (2-5%) 3. Carbonate (builder/pH agent) E.g. sodium or potassium carbonate (3-10%) 4. Enzyme stabilizer E.g. sodium citrate, glycine, or sodium bicarbonate (7-20%) 5. T1 lipase (enzyme) (3-10%) 6. Water or Sulfate (filler) E.g. sodium or potassium sulfate (20-50%)
Hard Water Preparation

(23) A stock solution of hard water was prepared by mixing 30 mM CaCl.sub.2.2H.sub.2O and 10 mM MgSO.sub.4.7H.sub.2O with 1 L water, which corresponded to 5000 ppm CaCO.sub.3. The stock solution was then diluted and standardized to 350 ppm CaCO.sub.3 by using a water hardness indicator (HI 96735 Hardness ISM, Hanna Instruments, Italy).

(24) Dishwashing Tests

(25) Dishwashing tests were done using the Leenert's Improved Detergency Tester (Japan) as described previously but with slight modifications [8]. Sets of microscope glass slides (6 pieces per set) were dipped for 1-2 s in a soil bath containing 20 g of peanut butter, 0.1 g of Oil Red lysochrome, and 60 ml of acetone, and dried for 2 hours. The dishwashing solutions were prepared by mixing 1.5 g of the formulated detergent solution with appropriate amount of T1 lipase (29.8 U/mg) and 1000 ml water of either 0 or 350 ppm CaCO.sub.3. The dried slides were washed in the dishwashing solutions prepared previously at different temperatures (40 C., 50 C., and 60 C.) with a stirring speed of 25010 rpm for 3 minutes. The washed slides were then rinsed with water of the same hardness for 1 minute. After rinsing, the slides were air-dried for 24 hours after which the slides were immersed in 100 ml acetone, and the OD at 518 nm of the red-colored acetone was evaluated using a spectrophotometer. The dishwashing performance was evaluated according to this formula:

(26) $\mathrm{Percent}\mathrm{soil}\mathrm{removed}\left(\%\right)=\left[\frac{\left(\mathrm{BW}-\mathrm{AW}\right)}{\mathrm{BW}}\right]100$

(27) where BW was the OD of the red-colored acetone immersed with a set of slides that were not washed, and AW was the OD of the red-colored acetone immersed with the set of slides that were washed. All washing and reading tests were done in duplicates to ensure reproducibility.

(28) Statistical Analysis

(29) Statistical analyses were done using one-way ANOVA and the Turkey test at 0.05 level using the SPSS Statistics 20.0.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, Ill., USA).

(30) Results and Discussions

(31) Stability of T1 Lipase in Detergent Components

(32) Stability of T1 lipase in various surfactants and bleaches was checked, and the results are shown in Table 1. The nonionic surfactants were mostly compatible. The interaction between nonionic surfactants and lipase is usually hydrophobic [9]; thus, the interaction might not seriously damage the protein structure. The surfactants that are made of sugar alcohol such as the Glucopon 600 CS UP (G600) and Tween 80 (T80) showed the highest stability with T1 lipase followed by PEG 300 (Table 1). One study showed that the protective effect of polyhydric or sugar alcohol improved lipase stability regardless of the nature of the sugar alcohol [10]. Another study also showed that the addition of a sugar alcohol, sorbitol showed improved lipase stability compared to incubating in ethylene glycol alone [11]. These results showed that sugar alcohol improved the stability of lipases, especially at elevated temperature.

(33) Table 2 also shows that T1 lipase was not compatible with ionic surfactants. Although anionic bile salt helps in lipid digestion in human intestines [12], the anionic sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS), which is a popular choice of surfactant in detergent formulations, destabilized T1 lipase (Table 1). SDS is generally known to denature proteins by binding to the protein backbone and unfolding the native structure, and it is common for lipases to be denatured by SDS. However, the combination of nonionic and anionic surfactants has shown to prevent enzyme denaturation. Table 1 showed that the combination of the nonionic G600 and anionic SDS prevented further denaturation of T1 lipase. This method has been used not only for the stability of enzymes in formulation but also for overall cleaning in which some studies have shown better cleaning when two surfactant systems were mixed [13]. The cationic CTAB strongly destabilized T1 lipase because the enzyme has a slight negative charge [6]. Consequently, T1 lipase might have precipitated and lost its functionality. The stability and improvement of enzymes by surfactants therefore vary depending on the enzyme and its characteristics [9].

(34) Perborates and percarbonates strongly destabilized T1 lipase (Table 1) albeit being mild bleaching/oxidizing agents. It is generally known that enzymes are susceptible to denaturation by bleaching agents unless they are genetically engineered to be more resistant to bleaching agents. Proteases such as Durazym and Purafect are two examples of proteases that are genetically engineered using site-directed mutagenesis to improve their stability with bleaching agents [14]. This implied that T1 lipase could also be genetically modified to be stable with bleaching agents. Bleaches are essential because some stains such as tea and coffee stains cannot be easily removed by surfactants and unless specific enzymes that can break down these polyaromatic compounds are employed as well.

(35) Stability of T1 lipase in various alkalinity agents was also checked, and the relative activities and resulting pH of the alkalinity agents in solutions were summarized in Table 1.

(36) TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Stability of T1 lipase in various surfactants and bleaches Surfactant or bleach Relative activity (%) PEG 300 (nonionic) 61 G600 (nonionic) 136 Tween 80 (nonionic) 98 SDS (anionic) 14 SDS/G600 (1:1) 43 CTAB (cationic) 1.9 Sodium perborate 3.4 Sodium percarbonate 0.3 w/o (control) 100

(37) Most of the alkalinity agents also bind to cations to reduce water hardness. Sodium carbonate (SC) and sodium tripolyphosphate (STPP) gave good pHs but showed the lowest residual activities. This might be due to the binding of SC and STPP to Ca.sup.2+ that were essential to T1 lipase in maintaining its structural stability. This occurrence was shown in a study whereby both SC and STPP bound to Ca.sup.2+, producing CaCO.sub.3 precipitates and Ca.sub.3(PO.sub.4).sub.2, respectively [15]. On the other hand, sodium citrate, which was also proven to be a good metal chelator, did not greatly affect the stability of T1 lipase compared to that of SC and STPP (Table 2). Sodium citrate had a binding constant 1-3 orders lower than that of enzymes [16], which might explain why the stability of T1 lipase was not greatly affected. Since sodium citrate has a low pKa, it could only be used as an auxiliary component with other mild builders in a detergent formulation.

(38) Since T1 lipase has an optimum pH of 9.0 and stable in between pH 6.0 and 11.0 [6], carbonate and bicarbonate were chosen due to their high pKa values. However, the buffering capacity of bicarbonate is only moderate, and T1 lipase was greatly destabilized by carbonate. Fortunately, a combination of carbonate/glycine at a ratio of 30:70 in an aqueous solution, which gave a resulting pH of 9.25 (close to the T1 lipase optimum pH at pH 9.0), showed high enzymatic stability (Table 2). This might indicate that glycine has a stabilizing effect on T1 lipase, compensating the effect of the reduction of Ca.sup.2+.

(39) TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Stability of T1 lipase in various alkalinity agents Alkalinity agents Relative activity (%) pH Sodium carbonate (SC) 1 10.84 SC:glycine (30:70) 129 9.25 Sodium bicarbonate (SB) 94 8.63 SC:SB (30:70) 0 9.50 Sodium citrate 48 8.30 Sodium tripolyphosphate 0 9.60 Glycine-NaOH (control) 100 9.00
Dishwashing Performance

(40) Dishwashing performance was evaluated in term of percent soil removed.

(41) The dishwashing performance of detergent A in ion-free water at various temperatures is shown in FIG. 1. As expected, the dishwashing performance improved as the temperature increased. At 0 ppm of CaCO.sub.3, a full detergency was almost achievable without the help of T1 lipase. The improvement after adding T1 lipase also became smaller after each increment in temperature, showing that elevated temperature lowered surface tension of water and promoted better soil removal. In addition, the dishwashing performance of the formulated detergent was quickly observable in the absence of ionic interference, especially at 60 C. where 50% of soil removal was observed within half of the duration of the test.

(42) FIG. 2 compares the dishwashing performance of detergent B in hard water of 350 ppm CaCO.sub.3 at various temperatures. Similar to the previous results, the dishwashing performance improved as the temperature increased but not as much as that in water of 0 ppm CaCO.sub.3. The performance of the nonionic surfactant was severely affected by the high amount of Ca.sup.2+ and Mg.sup.2+ presence in the water. This might be due to the formation of a highly charged structure made of the surfactant and ions, which prevented the removal of soil from the hard surface [13].

(43) Although nonionic surfactants (i.e. ethoxylates) are mostly insensitive to hard water, alkyl polyglucosides (APG) are different as they are made of sugar alcohols. A study showed that unlike ethoxylates, which are mostly uncharged, APG micelles are negatively charged [17]. This might explain the severe performance deterioration of APG in the presence of electrolytes, specifically cationic electrolytes.

(44) FIG. 2 also shows that the improvements in dishwashing performance by the addition of T1 lipase were more apparent in hard water because the enzyme was not negatively affected by the Ca.sup.2+ and Mg.sup.2+ presence in the water [6]. The improvement after adding T1 lipase was also more dramatic at 60 C. as the crude T1 lipase reached its optimum temperature. The purified T1 lipase has an optimum temperature of 70 C., and relative activities of 50% and 75% at 50 C. and 60 C., respectively [6]. At higher temperature, the active site of T1 lipase might become more exposed; thus, giving higher activity.

(45) FIG. 3 compares the dishwashing performance of detergent C in hard water of 350 ppm CaCO.sub.3 at 50 C. with increasing concentration of dispersing agent. Polyacrylate polymer is an excellent dispersing agent with mild chelating power and can reduce the effect of hard water by inhibiting calcium carbonate crystal formation. The effect of polyacrylate polymer can be seen in the improvement of dishwashing performance, especially when the concentration of dispersing agent was increased (with or without adding T1 lipase) (FIG. 3). However, better improvements were seen when dispersing agent and T1 lipase were combined. The improvements in detergency could be due to the synergistic effect between the dispersant and T1 lipase. Polyacrylates increased the negative charges in the solution, increasing the repulsive forces between the polymer and soil, and preventing redeposition of soil back to the hard surface. This may allow more soil to disperse into the bulk phase, exposing and increasing the surface area of the substrate for T1 lipase digestion.

(46) The increase in negative charges had also shown to increase lipase activity through another mechanism. In one study, polyelectrolyte complex micelles consisting of Lipolase (a lipase), a negatively charged polyacrylate polymer with molecular weight of 10,000 g/mol, and a positively charged copolymer showed higher activity than the free lipase [18]. This finding inferred that the negative charges from the polymer led to an open confirmation of the lipase; thus, increasing the activity of the lipase, which would otherwise be in a closed confirmation in the bulk. The activity of lipase is also generally known to increase when it is activated whereby its lid is in the open confirmation, which occurs at the oil/water interface.

(47) FIG. 3 also shows that at the highest concentration of polyacrylates (10%), the dishwashing performance was not significantly improved by the addition of T1 lipase. This might be due to the reduction of hard water by polyacrylates, improving the functionality of the surfactant. A study showed that hard water reduction was achieved through adsorption of the polyacrylates to the calcium carbonate surface [19]. This study showed that polyacrylates with lower molecular weight (2000-5000 g/mol) were shown to be better at adsorbing compared to those of higher than 5000 g/mol in which precipitation would occur instead of adsorption. This study also showed that precipitation would reduce the amount of polyacrylates available in the solution.

(48) Besides reducing hard water, polyacrylates had also shown to reduce water spot formation due to precipitation of calcium and carbonates. This reduction was achieved due to reduction of calcium carbonate by the polyacrylates through inhibition of crystal formations. One study showed that polyacrylates with molecular weight between 2100 and 240,000 g/mol were shown to be effective in dispersing a large soil into smaller fragments [20]. In addition, the dispensability would not only inhibit the crystal formations but also reduce redeposition of soil back to the cleaned surface.

(49) After the formulated detergent and T1 lipase had been evaluated for dishwashing performance in hard water, they were tested in the presence of water softening agents, i.e. sodium carbonate, while maintaining the T1 lipase stability using glycine in the ratio previously mentioned. This stabilizing system served as a substitute for the glycine-NaOH buffer (pH 9.0). Glycine-NaOH buffer was effective only at certain concentration and thus was deemed not applicable for dishwashing.

(50) FIG. 4 shows the dishwashing performance of detergent D in hard water of 350 ppm CaCO.sub.3 at 60 C. Sodium carbonate improved dishwashing performance of the detergent D (10% surfactant) by approximately 7% and 2% without and with T1 lipase, respectively (FIGS. 2 and 4). This showed that sodium carbonate might have reduced the hard water and slightly improved the surfactant functionality, while T1 lipase did not show any significant improvement.

(51) FIG. 4 also shows that the dishwashing performance decreased by almost 50% when the surfactant was reduced by 50% and T1 lipase was removed. However, the dishwashing performance of the halved concentrated surfactant was higher when T1 lipase was added compared to the performance of the halved concentrated surfactant alone. This proved again that T1 lipase was not negatively affected by the presence of Ca.sup.2+ and Mg.sup.2+ in the water, while the surfactant was. This could also be explained by the high efficiency of an enzyme system compared to a surfactant system, which the later depends on critical micelle concentration (CMC) and solubility to work efficiently.

(52) While surfactant concentration showed an important aspect in dishwashing, it is interesting to see whether the amount of T1 lipase played an important role in dishwashing performance. FIG. 5 compares the dishwashing performance of detergent E with different amount of added T1 lipase in hard water of CaCO.sub.3 at 60 C. The results show that adding T1 lipase almost doubled the dishwashing performance; however, adding more T1 lipase did not substantially improve the performance (FIG. 5). All results showed significant mean differences at the 0.05 level, using the Turkey test.

(53) In addition, the maximum dishwashing performance of the formulated detergent containing T1 lipase in hard water was slightly above 40%. This could be explained by the nature of the soil, which consisted of fat, protein, and carbohydrate. Since T1 lipase only break down fats, it is also important to consider other enzymes that can break down proteins and carbohydrates.

(54) These dishwashing results may suggest that a substantial increase in dishwashing performance could be achieved by adding other enzymes that are compatible with T1 lipase and the other components, and which could become auxiliary components, especially in this case where the surfactant and T1 lipase showed synergistic effect in dishwashing performance in the presence of ionic interferences.

(55) The performance of surfactants can be negatively affected by the presence of metal ions. Most ADD aims at reducing metal ion interferences during washing by incorporating chelating/complexing agents or builders, such as sodium tripolyphosphate (STPP), sodium silicates, sodium citrates, sodium carbonates, and zeolites. The chelating agents bind to metal ions, allowing the surfactant to perform effectively. However, it is well known that enzymes work well with metal ions, so our approach is to incorporate an enzyme into the formulation. STPP has been by far the best builder except that it is no longer allowed in modern formulations. Sodium carbonate has thus been widely used because of its cheap cost. Other formulations contains new, patented chemicals that work almost as good as STPP, such as carboxymethyl inuline (CMI) and different versions of polyacrylates.

(56) Preferred in this respect is that the new formulation of this present invention contains polyacrylates, which prevent calcite formations and disperse soils, and an enzyme that is able to digest the soil even in hard water.

(57) Table 4 to 6 represents temperature improved detergency. Hard water reduced detergency. Adding T1 improved detergency

(58) TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 4 Cleanliness (%) 0 ppm 350 ppm (T1) (+T1) (T1) (+T1) 40 0.3764 0.3884 1.1610 1.0828 40 0.5398 0.2543 1.1500 1.0700 50 0.1987 0.1432 1.1360 0.9949 50 0.1374 0.1504 1.0757 1.0632 60 0.0835 0.0705 1.0060 0.8663 60 0.0800 0.0750 0.9311 0.8273

(59) TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 5 Cleanliness (%) 0 ppm 350 ppm (T1) (+T1) (T1) (+T1) 40 69.03 68.04 4.48 10.91 40 55.59 79.08 5.38 11.96 50 83.65 88.22 6.53 18.14 50 88.70 87.63 11.50 12.53 60 93.13 94.20 17.23 28.72 60 93.42 93.83 23.39 31.94

(60) TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 6 Cleanliness (%) 0 PPM 350 PPM Average Stdev Average Stdev (T1) (+T1) (T1) (+T1) (T1) (+T1) (T1) (+T1) 40 62.31 73.56 9.51 7.801795 4.93 11.44 0.64 0.74469 50 86.17 87.92 3.57 0.418888 9.01 15.33 3.51 3.970712 60 93.27 94.01 0.20 0.261805 20.31 30.33 4.36 2.271887

(61) Table 7 represents the dispersing agent effect

(62) TABLE-US-00006 Concentrations Read 1 Read 2 ReadAve Clean 1 Clean 2 CleanAve Stdev 0.0 (T1) 1.2000 1.1900 1.1950 1.7 2.1 1.9 0.290895 (+T1) 1.1915 1.1800 1.1858 2.4 2.9 2.7 0.334529 2.5 (T1) 1.1477 1.1000 1.1239 7.5 9.5 8.5 1.387568 (+T1) 1.0034 0.9700 0.9867 18.8 20.2 19.5 0.971588 5.0 (T1) 1.0123 1.1000 1.0562 13.1 9.5 11.3 2.551146 (+T1) 0.8791 0.9000 0.8896 26.8 26.0 26.4 0.60797 10.0 (T1) 1.5340 1.5000 1.5170 26.7 28.3 27.5 1.148614 (+T1) 1.4218 1.4000 1.4109 32.1 33.1 32.6 0.736464

(63) Table 8 represents the surfactant concentration effect

(64) TABLE-US-00007 Clean Clean Read 1 Read 2 ReadAve 1 2 cleanave stdev D 0.9674 0.9090 0.9382 24.12 28.70 26.41 3.24 D + E 0.8910 0.8304 0.8607 30.11 34.87 32.49 3.36 D/2 1.1365 1.0359 1.0862 10.86 18.75 14.80 5.58 D/2 + E 0.9223 0.9108 0.9166 27.66 28.56 28.11 0.64

(65) TABLE-US-00008 Enzyme (mg/L): 0 25 50 100 Read 1 1.3134 0.7523 0.9357 0.7795 Read 2 1.2297 1.0941 1.0904 0.9971 Read 3 0.7286 Clean 1 20.00 42.18 43.00 40.09 Clean 2 25.09 33.35 33.58 39.26 Clean 3 44.00 AveRead 22.55 37.77 38.29 41.12 AveClean 22.55 37.77 38.29 41.12 Stdev 3.600145 6.242399 6.663069 2.531287

(66) Table 9 represents the effect of enzyme