+ Site Statistics
References:
54,258,434
Abstracts:
29,560,870
PMIDs:
28,072,757
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Comparison of sampling methods for microbiological testing of beef animal rectal/colonal feces, hides, and carcasses



Comparison of sampling methods for microbiological testing of beef animal rectal/colonal feces, hides, and carcasses



Journal of Food Protection 65(4): 621-626



This study compared sampling methods for detecting Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Salmonella in beef cattle feces and on hides and carcasses and for enumerating E. coli biotype I counts (ECC) on carcasses. Fecal samples were collected by rectal/colonal palpation and colonal sponge swabbing. Hides were sampled by sponge swabbing three sites, hair clipping, excision, rinsing, and gauze swabbing, whereas carcasses were sampled by three-site thoracic and pattern-mark sponge swabbing and tissue excision. Overall, irrespective of sampling method, 36.7, 13.3, and 0.0% of lots contained at least one E. coli O157:H7-positive hide, fecal, and carcass sample, respectively, while the corresponding prevalence of Salmonella was 70.0, 16.7, and 6.7%, respectively. For hide sampling, excision and gauze swabbing yielded the fewest (13.3%) E. coli O157:H7-positive samples, while hair clipping and sponge swabbing yielded the most (23.3%). None of the carcass-sampling methods detected E. coli O157:H7 or differed (P > 0.05) in their ability to enumerate ECC. Colonal swabbing was the most effective (10.0%) method for detecting E. coli O157:H7 in feces. No differences (P > 0.05) in Salmonella prevalence were observed between carcass-sampling methods, although three-site sponge swabbing and tissue excision detected the most (3.3%). Hide rinsing was the most effective (P < 0.05) Salmonella detection method (63.3%), but dangers associated with its application may preclude its use by industry; there were no differences (P > 0.05) among other hide-sampling methods. No differences (P > 0.05) in Salmonella detection were observed between fecal-sampling methods. Overall, three-site sponge swabbing was the most feasible and effective sampling method for the detection of E. coli O157:H7 and Salmonella on hides and carcasses. Reprinted by permission of the publisher.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 003688120

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 11952210

DOI: 10.4315/0362-028X-65.4.621


Related references

Animal- and truckload-level associations between Escherichia coli O157:H7 in feces and on hides at harvest and contamination of preevisceration beef carcasses. Journal of Food Protection 73(6): 1030-1037, 2010

Excision vs sponge swabbing - a comparison of methods for the microbiological sampling of beef, pork and lamb carcasses. Journal of Applied Microbiology 98(4): 896-900, 2005

A comparison of wet-dry swabbing and excision sampling methods for microbiological testing of bovine, porcine, and ovine carcasses at red meat slaughterhouses. Journal of Food Protection 68(10): 2155-2162, 2005

Salmonella on feces, hides and carcasses in beef slaughter facilities in Venezuela. International Journal of Food Microbiology 166(2): 226-230, 2013

An in vitro system for the comparison of excision and wet-dry swabbing for microbiological sampling of beef carcasses. Journal of Food Protection 70(4): 930-936, 2007

Correlation of enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli O157 prevalence in feces, hides, and carcasses of beef cattle during processing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 97(7): 2999-3003, 2000

Disinfectant and antibiotic susceptibility profiles of Escherichia coli O157:H7 strains from cattle carcasses, feces, and hides and ground beef from the United States. Journal of Food Protection 76(1): 6-17, 2013

Experimental comparison of excision and swabbing microbiological sampling methods for carcasses. Journal of Food Protection 68(10): 2163-2168, 2005

Prevalence and antibiotic susceptibility of Salmonella isolated from beef animal hides and carcasses. Journal of Food Protection 65(2): 284-290, 2002

Comparison of excision, swabbing and rinsing sampling methods to determine the microbiological quality of broiler carcasses. Journal of Food Safety 32(1): 134-139, 2012

Novel Continuous and Manual Sampling Methods for Beef Trim Microbiological Testing. Journal of Food Protection 81(10): 1605-1613, 2018

Evaluation of microbiological sampling methods on poultry carcasses and a study of bacterial contamination in broiler carcasses. Journal of the Japan Veterinary Medical Association 54(11): 857-861, 2001

Microbiological recovery from bovine, swine, equine, and ovine carcasses: Comparison of excision, sponge and swab sampling methods. Food Control 50: 919-924, 2015

Comparison of neck skin excision and whole carcass rinse sampling methods for microbiological evaluation of broiler carcasses before and after immersion chilling. Journal of Food Protection 73(5): 976-980, 2010

Microbial populations on animal hides and beef carcasses at different stages of slaughter in plants employing multiple-sequential interventions for decontamination. Journal of Food Protection 63(8): 1080-1086, 2000