Suppr超能文献

宰后浸水冷鲜鸡微生物采样方法的评估

Evaluation of three sampling methods for the microbiological analysis of broiler carcasses after immersion chilling.

机构信息

Laboratório de Bioquímica de Alimentos-LbqA, Faculdade de Farmácia, UFMG, Avenida Antonio Carlos 6627, Belo Horizonte, MG 31270-901, Brasil.

出版信息

J Food Prot. 2013 Aug;76(8):1330-5. doi: 10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-13-004.

Abstract

Countries have different official programs and implement different sampling methods for the detection of Salmonella on poultry carcasses. In Brazil, a 25-g sample of skin and muscle excision (SME) from the wings, neck, and pericloacal parts is used; in the European Union (EU), a 25-g sample of neck skin (NSE) is used; and, in the United States, the whole carcass is rinsed with 400 ml of diluent (WCR). In the present study, these methods were evaluated to compare Salmonella occurrence and counts of hygiene indicator microorganisms (Escherichia coli, Enterobacteriaceae, and total viable count of aerobic mesophilic bacteria) using different carcasses from the same flock and also using different analytical units taken from the same carcass. Eighty flocks, with four broiler carcasses from each, were included in this study; three broilers were sampled according to protocols from Brazil, the EU, and the United States, and the last one by all three methods. SME, NSE, and WCR provided equivalent results (P > 0.05) for Salmonella detection on broiler carcasses when using different carcasses from the same flock and when using the same carcass. The predominant serovar was Salmonella Enteritidis. For the enumeration of hygiene indicator microorganisms, WRC provided higher counts than SME or NSE (P < 0.05), when using both the same or different carcasses. Therefore, it is possible to directly compare Salmonella results in poultry carcasses when using the methods recommended by the legislative bodies of Brazil, the United States, and the EU. However, WCR provides the best results for hygiene indicator microorganisms.

摘要

不同国家针对禽肉沙门氏菌检测有不同的官方方案和采样方法。在巴西,采用 25 克翅、颈和肛周部位的皮肤和肌肉切除物(SME)样本;在欧盟,采用 25 克颈部皮肤样本(NSE);而在美国,整个屠体用 400 毫升稀释液冲洗(WCR)。本研究评估了这些方法,比较了同一批禽肉不同样本中沙门氏菌的发生情况和卫生指示微生物(大肠杆菌、肠杆菌科和需氧嗜温细菌总数)的计数,同时还比较了同一屠体不同分析单位的结果。本研究共纳入 80 个鸡群,每个鸡群有 4 只肉鸡屠体;根据巴西、欧盟和美国的方案,对 3 只肉鸡进行了采样,第 4 只肉鸡则采用了所有三种方法。对于同一批禽肉不同样本和同一屠体的沙门氏菌检测,SME、NSE 和 WCR 提供了等效的结果(P>0.05)。优势血清型为肠炎沙门氏菌。对于卫生指示微生物的计数,WRC 提供的结果高于 SME 或 NSE(P<0.05),无论是同一批还是不同批禽肉均如此。因此,当使用巴西、美国和欧盟立法机构推荐的方法时,可直接比较禽肉中沙门氏菌的结果。然而,WCR 最适合卫生指示微生物的检测。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验