Afflu L, Gyles C L
Department of Veterinary Microbiology and Immunology, University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
Int J Food Microbiol. 1997 Jul 22;37(2-3):241-4. doi: 10.1016/s0168-1605(97)00076-7.
Procedures involving Single Step Salmonella (SSS), 1-2 Test, and Modified Semisolid Rappaport-Vassiliadis Medium (MSRV) were compared for their speed and sensitivity in detection of Salmonella in ground beef contaminated with one isolate of each of five Salmonella serotypes. Inocula of 10, 10(2) and 10(3) CFU/g of ground beef were used. When pre-enrichment in buffered peptone water and selective enrichment in tetrathionate broth were used, SSS and MSRV detected all five species of Salmonella at all levels of contamination, whereas the 1-2 Test was positive in 0, 12, and 15 of 15 tests at 10, 10(2) and 10(3) CFU/g, respectively. When only pre-enrichment was used, the results with MSRV were unchanged but the SSS test failed to detect S. typhimurium. Thus, with pre-enrichment the MSRV and SSS procedures were equally sensitive and both produced a result on the third day. The 1-2 Test was less sensitive and slower, with results available on day-4. The MSRV protocol was best overall.
对涉及单步沙门氏菌(SSS)、1-2检测法以及改良半固体Rappaport-Vassiliadis培养基(MSRV)的检测程序,就其在检测被5种沙门氏菌血清型中的每一种的一个分离株污染的绞碎牛肉中沙门氏菌的速度和灵敏度进行了比较。使用了每克绞碎牛肉含10、10²和10³CFU的接种物。当采用在缓冲蛋白胨水中进行预增菌以及在四硫磺酸盐肉汤中进行选择性增菌时,SSS和MSRV在所有污染水平下均检测到了所有5种沙门氏菌,而1-2检测法在每克含10、10²和10³CFU时,分别在15次检测中的0次、12次和15次呈阳性。当仅使用预增菌时,MSRV的结果未变,但SSS检测法未能检测到鼠伤寒沙门氏菌。因此,采用预增菌时,MSRV和SSS程序同样灵敏,且均在第三天得出结果。1-2检测法灵敏度较低且速度较慢,在第4天得出结果。总体而言,MSRV方案最佳。