Alternative Indicator Bacteria Analyses for Evaluating the Sanitary Condition of Beef Carcasses

$37.00 plus tax (Refund Policy)

Buy Article:

Abstract:

Sponge samples were obtained from 47 (study 1) and 32 (study 2) beef carcasses in a small plant over 6 months. In study 2, slaughter equipment surfaces were also sampled. In study 1, the Petrifilm method was used to count presumptive Escherichia coli and spread plating on kanamycin esculin azide (KEA) agar with and without 40% added bile was used to count presumptive Enterococcus spp. Qualitative testing for presumptive E. coli and Enterococcus spp. in study 1 was done using lauryl sulfate tryptone broth (LST) + 4-methylumbelliferyl-β-D-glucuronide (MUG) and KEA + 40% bile broth, respectively. In study 2, LST + MUG was used as a most probable number (MPN) method along with the Petrifilm method. In the two studies, 8 (17.0%) and 11 (34.4%) carcasses were contaminated with presumptive E. coli; all but one contaminated carcass contained < 1 CFU/cm2. Presumptive Enterococcus spp. were recovered from 15 carcasses (31.9%) in study 1, but the KEA + 40% bile agar method lacked specificity (only 31.3% of isolates confirmed as Enterococcus spp.) The LST + MUG and Petrifilm methods were significantly (P , 0.05) related in terms of detecting presumptive E. coli, but the presence of presumptive Enterococcus spp. was not significantly related to the presence of presumptive E. coli. However, on slaughter plant equipment in Study 2 there was a statistically significant (P < 0.05) relationship between the presence of presumptive E. coli and presumptive Enterococcus spp. In study 2, there was no significant (P < 0.05) difference in numbers of presumptive E. coli (obtained using Petrifilm) on carcasses chilled 1 day (n = 16) and 7 days (n = 16), although more of the 7-day carcasses were contaminated (five and seven carcasses, respectively). For samples testing positive for presumptive E. coli, the 95% confidence intervals obtained using the LST + MUG MPN method included the Petrifilm value for all but one sample.

Document Type: Research Article

Affiliations: Department of Food Science, University of Wisconsin–Madison, 1605 Linden Drive, Madison, Wisconsin 53706-1565, USA

Publication date: January 1, 2000

More about this publication?
  • IAFP members must first sign in on the right to access full text articles of JFP

    First published in 1937, the Journal of Food Protection®, is a refereed monthly publication. Each issue contains scientific research and authoritative review articles reporting on a variety of topics in food science pertaining to food safety and quality. The Journal is internationally recognized as the leading publication in the field of food microbiology with a readership exceeding 11,000 scientists from 70 countries. The Journal of Food Protection® is indexed in Index Medicus, Current Contents, BIOSIS, PubMed, Medline, and many others.

    Print and online subscriptions are available to Members and Institutional subscribers. Online visitors who are not IAFP Members or journal subscribers will be charged on a pay-per-view basis. Information can be obtained by calling +1 800.369.6337; +1 515.276.3344; fax: +1 515.276.8655, E-mail: info@foodprotection.org or Web site: www.foodprotection.org
  • Information for Authors
  • Submit a Paper
  • Subscribe to this Title
  • Membership Information
  • Information for Advertisers
  • ingentaconnect is not responsible for the content or availability of external websites
Related content

Tools

Favourites

Share Content

Access Key

Free Content
Free content
New Content
New content
Open Access Content
Open access content
Subscribed Content
Subscribed content
Free Trial Content
Free trial content
Cookie Policy
X
Cookie Policy
ingentaconnect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more