Influence of Housing Systems on Microbial Load and Antimicrobial Resistance Patterns of Escherichia coli Isolates from Eggs Produced for Human Consumption
Abstract:Microbial counts (aerobic bacteria, psychrotrophs, Enterobacteriaceae, coliforms, Pseudomonas spp., Enterococcus spp., Staphylococcus spp., and molds and yeasts) were obtained for the shells of 240 table eggs in northwestern Spain. Eggs from six sources (40 samples in each) were analyzed: chicken eggs from five different housing systems (conventional battery cages, barn, free range, organic, and domestic breeding) and quail eggs (cages). A total of 120 Escherichia coli strains (20 from each source) were tested by the disk diffusion method for resistance to 12 antimicrobial drugs of veterinary and human health significance. Aerobic plate counts ranged from 1.96 ± 1.0 (barn) to 3.69 ± 0.7 (domestic) log CFU/cm2. Counts for most microbial groups differed significantly between sources. Eggs from domestic production had the highest contamination loads (P < 0.05) for aerobic bacteria, Enterococcus spp., and molds and yeasts and the highest prevalence of E. coli. Twenty-three E. coli isolates (19.17%) were susceptible to all antimicrobials tested, and 80.83 % were resistant to one (22.50%) or more (58.33%) antimicrobials. The housing system had a significant influence (P < 0.05) on the average resistance per strain, with the highest resistance in conventional cage (2.85) and barn (3.10) systems followed by free range (1.55) and quail (1.95). Eggs from organic (1.00) and domestic (0.75) production systems had the lowest resistance per strain. The highest prevalence of resistance was observed for the groups of antimicrobials more frequently used on poultry farms. Our results suggest that a relationship exists between the prevalence of antimicrobial resistance in E. coli strains and the more frequent use of antimicrobials in conventional (cage, barn, and free range) than in domestic and organic chicken housing systems. Education covering good sanitary practices for handling eggs to avoid cross-contamination or inadequate cooking is needed.
Document Type: Research Article
Affiliations: 1: Department of Food Hygiene and Food Technology, Veterinary Faculty, University of León, 24071 León, Spain 2: Department of Food Hygiene and Food Technology, Veterinary Faculty, University of León, 24071 León, Spain;, Email: email@example.com
Publication date: May 1, 2012
- IAFP Members with personal subscriptions to JFP Online: To access full-text JFP or JMFT articles, you must sign-in in the upper-right corner using your Ingenta sign-in details (your IAFP Member Login does not apply to this website). The Journal of Food Protection (JFP) 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 IAFP Members and institutional subscribers. IAFP Members with a subscription to JFP Online will have access to all available JFP and JMFT content. Online visitors who are not IAFP Members or journal subscribers will be charged on a pay-per-view basis. Membership and subscription information is available at 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