方法对样品及肉类中大肠弯曲杆菌回收的影响

IF 0.7 4区 农林科学 Q3 VETERINARY SCIENCES Acta Veterinaria-Beograd Pub Date : 2021-06-01 DOI:10.2478/acve-2021-0017
T. Lazou, E. Iossifidou, C. Dovas
{"title":"方法对样品及肉类中大肠弯曲杆菌回收的影响","authors":"T. Lazou, E. Iossifidou, C. Dovas","doi":"10.2478/acve-2021-0017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract A defined Campylobacter coli (C. coli) suspension was inoculated on sterile sampling materials (cotton bud, polyester bud, cellulose sponge) and pieces of lamb meat. Various combinations of diluents (phosphate buffer saline ± Tween®80) and sampling methods (direct homogenization, simulating the excision method for meat, and swabbing) were investigated for the recovery (detachment) of C. coli cells from the inoculated samples. The obtained C. coli bacteria, as quantified by real-time PCR with respect to the dilution factors and the initial inoculum, were used for the calculation of the recovery (%) per sampling material and method. Regarding artificially inoculated sampling materials, the lowest recovery was observed for cotton buds (2.8%) and the highest for cellulose sponge (28.9%), and the differences between the obtained results were statistically significant (P < 0.05). As regards lamb meat, the lowest recovery was observed for swabbing with cotton buds (3.2%) and the highest for direct homogenization (10.7%). The results indicate an overall low rate of bacterial recovery from contaminated samples, with cellulose sponges and polyester buds being significantly superior to cotton buds, and direct homogenization of meat with diluent better than swabbing. The type of sampling materials and methods applied for the quantification of C. coli entails a key impact on determining the actual contamination of the examined samples.","PeriodicalId":55559,"journal":{"name":"Acta Veterinaria-Beograd","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Method-Related Impacts on Campylobacter coli Recovery From Sampling Materials And Meat\",\"authors\":\"T. Lazou, E. Iossifidou, C. Dovas\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/acve-2021-0017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract A defined Campylobacter coli (C. coli) suspension was inoculated on sterile sampling materials (cotton bud, polyester bud, cellulose sponge) and pieces of lamb meat. Various combinations of diluents (phosphate buffer saline ± Tween®80) and sampling methods (direct homogenization, simulating the excision method for meat, and swabbing) were investigated for the recovery (detachment) of C. coli cells from the inoculated samples. The obtained C. coli bacteria, as quantified by real-time PCR with respect to the dilution factors and the initial inoculum, were used for the calculation of the recovery (%) per sampling material and method. Regarding artificially inoculated sampling materials, the lowest recovery was observed for cotton buds (2.8%) and the highest for cellulose sponge (28.9%), and the differences between the obtained results were statistically significant (P < 0.05). As regards lamb meat, the lowest recovery was observed for swabbing with cotton buds (3.2%) and the highest for direct homogenization (10.7%). The results indicate an overall low rate of bacterial recovery from contaminated samples, with cellulose sponges and polyester buds being significantly superior to cotton buds, and direct homogenization of meat with diluent better than swabbing. The type of sampling materials and methods applied for the quantification of C. coli entails a key impact on determining the actual contamination of the examined samples.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55559,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Veterinaria-Beograd\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Veterinaria-Beograd\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/acve-2021-0017\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Veterinaria-Beograd","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/acve-2021-0017","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要将一种确定的大肠弯曲杆菌(C. coli)悬液接种于无菌取样材料(棉芽、聚酯芽、纤维素海绵)和羊肉块上。研究了不同的稀释剂组合(磷酸盐缓冲盐水±Tween®80)和取样方法(直接均质、模拟肉类切除法和拭子法),以便从接种的样品中回收(分离)大肠杆菌细胞。通过实时荧光定量PCR对稀释系数和初始接种量进行定量,计算每种取样材料和方法的回收率(%)。在人工接种的样品中,棉芽回收率最低(2.8%),海绵纤维素回收率最高(28.9%),两者差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。对于羊肉,棉签法回收率最低(3.2%),直接均质法回收率最高(10.7%)。结果表明,污染样品的细菌回收率总体较低,纤维素海绵和聚酯芽的细菌回收率明显优于棉芽,用稀释剂直接均质比用擦拭法更好。用于大肠杆菌定量的取样材料和方法的类型对确定被检查样品的实际污染具有关键影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Method-Related Impacts on Campylobacter coli Recovery From Sampling Materials And Meat
Abstract A defined Campylobacter coli (C. coli) suspension was inoculated on sterile sampling materials (cotton bud, polyester bud, cellulose sponge) and pieces of lamb meat. Various combinations of diluents (phosphate buffer saline ± Tween®80) and sampling methods (direct homogenization, simulating the excision method for meat, and swabbing) were investigated for the recovery (detachment) of C. coli cells from the inoculated samples. The obtained C. coli bacteria, as quantified by real-time PCR with respect to the dilution factors and the initial inoculum, were used for the calculation of the recovery (%) per sampling material and method. Regarding artificially inoculated sampling materials, the lowest recovery was observed for cotton buds (2.8%) and the highest for cellulose sponge (28.9%), and the differences between the obtained results were statistically significant (P < 0.05). As regards lamb meat, the lowest recovery was observed for swabbing with cotton buds (3.2%) and the highest for direct homogenization (10.7%). The results indicate an overall low rate of bacterial recovery from contaminated samples, with cellulose sponges and polyester buds being significantly superior to cotton buds, and direct homogenization of meat with diluent better than swabbing. The type of sampling materials and methods applied for the quantification of C. coli entails a key impact on determining the actual contamination of the examined samples.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Acta Veterinaria-Beograd
Acta Veterinaria-Beograd 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
16.70%
发文量
33
审稿时长
18-36 weeks
期刊介绍: The Acta Veterinaria is an open access, peer-reviewed scientific journal of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Belgrade, Serbia, dedicated to the publication of original research articles, invited review articles, and to limited extent methodology articles and case reports. The journal considers articles on all aspects of veterinary science and medicine, including the diagnosis, prevention and treatment of medical conditions of domestic, companion, farm and wild animals, as well as the biomedical processes that underlie their health.
期刊最新文献
Determination of the antibacterial effect of bee venom against rainbow trout pathogens and antibiotic resistance gene expression Immunohistochemical investigation of FIPV3-70 antigen expression in the ileum of cats with effusive feline infective peritonitis Modeling the current and future distribution of Brucellosis under climate change scenarios in Qinghai Lake basin, China Seroprevalence of serovars of pathogenic leptospira in dogs and red foxes (Vulpes Vulpes) from bosnia and herzegovina Detection of Mycoplasma bovigenitalium and Mycoplasma tauri in Holstein Friesian dairy cows with subclinical endometritis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1