Comparison of selenite F, Muller-Kauffmann tetrathionate and Rappaport's medium for salmonella isolation from chicken giblets after pre-enrichment in buffered peptone water

Harvey, R. W. S.; Price, T. H.

doi:10.1017/s0022172400069436

Cited by 32 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The findings concerning the R25 medium were confirmed by Harvey, Price & Xirouchaki (1979), Harvey & Price (1981, 1982a and Fricker, Girdwood & Munro (1983). On the other hand, Alcaide et al (1982), using RV medium with the addition of novobiocin and van Schothorst & Renaud (1983), using RV medium made with soya peptone showed that the RV medium was significantly more efficient than selenite broth or Muller-Kauffmann tetrathionate broth (MK-ISO), respectively.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 82%

A comparison of the original Rappaport medium (R medium) and the Rappaport–Vassiliadis medium (RV medium) in the isolation of salmonellae from meat products

Vassiliadis

Kalapothaki

Mavrommati

et al. 1984

J. Hyg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYThe Rappaport-Vassiliadis enrichment medium (RV medium) in 10 ml quantities (RV/43°C, 10 ml) inoculated with 0-1 ml of pre-enrichment medium (P medium) was found more efficient in the isolation of salmonellae from 409 pre-enriched samples (mainly meat products), than the original Rappaport medium incubated at 43°C (R/43°C) and the RV medium in 5 ml quantities (RV/43°C, 5 ml) inoculated with 0-01 ml of P medium (P < 0-001, in both instances). Therefore, the inoculum from pre-enriched foods should not be less than 0-1 ml in 10 ml of RV medium.The RV/43°, 10 ml was also better (P < 0-01) in detecting samples containing salmonellas than the original Rappaport medium incubated at 37°C (R/37°C, 10 ml) and the modification R25 of R medium incubated at 37 'C. The R25 modification was used in 10 ml quantities (R25/37 'C, 10 ml) inoculated with 0-1 ml of P medium and in 5 ml quantities (R25/37°, 5 ml) inoculated with 0-01 ml of P medium. The last two R25 procedures were of the same efficiency in isolating salmonellas from meat products.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 82%

A comparison of the original Rappaport medium (R medium) and the Rappaport–Vassiliadis medium (RV medium) in the isolation of salmonellae from meat products

Vassiliadis

Kalapothaki

Mavrommati

et al. 1984

J. Hyg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Use of BPW pre‐enrichment with faecal samples may be linked to the popularity of RV enrichment broth, which requires small inoculum volumes, or high inoculum ratios ( Harvey and Price 1980). Harvey and Price (1981) considered the need for high inoculum ratios to be an advantage when pre‐enrichment is used but, citing the example of pig faeces, a potential liability if direct inoculation with large amounts of material is desirable.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(1999) reported that recovery of Salmonella bacteria from swine faeces enriched in TTB tended to be reduced if pre‐enrichment in BPW was used. Studies with a range of materials have commonly found RV to be superior to tetrathionate broths when compared subsequent to pre‐enrichment ( Harvey and Price 1981; Rhodes and Quesnel 1986). The nature of the source material, the prevalent serotypes in the material, and the use of direct enrichment or pre‐enrichment, were recognized to be factors likely to influence the results of studies comparing enrichment media ( Harvey and Price 1981).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It has been suggested that there may be more media and culture methods for the isolation of Salmonella bacteria than for any other bacteria ( Waltman 1998). A plethora of studies have compared microbiological techniques for isolating Salmonella bacteria from diverse materials, and conflicting findings among studies abound ( Harvey and Price 1981; D'aoust 1989; Busse 1995). The scope of this methodological dilemma was highlighted in a survey of US veterinary laboratories culturing poultry tissue and environmental samples for Salmonella bacteria.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of methods for isolating Salmonella bacteria from faeces of naturally infected pigs

et al. 2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A series of experiments was conducted using faecal samples collected from commercial swine farms to evaluate the effects of variation in methods used for the detection of Salmonella bacteria. The primary objective of the studies was to compare the protocols routinely used in two laboratories in the USA. The studies included five experiments comparing the enrichment protocols used routinely in the respective laboratories (Method 1: 10 g faeces—buffered peptone water (BPW) pre‐enrichment—selective enrichment in Rappaport/Vassiliadis (RV) broth; Method 2: ∼1g faeces—primary enrichments in tetrathionate and Hajna GN broths—secondary enrichment in RV broth). The effects of enrichment temperatures (37 vs 42 °C) using RV broth (two experiments) and delayed secondary enrichment (four experiments) were also evaluated. Direct comparison of Method 1 and Method 2 indicated comparable results. However, when compared using faecal samples of equal weight, the Method 2 enrichment protocol was more sensitive for detecting Salmonella bacteria than the Method 1 protocol. Enrichment in RV at 42 °C was superior to 37 °C, particularly for samples that were pre‐enriched in BPW. Delayed secondary enrichment increased detection of Salmonella bacteria in swine faeces. These results highlight the imperfect sensitivity of culture methods, and the need for researchers to consider the sensitivity of bacteriological methods in the design and interpretation of the results of epidemiologic studies based on faecal culture

show abstract

“…The ‗gold standard' for Salmonella detection in food follows a standard protocol of nonselective pre-enrichment, selective enrichment, isolation on selective agar media and biochemical and serological confirmation. Choice of enrichment broth, incubation temperature, inoculum ratio and plating media affect the Salmonella detection limit (17,34,45,51,83,84,141,143,160,193). Numerous cultivation methods that are commonly used in Salmonella surveillance and outbreak investigations vary significantly in sensitivity and specificity (30,45,63,120,164,193).…”

Section: Limitations Of International Equivalence In Product Samplingmentioning

confidence: 99%

General Interest Scientific and Teechnical Factors Affecting the Setting of Salmonella Criteria for Raw Poultry: A Global Perspective

Mead¹,

Lammerding

Cox

et al. 2010

Journal of Food Protection

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concerns about foodborne salmonellosis have led many countries to introduce microbiological criteria for certain food products. If such criteria are not well-grounded in science, they can be an unjustified obstacle to trade. Raw poultry products are an important part of the global food market. Import / export ambiguities, as well as regulatory confusion resulting from different Salmonella requirements, were the impetus for convening an international group of scientific experts from 16 countries to discuss the scientific and technical factors that affect the setting of a microbiological criterion for Salmonella contamination of raw chicken. A particular concern for the group was the use of criteria implying a ‗zero tolerance' for Salmonella and suggesting complete absence of the pathogen. The notion can be interpreted differently by various stakeholders and was considered inappropriate because there is neither an effective means of eliminating Salmonella from raw poultry nor any practical method for verifying its absence.Therefore, it may be more useful at present to set food-safety metrics that involve reductions in hazard levels. Using terms such as ‗zero tolerance' or ‗absence of a microbe' in relation to raw poultry should be avoided unless defined and explained by international agreement.Risk assessment provides a more meaningful approach than a zero-tolerance philosophy and new metrics, such as performance objectives that are linked to human health outcomes, should be utilized throughout the food chain to help in defining risk and identifying ways to reduce adverse effects on public health.PAGE 4 IntroductionThe association between poultry and Salmonella has a long history. More than 50 years ago, pullorum disease and fowl typhoid were common causes of mortality in chicken and turkey flocks, and development of the industry was delayed until these diseases were brought under control (147). Subsequently, a different problem emerged with the increasing isolation of nonhost-specific salmonellae from both poultry products and cases of human salmonellosis.Because of an apparent linkage between the two, fuelled by the intensive nature of poultry production and processing, which was seen to facilitate pathogen transmission, global efforts to control Salmonella in the poultry industry have increasingly gathered pace and particularly in the years following the pandemic spread of Salmonella Enteritidis in the late 1980s. However, fulfillment of this goal has not been easy. In the production of raw foods, such as chicken meat, there are multiple constraints in attempting to eliminate microbial health hazards, and these are both socio-economic and scientific (i.e., biological, technological and analytical). Food animal production and processing in different parts of the world are faced with similar challenges, such as the frequent presence of potentially pathogenic microorganisms that rarely cause disease in food animals but may do so in humans, along with the very nature of an industry in which environmental co...

show abstract

Comparison of selenite F, Muller-Kauffmann tetrathionate and Rappaport's medium for salmonella isolation from chicken giblets after pre-enrichment in buffered peptone water

Cited by 32 publications

References 15 publications

A comparison of the original Rappaport medium (R medium) and the Rappaport–Vassiliadis medium (RV medium) in the isolation of salmonellae from meat products

A comparison of the original Rappaport medium (R medium) and the Rappaport–Vassiliadis medium (RV medium) in the isolation of salmonellae from meat products

Comparison of methods for isolating Salmonella bacteria from faeces of naturally infected pigs

General Interest Scientific and Teechnical Factors Affecting the Setting of Salmonella Criteria for Raw Poultry: A Global Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About