Comparison of the Salmonella‐Tek ELISA to Culture Methods for Detection of <i>Salmonella enteritidis</i> in Litter and Cloacal Swabs of Poultry

Desmidt, Maria; Haesebrouck, Freddy; Ducatelle, Richard

doi:10.1111/j.1439-0450.1994.tb00259.x

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The lengthy nature of these procedures has led to the development of several rapid methods for the detection of Salmonella in food products. Such methods include enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) (6,11,12), immunomagnetic-bead ELISAs (5,7,10), and dot immunobinding assays (4). In addition, systems based on molecular detection, such as nucleic acid hybridization probes (gene probes) and plasmid analysis systems (3), have been developed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection of Salmonella from Chicken Rinses and Chicken Hot Dogs with the Automated BAX PCR System

Bailey

Cosby

2003

Journal of Food Protection

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The BAX system with automated PCR detection was compared with standard cultural procedures for the detection of naturally occurring and spiked Salmonella in 183 chicken carcass rinses and 90 chicken hot dogs. The automated assay procedure consists of overnight growth (16 to 18 h) of the sample in buffered peptone broth at 35 degrees C, transfer of the sample to lysis tubes, incubation and lysis of the cells, transfer of the sample to PCR tubes, and placement of tubes into the cycler-detector, which runs automatically. The automated PCR detection assay takes about 4 h after 16 to 24 h of overnight preenrichment. The culture procedure consists of preerichment, enrichment, plating, and serological confirmation and takes about 72 h. Three trials involving 10 to 31 samples were carried out for each product. Some samples were spiked with Salmonella Typhimurium, Salmonella Heidelberg, Salmonella Montevideo, and Salmonella Enteritidis at 1 to 250 cells per ml of rinse or 1 to 250 cells per g of meat. For unspiked chicken rinses, Salmonella was detected in 2 of 61 samples with the automated system and in 1 of 61 samples with the culture method. Salmonella was recovered from 111 of 122 spiked samples with the automated PCR system and from 113 of 122 spiked samples with the culture method. For chicken hot dogs, Salmonella was detected in all 60 of the spiked samples with both the automated PCR and the culture procedures. For the 30 unspiked samples, Salmonella was recovered from 19 samples with the automated PCR system and from 10 samples with the culture method. The automated PCR system provided reliable Salmonella screening of chicken product samples within 24 h.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection of Salmonella from Chicken Rinses and Chicken Hot Dogs with the Automated BAX PCR System

Bailey

Cosby

2003

Journal of Food Protection

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…5,7 In the present investigation, the performance of 2 commercially available EIA methods, designated EIA-1 and EIA-2, was compared to the MSRV method for detection of salmonella in swine cecal content collected at slaughter as well as in samples of swine feces collected on farms. MSRV method.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Conventional Culture Methods and Two Commercial Enzyme Immunoassays for Detection ofSalmonellain Porcine Fecal Samples and Cecal Contents

Wegener¹,

Baggesen²

1997

J VET Diagn Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Two commercial enzyme immunoassays, designated EIA-1 and EIA-2, for the detection of salmonella in feces and cecal contents were compared to conventional culture methods. Out of 362 cecal content samples, 35 were positive by EIA-1 and 30 were positive by EIA-2 and conventional methods. Out of 189 fecal samples, 41 were positive by EIA-1, 30 were positive by EIA-2, and 24 were positive by conventional culture methods. The EIA-1 assay method detected more positive samples overall, although only comparison of the fecal samples was statistically significant. The results indicate that the EIA-1 method is rapid, requiring only 24 hours, and may be more sensitive than the EIA-2 assay and conventional culture techniques. Enzyme immunoassays for the detection of salmonella in fecal samples or cecal contents provide a reasonable alternative to conventional culture techniques.Infection of pigs with Salmonella enterica species may lead to clinical disease with fever and profuse watery diarrhea or subclinical infections without clinical signs. Detection of salmonellae in subclinically infected animals is hampered by intermittent shedding and low numbers of bacteria in the feces. 3 Subclinical salmonella infection in swine constitutes a human health risk because fecal material from the animal may contaminate the carcass during slaughter. Meat from the contaminated carcass may subsequently give rise to human disease, directly or indirectly, by cross-contamination of other food products along the manufacturing and distribution line from the slaughterhouse to the consumer. 11 The importance of pork as a source of human salmonellosis has been shown in a number of investigations. Pork was estimated to be the primary source of sporadic human infections with Salmonella typhimurium in Denmark in 1992 and 1993. 2,14 Furthermore, contaminated pork distributed from a single slaughterhouse was found to be the source of a major Danish Salmonella infantis outbreak involving approximately 550 documented cases of disease in 1993. 13 In order to reduce salmonella contamination of Danish pork, a microbiologic screening program was conducted with the objective of detecting swine herds with subclinical salmonella infection. 3 Swine from infected herds could then be slaughtered under increased hyFrom the Danish Veterinary Laboratory, 27 Bülowsvej, DK-1790 Copenhagen V, Denmark.Received for publication July 5, 1996. giene measures in order to reduce carcass contamination. Samples of cecal contents were collected at slaughter, and infected farms were subsequently visited for collection of fecal pen samples in order to detect foci of infection within the herd and to devise a strategy for salmonella reduction.A number of conventional detection methods were previously evaluated for the detection of salmonella in swine cecal samples. 1 Pre-enrichment in buffered peptone water (BPW) followed by selective culture on modified semisolid Rappaport-Vassiliadis medium (MSRV) was found to be more sensitive than pre-enrichment in BPW followed by se...

show abstract

Salmonellain Aquatic Environments

Borrego

Castro

Figueras

2003

Encyclopedia of Environmental Microbiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Taxonomic Position of Salmonella The Role of Salmonella in Human Infection Importance of Salmonella in Water Environments Water Treatment and Salmonella Survival of Salmonella in Aquatic Environments Waterborne Outbreaks Caused by Salmonella Salmonella in Shellfish Detection and Enumeration Methods

show abstract

Comparison of the Salmonella‐Tek ELISA to Culture Methods for Detection of Salmonella enteritidis in Litter and Cloacal Swabs of Poultry

Cited by 6 publications

References 16 publications

Detection of Salmonella from Chicken Rinses and Chicken Hot Dogs with the Automated BAX PCR System

Detection of Salmonella from Chicken Rinses and Chicken Hot Dogs with the Automated BAX PCR System

Comparison of Conventional Culture Methods and Two Commercial Enzyme Immunoassays for Detection ofSalmonellain Porcine Fecal Samples and Cecal Contents

Salmonellain Aquatic Environments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About