Inability to Transfer Antibiotic Resistance in <i>Escherichia coli</i> on Meat Surfaces

Mattila, Tiina; O’Boyle, D.; Frost, A. J.

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2621.1988.tb09264.x

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although attachment to meat surfaces is readily demonstrable, the extent of interaction during spoilage has not been well established. Observations of microcolony formation by various species (Yada and Skura, 1982;Firstenberg-Eden et al, 1979;Stone and Zottola, 1985;Mattila et al, 1988) and the secretion of extracellular material (Fraser and Gilmour, 1986) indicate active colonization of the meat surface. Studies were needed to determine whether attachment is an incidental event or if meat surfaces are specifically colonized by spoilage microorganisms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Colonization of Beef Muscle Surfaces by Pseudomonas fluorescens and Pseudomonas fragi

Delaquis

McCurdy

1990

Journal of Food Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Attached and unattached cell densities were determined for Pseudomonas fluorescens and Pseudomonas fragi growing on the surface of beef muscle stored at 4 and 25°C, in presence of NaCl, KCl, and CaCl2. A mechanical rinsing procedure was developed for this purpose. Both species colonized the surface at both temperatures and were enhanced at low (4°C) temperature. Attached cells represented up to 90% of the total until a density of 105‐106 CFU cm−2 was reached. At that point, a proportion of attached cells to unattached cells declined but colonization of the surface continued. In presence of CaCl2, ratios of attached to unattached cells did not decline, suggesting a significant role for the calcium ion in colonization. Ability to colonize meat surfaces may be a significant competitive advantage for meat spoilage bacteria such as Pseudomonas fragi and Pseudomonas fluorescens.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Colonization of Beef Muscle Surfaces by Pseudomonas fluorescens and Pseudomonas fragi

Delaquis

McCurdy

1990

Journal of Food Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Part of the persistence in the meat plant environment may, at least in part, be explained by cross-resistance with sanitation products, particularly through multidrug efflux pumps [101,110,121]. In an early (1988) study, Mattila et al [122] investigated the transfer of antibiotic resistance in E. coli on the surface of meat at 20 and 4 • C. They concluded that the lack of transfer between donor and recipient cells was due to the sessile growth on the meat surface which prevented the cell contact necessary for the transfer of genetic materials. Van Meervenne et al [123] indicated that a threshold cell density is necessary for the transfer of plasmid-bearing antibiotic resistance on cooked ham.…”

Section: From Pig To Meatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Antibiotic Resistance: From Pig to Meat

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pork meat is in high demand worldwide and this is expected to increase. Pork is often raised in intensive conditions, which is conducive to the spread of infectious diseases. Vaccines, antibiotics, and other biosafety measures help mitigate the impact of infectious diseases. However, bacterial strains resistant to antibiotics are more and more frequently found in pig farms, animals, and the environment. It is now recognized that a holistic perspective is needed to sustainably fight antibiotic resistance, and that an integrated One Health approach is essential. With this in mind, this review tackles antibiotic resistance throughout the pork raising process, including their microbiome; many factors of their environment (agricultural workers, farms, rivers, etc.); and an overview of the impact of antibiotic resistance on pork meat, which is the end product available to consumers. Antibiotic resistance, while a natural process, is a public health concern. If we react, and act, collectively, it is expected to be, at least partially, reversible with judicious antibiotic usage and the development of innovative strategies and tools to foster animal health.

show abstract

“…Since tet (M) was already successfully transferred from meat isolates in vitro (Gevers and others 2003), genetic transfer between tet (M) carriers and initially tet (M)‐negative bacteria during storage might further increase the tet (M) contents at retail. Conditions during refrigeration are thought to be unfavourable to bacterial conjugation (Mattila and others 1988; Novotny and Lavin 1971), but this was not assessed for psychrotrophic bacteria, which are metabolically active at low temperatures.…”

Section: Future Prospects: Epidemiology and Genetic Transfermentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantity of the Tetracycline Resistance Gene tet(M) Differs Substantially between Meat at Slaughterhouses and at Retail

Hölzel¹,

Huther²,

Schwaiger³

et al. 2011

Journal of Food Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We successfully applied the direct quantitative monitoring of resistance genes in meat, which generally might aid as a useful and rapid additional tool for risk assessment. We know that bacteria provide a large pool of resistance genes, which are widely shared between each other-the larger the pool is, the more genes might be exchanged. Thus, in terms of resistance gene monitoring, we should sometimes overcome the restricted view on single bacteria and look at the gene pool, instead.

show abstract

Inability to Transfer Antibiotic Resistance in Escherichia coli on Meat Surfaces

Cited by 6 publications

References 17 publications

Colonization of Beef Muscle Surfaces by Pseudomonas fluorescens and Pseudomonas fragi

Colonization of Beef Muscle Surfaces by Pseudomonas fluorescens and Pseudomonas fragi

Antibiotic Resistance: From Pig to Meat

Quantity of the Tetracycline Resistance Gene tet(M) Differs Substantially between Meat at Slaughterhouses and at Retail

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About