Rapid and definitive detection of
            <i>Salmonella</i>
            in foods by PCR

Bennett,; Greenwood,; Tennant,; Banks,; Betts,

doi:10.1046/j.1472-765x.1998.00368.x

Cited by 105 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The evaluated PCR-based methods showed sensitivities equal to or higher than the culture-based methods, and, in addition, the specificity was very high, which agrees with studies of food materials (10,12,24,32).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Accuracy and Sensitivity of Commercial PCR-Based Methods for Detection of Salmonella enterica in Feed

Koyuncu

Andersson

Häggblom

2010

Appl Environ Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study compared the performance of commercial PCR-based Salmonella enterica detection methods (BAX System Q7, the iQ-Check Salmonella II kit, and the TaqMan Salmonella enterica detection kit) with culturebased methods (modified semisolid Rappaport-Vassiliadis [MSRV] and NMKL71) in spiked and naturally contaminated samples of feed mill scrapings (FMS), palm kernel meal (PKM), pelleted feed (PF), rape seed meal (RSM), soybean meal (SM), and wheat grain (WG). When results from the various feeds were compared, the number of Salmonella enterica CFU/25 g required to produce a positive were as follows: PKM > FMS ‫؍‬ WG > RSM ‫؍‬ SM ‫؍‬ PF. These data are similar to those developed in earlier studies with culture-based Salmonella detection methods. PCR-based methods were performed similarly to culture-based methods, with respect to sensitivity and specificity. However, many PCR positives could not be confirmed by Salmonella isolation and for that reason the evaluated methods were found to be suitable only when rapid results were paramount. Nevertheless, PCR-based methods cannot presently replace culture-based methods when typing information is required for tracing studies or epidemiological investigations. The observed difference in detection levels is a potential problem when prevalence data are compared as well as when feed ingredients are tested for conformance with microbiological criteria. This paper also presents a statistical model that describes the detection probability when different levels (CFU) of Salmonella contamination are present in feed materials.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Accuracy and Sensitivity of Commercial PCR-Based Methods for Detection of Salmonella enterica in Feed

Koyuncu

Andersson

Häggblom

2010

Appl Environ Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite global improvements in public inorder to cause infection is rather small that is fewer health facilities, a marked increase in human than 10 [9] and it is a must for the livestock products to salmonellosis has been reported in many countries be tested for the presence of Salmonella due to it's including the European Union [2]. Outbreaks of potentially low infective dose [10]. The detection of Salmonella have been associated with wide variety of Salmonella in foods is problematic due to presence of foods especially those of animal origin [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The conventional and dairy products [4]. culture method, which is routinely used for isolation of S.enteritidis is the main cause of food borne Salmonella is time consuming, laborious and may not salmonellosis [5] and during the last 20 y, it has been a be suitable for viable but non culturable (VBNC) [10]. major causative agent of foodborne gastroenteritis in To overcome this drawback, immunological and humans [6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Study on the incidence of Salmonella enteritidis in Poultry and meat Samples by Cultural and PCR Methods

Putturu¹,

Thirtham²,

Rao³

2012

Vet. World

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: To study the incidence of S.enteritidis in poultry and meat samples by cultural and PCR methods. Materials and Methods: A total of 130 samples (25 each of chicken, mutton, poultry faeces, cloacal samples and 10 each of liver, spleen and kidney) collected from different sources were subjected to cultural and PCR methods for the presence of Salmonella and Salmonella enteritidis. Primers for invA and sefA gene were used for Salmonella and S.enteritidis respectively. Results: Out of 130 samples, 87 were positive for Salmonella spp. i.e. chicken-16(64%), mutton-12(48%), faeces-23(92%), cloacal swabs-23(92%), liver-5(50%), spleen and kidney samples-4(40%) each by PCR methods, whereas 77 were positive by cultural method i.e. chicken-14(56%), mutton-10(40%), faeces-22(88%), cloacal swabs-21(84%), liver-4(40%), spleen and kidney-3(30% each). Out of 87 positive for Salmonella by PCR method, 59(chicken-12, mutton-7, faeces-17, cloacal swabs-15, liver-3, spleen-2, kidney-3) were positive for S.enteritidis. High incidence of S.enteritidis (68%) in all the above samples are indicative of unhygienic conditions in poultry farms. Selective enrichment with Rappaport-Vassilidias (RV) broths and Tetrathionate (TT) broths were superior over Selenite-F (SF) and Selenite cysteine (SC) broths. Conclusions: High incidence of S.enteritidis was seen in most of poultry samples like chicken, kidney, liver and it's faeces than mutton, which was indicative of contamination of S.enteritidis is more prevalent in poultry farms.

show abstract

“…Efforts have been made to reduce the time required and to increase the sensitivity of methods to detect Salmonella serovars in poultry samples (16,25). PCR with preincubation in an enrichment broth has been performed for human (5,13,14,28), animal (6,23,24), fecal, and food (1,2,4,9,11,19) samples. This has been found to be a useful and more rapid method because it increases the number of viable Salmonella in the sample and, therefore, increases the sensitivity of the assay (5,9,11,22).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection of Salmonellae in Chicken Feces by a Combination of Tetrathionate Broth Enrichment, Capillary PCR, and Capillary Gel Electrophoresis

Çarlı¹,

Unal²,

Caner³

et al. 2001

J Clin Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This report describes a rapid detection procedure for salmonellae from chicken feces by the combination of tetrathionate primary enrichment (preenrichment [PE])-bacterial lysis-capillary PCR and capillary gel electrophoresis. Pure Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis 64K was reisolated and detected by capillary PCR after buffered peptone water and nutrient broth, tetrathionate broth base Hajna (TTBH), and tetrathionate broth (TTB) preenrichments. When the same culture was mixed with intestinal homogenate, bacteriological reisolation and capillary PCR detection was achieved only by TTBH and TTB preenrichments. Capillary gel electrophoresis revealed that a Salmonella genus-specific 281-bp PCR product was detected when Salmonella strains but not non-Salmonella strains were tested. The detection limit of capillary PCR with whole-cell DNA extracted from pure Salmonella enterica serovars Enteritidis 64K, Typhimurium LT2-CIP60-62, and Gallinarum 64K was 3, 3, and 9 CFU ml ؊1 , respectively. The detection limit of capillary PCR from whole-cell DNA extracted from intestinal homogenate artificially contaminated with the same three strains was 3, 3, and 7 CFU ml ؊1 , respectively. We compared the results of the capillary PCR and bacteriological examination from the natural samples. Thirty-five of 53 naturally contaminated samples produced a specific PCR product. In 9 of the 35 PCR-positive samples, Salmonella could not be detected bacteriologically either by PE or a primary and delayed secondary enrichment (DSE) combination. In the 18 PCR-negative samples, 4 samples were found to harbor Salmonella by both PE and DSE and 14 samples were positive after DSE. Fifty-three additional intestinal homogenate samples, which were negative by their PE and DSE in bacteriological examination, were found to be also negative by their PCRs. The total time required to detect Salmonella with the capillary PCR method we used was approximately 20 h. If samples are from clinically diseased birds, the total time for PCR and detection is reduced to 2 h since the 18-h PE is not required. These results indicate that TTB enrichment, bacterial lysis, and genus-specific capillary PCR combined with capillary gel electrophoresis constitute a sensitive and selective procedure which has the potential to rapidly identify Salmonella-infected flocks.Salmonellae are among the major bacterial pathogens of poultry in Turkey and in the world (3,8). Prevention of Salmonella infection is important for poultry health and for the food industry, and prevention can be achieved only by good monitoring and screening programs (10,17,27). Salmonella detection by bacteriological methods usually requires 5 to 11 days (10, 27), and samples with low numbers of Salmonella cells, usually seen in subclinically infected chickens, may give false-negative results (7). Efforts have been made to reduce the time required and to increase the sensitivity of methods to detect Salmonella serovars in poultry samples (16,25). PCR with preincubation in an enrichment broth has been perform...

show abstract

Rapid and definitive detection of Salmonella in foods by PCR

Cited by 105 publications

References 13 publications

Accuracy and Sensitivity of Commercial PCR-Based Methods for Detection of Salmonella enterica in Feed

Accuracy and Sensitivity of Commercial PCR-Based Methods for Detection of Salmonella enterica in Feed

Study on the incidence of Salmonella enteritidis in Poultry and meat Samples by Cultural and PCR Methods

Detection of Salmonellae in Chicken Feces by a Combination of Tetrathionate Broth Enrichment, Capillary PCR, and Capillary Gel Electrophoresis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About