Comparison of Three Chicken Sampling Methodologies: Assessing Microbial Indicators and Salmonella spp. Prevalence
Cargando...
Publicado
Archivos
Fecha
2024
Autores
Asesores
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Zamorano: Escuela Agrícola Panamericana
Resumen
This study evaluated the performance of three different sampling methodologies: MicroTally® Mitt, MicroTally® Swab, and Composite Rinse in detecting microbial indicators (Mesophilic Aerobes and Enterobacteriaceae) and pathogen loads and prevalence (Salmonella) in chicken tender samples from a poultry processing operation. Four chicken tender pallets were sampled, each pallet divided into fourteen-pound bags and divided into two equal parts. One part was analyzed using a composite rinse methodology, the other using MicroTally® Mitt, and the other part using MicroTally® Swab methods. Samples were analyzed for microbial indicators using the Tempo® System and for Salmonella enumeration and prevalence using GeneUp® Quant Salmonella and GeneUp® Salmonella detection protocols. Data analysis was conducted using Statistical Analysis System (SAS), including ANOVA with Duncan for mean separation, and Chi-square for Salmonella prevalence. Results indicated no significant differences in Mesophilic aerobes Count (AC) and Enterobacteriaceae (EB) counts between the sampling methods. Salmonella prevalence was slightly higher in the MicroTally Mitt (50%) compared to the Composite Rinse (25%) and in MicroTally Swab (38%) compared to Composite Rinse (25%), but these differences were not statistically significant. Overall, the MicroTally Mitt and MicroTally Swab methods demonstrated comparable performance to the Composite Rinse method for detecting microbial indicators and pathogens in chicken samples, also, MicroTally Mitt and MicroTally allow testing more tenders in less time, which can be particularly beneficial in poultry processing facilities.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Poultry Parts, Sampling methods, Salmonella detection, Total Mesophilic Aerobes Count