首页> 外文期刊>Journal of food protection >Microbiological Characterization of Imported and Domestic Boneless Beef Trim Used for Ground Beef
【24h】

Microbiological Characterization of Imported and Domestic Boneless Beef Trim Used for Ground Beef

机译:进口和国产无骨牛肉切末的微生物学表征

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

The United States imports lean boneless beef trim from Australia (AUS), New Zealand (NZL), and Uruguay (URY) to meet demand for ground beef production. The reported incidence of and etiological agents responsible for foodborne diseases differ between these countries and the United States. Our objective was to determine whether current U.S. microbiological profiling adequately addresses the potential differences between foreign and domestic beef trim. We compared the hygienic status of imported and domestic (USA) beef trim by enumeration of aerobic bacteria, Enterobacteriaceae, coliforms, Escherichia coli, and Staphylococcus aureus. We also compared the prevalence of pathogens between imported and domestic samples by screening for the presence of Salmonella, Campylobacter spp., Listeria spp., and non-0157 Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC). A total of 1,186 samples (487 USA, 220 AUS, 223 NZL, and 256 URY) of boneless beef trim were analyzed. Results of enumeration revealed significant differences between samples from all countries, with the lowest pathogen numbers in samples from AUS and the highest in samples from URY. Six Salmonella isolates (1 NZL, 1 URY, and 4 USA), 79 L. monocytogenes isolates (4 AUS, 5 NZL, 53 URY, and 17 USA), and 7 Campylobacter isolates (1 NZL, 1 URY, 5 USA) were found among the trim samples tested. Non-O157 STEC prevalence was 10% in NZL samples and about 30% in all of the other samples; 99 STEC strains were isolated. Serotyping of these isolates revealed that serotypes associated with hemolytic uremic syndrome were not different in prevalence between imported and domestic beef trim. Although it may be tempting to do so, these data cannot be used to compare the microbiological quality of beef trim between the countries examined. However, these results indicate that the current pathogen monitoring procedures in the United States are adequate for evaluation of imported beef trim.
机译:美国从澳大利亚(AUS),新西兰(NZL)和乌拉圭(URY)进口瘦肉去骨牛肉切面,以满足对碎牛肉生产的需求。在这些国家和美国之间,报告的食源性疾病发病率和病原学原因有所不同。我们的目标是确定当前的美国微生物学分析是否能充分解决国外和国内牛肉条之间的潜在差异。我们通过列举需氧细菌,肠杆菌科,大肠菌群,大肠埃希氏菌和金黄色葡萄球菌比较了进口和国产(美国)牛肉条的卫生状况。我们还通过筛选沙门氏菌,弯曲杆菌属,李斯特菌和非-0157产志贺毒素的大肠杆菌(STEC)的存在,比较了进口样品和国内样品之间病原体的患病率。共分析了1186个无骨牛肉条的样品(487个美国,220个AUS,223个NZL和256个URY)。计数结果表明,所有国家/地区的样本之间存在显着差异,AUS样本中的病原体数量最低,而URY样本中的病原体数量最高。分别分离出6株沙门氏菌(1 NZL,1 URY和4 USA),79株单核细胞增生李斯特菌(4 AUS,5 NZL,53 URY和17 USA)和7弯曲杆菌(1 NZL,1 URY,5 USA)。在测试的装饰样品中发现。 NZL样本中非O157 STEC患病率为10%,所有其他样本中约为30%。分离出99个STEC菌株。这些分离株的血清分型显示,与溶血性尿毒症综合征相关的血清型在进口和国产牛肉修剪之间的流行率没有差异。尽管这样做可能很诱人,但这些数据不能用于比较所检查国家之间的牛肉条的微生物质量。但是,这些结果表明,美国目前的病原体监测程序足以评估进口的牛肉条。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号