Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.13103/JFHS.2022.37.1.15

Comparison of Conventional Culture Method, Enzyme Immune Method, and PCR for the Rapid Detection of Salmonella spp. in Pet Food  

Yun, Hyejeong (Division of Safety Analysis, National Agricultural Products Quality Management Service)
Cha, Sun Ho (GenoTech Corporation)
Lee, Seung-Hwa (Division of Safety Analysis, National Agricultural Products Quality Management Service)
Jeong, Min-Hee (Division of Safety Analysis, National Agricultural Products Quality Management Service)
Na, Tae-Woong (Division of Safety Analysis, National Agricultural Products Quality Management Service)
Kim, Haejin (Division of Safety Analysis, National Agricultural Products Quality Management Service)
Cho, Hyunjeong (Division of Safety Analysis, National Agricultural Products Quality Management Service)
Hong, Seong-Hee (Division of Safety Analysis, National Agricultural Products Quality Management Service)
Publication Information
Journal of Food Hygiene and Safety / v.37, no.1, 2022 , pp. 15-20 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare the conventional culture method, enzyme immune method and the PCR method using species-specific primer in the analysis on the Salmonella spp. found in domestically distributed pet foods. For the study, Salmonella spp. were detected from 175 samples. From the conventional culture method and the PCR method, two samples (jerky and corn gluten) were determined as positive. Also, from the enzyme immune method, one sample (corn gluten) was test-positive. The study revealed that application of the PCR method with species-specific primer allows better distinguishment between the species of the strain collected from the samples than the conventional culture method and/or the enzyme immune method.
Keywords
Salmonella; Pet food; Rapid detection; PCR;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 3  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Gillespie, J.H., Timoney, J.F., Scott, F,W., Barlough, J.E., 1988. Hagan and Bruner's microbiology and infectious diseases of domestic animals. 8th ed, Comstock Pub. Assoc., Ithaca and London, USA, pp. 74-88.
2 Wang, X., Jothikumar, N., Griffiths, M.W., Enrichment and DNA extraction protocols for the simultaneous detection of Salmonella and Listeria monocytogenes in raw sausage meat with multiplex real-time PCR. J. Food Prot., 67, 189-192 (2004).   DOI
3 Linton, A.H., 1983. Guidelines on prevention and control of Salmonellosis. WHO Geneva, pp. 10-128
4 Cho, A.R., Dong, H.J., Cho, S.B., Rapid and sensitive detection of Salmonella spp. by using a loop-mediated isothermal amplification assay in duck carcass sample. Food Sci. Anim. Resour., 33, 655-663 (2013).   DOI
5 Bansal, N.S., Gray, V., McDonell, F., Validated PCR assay for the routine detection of Salmonella in food. J. Food Prot., 69, 282-287 (2006).   DOI
6 Yang, B., Qu, D., Zhang, X., Shen, J., Cui, S., Shi, Y., Xi, M., Sheng, M., Zhi, S., Meng, J., Prevalence and characterization of Salmonella serovars in retail meats of marketplace in Shaanxi, China. Int. J. Food Micobiol., 141, 63-72 (2010).   DOI
7 Chansoo, Lee., (2021, March 1). Food Standards and Standards Notice. Retrieved from https://www.mfds.go.kr/brd/m_211/view.do?seq=14667
8 Calnek, B.W., Barnes, HJ., 1995. Disease of Poultry. 9th ed, Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA, UAS, pp. 81-129
9 Melissa, O.P., Maria, C., Martha, E.S., Frank, J., Peter, D., Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of three Salmonella rapid detection kits using fresh and frozen poultry environmental samples versus those of standard plating. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 65, 1055-1060 (1999).   DOI
10 Bohaychuk, V.M., Gensler, G.E., McFall. M.E., King. R.K., Renter. D.G., A real-time PCR assay for the detection of Salmonella in a wide variety of food and food animal matrics. J. Food Prot., 70, 1080-1087 (2007).   DOI
11 Luk, J.M., Kongmuang, U., Reeves, P.R., Linberg, A.A., Selective amplification of abequose and paratose synthase genes (rfb) by polymerase chain reaction for identification of Salmonella major serogroups (A, B, C2, and D). J. Clin.. Microbiol., 31, 2118-2123 (1993).   DOI
12 Kim, S.H., Lee, Y.S., Joo, I.S., Kwak, H.S., Chung, G.T., Kim, S.H., Rapid detection for Salmonella spp. by ultrafast real-time PCR Assay. J. Food Hyg. Saf., 33, 50-57 (2018).   DOI
13 Lampel, K.A., Keasler, S.P., Hanes, D.E., Specific detection of Salmonella enterica serotype Enteritidis using the polymerase chain reaction. Epidemiol. Infect., 116, 137-145 (1996).   DOI
14 Persson, S., Jacobsen, T., Olsen, J.E., Olsen, K.E.P., Hansen, F., A new real-time PCR method for the identification of Salmonella Dublin. J. Appl. Microbiol., 113, 615-621 (2012).   DOI
15 Bang, M.K., Park, S.J., Kim, Y.J., Kim, J.G., Oh, S.W., Rapid detection of Salmonella spp. in fresh-cut cabbage by Real-time PCR. J. Korean Soc.. Food Sci. Nutr., 39, 1522-1527 (2010).   DOI
16 Hyeon, J.Y., Hwang, I.G., Kwak, H.S., Park, J.S., Heo, S., Choi, I.S., Park, C.K., Seo, K.H., Evaluation of an automated ELISA (VIDAS(R)) and Real-time PCR by comparing with a conventional culture method for the detection of Salmonella spp. in steamed pork and raw broccoli sprouts. Korean J. Food Sci. Ani. Resour., 29, 506-512 (2009).   DOI
17 De Medici, D., Pezzotti, G., Marfoglia, C., Caciolo, D., Foschi, G., Orefice, L., Comparison between ICS-Vidas, MSRV and standard cultural method for Salmonella recovery in poultry meat. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 45, 205-210 (1998).   DOI
18 Uyttendaele, M., Vanwildmeersch, K.., Debevere, J., Evaluation of real-time PCR as automated ELISA and a conventional culture method using a semi-solid medium for detection of Salmonella. Lett. Appl. Microbiol., 37, 386-391 (2003).   DOI