Comparison of destructive and nondestructive sampling techniques of retail chicken carcasses for enumeration of hygiene indicator microorganisms
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2012 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV |
Texto Completo: | http://dx.doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-11-247 http://www.locus.ufv.br/handle/123456789/16072 |
Resumo: | The type of sampling technique used to obtain food samples is fundamental to the success of microbiological analysis. Destructive and nondestructive techniques, such as tissue excision and rinsing, respectively, are widely employed in obtaining samples from chicken carcasses. In this study, four sampling techniques used for chicken carcasses were compared to evaluate their performances in the enumeration of hygiene indicator microorganisms. Sixty fresh chicken carcasses were sampled by rinsing, tissue excision, superficial swabbing, and skin excision. All samples were submitted for enumeration of mesophilic aerobes, Enterobacteriaceae, coliforms, and Escherichia coli. The results were compared to determine the statistical significance of differences and correlation (P < 0.05). Tissue excision provided the highest microbial counts compared with the other procedures, with significant differences obtained only for coliforms and E. coli (P < 0.05). Significant correlations (P < 0.05) were observed for all the sampling techniques evaluated for most of the hygiene indicators. Despite presenting a higher recovery ability, tissue excision did not present significant differences for microorganism enumeration compared with other nondestructive techniques, such as rinsing, indicating its adequacy for microbiological analysis of chicken carcasses. |
id |
UFV_d38aade35c1f3afc062463cc3dec01fe |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:locus.ufv.br:123456789/16072 |
network_acronym_str |
UFV |
network_name_str |
LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV |
repository_id_str |
2145 |
spelling |
Comparison of destructive and nondestructive sampling techniques of retail chicken carcasses for enumeration of hygiene indicator microorganismsChicken carcassesIndicator microorganismsThe type of sampling technique used to obtain food samples is fundamental to the success of microbiological analysis. Destructive and nondestructive techniques, such as tissue excision and rinsing, respectively, are widely employed in obtaining samples from chicken carcasses. In this study, four sampling techniques used for chicken carcasses were compared to evaluate their performances in the enumeration of hygiene indicator microorganisms. Sixty fresh chicken carcasses were sampled by rinsing, tissue excision, superficial swabbing, and skin excision. All samples were submitted for enumeration of mesophilic aerobes, Enterobacteriaceae, coliforms, and Escherichia coli. The results were compared to determine the statistical significance of differences and correlation (P < 0.05). Tissue excision provided the highest microbial counts compared with the other procedures, with significant differences obtained only for coliforms and E. coli (P < 0.05). Significant correlations (P < 0.05) were observed for all the sampling techniques evaluated for most of the hygiene indicators. Despite presenting a higher recovery ability, tissue excision did not present significant differences for microorganism enumeration compared with other nondestructive techniques, such as rinsing, indicating its adequacy for microbiological analysis of chicken carcasses.Journal of Food Protection2018-01-02T13:26:38Z2018-01-02T13:26:38Z2012-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlepdfapplication/pdf1944-9097http://dx.doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-11-247http://www.locus.ufv.br/handle/123456789/16072engv. 75, n. 1, p. 29–33, Jan. 2012Cossi, Marcus Vinícius CoutinhoAlmeida, Michelle Vieira deDias, Mariane RezendePinto, Paulo Sérgio de ArrudaNero, Luís Augustoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFVinstname:Universidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV)instacron:UFV2024-07-12T06:55:27Zoai:locus.ufv.br:123456789/16072Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttps://www.locus.ufv.br/oai/requestfabiojreis@ufv.bropendoar:21452024-07-12T06:55:27LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV - Universidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Comparison of destructive and nondestructive sampling techniques of retail chicken carcasses for enumeration of hygiene indicator microorganisms |
title |
Comparison of destructive and nondestructive sampling techniques of retail chicken carcasses for enumeration of hygiene indicator microorganisms |
spellingShingle |
Comparison of destructive and nondestructive sampling techniques of retail chicken carcasses for enumeration of hygiene indicator microorganisms Cossi, Marcus Vinícius Coutinho Chicken carcasses Indicator microorganisms |
title_short |
Comparison of destructive and nondestructive sampling techniques of retail chicken carcasses for enumeration of hygiene indicator microorganisms |
title_full |
Comparison of destructive and nondestructive sampling techniques of retail chicken carcasses for enumeration of hygiene indicator microorganisms |
title_fullStr |
Comparison of destructive and nondestructive sampling techniques of retail chicken carcasses for enumeration of hygiene indicator microorganisms |
title_full_unstemmed |
Comparison of destructive and nondestructive sampling techniques of retail chicken carcasses for enumeration of hygiene indicator microorganisms |
title_sort |
Comparison of destructive and nondestructive sampling techniques of retail chicken carcasses for enumeration of hygiene indicator microorganisms |
author |
Cossi, Marcus Vinícius Coutinho |
author_facet |
Cossi, Marcus Vinícius Coutinho Almeida, Michelle Vieira de Dias, Mariane Rezende Pinto, Paulo Sérgio de Arruda Nero, Luís Augusto |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Almeida, Michelle Vieira de Dias, Mariane Rezende Pinto, Paulo Sérgio de Arruda Nero, Luís Augusto |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Cossi, Marcus Vinícius Coutinho Almeida, Michelle Vieira de Dias, Mariane Rezende Pinto, Paulo Sérgio de Arruda Nero, Luís Augusto |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Chicken carcasses Indicator microorganisms |
topic |
Chicken carcasses Indicator microorganisms |
description |
The type of sampling technique used to obtain food samples is fundamental to the success of microbiological analysis. Destructive and nondestructive techniques, such as tissue excision and rinsing, respectively, are widely employed in obtaining samples from chicken carcasses. In this study, four sampling techniques used for chicken carcasses were compared to evaluate their performances in the enumeration of hygiene indicator microorganisms. Sixty fresh chicken carcasses were sampled by rinsing, tissue excision, superficial swabbing, and skin excision. All samples were submitted for enumeration of mesophilic aerobes, Enterobacteriaceae, coliforms, and Escherichia coli. The results were compared to determine the statistical significance of differences and correlation (P < 0.05). Tissue excision provided the highest microbial counts compared with the other procedures, with significant differences obtained only for coliforms and E. coli (P < 0.05). Significant correlations (P < 0.05) were observed for all the sampling techniques evaluated for most of the hygiene indicators. Despite presenting a higher recovery ability, tissue excision did not present significant differences for microorganism enumeration compared with other nondestructive techniques, such as rinsing, indicating its adequacy for microbiological analysis of chicken carcasses. |
publishDate |
2012 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2012-01 2018-01-02T13:26:38Z 2018-01-02T13:26:38Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
1944-9097 http://dx.doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-11-247 http://www.locus.ufv.br/handle/123456789/16072 |
identifier_str_mv |
1944-9097 |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-11-247 http://www.locus.ufv.br/handle/123456789/16072 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
v. 75, n. 1, p. 29–33, Jan. 2012 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
pdf application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Journal of Food Protection |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Journal of Food Protection |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV instname:Universidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV) instacron:UFV |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV) |
instacron_str |
UFV |
institution |
UFV |
reponame_str |
LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV |
collection |
LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
LOCUS Repositório Institucional da UFV - Universidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
fabiojreis@ufv.br |
_version_ |
1822610588525658112 |