Microbiological assessment at slaughter of chicken carcasses from commercial, backyard and semi-backyard production systems
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
Texto Completo: | http://dx.doi.org/10.3855/jidc.14882 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/223358 |
Resumo: | Introduction: Smaller scale, alternative, chicken production systems are gaining popularity globally. However, this brings public health and market confidence concerns, especially where there are no established standards of production. The aim of this study was to carry out a microbiological analysis of chicken carcasses from the commercial, backyard and semi-backyard production systems, slaughtered in the same slaughterhouse. Methodology: Samples of 102 chicken carcasses were taken in two steps of the slaughter (A: after bleeding; and B: after chiller tank) and were subjected to aerobic mesophilic, coliforms at 35 °C and coliforms at 45 °C counts, and Salmonella spp. detection. Salmonella spp. isolates were subjected to antimicrobial resistance analysis. Results: At slaughter step A, carcasses from the backyard system had less contamination than carcasses from the commercial system, with a difference of 0.7 log10 CFU/mL. Salmonella was identified in carcasses of all production systems and in both slaughter steps. Nine chicken carcasses were positive for Salmonella and no significant difference was observed in the occurrence of Salmonella amongst the carcasses from different production systems. Two Salmonella isolates, that presented the highest resistance profiles (one isolate was resistant to eight and the other to six out of ten tested antibiotics), were identified on carcasses from the semi-backyard system. Conclusions: Carcasses from the backyard system had a lower microbial count at the initial step of the slaughter process than the commercial production system. In addition, greater resistance to antimicrobials was observed in Salmonella isolates from semi-backyard system. |
id |
UNSP_52e3c02de260dd5842763f6f3c88856c |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/223358 |
network_acronym_str |
UNSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository_id_str |
2946 |
spelling |
Microbiological assessment at slaughter of chicken carcasses from commercial, backyard and semi-backyard production systemsBroilersCarcass qualityFree rangeMicrobiologySalmonellaIntroduction: Smaller scale, alternative, chicken production systems are gaining popularity globally. However, this brings public health and market confidence concerns, especially where there are no established standards of production. The aim of this study was to carry out a microbiological analysis of chicken carcasses from the commercial, backyard and semi-backyard production systems, slaughtered in the same slaughterhouse. Methodology: Samples of 102 chicken carcasses were taken in two steps of the slaughter (A: after bleeding; and B: after chiller tank) and were subjected to aerobic mesophilic, coliforms at 35 °C and coliforms at 45 °C counts, and Salmonella spp. detection. Salmonella spp. isolates were subjected to antimicrobial resistance analysis. Results: At slaughter step A, carcasses from the backyard system had less contamination than carcasses from the commercial system, with a difference of 0.7 log10 CFU/mL. Salmonella was identified in carcasses of all production systems and in both slaughter steps. Nine chicken carcasses were positive for Salmonella and no significant difference was observed in the occurrence of Salmonella amongst the carcasses from different production systems. Two Salmonella isolates, that presented the highest resistance profiles (one isolate was resistant to eight and the other to six out of ten tested antibiotics), were identified on carcasses from the semi-backyard system. Conclusions: Carcasses from the backyard system had a lower microbial count at the initial step of the slaughter process than the commercial production system. In addition, greater resistance to antimicrobials was observed in Salmonella isolates from semi-backyard system.Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)Faculty of Veterinary Medicine Federal University of Uberlândia Umuarama CampusSchool of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science – UNESP Botucatu CampusSchool of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science – UNESP Botucatu CampusUniversidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU)Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)Garcia, Débora TamanahaNascimento, Yago Fernandes [UNESP]da Cunha Dias, Sthefany [UNESP]Moura, Amanda OliveiraCosta, Priscila Cristinado Amaral, Alexandre BicalhoPeres, Phelipe Augusto Borba Martinsde Fátima Carrijo, KêniaCossi, Marcus Vinícius2022-04-28T19:50:11Z2022-04-28T19:50:11Z2021-12-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article1891-1898http://dx.doi.org/10.3855/jidc.14882Journal of Infection in Developing Countries, v. 15, n. 12, p. 1891-1898, 2021.1972-26802036-6590http://hdl.handle.net/11449/22335810.3855/jidc.148822-s2.0-85123657454Scopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengJournal of Infection in Developing Countriesinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2022-04-28T19:50:11Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/223358Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462024-08-05T20:55:00.935588Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Microbiological assessment at slaughter of chicken carcasses from commercial, backyard and semi-backyard production systems |
title |
Microbiological assessment at slaughter of chicken carcasses from commercial, backyard and semi-backyard production systems |
spellingShingle |
Microbiological assessment at slaughter of chicken carcasses from commercial, backyard and semi-backyard production systems Garcia, Débora Tamanaha Broilers Carcass quality Free range Microbiology Salmonella |
title_short |
Microbiological assessment at slaughter of chicken carcasses from commercial, backyard and semi-backyard production systems |
title_full |
Microbiological assessment at slaughter of chicken carcasses from commercial, backyard and semi-backyard production systems |
title_fullStr |
Microbiological assessment at slaughter of chicken carcasses from commercial, backyard and semi-backyard production systems |
title_full_unstemmed |
Microbiological assessment at slaughter of chicken carcasses from commercial, backyard and semi-backyard production systems |
title_sort |
Microbiological assessment at slaughter of chicken carcasses from commercial, backyard and semi-backyard production systems |
author |
Garcia, Débora Tamanaha |
author_facet |
Garcia, Débora Tamanaha Nascimento, Yago Fernandes [UNESP] da Cunha Dias, Sthefany [UNESP] Moura, Amanda Oliveira Costa, Priscila Cristina do Amaral, Alexandre Bicalho Peres, Phelipe Augusto Borba Martins de Fátima Carrijo, Kênia Cossi, Marcus Vinícius |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Nascimento, Yago Fernandes [UNESP] da Cunha Dias, Sthefany [UNESP] Moura, Amanda Oliveira Costa, Priscila Cristina do Amaral, Alexandre Bicalho Peres, Phelipe Augusto Borba Martins de Fátima Carrijo, Kênia Cossi, Marcus Vinícius |
author2_role |
author author author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU) Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Garcia, Débora Tamanaha Nascimento, Yago Fernandes [UNESP] da Cunha Dias, Sthefany [UNESP] Moura, Amanda Oliveira Costa, Priscila Cristina do Amaral, Alexandre Bicalho Peres, Phelipe Augusto Borba Martins de Fátima Carrijo, Kênia Cossi, Marcus Vinícius |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Broilers Carcass quality Free range Microbiology Salmonella |
topic |
Broilers Carcass quality Free range Microbiology Salmonella |
description |
Introduction: Smaller scale, alternative, chicken production systems are gaining popularity globally. However, this brings public health and market confidence concerns, especially where there are no established standards of production. The aim of this study was to carry out a microbiological analysis of chicken carcasses from the commercial, backyard and semi-backyard production systems, slaughtered in the same slaughterhouse. Methodology: Samples of 102 chicken carcasses were taken in two steps of the slaughter (A: after bleeding; and B: after chiller tank) and were subjected to aerobic mesophilic, coliforms at 35 °C and coliforms at 45 °C counts, and Salmonella spp. detection. Salmonella spp. isolates were subjected to antimicrobial resistance analysis. Results: At slaughter step A, carcasses from the backyard system had less contamination than carcasses from the commercial system, with a difference of 0.7 log10 CFU/mL. Salmonella was identified in carcasses of all production systems and in both slaughter steps. Nine chicken carcasses were positive for Salmonella and no significant difference was observed in the occurrence of Salmonella amongst the carcasses from different production systems. Two Salmonella isolates, that presented the highest resistance profiles (one isolate was resistant to eight and the other to six out of ten tested antibiotics), were identified on carcasses from the semi-backyard system. Conclusions: Carcasses from the backyard system had a lower microbial count at the initial step of the slaughter process than the commercial production system. In addition, greater resistance to antimicrobials was observed in Salmonella isolates from semi-backyard system. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-12-01 2022-04-28T19:50:11Z 2022-04-28T19:50:11Z |
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 |
http://dx.doi.org/10.3855/jidc.14882 Journal of Infection in Developing Countries, v. 15, n. 12, p. 1891-1898, 2021. 1972-2680 2036-6590 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/223358 10.3855/jidc.14882 2-s2.0-85123657454 |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.3855/jidc.14882 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/223358 |
identifier_str_mv |
Journal of Infection in Developing Countries, v. 15, n. 12, p. 1891-1898, 2021. 1972-2680 2036-6590 10.3855/jidc.14882 2-s2.0-85123657454 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Journal of Infection in Developing Countries |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
1891-1898 |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Scopus reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) instacron:UNESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
instacron_str |
UNESP |
institution |
UNESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1808129262692073472 |