Cargando…
Enterobacteriaceae and Salmonella contamination of wild boar (Sus scrofa) carcasses: comparison between different sampling strategies
During 2020, a total of 64 wild boar carcasses were tested for Enterobacteriaceae count (EBC), Salmonella and Yersinia enterocolitica in the abdominal region (i) within 5 h after hunting in the game collection point and (ii) before dressing and processing in the game-handling establishment (GHE) (49...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8475815/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34602932 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10344-021-01531-0 |
_version_ | 1784575478371188736 |
---|---|
author | Bonardi, Silvia Tansini, Cesare Cacchioli, Antonio Soliani, Laura Poli, Luca Lamperti, Luca Corradi, Margherita Gilioli, Stefano |
author_facet | Bonardi, Silvia Tansini, Cesare Cacchioli, Antonio Soliani, Laura Poli, Luca Lamperti, Luca Corradi, Margherita Gilioli, Stefano |
author_sort | Bonardi, Silvia |
collection | PubMed |
description | During 2020, a total of 64 wild boar carcasses were tested for Enterobacteriaceae count (EBC), Salmonella and Yersinia enterocolitica in the abdominal region (i) within 5 h after hunting in the game collection point and (ii) before dressing and processing in the game-handling establishment (GHE) (49 carcasses—average time interval between (i) and (ii): 4.3 days). Because of COVID-19 restrictions, 15 carcasses were transported to a near slaughterhouse (average time interval between (i) and (ii): 2.3 days). Mesenteric lymph nodes (MLNs) were collected and tested for Salmonella and Y. enterocolitica. Results are shown in relation to sampling A (49 carcasses—GHE) and sampling B (15 carcasses—slaughterhouse). Sampling A: EBC median values were (i) 2.51 log(10) CFU/cm(2) and (ii) 2.79 log(10) CFU/cm(2). EBC increase between (i) and (ii) was statistically significant (p = 0.001). Salmonella prevalence on carcasses varied from (i) 2.0 to (ii) 6.1%. Sampling B: EBC median values were (i) 3.1 log(10) CFU/cm(2) and (ii) 3.32 log(10) CFU/cm(2). EBC increase between (i) and (ii) was not statistically significant (p = 0.191). Salmonella prevalence on carcasses varied from (i) 6.7 to (ii) 0.0%. The prevalence (sampling A + B) of lymphatic Salmonella carriers was 7.8% (5/64). From carcasses and/or MNLs, the serovars Enteritidis, Typhimurium, Agama, Zaiman and Diarizonae O:50 (z) were detected. Y. enterocolitica was never isolated. Long chilling periods prior to wild game processing should be avoided, and carcasses should be tested at GHE rather than after shooting to proper reflect the microbial load of wild boar meat entering the food chain. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8475815 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84758152021-09-28 Enterobacteriaceae and Salmonella contamination of wild boar (Sus scrofa) carcasses: comparison between different sampling strategies Bonardi, Silvia Tansini, Cesare Cacchioli, Antonio Soliani, Laura Poli, Luca Lamperti, Luca Corradi, Margherita Gilioli, Stefano Eur J Wildl Res Original Article During 2020, a total of 64 wild boar carcasses were tested for Enterobacteriaceae count (EBC), Salmonella and Yersinia enterocolitica in the abdominal region (i) within 5 h after hunting in the game collection point and (ii) before dressing and processing in the game-handling establishment (GHE) (49 carcasses—average time interval between (i) and (ii): 4.3 days). Because of COVID-19 restrictions, 15 carcasses were transported to a near slaughterhouse (average time interval between (i) and (ii): 2.3 days). Mesenteric lymph nodes (MLNs) were collected and tested for Salmonella and Y. enterocolitica. Results are shown in relation to sampling A (49 carcasses—GHE) and sampling B (15 carcasses—slaughterhouse). Sampling A: EBC median values were (i) 2.51 log(10) CFU/cm(2) and (ii) 2.79 log(10) CFU/cm(2). EBC increase between (i) and (ii) was statistically significant (p = 0.001). Salmonella prevalence on carcasses varied from (i) 2.0 to (ii) 6.1%. Sampling B: EBC median values were (i) 3.1 log(10) CFU/cm(2) and (ii) 3.32 log(10) CFU/cm(2). EBC increase between (i) and (ii) was not statistically significant (p = 0.191). Salmonella prevalence on carcasses varied from (i) 6.7 to (ii) 0.0%. The prevalence (sampling A + B) of lymphatic Salmonella carriers was 7.8% (5/64). From carcasses and/or MNLs, the serovars Enteritidis, Typhimurium, Agama, Zaiman and Diarizonae O:50 (z) were detected. Y. enterocolitica was never isolated. Long chilling periods prior to wild game processing should be avoided, and carcasses should be tested at GHE rather than after shooting to proper reflect the microbial load of wild boar meat entering the food chain. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-09-25 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8475815/ /pubmed/34602932 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10344-021-01531-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Bonardi, Silvia Tansini, Cesare Cacchioli, Antonio Soliani, Laura Poli, Luca Lamperti, Luca Corradi, Margherita Gilioli, Stefano Enterobacteriaceae and Salmonella contamination of wild boar (Sus scrofa) carcasses: comparison between different sampling strategies |
title | Enterobacteriaceae and Salmonella contamination of wild boar (Sus scrofa) carcasses: comparison between different sampling strategies |
title_full | Enterobacteriaceae and Salmonella contamination of wild boar (Sus scrofa) carcasses: comparison between different sampling strategies |
title_fullStr | Enterobacteriaceae and Salmonella contamination of wild boar (Sus scrofa) carcasses: comparison between different sampling strategies |
title_full_unstemmed | Enterobacteriaceae and Salmonella contamination of wild boar (Sus scrofa) carcasses: comparison between different sampling strategies |
title_short | Enterobacteriaceae and Salmonella contamination of wild boar (Sus scrofa) carcasses: comparison between different sampling strategies |
title_sort | enterobacteriaceae and salmonella contamination of wild boar (sus scrofa) carcasses: comparison between different sampling strategies |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8475815/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34602932 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10344-021-01531-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bonardisilvia enterobacteriaceaeandsalmonellacontaminationofwildboarsusscrofacarcassescomparisonbetweendifferentsamplingstrategies AT tansinicesare enterobacteriaceaeandsalmonellacontaminationofwildboarsusscrofacarcassescomparisonbetweendifferentsamplingstrategies AT cacchioliantonio enterobacteriaceaeandsalmonellacontaminationofwildboarsusscrofacarcassescomparisonbetweendifferentsamplingstrategies AT solianilaura enterobacteriaceaeandsalmonellacontaminationofwildboarsusscrofacarcassescomparisonbetweendifferentsamplingstrategies AT poliluca enterobacteriaceaeandsalmonellacontaminationofwildboarsusscrofacarcassescomparisonbetweendifferentsamplingstrategies AT lampertiluca enterobacteriaceaeandsalmonellacontaminationofwildboarsusscrofacarcassescomparisonbetweendifferentsamplingstrategies AT corradimargherita enterobacteriaceaeandsalmonellacontaminationofwildboarsusscrofacarcassescomparisonbetweendifferentsamplingstrategies AT giliolistefano enterobacteriaceaeandsalmonellacontaminationofwildboarsusscrofacarcassescomparisonbetweendifferentsamplingstrategies |