Application of BAX system, Tecra Unique^TMSalmonella test, and a conventional culture method for the detection of Salmonella in ready-to-eat and raw foods

Abstract

Aims: To compare the BAX system, the Tecra UniqueTM Salmonella test, and a conventional culture method for the detection of Salmonella in various foods. Methods and Results: Ready‐to‐eat and raw foods were inoculated with Salmonella serotype Typhimurium, Salmonella serotype Enteritidis, Salmonella serotype Typhi, or Salmonella serotype Derby. Incubated pre‐enrichment cultures were examined using the BAX system, the Tecra UniqueTM Salmonella test, and a conventional culture method. Salmonella could be detected in all ready‐to‐eat food samples inoculated with S. Typhimurium, S. Enteritidis, or S. Derby, with any of the three test methods. However, false negatives were obtained with the Tecra test and the culture method when samples with higher background flora were inoculated with S. Typhi. Sensitivity test results suggested the two rapid tests performed as well as the culture method in the detection of 101 CFU of S. Typhimurium in 25‐g cooked or raw food. Conclusions: The BAX system and the Tecra UniqueTM Salmonella test demonstrated results comparable with those of the culture method in the detection of Salmonella serotypes used except S. Typhi. Significance and Impact of the Study: This is the first evaluation of the BAX system, the Tecra UniqueTM Salmonella test, and a culture method in the detection of Salmonella in a variety of western and oriental foods.

Accuracy and Sensitivity of Commercial PCR-Based Methods for Detection of Salmonella enterica in Feed

“…The evaluated PCR-based methods showed sensitivities equal to or higher than the culture-based methods, and, in addition, the specificity was very high, which agrees with studies of food materials (10,12,24,32).…”

“…The PCR-based methods evaluated in the present study (i.e., BAX System Q7 [DuPont Qualicon], the iQ-Check Salmonella II kit [Bio-Rad], and the TaqMan Salmonella enterica detection kit [Applied Biosystems]) have all been evaluated previously with food products but not feed ingredients, and, to our knowledge, no comparative studies have been conducted (8,12,17,20,28,29,31,34,37,43).…”

Microbiological Quality and Antibiogram of E. coli, Salmonella and Vibrio of Salad and Water from Restaurants of Chittagong

“…33.33% (5) of water sample had count were more than 1100 CFU/100ml. The presence of Salmonella in 25 g of a sample examined is regarded as potentially hazardous to consumers, and is unacceptable for consumption (Cheung et al 2007) and 13.33% salad sample were found unsatisfactory. This result also indicated the possibility of fecal contamination and did not conform to the guideline of WHO (2001), which limits the number of fecal coliforms to be zero per 100 mL of water.…”

Salmonella in food surveillance: PCR, immunoassays, and other rapid detection and quantification methods

“…In 2010, about 5300 ready-to-eat food samples were scheduled for Salmonella detection by PHLSB in the Food Surveillance Programme. Traditionally, labor-intensive and time-consuming conventional standard culture methods, which usually require at least 3 working days to generate the results, have always been employed by many laboratories to detect Salmonella in foods (Cheung, Kwok, & Kam, 2007). In food surveillance, regarding the enormous volume of sample received for Salmonella detection, it is obvious that, when compared to the culture method, rapid methods with shorter turnaround time (1-2 days) for Salmonella detection would significantly reduce the resources required in routine laboratory operations, and enhance the overall efficiency and productivity of public health laboratory services.…”