2013
DOI: 10.3126/ijim.v2i3.8671
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessment of bacterial load in broiler chicken meat from the retail meat shops in Chitwan, Nepal

Abstract: INTRODUCTION: Keeping quality of meat and meat related food hazard relates to microbes present in the meat during processing or storage. The poultry slaughtered and dressed under Chitwan conditions carrying high initial contamination would be present in meat as inherent contamination in the finished products. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 26 fresh broiler meat samples from registered retail shops. The samples were subjected to bacteriological analysis such as total viable count (TV… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
25
3

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
5
25
3
Order By: Relevance
“…In this study, total coliform count 2.19 log CFU/g of market meat was similar with results reported by Capita et al (2002) (2.7 log CFU/g) and Northcutt et al (2003) (2.6 log CFU/g) (Capita et al, 2002;Northcutt et al, 2003). In contrast, less coliform counts were reported by Joshi et al (1.03 log CFU/g) and Selvan et al (2007) (1.13 log CFU/g) (Joshi & Joshi, 2010;Selvan et al, 2007) (Ibrahim et al, 2015;Bhandari et al, 2013;Selvan et al, 2007). In this study, total faecal coliform count was absent in market meat.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In this study, total coliform count 2.19 log CFU/g of market meat was similar with results reported by Capita et al (2002) (2.7 log CFU/g) and Northcutt et al (2003) (2.6 log CFU/g) (Capita et al, 2002;Northcutt et al, 2003). In contrast, less coliform counts were reported by Joshi et al (1.03 log CFU/g) and Selvan et al (2007) (1.13 log CFU/g) (Joshi & Joshi, 2010;Selvan et al, 2007) (Ibrahim et al, 2015;Bhandari et al, 2013;Selvan et al, 2007). In this study, total faecal coliform count was absent in market meat.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…The total aerobic plate count 4.45 log CFU/g in market meat of this study is consistent with previous studies conducted by Chaudhey et al (2011) (5.07 log CFU/g) (Chaudhrya et al, 2011). Sengupta et al (2012), Omorodion and Odu (2014), and Bhandari et al (2013) have reported higher counts of total aerobic bacteria 6.39 log CFU/g, 5.96 log CFU/g and 7.24 log CFU/g respectively in market chicken meat (Ibrahim et al, 2015;Omorodion & Odu, 2014;Bhandari et al, 2013). On the other hand, lower counts were reported by Rindhe et al (2008) (3.67 log CFU/g) (Rindhe et al, 2008), and Aljasser et al (2012) (4.03 log CFU/g) (Al-Jasser, 2012).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…During study of various raw meat samples of a local market in Kathmandu, prevalence of salmonella was 11.4% and presence of salmonella in meat was highest in summer season (Maharjan et al, 2006). Prevalence of Salmonella in Chitwan was 46.2 % in the study of Bhandari et al, (2013), which is higher than our study. This may be due to difference in sample and location of Chitwan district and may be due to categorization of poultry type and age in our study.…”
Section: Resultscontrasting
confidence: 80%
“…Although. Datta et al (2012) and Chaiba et al (2007) obtained microbial load with a total count of 6.5  10 5 to 6.110 6 per gm, but Adu-Gyamfi et al (2009) and Bhandari et al (2013) observed higher count of 6.910 6 CFU/ gm, 11.1 10 6 CFU/ gm of meat. At the mean time Al-Mohizea (1994) observed the initial total viable count (log 10 CFU/cm 2 ) which ranged from 3.8 to 5.5 with a mean of 4.67.…”
Section: Statistical Analysis Of Experimental Datamentioning
confidence: 97%