2011
DOI: 10.1128/aem.02089-10
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Detection of Shiga Toxin-Producing Escherichia coli Serotypes O26:H11, O103:H2, O111:H8, O145:H28, and O157:H7 in Raw-Milk Cheeses by Using Multiplex Real-Time PCR

Abstract: Shiga toxin (Stx)-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) strains are a diverse group of food-borne pathogens with various levels of virulence for humans. In this study, we describe the use of a combination of multiple real-time PCR assays for the screening of 400 raw-milk cheeses for the five main pathogenic STEC serotypes (O26:H11, O103:H2, O111:H8, O145:H28, and O157:H7). The prevalences of samples positive for stx, intimin-encoding gene (eae), and at least one of the five O group genetic markers were 29.8%, 37.3… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

9
61
1
3

Year Published

2012
2012
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 85 publications
(74 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
9
61
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…This difference for the dairy samples is less evident, 42 % positive by qPCR and 36 % positive by identification of isolates. These results confirm previous findings concerning the higher percent of prevalence of STEC when determined by PCR methods applied directly in food samples compared to culture based methods (Auvray et al, 2009;Madic et al, 2011;Pradel et al, 2000). Such deviation may partly be explained by the fact that isolates were randomly selected and that for most samples, a relatively low STEC load was detected.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…This difference for the dairy samples is less evident, 42 % positive by qPCR and 36 % positive by identification of isolates. These results confirm previous findings concerning the higher percent of prevalence of STEC when determined by PCR methods applied directly in food samples compared to culture based methods (Auvray et al, 2009;Madic et al, 2011;Pradel et al, 2000). Such deviation may partly be explained by the fact that isolates were randomly selected and that for most samples, a relatively low STEC load was detected.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…It has been suggested that such a discrepancy could be attributed to the stress to which bacteria are subjected during processing (Pradel et al, 2000). It should also be noted that a difficulty in STEC isolation has been previously reported (Auvray et al, 2007;Madic et al, 2011).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 89%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Thus, the presence of these microorganisms poses a risk to the consumer's health and contributes to the deterioration of the product (MONTANHINI et al, 2013). High amounts of these microorganisms also indicated a greater possibility of pathogens being present in the food as most pathogens are mesophilic bacteria (MADIC et al, 2011).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…E. coli isolates positive for stx1 and/or stx2 genes were classified as STEC, isolates positive for eae gene, and negative for stx1, stx2, bfpA and EPEC adherence factor (EAF) plasmid were classified as atypical EPEC (Trabulsi et al, 2002). The five major serotypes associated with EHEC (O157:H7, O26:H11, O145:H28, O111:H8 and O103:H2) were investigated in STEC and potential EPEC isolates, by real-time PCR with conditions and control strains described elsewhere (Madic et al, 2011;Perelle et al, 2004Perelle et al, , 2005.…”
Section: Characterization Of Stx-and Eae-positive E Coli Isolatesmentioning
confidence: 99%