2018
DOI: 10.1007/s12161-018-1363-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development of a Capture ELISA for Rapid Detection of Salmonella enterica in Food Samples

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Recently, immunological methods and molecular biology methods are popular for detecting Salmonella pathogens. Main immunological detection includes ELISA and colloidal gold immunochromatographic test methods, the former detection limit is about 10 3 –10 6 CFU/ml, the detection time is 3–4 hr (Brandao, Liebana, & Pividori, 2015; Di Febo et al, 2019), the latter detection limit is 10 5 CFU/ml, the detection time is about 15 min (Duan et al, 2017); however, Salmonella pathogen often contaminates food only at low levels, which often resulted in negative results. Molecular biology methods have lower detection limits, especially PCR, the detection limit can be up to 10 2 CFU/ml (Alves, Hirooka, & de Oliveira, 2016; Y. J. Li, 2016), the detection time is 5 hr or so, but using the traditional PCR to detect microorganisms often needs extracting DNA, amplification and electrophoresis, and so on, and the operation are relatively complicated.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, immunological methods and molecular biology methods are popular for detecting Salmonella pathogens. Main immunological detection includes ELISA and colloidal gold immunochromatographic test methods, the former detection limit is about 10 3 –10 6 CFU/ml, the detection time is 3–4 hr (Brandao, Liebana, & Pividori, 2015; Di Febo et al, 2019), the latter detection limit is 10 5 CFU/ml, the detection time is about 15 min (Duan et al, 2017); however, Salmonella pathogen often contaminates food only at low levels, which often resulted in negative results. Molecular biology methods have lower detection limits, especially PCR, the detection limit can be up to 10 2 CFU/ml (Alves, Hirooka, & de Oliveira, 2016; Y. J. Li, 2016), the detection time is 5 hr or so, but using the traditional PCR to detect microorganisms often needs extracting DNA, amplification and electrophoresis, and so on, and the operation are relatively complicated.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In their study, ELISA selectivity and sensitivity increased significantly by increasing the number of antibodies used. Febo et al (2019) applied capture ELISA to detect Salmonella enterica in dairy products, meat, pasta, flour, eggs, and animal feed, and indicated that results by ELISA showed agreement with ISO method with 100, 81, and 90.5% of sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy, respectively. Zhao et al (2020) developed wax‐printed paper‐based ELISA and applied to detect E .…”
Section: Enzyme‐linked Immunosorbent Assaymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At present, quite a lot of attention has been devoted to the research for the rapid detection of E. coli O157:H7 ( Park et al, 2020 ) The conventionally used plate counting method is reliable to some extent but inevitably limited owing to the time-consumption ( Sieuwerts et al, 2008 ; Zhao et al, 2014 ). Technological advances introduced and proposed new methods and techniques, such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR) ( Amagliani et al, 2004 ; Zhou et al, 2022 ) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) ( Di Febo et al, 2019 ; Hu Y. et al, 2021 ), but the requirement of high precision and accuracy as well as the need of highly professional trainers limited their use to some extent. To address all these issues related to conventional and advanced techniques, biosensors have been developed ( Aziz et al, 2022 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%