2000
DOI: 10.1016/s0168-1605(00)00294-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of the hygienic performances of the processes for cleaning, dressing and cooling pig carcasses at eight packing plants

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
14
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3
1
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
2
14
1
Order By: Relevance
“…It could be presumed that normal water wash of pork carcasses would not have a significant impact on the pathogen, because it reduces TVC on average by 0.3 log only (Gill et al, 2000). In respect to heat (hot water, steam) treatment of pig carcasses, no information related to Salmonella reductions is currently available.…”
Section: Pig Carcass Decontaminationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…It could be presumed that normal water wash of pork carcasses would not have a significant impact on the pathogen, because it reduces TVC on average by 0.3 log only (Gill et al, 2000). In respect to heat (hot water, steam) treatment of pig carcasses, no information related to Salmonella reductions is currently available.…”
Section: Pig Carcass Decontaminationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Regulatory required chilling of pork carcasses to ≤7°C within 24 h is an effective tool to suppress Salmonella growth and reduce their counts in order to prevent their entry to further steps of the meat chain, and also to suppress the background microbiota, although the TVC changes only very little (Beutling, 1992;Gill et al, 2000;Ortner, 1988;Savell et al, 2004). On the other hand, there is a lack of information on possible between-carcass cross-contamination due to physical contact between them and/or rapid air circulation.…”
Section: Pig Carcass Chillingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Published data indicate that under commercial conditions, chilling can result in increases, decreases or no changes of bacterial contamination, dependent on temperature, air speed, humidity, carcass spacing and duration (Bolton et al, 2002;Gill et al, 2000;Lenahan et al, 2009;Nesbakken et al, 2008;Pearce et al, 2004;Rahkio et al, 1992;Spescha et al, 2006;Yu et al, 1999). Spescha et al (2006) investigated the antibacterial efficacy of blast chilling and conventional chilling under commercial conditions.…”
Section: Chillingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, several studies investigated the antibacterial efficacy of chilling procedures under commercial conditions without exact designation of process parameters (Bolton et al, 2002;Gill et al, 2000;Lenahan et al, 2009). Inconsistent effects ranging from moderate decreases to slight increases of the bacterial levels on pig carcasses were thereby observed.…”
Section: Chillingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation