Gary Gensler

Occurrence of Pathogens in Raw and Ready-to-Eat Meat and Poultry Products Collected from the Retail Marketplace in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

A total of 800 meat and poultry products were purchased from the retail marketplace in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. The products consisted of raw ground beef, chicken legs, pork chops, and ready-to-eat fermented sausage, roast beef, processed turkey breast, chicken wieners, and beef wieners. The samples were analyzed to determine the prevalence of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli, Salmonella, Campylobacter spp., and Listeria monocytogenes. Shiga toxin-producing E. coli 022: H8 was found in one raw ground beef sample. Salmonella and Campylobacter were found in 30 and 62% of raw chicken legs, respectively. L. monocytogenes was found in 52% of raw ground beef, 34% of raw chicken legs, 24% of raw pork chops, 4% of fermented sausages, 3% of processed turkey breast, 5% of beef wieners, and 3% of chicken wieners. The occurrence of pathogens in this study is similar to that in retail products in many other international locales.

A Real-Time PCR Assay for the Detection of Salmonella in a Wide Variety of Food and Food-Animal Matrices†

Conventional culture methods have traditionally been considered the “gold standards” for the isolation and identification of foodborne pathogens. However, culture methods are labor-intensive and time-consuming. We have developed a real-time PCR assay for the detection of Salmonella in a variety of food and food-animal matrices. The real-time PCR assay incorporates both primers and hybridization probes based on the sequence of the Salmonella invA gene and uses fluorescent resonance energy transfer technology to ensure highly sensitive and specific results. This method correctly classified 51 laboratory isolates of Salmonella and 28 non-Salmonella strains. The method was also validated with a large number of field samples that consisted of porcine feces and cecal contents, pork carcasses, bovine feces and beef carcasses, poultry cecal contents and carcasses, equine feces, animal feeds, and various food products. The samples (3,388) were preenriched in buffered peptone water and then selectively enriched in ...

Evaluation of Detection Methods for Screening Meat and Poultry Products for the Presence of Foodborne Pathogens

Rapid and molecular technologies such as enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), PCR, and lateral flow immunoprecipitation can reduce the time and labor involved in screening food products for the presence of pathogens. These technologies were compared with conventional culture methodology for the detection of Salmonella, Campylobacter, Listeria, and Escherichia coli O157:H7 inoculated in raw and processed meat and poultry products. Recommended protocols were modified so that the same enrichment broths used in the culture methods were also used in the ELISA, PCR, and lateral flow immunoprecipitation assays. The percent agreement between the rapid technologies and culture methods ranged from 80 to 100% depending on the pathogen detected and the method used. ELISA, PCR, and lateral flow immunoprecipitation all performed well, with no statistical difference, compared with the culture method for the detection of E. coli O157:H7. ELISA performed better for the detection of Salmonella, with sensitivity and specificity rates of 100%. PCR performed better for the detection of Campylobacter jejuni, with 100% agreement to the culture method. PCR was highly sensitive for the detection of all the foodborne pathogens tested except Listeria monocytogenes. Although the lateral flow immunoprecipitation tests were statistically different from the culture methods for Salmonella and Listeria because of false-positive results, the tests did not produce any false negatives, indicating that this method would be suitable for screening meat and poultry products for these pathogens.

Phenotypic and genetic characterization of antimicrobial resistance in Salmonella serovars isolated from retail meats in Alberta, Canada

This study determined the prevalence of Salmonella serovars, antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and resistance genes in Salmonella isolated from retail meats purchased in Alberta, Canada. Samples were collected during one year period (May 2007-April 2008) on weekly basis from 19 census divisions in Alberta. A total of 564 samples including chicken (n = 206), turkey (n = 91), beef (n = 134) and pork (n = 133) were purchased. Salmonella were recovered from chicken (40%), turkey (27%) and pork (2%) samples and was not found in ground beef. A total of 21, 8, and 3 different serovars were recovered from chicken, turkey and pork meats, respectively. Salmonella Hadar was most common in chicken whereas S. Heidelberg was common in turkey meat. Overall 29% (32/110) of isolates were susceptible to tested antimicrobials and resistance to ciprofloxacin, amikacin and nalidixic acid was not found in any isolate. Multiresistance (≥2 antimicrobials) was found in 56% of isolates. Resistance to amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (AMC), ceftiofur (TIO), and ceftriaxone (CRO) was found in about 21% of chicken and 25% of turkey isolates. Resistance to either of tetracycline (TET), streptomycin (STR) or ampicillin (AMP) was unconditionally associated with S. Hadar but resistance to either of TET, AMP, AMC, TIO, CRO or cefoxitin was associated with S. Heidelberg. The strA/B (42% isolates), tet(A) (28% isolates), bla(CMY-2) (21% isolates) and bla(TEM) (17% isolates) were the most common resistance genes found. The bla(CMY-2) and bla(TEM) genes were unconditionally associated with S. Heidelberg; tet(A) and strA/B with S. Hadar and tet(B) gene with S. Kentucky. The strA/B genes were not associated with S. Heidelberg. Our data suggests that the prevalence of Salmonella serovars varied by the meat type and that AMR and resistance genes varied by the Salmonella serovars.

Evaluation of environmental sampling methods and rapid detection assays for recovery and identification of Listeria spp. from meat processing facilities.

Studies that isolated Listeria spp. from the environment of two meat processing facilities were conducted. Samples were collected in the processing environment of the facilities with three different sampling methods (cotton swab, sterile sponge, and composite-ply tissues) to evaluate their ability to recover Listeria spp. A total of 240 samples for each sampling method were collected and tested. The cotton swab method of sampling was significantly (P < 0.01) less efficient in recovery of Listeria spp. than the sterile-sponge and composite-ply tissue methods, which were similar (P > 0.05) in their ability to recover Listeria spp. The specificity and sensitivity of four detection methods (conventional culture, Petrifilm Environmental Listeria Plates [ELP], lateral-flow immunoprecipitation [LFI], and automated PCR) were evaluated for identification of Listeria spp. Facilities were visited until a minimum of 100 positive and 100 negative samples per detection method were collected. The LFI and PCR methods were highly sensitive (95.5 and 99.1%, respectively) and specific (100%) relative to the culture method. The ELP method was significantly less efficient (P < 0.01) than LFI and PCR in detection of Listeria spp., with lower sensitivity (50.6%) and specificity (91.5%). Kappa values indicated excellent agreement of the LFI and PCR assays and moderate agreement of the ELP method to the culture method. Overall, ELP was easy to use but less efficient in detection of Listeria spp. from environmental samples, while the LFI and PCR methods were found to be excellent alternatives to culture, considering performance and time and labor inputs.