4.4 Article

Prevalence, Antibiotic Resistance, and Molecular Characterization of Salmonella Serovars in Retail Meat Products

Journal

JOURNAL OF FOOD PROTECTION
Volume 74, Issue 1, Pages 161-166

Publisher

INT ASSOC FOOD PROTECTION
DOI: 10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-10-327

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Korea Institute of Planning and Evaluation for Technology in Food, Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries [108077-03-2-SB020]
  2. Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The prevalence of Salmonella was determined in chicken meat (n = 26), beef (n = 49), and pork (n = 56) collected from wholesale markets, retail stores, and traditional markets in Seoul, South Korea, in 2009. Antibiotic resistance was assessed, and the molecular subtypes of Salmonella isolates were ascertained using an automated repetitive sequence based PCR (rep-PCR) system (DiversiLab). A total of 18 Salmonella strains were isolated from 17 of 131 samples: 16 strains from each of 16 samples and 2 strains from the same pork sample. The prevalence of Salmonella from the retail meats was 2.0% in beef, 8.9% in pork, and 42.3% in chicken meat. Among 10 different serotypes, Salmonella enterica Panama was recovered from a beef sample, and Salmonella London and Salmonella Montevideo were the predominant serotypes from pork and chicken meat, respectively. The highest antibiotic resistance observed was to erythromycin (100%) followed by streptomycin (22.2%) and tetracycline and chloramphenicol (16.7%). Of the 18 isolates, 5 (27.8%) were resistant to two or more antibiotics, and 1 isolate from chicken meat was resistant to eight antibiotics, including cephalosporins. Differentiation between all of the Salmonella isolates except between Salmonella Montevideo and Salmonella London was successfully performed with the automated rep-PCR system, indicating that it can be added to the toolbox for source tracking of foodborne pathogens associated with outbreaks.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available