4.7 Article

Evaluation of porcine gastric mucin assay for detection and quantification of human norovirus in fresh herbs and leafy vegetables

Journal

FOOD MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 84, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fm.2019.103254

Keywords

Norovirus; Herbs and leafy greens; Droplet digital RT-PCR; Porcine gastric mucin

Funding

  1. Research Division of the Bureau of Microbial Hazards, Health Canada

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Leafy vegetables and fresh herbs are important parts of a healthy diet, however, they can be common vehicles of norovirus (NoV) infection and lead to serious health and economic concerns globally. NoV is highly infectious and persistent in the food and the environment, while being resistant to conventional food decontamination practices. Herbs and leafy greens are often consumed raw, and if contaminated with NoV, they may cause illness. Consequently, for outbreak prevention and surveillance purposes, sensitive and rapid methods are required to detect the presence of infectious NoV in naturally contaminated produce during its shelf life. Herein, we compared the extraction efficiency of the ISO/TS 15216-1:2017 method with the porcine gastric mucin coated magnetic beads (PGM-MB) assay, combined with heat-denaturation for RNA extraction, for detection of human NoV in artificially contaminated fresh green seaweed, basil, mint, and baby spinach. Droplet-digital RT-PCR was used to quantify the extracted genome by both methods. Our data demonstrated that while the PGM-MB assay takes considerably less time, it yields significantly higher recovery rates compared with the ISO/TS 15216-1:2017. Furthermore, since this method has the ability to be adapted in high-throughput and automated systems, it can be further modified to be employed by the food industry to reduce the number of NoV illnesses and outbreaks at the source of distribution.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available