4.7 Article

Sensitivity of two techniques to detect Escherichia coli O157 in naturally infected bovine fecal samples

Journal

FOOD MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 24, Issue 6, Pages 633-639

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fm.2006.12.001

Keywords

Immunomagnetic separation; enrichment broth; E. coli O157; sensitivity; detection

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to investigate the sensitivity and reliability of two techniques commonly used for the isolation of Escherichia coli O157: (i) buffered peptone water (BPW) containing vancomycin, cefsulodin and cefixime followed by immunomagnetic separation (IMS-VCC) and (ii) modified E coli (EC) broth supplemented with novobiocin (m ECn), both followed by culturing on cefixime tellurite sorbitol McConkey (ctSMAC) agar plates. Over a 2-year period, 24 feedlots located over a large geographical area (similar to 600 x 450 km) were screened for the presence of E. coli O157. A total of 194 E coli O157 isolates were identified; 151 (77.4%) using IMS-VCC and 108 (55.4%) using in ECn. The recovery rates of IMS-VCC varied from 100% to 47%, whereas for in ECn ranged from 100% to 16%. All isolates were grouped, using randomly amplified polymorphic DNA-polymerase chain reaction (RAPD-PCR), into 3 major clusters that comprised 39 different subtypes, providing evidence of considerable genetic heterogeneity. The results from this study revealed false negatives in IMS-VCC technique, most probably due to the high genetic diversity of environmental E coli O157 isolates and antibiotic sensitivity. Using only IMS-VCC as a method for detection may result in significant underestimation of the pathogen. Performing two different enrichment steps in parallel can lead to markedly improved recovery rates of E coli O157 isolates from naturally infected samples. (c) 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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