4.7 Article

Survival of Escherichia coli O26:H11 exceeds that of Escherichia coli O157: H7 as assessed by simulated human digestion of contaminated raw milk cheeses

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2013.11.029

关键词

Raw milk cheese; STEC; E. coli O157:H7; E. coli O26:H11; Digestion

资金

  1. CNIEL

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Shiga toxin producing Escherichia coli (STEC) are an important cause of human foodborne outbreaks. The consumption of raw milk dairy products may be an important route of STEC infection. For successful foodborne transmission, STEC strains must survive stress conditions met during gastrointestinal transit in humans. The aim of this study was to evaluate the survival of two STEC strains of serotypes O157:H7 and O26:H11 during simulated human digestion in the TNO gastro-Intestinal tract Model (TIM) of contaminated uncooked pressed cheeses. The survival of cheese microflora during in vitro gastrointestinal transit was also determined for the first time. The level of STEC increased from 2 log(10) CFU/ml to 4 log(10) CFU/g during the first 24 h of cheese making and remained stable at around 4 log(10) CFU/g during cheese ripening and conservation. During transit through the artificial stomach and duodenum, levels of STEC decreased: O2% of E. coli O157:H7 and 1.8% of E. coli O26: H11 were recovered at 150 min in the gastric compartment, compared with 14.3% for the transit marker. Bacterial resumption was observed in the jejunum and ileum: 35.8% of E. coli O157:H7 and 663.2% of E. coli O26:H11 were recovered at 360 min in the ileal compartment, compared with 12.6% for the transit marker. The fate of STEC was strain-dependent, the survival of E. coli O26:H11 being 13 times greater than that of E. coli 0157: H7 at the end of digestion in the cumulative ileal deliveries. These data provide a better understanding of STEC behavior during gastrointestinal transit in humans after ingestion of contaminated cheese. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据