4.4 Article

Pathogenic Escherichia coli and Salmonella spp. in Chicken Carcass Rinses: Isolation and Genotyping by ERIC-PCR

期刊

PAKISTAN VETERINARY JOURNAL
卷 42, 期 4, 页码 493-498

出版社

UNIV AGRICULTURE, FAC VETERINARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.29261/pakvetj/2022.049

关键词

Escherichia coli; Chicken carcass; Salmonella spp; ERIC-PCR; Genotyping

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present study aimed to identify pathogenic Escherichia coli and Salmonella spp. in retail chicken samples and investigate their genetic relation. The results showed a high incidence of E. coli and Salmonella spp. in chicken carcasses, but no virulent strains were detected. The genetic diversity of Salmonella spp. was found to be higher compared to E. coli isolates.
The present study aimed to determine the pathogenic Escherichia coli and Salmonella spp. and to investigate their phylogenetic relation by Enterobacterial Repetitive Intergenic Consensus Polymerase Chain Reaction (ERIC-PCR) in retail chicken samples. A total of 75 samples were processed for isolation of E. coli and Salmonella spp. by classical cultural methods and isolates were confirmed by the species-specific PCR. Salmonella spp. was detected in 21.3% and E. coli was detected in 74.6% of the chicken carcasses. S. Enteritidis and S. Typhimurium were not detected in chickens by duplex PCR-based assay. O157 based on serotyping and PCR, was not detected in any of the isolates. Besides, virulence and toxin genes were not detected in any of the E. coli isolates. According to ERIC patterns, the obtained ribotypes showed that all Salmonella spp. isolates presented large genetic diversity, whereas only two (3.5%) of E. coli isolates were genetically identical. Although virulent E. coli, and pathogenic serotypes of Salmonella spp. were not detected in our study, it is thought that their high incidence should be considered as an indicator of failure to comply with hygienic conditions and lack of sanitary practices especially in slaughterhouses.

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

4.4
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