4.6 Article

Role of broiler carcasses and processing plant air in contamination of modified-atmosphere-packaged broiler products with psychrotrophic lactic acid bacteria

期刊

APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 73, 期 4, 页码 1136-1145

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AEM.01644-06

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Some psychrotrophic lactic acid bacteria (LAB) are specific meat spoilage organisms in modified-atmosphere-packaged (MAP), cold-stored meat products. To determine if incoming broilers or the production plant environment is a source of spoilage LAB, a total of 86, 122, and 447 LAB isolates from broiler carcasses, production plant air, and MAP broiler products, respectively, were characterized using a library of HindIII restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) patterns of the 16 and 23S rRNA genes as operational taxonomic units in numerical analyses. Six hundred thirteen LAB isolates from the total of 655 clustered in 29 groups considered to be species specific. Sixty-four percent of product isolates clustered either with Carnobacterium divergens or with Carnobacterium maltaromaticum type strains. The third major product-associated cluster (17% of isolates) was formed by unknown LAB. Representative strains from these three clusters were analyzed for the phylogeny of their 16S rRNA genes. This analysis verified that the two largest RFLP clusters consisted of carnobacteria and showed that the unknown LAB group consisted of Lactococcus spp. No product-associated LAB were detected in broiler carcasses sampled at the beginning of slaughter, whereas carnobacteria and lactococci, along with some other specific meat spoilage LAB, were recovered from processing plant air at many sites. This study reveals that incoming broiler chickens are not major sources of psychrotrophic spoilage LAB, whereas the detection of these organisms from the air of the processing environment highlights the role of processing facilities as sources of LAB contamination.

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

4.6
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