4.1 Article

Ocurrence of Vibrio spp., positive coagulase staphylococci and enteric bacteria in oysters (Crassostrea gigas) harvested in the south bay of Santa Catarina island, Brazil

期刊

CIENCIA E TECNOLOGIA DE ALIMENTOS
卷 32, 期 3, 页码 478-484

出版社

SOC BRASILEIRA CIENCIA TECNOLOGIA ALIMENTOS
DOI: 10.1590/S0101-20612012005000061

关键词

microbiological quality; bivalve mollusks; filter-feeders; Escherichia coli; Vibrio parahaemolyticus; Vibrio vulnificus

资金

  1. CNPq SECIS/MCT - National Council of Scientific and Technological Development SECIS/Ministry of Science and Technology, Brazil
  2. CT-Agro - Fund for the Agribusiness Sector
  3. CT- Hidro - Fund for the Water Resources Sector

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to assess the contamination of oysters (Crassostrea gigas), harvested in six different regions of the South Bay of Santa Catarina Island, with Coliforms at 45 degrees C, Escherichia coli, Vibrio spp., positive coagulase staphylococci, and Salmonella sp. over a period of one year. One hundred eighty oyster samples were collected directly from their culture sites and analyzed. Each sample consisted of a pool of 12 oysters. All of the samples analyzed showed absence of Salmonella, 18 (10%) samples showed presence of Escherichia coli, 15 (8.3%) samples were positive for V. alginolyticus, and Vibrio cholerae was detected in 4 samples (2.2%). The counts of positive-coagulase staphylococci varied from <10 to 1.9 x 10(2) CFU.g(-1), whereas the counts of Coliforms at 45 degrees C and E. coli ranged from <3 to 1.5 x 10(2) MPN.g(-1) and <3 and 4.3 x 10 MPN.g(-1), respectively. Counts of V. parahaemolyticus and V. vulnificus ranged between <3 and 7 MPN.g(-1), for both microorganisms. This suggests the need for monitoring these vibrios contamination in oysters. Based on the results of the microbiological assays, the samples analyzed showed acceptable bacteriological quality, i.e., they were within the parameters established by Brazilian Legislation.

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

4.1
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