A survey of the microbial communities of commercial pre-sliced, packaged deli-style ham throughout storage

Rebecca A Furbeck, Chad G. Bower, S. Fernando, G. Sullivan
{"title":"A survey of the microbial communities of commercial pre-sliced, packaged deli-style ham throughout storage","authors":"Rebecca A Furbeck, Chad G. Bower, S. Fernando, G. Sullivan","doi":"10.22175/mmb.15446","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The goal of this study was to evaluate the variation in spoilage microbiota associated with sliced, pre-packaged, deli-style ham from varying processing environments available in the retail market in the United States.  Three different brands of pre-sliced ham, water added were purchased at local markets and evaluated every two weeks beginning four weeks prior to the sell-by date until four weeks beyond the sell-by date.  Analysis of 16S rRNA genes using operational taxonomic units (OTUs) showed that brand A had a different bacterial community structure compared to brands B and C, according to unweighted(P = 0.006) and weighted (P < 0.001) UniFrac distance matrices.  Brand A had a greater proportion of sequence reads mapping to Carnobacterium, Bacillus, and Prevotella, while B and C had greater proportions of Pseudomonas, Photobacterium, and Lactococcus.  Brand A also had a lower salt concentration(P < 0.007), greater moisture percentage and less fat percentage (P< 0.012) and increased aerobic plate count (APC) (P = 0.017).  Differences in spoilage microbiota can in part be attributed to the factors involved with different processing locations, as shown by three different brands of ham, as well as slight differences in formulation including salt concentration and organic acid use.","PeriodicalId":18316,"journal":{"name":"Meat and Muscle Biology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Meat and Muscle Biology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22175/mmb.15446","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The goal of this study was to evaluate the variation in spoilage microbiota associated with sliced, pre-packaged, deli-style ham from varying processing environments available in the retail market in the United States.  Three different brands of pre-sliced ham, water added were purchased at local markets and evaluated every two weeks beginning four weeks prior to the sell-by date until four weeks beyond the sell-by date.  Analysis of 16S rRNA genes using operational taxonomic units (OTUs) showed that brand A had a different bacterial community structure compared to brands B and C, according to unweighted(P = 0.006) and weighted (P < 0.001) UniFrac distance matrices.  Brand A had a greater proportion of sequence reads mapping to Carnobacterium, Bacillus, and Prevotella, while B and C had greater proportions of Pseudomonas, Photobacterium, and Lactococcus.  Brand A also had a lower salt concentration(P < 0.007), greater moisture percentage and less fat percentage (P< 0.012) and increased aerobic plate count (APC) (P = 0.017).  Differences in spoilage microbiota can in part be attributed to the factors involved with different processing locations, as shown by three different brands of ham, as well as slight differences in formulation including salt concentration and organic acid use.
商业预切片,包装熟食火腿在整个储存过程中的微生物群落调查
本研究的目的是评估与美国零售市场上不同加工环境下切片、预包装、熟食火腿相关的腐败微生物群的变化。在当地市场购买了三种不同品牌的预切片火腿,加了水,从保质期前四周开始,每两周评估一次,直到保质期后四周。使用操作分类单位(OTUs)对16S rRNA基因进行分析,结果显示,根据unweighted(P = 0.006)和weighted(P < 0.001) UniFrac距离矩阵,品牌A与品牌B和品牌C具有不同的细菌群落结构。品牌A有更多的序列读数映射到肉杆菌、芽孢杆菌和普雷沃氏菌,而品牌B和品牌C有更多的假单胞菌、光细菌和乳球菌。品牌A还具有较低的盐浓度(P< 0.007),较高的水分率和较低的脂肪率(P< 0.012),较高的好氧平板计数(APC) (P = 0.017)。腐坏菌群的差异可以部分归因于不同加工地点所涉及的因素,如三种不同品牌的火腿所示,以及配方(包括盐浓度和有机酸的使用)的细微差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信