Shannon Kiener , Emily Smith , Neha Singh , Sarah M. Nemser , Karina Hettwer , Megan R. Miller , Andriy Tkachenko , Steffen Uhlig , Ravinder Reddy
{"title":"用沙门氏菌细菌学分析手册方法测定生宠物食品基质中沙门氏菌的检出限和相对检出限。","authors":"Shannon Kiener , Emily Smith , Neha Singh , Sarah M. Nemser , Karina Hettwer , Megan R. Miller , Andriy Tkachenko , Steffen Uhlig , Ravinder Reddy","doi":"10.1016/j.mimet.2025.107116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Each year, there are multiple <em>Salmonella</em> recalls due to contaminated pet food products. Routine testing of finished products requires reliable, quick, and sensitive detection methods. In this study we comparatively evaluated the sensitivity of a culture-based reference method and two alternative methods, which are based on LAMP and PCR principles. The evaluation was performed in multiple trials using challenging pet food matrices, which were tested after various storage time intervals to better address the reliability of the methods. Raw freeze-dried treats, kibble, and patties were individually inoculated with <em>Salmonella Typhimurium</em> at fractional and high inoculation levels. Raw freeze-dried treats and kibble were inoculated at 0, 1, 3, 5, 7 and 10 CFU/25 g and raw patties were inoculated at 0, 1, 3, 5, 7, 10 and 30 CFU/25 g. For the culture method, the level of detection (LOD<sub>50</sub>) values were 0.9, 1.1, and 3.7 CFU/25 g for freeze-dried treats, kibble, and patties respectively. The calculated relative level of detection (RLOD) values were close to 1 CFU/25 g, indicating that LAMP and PCR methods have similar LOD<sub>50</sub> values to the culture method. It was also confirmed that the alternative LAMP and PCR methods can provide reliable results within 24 h that match the reference culture method. Faster response times are invaluable when responding to potential pet food product contamination.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16409,"journal":{"name":"Journal of microbiological methods","volume":"232 ","pages":"Article 107116"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Determination of limit of detection and relative limit of detection of Salmonella in raw pet food matrices using Salmonella bacteriological analytical manual methods\",\"authors\":\"Shannon Kiener , Emily Smith , Neha Singh , Sarah M. Nemser , Karina Hettwer , Megan R. Miller , Andriy Tkachenko , Steffen Uhlig , Ravinder Reddy\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.mimet.2025.107116\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Each year, there are multiple <em>Salmonella</em> recalls due to contaminated pet food products. Routine testing of finished products requires reliable, quick, and sensitive detection methods. In this study we comparatively evaluated the sensitivity of a culture-based reference method and two alternative methods, which are based on LAMP and PCR principles. The evaluation was performed in multiple trials using challenging pet food matrices, which were tested after various storage time intervals to better address the reliability of the methods. Raw freeze-dried treats, kibble, and patties were individually inoculated with <em>Salmonella Typhimurium</em> at fractional and high inoculation levels. Raw freeze-dried treats and kibble were inoculated at 0, 1, 3, 5, 7 and 10 CFU/25 g and raw patties were inoculated at 0, 1, 3, 5, 7, 10 and 30 CFU/25 g. For the culture method, the level of detection (LOD<sub>50</sub>) values were 0.9, 1.1, and 3.7 CFU/25 g for freeze-dried treats, kibble, and patties respectively. The calculated relative level of detection (RLOD) values were close to 1 CFU/25 g, indicating that LAMP and PCR methods have similar LOD<sub>50</sub> values to the culture method. It was also confirmed that the alternative LAMP and PCR methods can provide reliable results within 24 h that match the reference culture method. Faster response times are invaluable when responding to potential pet food product contamination.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16409,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of microbiological methods\",\"volume\":\"232 \",\"pages\":\"Article 107116\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of microbiological methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167701225000326\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of microbiological methods","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167701225000326","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Determination of limit of detection and relative limit of detection of Salmonella in raw pet food matrices using Salmonella bacteriological analytical manual methods
Each year, there are multiple Salmonella recalls due to contaminated pet food products. Routine testing of finished products requires reliable, quick, and sensitive detection methods. In this study we comparatively evaluated the sensitivity of a culture-based reference method and two alternative methods, which are based on LAMP and PCR principles. The evaluation was performed in multiple trials using challenging pet food matrices, which were tested after various storage time intervals to better address the reliability of the methods. Raw freeze-dried treats, kibble, and patties were individually inoculated with Salmonella Typhimurium at fractional and high inoculation levels. Raw freeze-dried treats and kibble were inoculated at 0, 1, 3, 5, 7 and 10 CFU/25 g and raw patties were inoculated at 0, 1, 3, 5, 7, 10 and 30 CFU/25 g. For the culture method, the level of detection (LOD50) values were 0.9, 1.1, and 3.7 CFU/25 g for freeze-dried treats, kibble, and patties respectively. The calculated relative level of detection (RLOD) values were close to 1 CFU/25 g, indicating that LAMP and PCR methods have similar LOD50 values to the culture method. It was also confirmed that the alternative LAMP and PCR methods can provide reliable results within 24 h that match the reference culture method. Faster response times are invaluable when responding to potential pet food product contamination.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Microbiological Methods publishes scholarly and original articles, notes and review articles. These articles must include novel and/or state-of-the-art methods, or significant improvements to existing methods. Novel and innovative applications of current methods that are validated and useful will also be published. JMM strives for scholarship, innovation and excellence. This demands scientific rigour, the best available methods and technologies, correctly replicated experiments/tests, the inclusion of proper controls, calibrations, and the correct statistical analysis. The presentation of the data must support the interpretation of the method/approach.
All aspects of microbiology are covered, except virology. These include agricultural microbiology, applied and environmental microbiology, bioassays, bioinformatics, biotechnology, biochemical microbiology, clinical microbiology, diagnostics, food monitoring and quality control microbiology, microbial genetics and genomics, geomicrobiology, microbiome methods regardless of habitat, high through-put sequencing methods and analysis, microbial pathogenesis and host responses, metabolomics, metagenomics, metaproteomics, microbial ecology and diversity, microbial physiology, microbial ultra-structure, microscopic and imaging methods, molecular microbiology, mycology, novel mathematical microbiology and modelling, parasitology, plant-microbe interactions, protein markers/profiles, proteomics, pyrosequencing, public health microbiology, radioisotopes applied to microbiology, robotics applied to microbiological methods,rumen microbiology, microbiological methods for space missions and extreme environments, sampling methods and samplers, soil and sediment microbiology, transcriptomics, veterinary microbiology, sero-diagnostics and typing/identification.