A comparative study of culture methods and polymerase chain reaction assay for Salmonella detection in poultry feed

Autores
Soria, Maria Cecilia; Soria, Mario; Bueno, Dante Javier; Colazo, Jose
Año de publicación
2011
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
The present work compared 2 culture methods and PCR assay for the detection of motile and non-motile Salmonella strains using artificially contaminated poultry feed. The specificity was 1 in all methods. The accuracy and sensitivity were between 0.5 and 1 for motile Salmonella strains, whereas these parameters were between 0 and 0.6 for non-motile Salmonella strains. The positive predictive value was 1 for tetrathionate (TT), PCR, and modified semisolid Rappaport-Vassiliadis (MSRV) methods in most of the strains studied. The negative predictive value of each method was very low for non-motile Salmonella strains. The detection level of motile strains was 8 to 20 cfu/25 g for all methods, whereas it was ≥104 cfu/25 g in culture methods for non-motile Salmonella strains. In general, the PCR method detected lower non-motile Salmonella contamination levels in feed than did culture methods. Extending incubation time of the enrichment medium to 6 d in the TT method did not improve the isolation rates. All selective plating media did not show any statistical differences in the parameters of performance studied. Kappa coefficients showed that there was good agreement between TT and MSRV methods, and MSRV and PCR methods for motile Salmonella strains in poultry feed samples. The agreement was fair between TT and PCR methods for these strains. For non-motile Salmonella strains, there was poor (TT and MSRV methods), slight (PCR and TT methods), and fair (MSRV and PCR methods) agreement. The TT, MSRV, and PCR methods are similar in terms of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for different motile Salmonella strains in poultry feed. For non-motile Salmonella strains, the use of the PCR method improves the same parameters, described before, in this matrix. The difference in detection levels obtained with the methods used for motile and nonmotile Salmonella strains and the difficulty to detect these last strains represent a potential problem, when a poultry feed sample is considered negative for the presence of Salmonella.
EEA Concepción del Uruguay
Fil: Soria, Maria Cecilia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Concepción del Uruguay; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Soria, Mario Alberto. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Concepción del Uruguay; Argentina
Fil: Bueno, Dante Javier. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Concepción del Uruguay; Argentina
Fil: Colazo, Jose. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Concepción del Uruguay; Argentina
Fuente
Poultry Science 90 (11) : 2606–2618 (November 2011)
Materia
Aves de Corral
Enfermedades de los Animales
Salmonella
Técnicas de Cultivo
PCR
Alimentación Avícola
Poultry
Animal Diseases
Culture Techniques
Poultry Feeding
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
Repositorio
INTA Digital (INTA)
Institución
Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
OAI Identificador
oai:localhost:20.500.12123/6465
Acceder
id INTADig_7e91a8b155317800199085a7e806585f
oai_identifier_str oai:localhost:20.500.12123/6465
network_acronym_str INTADig
repository_id_str l
network_name_str INTA Digital (INTA)
spelling A comparative study of culture methods and polymerase chain reaction assay for Salmonella detection in poultry feedSoria, Maria CeciliaSoria, MarioBueno, Dante JavierColazo, JoseAves de CorralEnfermedades de los AnimalesSalmonellaTécnicas de CultivoPCRAlimentación AvícolaPoultryAnimal DiseasesCulture TechniquesPoultry FeedingThe present work compared 2 culture methods and PCR assay for the detection of motile and non-motile Salmonella strains using artificially contaminated poultry feed. The specificity was 1 in all methods. The accuracy and sensitivity were between 0.5 and 1 for motile Salmonella strains, whereas these parameters were between 0 and 0.6 for non-motile Salmonella strains. The positive predictive value was 1 for tetrathionate (TT), PCR, and modified semisolid Rappaport-Vassiliadis (MSRV) methods in most of the strains studied. The negative predictive value of each method was very low for non-motile Salmonella strains. The detection level of motile strains was 8 to 20 cfu/25 g for all methods, whereas it was ≥104 cfu/25 g in culture methods for non-motile Salmonella strains. In general, the PCR method detected lower non-motile Salmonella contamination levels in feed than did culture methods. Extending incubation time of the enrichment medium to 6 d in the TT method did not improve the isolation rates. All selective plating media did not show any statistical differences in the parameters of performance studied. Kappa coefficients showed that there was good agreement between TT and MSRV methods, and MSRV and PCR methods for motile Salmonella strains in poultry feed samples. The agreement was fair between TT and PCR methods for these strains. For non-motile Salmonella strains, there was poor (TT and MSRV methods), slight (PCR and TT methods), and fair (MSRV and PCR methods) agreement. The TT, MSRV, and PCR methods are similar in terms of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for different motile Salmonella strains in poultry feed. For non-motile Salmonella strains, the use of the PCR method improves the same parameters, described before, in this matrix. The difference in detection levels obtained with the methods used for motile and nonmotile Salmonella strains and the difficulty to detect these last strains represent a potential problem, when a poultry feed sample is considered negative for the presence of Salmonella.EEA Concepción del UruguayFil: Soria, Maria Cecilia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Concepción del Uruguay; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Soria, Mario Alberto. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Concepción del Uruguay; ArgentinaFil: Bueno, Dante Javier. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Concepción del Uruguay; ArgentinaFil: Colazo, Jose. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Concepción del Uruguay; ArgentinaOxford Academic Press2019-12-06T13:55:18Z2019-12-06T13:55:18Z2011-11info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfhttps://academic.oup.com/ps/article/90/11/2606/1503580http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/64650032-57911525-3171https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2011-01548Poultry Science 90 (11) : 2606–2618 (November 2011)reponame:INTA Digital (INTA)instname:Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuariaenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)2025-09-29T13:44:50Zoai:localhost:20.500.12123/6465instacron:INTAInstitucionalhttp://repositorio.inta.gob.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://repositorio.inta.gob.ar/oai/requesttripaldi.nicolas@inta.gob.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:l2025-09-29 13:44:50.832INTA Digital (INTA) - Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuariafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv A comparative study of culture methods and polymerase chain reaction assay for Salmonella detection in poultry feed
title A comparative study of culture methods and polymerase chain reaction assay for Salmonella detection in poultry feed
spellingShingle A comparative study of culture methods and polymerase chain reaction assay for Salmonella detection in poultry feed
Soria, Maria Cecilia
Aves de Corral
Enfermedades de los Animales
Salmonella
Técnicas de Cultivo
PCR
Alimentación Avícola
Poultry
Animal Diseases
Culture Techniques
Poultry Feeding
title_short A comparative study of culture methods and polymerase chain reaction assay for Salmonella detection in poultry feed
title_full A comparative study of culture methods and polymerase chain reaction assay for Salmonella detection in poultry feed
title_fullStr A comparative study of culture methods and polymerase chain reaction assay for Salmonella detection in poultry feed
title_full_unstemmed A comparative study of culture methods and polymerase chain reaction assay for Salmonella detection in poultry feed
title_sort A comparative study of culture methods and polymerase chain reaction assay for Salmonella detection in poultry feed
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Soria, Maria Cecilia
Soria, Mario
Bueno, Dante Javier
Colazo, Jose
author Soria, Maria Cecilia
author_facet Soria, Maria Cecilia
Soria, Mario
Bueno, Dante Javier
Colazo, Jose
author_role author
author2 Soria, Mario
Bueno, Dante Javier
Colazo, Jose
author2_role author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Aves de Corral
Enfermedades de los Animales
Salmonella
Técnicas de Cultivo
PCR
Alimentación Avícola
Poultry
Animal Diseases
Culture Techniques
Poultry Feeding
topic Aves de Corral
Enfermedades de los Animales
Salmonella
Técnicas de Cultivo
PCR
Alimentación Avícola
Poultry
Animal Diseases
Culture Techniques
Poultry Feeding
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv The present work compared 2 culture methods and PCR assay for the detection of motile and non-motile Salmonella strains using artificially contaminated poultry feed. The specificity was 1 in all methods. The accuracy and sensitivity were between 0.5 and 1 for motile Salmonella strains, whereas these parameters were between 0 and 0.6 for non-motile Salmonella strains. The positive predictive value was 1 for tetrathionate (TT), PCR, and modified semisolid Rappaport-Vassiliadis (MSRV) methods in most of the strains studied. The negative predictive value of each method was very low for non-motile Salmonella strains. The detection level of motile strains was 8 to 20 cfu/25 g for all methods, whereas it was ≥104 cfu/25 g in culture methods for non-motile Salmonella strains. In general, the PCR method detected lower non-motile Salmonella contamination levels in feed than did culture methods. Extending incubation time of the enrichment medium to 6 d in the TT method did not improve the isolation rates. All selective plating media did not show any statistical differences in the parameters of performance studied. Kappa coefficients showed that there was good agreement between TT and MSRV methods, and MSRV and PCR methods for motile Salmonella strains in poultry feed samples. The agreement was fair between TT and PCR methods for these strains. For non-motile Salmonella strains, there was poor (TT and MSRV methods), slight (PCR and TT methods), and fair (MSRV and PCR methods) agreement. The TT, MSRV, and PCR methods are similar in terms of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for different motile Salmonella strains in poultry feed. For non-motile Salmonella strains, the use of the PCR method improves the same parameters, described before, in this matrix. The difference in detection levels obtained with the methods used for motile and nonmotile Salmonella strains and the difficulty to detect these last strains represent a potential problem, when a poultry feed sample is considered negative for the presence of Salmonella.
EEA Concepción del Uruguay
Fil: Soria, Maria Cecilia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Concepción del Uruguay; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Soria, Mario Alberto. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Concepción del Uruguay; Argentina
Fil: Bueno, Dante Javier. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Concepción del Uruguay; Argentina
Fil: Colazo, Jose. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Concepción del Uruguay; Argentina
description The present work compared 2 culture methods and PCR assay for the detection of motile and non-motile Salmonella strains using artificially contaminated poultry feed. The specificity was 1 in all methods. The accuracy and sensitivity were between 0.5 and 1 for motile Salmonella strains, whereas these parameters were between 0 and 0.6 for non-motile Salmonella strains. The positive predictive value was 1 for tetrathionate (TT), PCR, and modified semisolid Rappaport-Vassiliadis (MSRV) methods in most of the strains studied. The negative predictive value of each method was very low for non-motile Salmonella strains. The detection level of motile strains was 8 to 20 cfu/25 g for all methods, whereas it was ≥104 cfu/25 g in culture methods for non-motile Salmonella strains. In general, the PCR method detected lower non-motile Salmonella contamination levels in feed than did culture methods. Extending incubation time of the enrichment medium to 6 d in the TT method did not improve the isolation rates. All selective plating media did not show any statistical differences in the parameters of performance studied. Kappa coefficients showed that there was good agreement between TT and MSRV methods, and MSRV and PCR methods for motile Salmonella strains in poultry feed samples. The agreement was fair between TT and PCR methods for these strains. For non-motile Salmonella strains, there was poor (TT and MSRV methods), slight (PCR and TT methods), and fair (MSRV and PCR methods) agreement. The TT, MSRV, and PCR methods are similar in terms of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for different motile Salmonella strains in poultry feed. For non-motile Salmonella strains, the use of the PCR method improves the same parameters, described before, in this matrix. The difference in detection levels obtained with the methods used for motile and nonmotile Salmonella strains and the difficulty to detect these last strains represent a potential problem, when a poultry feed sample is considered negative for the presence of Salmonella.
publishDate 2011
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2011-11
2019-12-06T13:55:18Z
2019-12-06T13:55:18Z
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv https://academic.oup.com/ps/article/90/11/2606/1503580
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/6465
0032-5791
1525-3171
https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2011-01548
url https://academic.oup.com/ps/article/90/11/2606/1503580
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/6465
https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2011-01548
identifier_str_mv 0032-5791
1525-3171
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Oxford Academic Press
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Oxford Academic Press
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Poultry Science 90 (11) : 2606–2618 (November 2011)
reponame:INTA Digital (INTA)
instname:Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
reponame_str INTA Digital (INTA)
collection INTA Digital (INTA)
instname_str Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
repository.name.fl_str_mv INTA Digital (INTA) - Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
repository.mail.fl_str_mv tripaldi.nicolas@inta.gob.ar
_version_ 1844619140421124096
score 12.559606

Publicaciones similares