Evaluation of culture, ELISA and PCR assays for the detection of Salmonella in seafood

被引:76
作者
Kumar, R. [1 ]
Surendran, P. K.
Thampuran, N. [1 ]
机构
[1] Cent Inst Fisheries Technol, Microbiol Fermentat & Biotechnol Div, Cochin 682029, Kerala, India
关键词
contamination; enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; gene; polymerase chain reaction; Salmonella; seafood;
D O I
10.1111/j.1472-765X.2007.02286.x
中图分类号
Q81 [生物工程学(生物技术)]; Q93 [微生物学];
学科分类号
071005 ; 0836 ; 090102 ; 100705 ;
摘要
Aims: The study evaluated the efficiency of culture, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays for the detection of Salmonella in naturally contaminated seafood. Methods and Results: In this study, 215 seafood samples comprising fish, shrimp, crab, clam, mussel, oyster, squid, cuttlefish and octopus from fish market of Cochin (India), were compared by culture, ELISA and PCR methods. Bacteriological Analytical Manual (BAM), U.S. Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) method was followed for culture assay, and Salmonella Tek, a commercial sandwich ELISA kit, was used for ELISA assay. Salmonella-specific PCR assay was developed for 284 bp Salmonella-specific invA gene amplicon. PCR assay exhibited 31.6% seafood positive for Salmonella followed by ELISA (23.7%) and culture method (21.3%). There was fair to excellent agreement between culture, ELISA and PCR assays (kappa coefficient values ranging from 0.385 to 1.0) for different seafood samples. Conclusion: The investigation revealed the greater concordance between culture and ELISA methods for seafood. Among the three methods, PCR assay was most sensitive. Lower detection rate with culture and ELISA assays could be attributed to greater sensitivity of the PCR method in the detection of Salmonella in seafood. Significance and Impact of the Study: We propose the incorporation of dual tests based on different principle and procedure for the routine analysis of Salmonella in seafood.
引用
收藏
页码:221 / 226
页数:6
相关论文
共 20 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1998, BACTERIOLOGICAL ANAL
[2]   Comparison of PCR, electrochemical enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays, and the standard culture method for detecting Salmonella in meat products [J].
Croci, L ;
Delibato, E ;
Volpe, G ;
De Medici, D ;
Palleschi, G .
APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY, 2004, 70 (03) :1393-1396
[3]   AN ENZYME-IMMUNOASSAY TECHNIQUE FOR DETECTION OF SALMONELLAE IN MEAT AND POULTRY PRODUCTS [J].
EMSWILERROSE, B ;
GEHLE, WD ;
JOHNSTON, RW ;
OKREND, A ;
MORAN, A ;
BENNETT, B .
JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE, 1984, 49 (04) :1018-1020
[4]   Evaluation of a polymerase chain reaction-based test for detecting Salmonella spp. in food samples:: Probelia Salmonella spp. [J].
Fach, P ;
Dilasser, F ;
Grout, J ;
Tache, J .
JOURNAL OF FOOD PROTECTION, 1999, 62 (12) :1387-1393
[5]   Twelve-hour PCR-based method for detection of Salmonella spp. in food [J].
Ferretti, R ;
Mannazzu, I ;
Cocolin, L ;
Comi, G ;
Clementi, F .
APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY, 2001, 67 (02) :977-978
[6]   Comparison of culture, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), TaqMan Salmonella, and Transia Card Salmonella assays for detection of Salmonella spp. in naturally-contaminated ground chicken, ground turkey, and ground beef [J].
Fratamico, PM .
MOLECULAR AND CELLULAR PROBES, 2003, 17 (05) :215-221
[7]  
Hatha AAM, 1997, FOOD MICROBIOL, V14, P111, DOI 10.1006/fmic.1996.0070
[8]   Detection of Salmonella spp. in tropical seafood by polymerase chain reaction [J].
Kumar, HS ;
Sunil, R ;
Venugopal, MN ;
Karunasagar, I ;
Karunasagar, I .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FOOD MICROBIOLOGY, 2003, 88 (01) :91-95
[9]   Rapid detection of Salmonella typhi in foods by combination of immunomagnetic separation and polymerase chain reaction [J].
Kumar, S ;
Balakrishna, K ;
Singh, GP ;
Batra, HV .
WORLD JOURNAL OF MICROBIOLOGY & BIOTECHNOLOGY, 2005, 21 (05) :625-628
[10]   Establishment of the PCR system specific to Salmonella spp. and its application for the inspection of food and fecal samples [J].
Makino, S ;
Kurazono, H ;
Chongsanguam, M ;
Hayashi, H ;
Cheun, H ;
Suzuki, S ;
Shirahata, T .
JOURNAL OF VETERINARY MEDICAL SCIENCE, 1999, 61 (11) :1245-1247