Skip to main content
Log in

Use of a commercial tissue dissociation system to detect Salmonella-contaminated poultry products

  • Communication
  • Published:
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Successful detection of bacterial pathogens in food can be challenging due to the physical and compositional complexity of the matrix. Different mechanical/physical and chemical methods have been developed to separate microorganisms from food matrices to facilitate detection. The present study benchmarked a commercial tissue digestion system that applies both chemical and physical methods to separate microorganisms from tissues against stomaching, a standard process currently utilized by commercial and regulatory food safety laboratories. The impacts of the treatments on the physical properties of the food matrix were characterized along with the compatibility of the methods with downstream microbiological and molecular detection assays. The results indicate the tissue digestion system can significantly reduce the average particle size of the chicken sample relative to processing via a stomacher (P < 0.001) without adversely affecting either real-time PCR (qPCR) or plate counting assays, which are typically used to detect Salmonella. Furthermore, inoculated chicken treated with the GentleMACS resulted in a significant increase (P < 0.003) in the qPCR’s detection capabilities relative to stomached controls. Cohen kappa (κ) coefficient and McNemar’s test indicate the plating assays and PCR results agree with measurements obtained via the 3 M Molecular Detection System as defined in the MLG standard (κ > 0.62; P > 0.08). Collectively, the results demonstrate that the technique enables detection of pathogens in meat at lower levels of contamination using current industry standard technologies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Cox N, Richardson L, Cason J, Buhr R, Vizzier-Thaxton Y, Smith D, Fedorka-Cray P, Romanenghi C, Pereira L, Doyle M. Comparison of neck skin excision and whole carcass rinse sampling methods for microbiological evaluation of broiler carcasses before and after immersion chilling. J Food Protect. 2010;73(5):976–80.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Rohde A, Hammerl JA, Appel B, Dieckmann R, Al Dahouk S. Sampling and homogenization strategies significantly influence the detection of foodborne pathogens in meat. Biomed Res Int. 2015:145437. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/145437

  3. Pitard FF (2019) Theory of sampling and sampling practice. Chapman and Hall/CRC. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781351105934

  4. Sharpe A (2003) Separation and concentration of samples. In: Detecting pathogens in food. Woodhead Publishing, pp 52–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-85573-670-2.50008-7

  5. Hannah J, Cason J, Richardson J, Cox N, Hinton A Jr, Buhr R, Smith D. Effect of stomaching on numbers of bacteria recovered from chicken skin. Poult Sci. 2011;90(2):491–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. McMeekin T, Thomas C. Retention of bacteria on chicken skin after immersion in bacterial suspensions. J Appl Bacteriol. 1978;45(3):383–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Wang D, Wang Z, He F, Kinchla AJ, Nugen SR. Enzymatic digestion for improved bacteria separation from leafy green vegetables. J Food Protect. 2016;79(8):1378–86.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Rodrigues-Szulc U, Ventoura G, Mackey B, Payne M. Rapid physicochemical detachment, separation and concentration of bacteria from beef surfaces. J Appl Bacteriol. 1996;80(6):673–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Vibbert HB, Ku S, Li X, Liu X, Ximenes E, Kreke T, Ladisch MR, Deering AJ, Gehring AG. Accelerating sample preparation through enzyme-assisted microfiltration of Salmonella in chicken extract. Biotechnol Prog. 2015;31(6):1551–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/btpr.2167.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Armstrong CM, Gehring AG, Paoli GC, Chen CY, He Y, Capobianco JA (2019) Impacts of clarification techniques on sample constituents and pathogen retention. Foods (Basel, Switzerland) 8(12). https://doi.org/10.3390/foods8120636.

  11. Brewster JD, Paul M. Short communication: Improved method for centrifugal recovery of bacteria from raw milk applied to sensitive real-time quantitative PCR detection of Salmonella spp. 1. J Dairy Sci. 2016;99(5):3375–9. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2015-9655.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service, OoPH S. Isolation and identification of Salmonella from meat, poultry, pasteurized egg, and Siluriformes (fish) products and carcass and environmental sponge. Microbiol Lab Guideb. 2021;4:11.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Chen CY, Nace GW, Irwin PL. A 6 x 6 drop plate method for simultaneous colony counting and MPN enumeration of Campylobacter jejuni, Listeria monocytogenes, and Escherichia coli. J Microbiol Methods. 2003;55(2):475–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Suo B, He Y, Tu SI, Shi X. A multiplex real-time polymerase chain reaction for simultaneous detection of Salmonella spp., Escherichia coli O157, and Listeria monocytogenes in meat products. Foodborne Pathog Dis. 2010;7(6):619–28. https://doi.org/10.1089/fpd.2009.0430.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. McHugh ML. Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochemia medica. 2012;22(3):276–82.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Pembury Smith MQ, Ruxton GD. Effective use of the McNemar test. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 2020;74(11):1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, National Program 108: Food Safety in-house appropriated projects 8072-42000-093-00D and 8072-42000-094-00D. The authors thank George Paoli and Gaylen Uhlich for providing the kanamycin-resistant derivative of S. Minnesota used in this study. Mention of trade names or commercial products in this article is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. USDA is an equal-opportunity employer.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joseph Capobianco.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Cheryl M. Armstrong and Yiping He are equal contributors.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 110 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Armstrong, C.M., He, Y., Chen, CY. et al. Use of a commercial tissue dissociation system to detect Salmonella-contaminated poultry products. Anal Bioanal Chem 416, 621–626 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-023-04668-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-023-04668-w

Keywords

Navigation