Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology

, Volume 100, Issue 12, pp 5247–5255 | Cite as

Microbial pathogen quality criteria of rendered products

  • Pramod K. PandeyEmail author
  • Sagor Biswas
  • Philip Kass


The North American rendering industry processes approximately 24 million metric tons (Mt) of raw materials and produces more than 8 million Mt of rendered products. More than 85 % of rendered products produced annually in the USA are used for producing animal feed. Pathogen contamination in rendered products is an important and topical issue. Although elevated temperatures (115–140 °C) for 40–90 min during the standard rendering processes are mathematically sufficient to completely destroy commonly found pathogens, the presence of pathogens in rendered products has nevertheless been reported. Increased concern over the risk of microbial contamination in rendered products may require additional safeguards for producing pathogen-free rendered products. This study provides an overview of rendered products, existing microbial pathogen quality criteria of rendered products (MPQCR), limitations, and the scope of improving the MPQCR.


Rendering industry Rendered products Pathogens Microbial quality 



The material presented here is based on work supported by California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) (Agreement no. 14-0438-SA). Any opinions, findings, citations, statements, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the CDFA.

Compliance with ethical standards

Competing Interests

Authors (Pramod Pandey, Sagor Biswas, Philip Kass) declare that they have no financial and non-financial competing interests in this manuscript.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants are animals performed by any of the authors.


  1. Alali WQ, Ricke SC (2012) The ecology and control of bacterial pathogens in animal feed. In: Fink-Gremmels J (ed) Animal feed contamination, 1st edn. Woodhead Publishing, pp. 35–55.Google Scholar
  2. Andreoletti O, Budka H, Buncic S, Colin P, Collins JD, De A, Noeckler BN, Maradona MP, Roberts T, Vågsholm I (2008) Microbiological risk assessment in feedingstuffs for food-producing animals—Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Biological Hazards. EFSA J 720:1–84Google Scholar
  3. Armstrong SD, Smith DR, Owens PR, Joern B, Williams C (2010) Manure spills and remediation methods to improve water quality. In: Lichtfouse E (ed) Genetic engineering, biofertilization, soil quality and organic farming vol. 4. Springer, Netherlands, pp. 201–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beumer H, Van der Poel AFB (1997) Effects on hygienic quality of feeds examined. Feedstuffs 69(53):13–15Google Scholar
  5. Boyer CI, Bruner DW, Brown JA (1958) Salmonella organisms isolated from poultry feed. Avian Dis 2(4):296–401Google Scholar
  6. California Code of Regulations (CDR) (2015) Methods of rendering to produce products used in animal feed or other agricultural uses Accessed 3 April 2016
  7. California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) (2015) Regulations for renderers, collection centers, dead animal haulers, and transporters of inedible kitchen grease https://wwwcdfacagov/ahfss/pdfs/regulations/MPI_RenderingProposedTextpdf Accessed 23 March 2016
  8. CAL/EPA (2004) Emergency animal disease. Regulatory guidance for disposal and decontamination http://wwwcalepacagov/Disaster/Documents/EADiseasepdf Accessed 23 January 2016
  9. Clark GM, Kaufmann AF, Gangarosa EJ (1973) Epidemiology of an international outbreak of Salmonella agona. Lancet 302(7827):490–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Crump JA, Griffin PM, Angulo FJ (2002) Bacterial contamination of animal feed and its relationship to human foodborne illness. Clin Infect Dis 35(7):859–865CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. D’Aoust JY, Sewell AM (1986) Slow rehydration for detection of Salmonella spp. in feeds and feed ingredients. Appl Environ Microbiol 51(6):1220–1223PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Dargatz DA, Strohmeyer RA, Morley PS, Hyatt DR, Salman MD (2005) Characterization of Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica from cattle feed ingredients. Foodborne Pathog Dis 2(4):341–347CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Davies RH, Wray C (1997) Distribution of salmonella contamination in ten animal feedmills. Vet Microbiol 57(2):159–169CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Davies PR, Hurd HS, Funk JA, Fedorka-Cray PJ, Jones FT (2004) The role of contaminated feed in the epidemiology and control of Salmonella enterica in pork production. Foodborne Pathog Dis 1(4):202–215CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs and Animal and Plant Health Agency (2014) Guidance for the animal by-product industry. Government of UK https://wwwgovuk/guidance/animal-by-product-categories-site-approval-hygiene-and-disposal Accessed 23 February 2016
  16. European Community (EC) (2003) Regulation EC/1831/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on additives for use in animal nutrition. http://eur-lexeuropaeu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32003R1831 Accessed 4 April 2016
  17. Edwards PR, Bruner DW, Moran AB (1948) Further studies on the occurrence and distribution of Salmonella types in the United States. Journal Infect Dis 83(3):220–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (2014) Technical specifications on randomized sampling for harmonized monitoring of antimicrobial resistance in zoonotic and commensal bacteria. EFSA J 12(5):3686. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2014.3686 Google Scholar
  19. Ge B, LaFon PC, Carter PJ, McDermott SD, Abbott J, Glenn A, Ayers SL, Friedman SL, Paige JC, Wagner DD (2013) Retrospective analysis of Salmonella, Campylobacter, Escherichia coli, and Enterococcus in animal feed ingredients. Foodborne Pathog Dis 10:684–691CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Gray DF, Lewis PF, Gorrie CJR (1958) Bone meal as a source of bovine salmonellosis. The Aust Vet J 34(11):345–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Green AK (2010) Salmonella detectives. Render http://wwwrendermagazinecom/articles/2010-issues/2010-october/2010-10-acrec-solutions/ Accessed 4 April 2016
  22. Hacking WC, Mitchell WR, Carlson HC (1978) Salmonella investigation in an Ontario feed mill. Can J Comp Med Vet Sci 42(4):400–406Google Scholar
  23. Hamilton C, Meeker D (2011) Overview of the rendering industry and its contribution to public and animal health. Accessed 23 January 2016
  24. Hayes M (2014) Validation of thermal destruction of pathogenic bacteria in rendered animal products. PhD dissertation, Clemson University, USA. Accessed 23 January 2016
  25. Hofacre CL, White DG, Maurer JJ, Morales C, Lobsinger C, Hudson C (2001) Characterization of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in rendered animal products. Avian Dis 45(4):953–961CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Isa JM, Boycott BR, Broughton E (1963) A survey of Salmonella contamination in animal feeds and feed constituents. Can Vet Jour 4(2):41–43Google Scholar
  27. Jacobs J, Guinee PAM, Kampelmacher EH, van Keulen A (1963) Studies on the incidence of Salmonella in imported fish meal. ZBL Vet Med B 10(6):542–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jayathilakan K, Sultana K, Radhakrishna K, Bawa AS (2011) Utilization of byproducts and waste materials from meat, poultry and fish processing industries: a review. J Food Sci Technol 49(3):278–293CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. Jones FT, Ricke SC (1994) Researchers propose tentative HACCP plan for feed manufacturers. Feedstuffs 66(18):32,36–32,38 40-42Google Scholar
  30. Kinley B (2009) Prevalence and biological control of Salmonella contamination in rendering plant environments and the finished rendered meals. PhD dissertation. Clemson University, SC. Accessed 15 May 2015
  31. Kinley B, Rieck J, Dawson P, Jiang X (2010) Analysis of Salmonella and enterococci isolated from rendered animal products. Can J Microbiol 56(1):65–73CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Lipp EK, Rodriguez-Palacios C, Rose JB (2001) Occurrence and distribution of the human pathogen Vibrio vulnificus in a subtropical Gulf of Mexico estuary. Hydrobiologia 460(1):165–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Liu DC (2002) Better utilization of by-products from the meat industry 2002-10-01. Extension Bulletins Food and fertilizer Technology Center for the Asian and Pacific region (FFTC publication database) http://wwwagnetorg/libraryphp?func=view&id=20110706135001 Accessed 5 April 2016
  34. Lynn TV, Hancock DD, Besser TE, Rice DH, Harrison JH, Stewart NT, Rowan LL (1998) The occurrence and replication of Escherichia coli in cattle feeds. J Dairy Sci 71:1102–1108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McChesney DG, Kaplan G, Gardner P (1995) FDA survey determines Salmonella contamination. Feedstuffs 67(7):20–23Google Scholar
  36. Meeker DL, Hamilton CR (2006) An overview of the rendering industry. Meeker DL (ed) Essentials of rendering: all about the animal by-product industry, National Renderers Association, Kirby Lithographic Company, Arlington, Virginia, USA Arlington VA, pp.1–16 Accessed 15 December 2015
  37. Nargund VN (2004) Human health safety of animal feeds workshop. Emerging Infectious Disease 10(12):2268 . doi: 10.3201/eid1012.040987 Accessed 4 April 2016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nesse LL, Nordby K, Heir E, Bergsjoe B, Vardund T, Nygaard H, Holstad G (2003) Molecular analyses of Salmonella enterica isolates from fish feed factories and fish feed ingredients. Appl Environ Microbiol 69(2):1075–1081CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. Ockerman HW, Hansen CL (1988) Animal co-product processing. Ellis Horwood Ltd, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  40. Pandey PK, Soupir ML, Rehmann CR (2012a) A model for predicting resuspension of E. coli from streambed sediments. Water Res 46(1):115–126CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Pandey PK, Soupir ML, Haddad M, Rothwell JJ (2012b) Assessing the impacts of watershed indexes and precipitation on spatial in-stream E. coli concentrations. Ecol Indic 23:641–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pandey PK, Soupir ML (2013) Assessing the impacts of E. coli laden streambed sediment on E. coli loads over a range of flows and sediment characteristics. J Am Water Resour Assoc 49(6):1261–1269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pandey PK, Soupir ML (2014) Assessing linkages between E. coli levels in streambed sediment and overlying water in an agricultural watershed in Iowa during the first heavy rain event of the season. T ASABE 57(6):1571–1581Google Scholar
  44. Pandey PK, Soupir ML, Ikenberry CD, Rehmann CR (2015) Predicting streambed sediment and water column E. coli levels at watershed scale. J Am Water Resour Assoc 46(1):115–126Google Scholar
  45. Pearl GG (2005) Feeding meat products to poultry today and future issues. Zimmermann N (ed) 2005 Proceeding of the Third Mid-Atlantic Nutrition Conference. Accessed 5 April 2016
  46. Sapkota AR, Lefferts LY, McKenzie S, Walker P (2007) What do we feed to food-production animals? A review of animal feed ingredients and their potential impacts on human health. Environ Health Perspect 115(5):663–670CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. Sargeant JM, Sanderson MW, Smith RA, Griffin DD (2004a) Associations between management, climate, and Escherichia coli O157 in the feces of feedlot cattle in the Midwestern USA. Prev Vet Med 66(1–4):175–206CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Sargeant JM, Sanderson MW, Griffin DD, Smith RA (2004b) Factors associated with the presence of Escherichia coli O157 in feedlot-cattle water and feed in the Midwestern USA. Prev Vet Med 66(1–4):207–237CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Soupir ML, Mostaghimi S, Yagow ER, Hagedorn C, Vaughan DH (2006) Transport of fecal bacteria from poultry litter and cattle manures applied to pastureland. Water Air Soil Pollut 169(1–4):125–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Swisher K (2014) Market Report 2013 Pressure is on US supplies, prices, and exports Render Magazine April, 10–15 https://d10k7k7mywg42zcloudfrontnet/assets/533f2037f002ff0f280000d2/MarketReport2013pdf Accessed 12 December 2015
  51. Troutt HF, Schaeffer D, Kakoma I, Pearl GG (2001) Prevalence of selected foodborne pathogens in final rendered products: Pilot study. Directors Digest 312:1–7Google Scholar
  52. United States General Accounting Office (USAGO) (2000) Food safety: controls can be strengthened to reduce the risk of disease linked to unsafe animal feed 2000. Washington, DC: US General Accounting Office, 2000. Report GAO/RCED-00-255. Accessed 10 October 2015
  53. Veldman A, Vahl HA, Borggreve GJ, Fuller DC (1995) A survey of the incidence of Salmonella species and Enterobacteriaceae in poultry feeds and feed components. Vet Rec 136(7):169–172CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Wagner D (2004) Microbiological data summary from FDA feed commodity surveys. CDC, Animal Feed Workshop Presentation. Accessed 5 April 2015
  55. Watkins JR, Flowers AI, Grumbles LC (1959) Salmonella organisms in animal products used in poultry feeds. Avian Dis 3(3):290–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Whyte P, McGill K, Collins JD (2003) A survey of the prevalence of Salmonella and other enteric pathogens in a commercial poultry feed mill. J Food Safety 23(1):13–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Population Health and Reproduction, School of Veterinary MedicineUniversity of California DavisDavisUSA
  2. 2.University of CaliforniaDivision of Agriculture and Natural ResourcesDavisUSA

Personalised recommendations