Microbiological approaches/ methods for detection of common microbes causing food poisoning and strategies for its mitigation.

“MICROBIOLOGICALAPPROACHES/
METHODS FOR DETECTION OF
COMMON MICROBES CAUSING FOOD
POISONING AND STRATEGIES FOR ITS
MITIGATION.”
PREPARED BY
DR. SUSHIL NEUPANE
B.V.SC. AND A.H.
INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURE AND ANIMAL SCIENCE PAKLIHAWA
TRIBHUVAN UNIVERSITY
SIDDHARTHANAGAR 1, RUPANDEHI, NEPAL

INTRODUCTION
 Foods are not only nutritious to consumers, but are also excellent sources of
nutrients for microbial growth (Jay et al., 2005).
 Escherichia coli , Salmonella serotypes, Campylobacter jejuni, Clostridium
perfringens, Clostridium botulinum, Listeria monocytogenes,
Staphylococcus aureus, Yersinia enterocolitica, Aeromonas hydrophila, and
Bacillus cereus are important pathogenic contaminants of meat and poultry
products (Doulgeraki et al., 2012).

INTRODUCTION
 Foodborne diseases are illnesses that are acquired through ingestion of food
contaminated with pathogenic microorganisms, bacterial and nonbacterial toxins,
or other substances.
 Acute gastroenteritis and toxin-mediated food poisoning are the most common
forms of illness and can range in severity from mild to serious, even resulting in
death.
 Some foodborne diseases can lead to long-term sequelae, such as impaired kidney
function after Shiga toxin–producing Escherichia coli infection, Guillain-Barré
syndrome after Campylobacter infection, and reactive arthritis and irritable bowel
syndrome after a variety of infections.

INTRODUCTION
 Groups at higher risk of acquiring or experiencing more severe foodborne
disease include infants, young children, pregnant women, older adults, and
immunocompromised persons.
 To reduce contamination, food producers identify points where the risk of
contamination can be controlled and use production systems that decrease the
hazards.
 Individuals can reduce their risk of illness by adhering to safe food handling
practices.

OBJECTIVES
 To know about different microbes that cause food poisoning.
 To know about the different strategies that the international food
industry are following to mitigate the problem.

RATIONALE OF STUDY
 This research helps to identify the problems in the food industry in
context of Nepal and gives ideas about the international standard like
HACCP and bridge the gap about the relationship between food
industry and human health.

The composition of microflora in meat depends on various factors
(Cerveny et al., 2009):
Pre-slaughter
husbandry practices
(free range vs
intensive rearing)
Age of the animal at
the time of
slaughtering
Handling during
slaughtering,
evisceration, and
processing
Temperature controls
during slaughtering,
processing, and
distribution
Preservation
methods
Type of
packaging

Genera of Bacteria and fungi most frequently found on Meats and Poultry
Source: (Jay et al.,
2008)

The stick knife Animal hide Hands of handlers
Handling and
storage
environment
Gastrointestinal
tract
Lymph
nodes
Containers
PRIMARY SOURCES AND ROUTES OF
MICROORGANISMS

Detection of Spoilage Bacteria
A. Enumeration methods
Epifluorescence
microscopes
Microscope
ATP
Bioluminescence

B. Detection methods
 Current detection methods are based on immunological or nucleic acid-based
procedures.
 Immunological methods employ antibodies that are raised to react to surface antigens
of specific microorganisms.
1. ELISA:

2. PCR (Manu et al., 2021)
 PCR has been used in detecting bacteria that can spoil vacuum-packaged meats.
 This method has been reported to allow for rapid and selective identification and/or
detection of microorganisms in different matrices by amplifying specific gene fragments and
detecting the PCR amplicons by gel electrophoresis.
 PCR is at present one of the most rapid procedures available for the detection of pathogens
in foods, with test times for Salmonella spp., for example, of approximately 18 hours.

Detection of Microbial Metabolites
 The use of solid phase micro extraction gas chromatography and mass
spectroscopy of dimethyl sulfate ethyloctonate, 2-ethyl 1 hexonate, etc. has
recently been attempted by researchers as a method of the detection of spoilage
indirectly (Ajaykumar et al., 2019).
 These methods are not very popular as the spoilage to some extent has to be
detected more quickly than the time taken for most of the tests (Ajaykumar et
al., 2019).

Interventions before Hide Removal
(Jay et al., 2008)
A. Cleaning of Live Animals
Clipping or hair trimming
Spray washing with warm, cold, or
ozonized water or antimicrobial solutions
Bathing animals in a trough

B. Cleaning of Stunned Animals
Stunned animals may be either spray washed with water or
chemical solutions, dehaired, or treated with steam.
It is recommended that a final rinse be used, followed by
vacuuming, to improve the decontamination effects and to
remove excessive liquid.

C. Chemical Dehairing
Application of a sodium sulfide solution
Pressurized water spraying of animals
spraying with a neutralizing solution,
sodium carbonate or sodium bicarbonate in
combination with hydrogen peroxide

Interventions During and After Hide
Removal but Before Evisceration
1. Hide Removal Opening hides at rear
hocks, removal of
hoofs, skinning the
butt
Opening the brisket
and tail skin
Skinning the brisket
and back
Pulling the hide using
cattle skinning
machines or ‘‘hide-
pullers’’.

2. Knife
Trimming
Knife trimming is an extensively used commercial
practice in slaughter plants.
This procedure is of particular importance in
removal of contamination in areas that are difficult
to access using washing or spraying (e.g., inside
portion of the round, which lies on the inside of the
leg of animal carcasses).

3. Spot-Cleaning by Steam/Water Vacuuming
The method includes application of steam or hot water which loosens up the
soil as well as detaches and destroys or injures bacteria.
Steam/hot water treatment is followed by vacuuming which removes
physical and biological contaminants

4. Pre-
evisceration
Decontamina
tion
In addition to animal and hide sources, bacteria may be
introduced from processing equipment, hands of employees,
aerosols, or other vectors at any step of carcass handling.
Slaughter plants use warm (approximately 42°C) 2% lactic
acid in on-line spray cabinets as a pre-evisceration wash,
while some establishments have adopted spray washing with
hot water (74°C)

Interventions During and After
Evisceration
1. Bung Tying and Evisceration
The bung tying operation involves
manual incision of the skin which
surrounds the rectum, pulling the
bung and covering it with a
plastic bag.
This procedure must be
performed in a manner that
minimizes contamination from
the anus area to the carcass
surface via employees’ hands and
utensils or reduces cross-
contamination between carcasses.

Evisceration
2. Carcass Splitting
Bruises and damaged tissues must be removed from the midline area
of the back of eviscerated carcasses to prevent contamination of
underlying tissues during carcass splitting.
Carcass splitting is performed with a saw or cleaver along the vertical
midline and is followed by the spinal cord removal, as required by
regulation, with a knife and a hook, or using an automated vacuum
system.

Evisceration
3. Water Spray Washing
Carcass splitting is followed by spray washing with cold water to remove
bone dust and blood from the carcass surface.
Spraying/washing of animal carcasses with water (at temperatures that do
not injure or kill bacteria) has been extensively researched, and on average,
provides approximately a 90% physical reduction of microbial
populations.

Evisceration
4. Hot Water Treatment
In contrast to cold or warm water treatments, hot water (>74°C) appears to
be more effective in reducing carcass microbial loads as it injures or kills
bacteria.

Evisceration
5. Decontamination with pressurized steam
Decontamination with pressurized steam, or ‘‘steam pasteurization’’, is one of
the most effective interventions.
The method involves the following steps: removal of water from carcass side
surfaces, which remains after post-evisceration washing, using air blowers or
vacuum; surface ‘‘pasteurization’’ with pressurized steam (6.5–10 s); and a cold
water spray to cool down carcass surfaces.

Evisceration
6. Spraying
with Chemical
Antimicrobials
While spraying with water physically removes bacteria and
depending on water temperature may cause thermal
destruction/injury to cells, spraying with chemical
antimicrobials, in addition to an immediate pathogen
reduction, may also prevent or inhibit growth of surviving
pathogens during storage.
Spray washing carcasses with antimicrobials is widely used by
the meat-processing industry.

Evisceration
7. High hydrostatic pressure
High hydrostatic pressure is an
alternative and industrially attractive
non-thermal technology with higher
potential of application to meat
products.
The technology may be used for
hygienization of sliced cooked or
cured meat products extending its
shelf-life without major changes in
sensorial properties.

Evisceration
8. Irradiation
Irradiation is among the most effective postharvest intervention
methods for inactivating food-borne pathogens in meat.
Exposing meat products under ionizing radiation such as gamma
rays or high-energy electrons can kill pathogens as well as
indigenous microflora, and extend shelf life.

Fig: Control of hazards at different stages of the meat chain

Strategies for mitigation of bacterial
contamination in meat
1. Regulatory Requirements
Reinforcement of the “zero tolerance” policy requiring removal of visible soil
from carcasses by knife-trimming before washing and decontamination
• Implementation of formally inspected sanitation standard operating
procedures,
Declaration of E. coli O157:H7 as an “adulterant” in ground meat and in all
other non-intact meat products
• Implementation of HACCP as a process management system and compliance
with performance criteria for E. coli biotype I to verify process control (done
by meat processors) and Salmonella as a verification of HACCP and for
tracking pathogen reduction.

2. Prerequisite Programs and HACCP
HACCP is defined as a systematic approach for the identification, evaluation and control of
food safety hazards based on seven principles: hazard analysis; critical control points (CCP);
critical limits (CL); monitoring procedures; corrective actions; verification procedures; and
record-keeping/documentation procedures.
HACCP implementation should be based on strong prerequisite programs (PP), including
Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) and Good Hygiene Practices (GHP), which are its
essential foundation
Benefits of proper HACCP implementation include enhanced food safety assurance, better
use of resources, timely response to problems and compliance with regulations, customer
specifications and consumer demands.

3. HACCP Implementation through SOP (standard operating procedures).
HACCP programs should be
applied throughout the food chain
and should be based on a
foundation consisting of effective
prerequisite programs (PP),
including Good Manufacturing
Practices (GMP) and Good
Hygiene Practices (GHP).
This can be accomplished
through development and
implementation of SOPs or job
instructions.
SOPs include procedures for each
step in a process, procedures
describing how each GMP and
GHP is to be carried out, and
procedures to be followed at each
CCP.
In other words, SOPs describe in
detail, at least, how each activity
is done.

4.
Validation
of CCP and
CL (Critical
Limits)
Validation is a necessary component of HACCP, which
may be considered as a form of verification.
It is used to ensure that the CLs at each CCP of a
HACCP plan are achieved or achieve their targets.
Simply, HACCP plans and CCPs and CLs are validated
to determine whether they are working as intended for
the prevention, elimination or reduction of food safety
hazards
Initial validation should be repeated when changes in
processing occur or problems arise as determined by
monitoring and verification.

5. Monitoring of CCPs and CLs
The effectiveness of a HACCP plan in controlling food safety hazards depends
on development of proper monitoring systems, statistically valid monitoring
frequencies, proper training of personnel conducting monitoring, validation
and verification activities, and continuous evaluation of production processes.
• Monitoring facilitates continuous tracking of the operation at CCPs,
produces written documentation for use in verification, determines lack or
loss of control and facilitates proper corrective actions.
Effective monitoring of CCPs is often based on the use of statistical process
control (SPC) to summarize monitoring data on charts, providing a pictorial,
more realistic and continuous assessment of process performance.

6. Verification of HACCP
Verification activities are also important in
situations of emerging product safety
concerns; to confirm that changes in
processing or the HACCP plan have no
adverse effect; and to determine whether
the HACCP plan needs modification due
to changes in the process, equipment,
product formulation, etc.
While validation covers the scientific and
technical quality elements of the HACCP
plan, verification covers procedures that
determine compliance with the HACCP
plan.

7. Education and Training
Correct, complete and routine implementation of HACCP is expected to
occur only when there is proper, complete and routine education and
training of management and employees in the importance of controlling
foodborne hazards, the goals of HACCP, and the proper and continuous
application of its principles.
Food workers should be trained through proper SOPs to effectively
perform their work activities, especially those associated with CCPs,
GMPs and GHPs.
Education and training in food safety principles and proper food
handling procedures is also needed for consumers.

CONCLUSION
 Food being nutritious to consumers are also good source for microbial growth.
 Hands of handlers, handling and storage environment, animal hide, gastrointestinal tract,,
containers etc. are the primary source and routes of microorganisms to fresh meats leading
to contamination.
 Its very necessary to prevent contamination of meat for human consumption and to extend
shelf life of meat.
 Contamination can be minimized by ; Cleaning of live animals/stunned animals,
Slaughtering and processing of animal meat in flies free clean room/place, using of stainless
knives and slaughtering equipment, proper dehairing, hide removal, splitting of meats and
storing meats in appropriate temperature.
 Strategies for mitigation of bacterial contamination in meat involves: Reinforcement of the
“zero tolerance” policy; Declaration of E. coli O157:H7 as an “adulterant” in ground meat,
sanitation, standard operating procedures, implementation of HACCP, validation and
monitoring of CCPs and CLs , verification of HACCP, education and training.

REFERENCES
 Abd-el-malek, A. (2021). Cooked poultry meat and products as a potential source of some food poisoning bacteria Cooked poultry
meat and products as a potential source of some food poisoning bacteria. (June 2017). https://doi.org/10.9790/2402-1106032329
 Ahmed, I., Lin, H., Zou, L., Li, Z., Brody, A. L., Qazi, I. M., … Sun, L. (2018). An overview of smart packaging technologies for
monitoring safety and quality of meat and meat products. Packaging Technology and Science, 31(7), 449–471.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pts.2380
 Ajaykumar, V. J., & Mandal, P. K. (2019). Modern concept and detection of spoilage in meat and meat products. In Meat Quality
Analysis: Advanced Evaluation Methods, Techniques, and Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-819233-7.00018-5
 Berbegal, C., Fragasso, M., Russo, P., Bimbo, F., Grieco, F., Spano, G., & Capozzi, V. (2019). Climate Changes and Food
Quality : The Potential of Microbial Activities as Mitigating Strategies in the Wine Sector. 1–15.
 Capozzi, V., Fragasso, M., & Bimbo, F. (2021). Microbial Resources , Fermentation and Reduction of Negative Externalities in
Food Systems : Patterns toward Sustainability and Resilience.
 Doulgeraki, A. I., Ercolini, D., Villani, F., & Nychas, G. J. E. (2012). Spoilage microbiota associated to the storage of raw meat in
different conditions. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 157(2), 130–141.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2012.05.020
 Editors, S., Busta, F. F., Cords, B. R., Donnelly, C. W., Hall, P., Hocking, A. D., … Doyle, M. P. (n.d.). Series Editors.
 Fancher, C. A., Zhang, L., Kiess, A. S., Adhikari, P. A., Dinh, T. T. N., & Sukumaran, A. T. (2020). Avian Pathogenic Escherichia
coli and Clostridium perfringens : Challenges in No Antibiotics Ever Broiler Production and Potential Solutions.
 Jay, J. M., Loessner, M. J., & Golden, D. A. (2008). Modern food microbiology. Springer Science & Business Media.
 Cerveny, J., Meyer, J. D., & Hall, P. A. (2009). Microbiological spoilage of meat and poultry products. In Compendium of the microbiological
spoilage of foods and beverages (pp. 69-86). Springer, New York, NY.

REFERENCES
 Gast, R. K., & A, R. K. G. (n.d.). Serotype-Specific and Serotype-Independent Strategies for Preharvest Control of Food-Borne
Salmonella in Poultry Invited Review — Serotype-Specific and Serotype-Independent Strategies for Preharvest Control of Food-Borne
Salmonella in Poultry. 51(4), 817–828.
 Inguglia, E. S., Zhang, Z., Tiwari, B. K., Kerry, J. P., & Burgess, C. M. (2017). Trends in Food Science & Technology Salt reduction
strategies in processed meat products e A review. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 59, 70–78.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2016.10.016
 Journal, B., Science, P., & Brasileira, R. (2004). Microbiological quality of poultry meat : a review *.
 Kaittanis, C., Santra, S., & Perez, J. M. (2010). Emerging nanotechnology-based strategies for the identi fi cation of microbial
pathogenesis ☆. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, 62(4–5), 408–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2009.11.013
 Kumar, H., Bhardwaj, K., Kaur, T., Nepovimova, E., Kuča, K., Kumar, V., … Kumar, D. (2020). Review detection of bacterial pathogens
and antibiotic residues in chicken meat: a review. Foods, 9(10), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9101504
 Manu, M. K., Li, D., Liwen, L., Jun, Z., Varjani, S., & Wong, J. W. C. (2021). Bioresource Technology A review on nitrogen dynamics
and mitigation strategies of food waste digestate composting. Bioresource Technology, 334(January), 125032.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2021.125032
 Mishra, B., & Jha, R. (2019). Oxidative Stress in the Poultry Gut : Potential Challenges and Interventions. 6(March), 1–5.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2019.00060
 Mycotoxins, M., Zhu, Y., Hassan, Y. I., Lepp, D., Shao, S., & Zhou, T. (2017). Strategies and Methodologies for Developing Microbial
Detoxification Systems to. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins9040130
 Nastasijevic, I., Proscia, F., Boskovic, M., Glisic, M., Blagojevic, B., Sorgentone, S., … Ferri, M. (2020). The European Union control
strategy for Campylobacter spp . in the broiler meat chain. (March). https://doi.org/10.1111/jfs.12819

Microbiological approaches/ methods for detection of common microbes causing food poisoning and strategies for its mitigation.

Microbiological approaches/ methods for detection of common microbes causing food poisoning and strategies for its mitigation.

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Microbiological approaches/ methods for detection of common microbes causing food poisoning and strategies for its mitigation.

Similar to Microbiological approaches/ methods for detection of common microbes causing food poisoning and strategies for its mitigation. (20)

More from Dr. Sushil Neupane

More from Dr. Sushil Neupane (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Microbiological approaches/ methods for detection of common microbes causing food poisoning and strategies for its mitigation.