Two sampling techniques for game meat
A study was conducted to compare the excision sampling technique used by the export market and the sampling technique preferred by European countries, namely the biotrace cattle and swine test. The measuring unit for the excision sampling was grams (g) and square centimetres (cm2) for the swabbing t...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of the South African Veterinary Association 2013-01, Vol.84 (1), p.E1 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | E1 |
container_title | Journal of the South African Veterinary Association |
container_volume | 84 |
creator | van der Merwe, Maretha Jooste, Piet J Hoffman, Louw C Calitz, Frikkie J |
description | A study was conducted to compare the excision sampling technique used by the export market and the sampling technique preferred by European countries, namely the biotrace cattle and swine test. The measuring unit for the excision sampling was grams (g) and square centimetres (cm2) for the swabbing technique. The two techniques were compared after a pilot test was conducted on spiked approved beef carcasses (n = 12) that statistically proved the two measuring units correlated. The two sampling techniques were conducted on the same game carcasses (n = 13) and analyses performed for aerobic plate count (APC), Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus, for both techniques. A more representative result was obtained by swabbing and no damage was caused to the carcass. Conversely, the excision technique yielded fewer organisms and caused minor damage to the carcass. The recovery ratio from the sampling technique improved 5.4 times for APC, 108.0 times for E. coli and 3.4 times for S. aureus over the results obtained from the excision technique. It was concluded that the sampling methods of excision and swabbing can be used to obtain bacterial profiles from both export and local carcasses and could be used to indicate whether game carcasses intended for the local market are possibly on par with game carcasses intended for the export market and therefore safe for human consumption. |
doi_str_mv | 10.4102/jsava.v84i1.536 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1370337318</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A341558313</galeid><sourcerecordid>A341558313</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-40df30a5e1b8293bde9eb0bb9e7a3317399009ab6e1c0fd44fbfabdf4a7c1d253</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kM1rwzAMxc3YWEvX824jMHZMallOYh9L2RcUdunOxk7sLqVJOjvt2H8_t90mHQTiPenxI-QWaMaBstkm6IPODoI3kOVYXJAxY4ynkmN-ScZAQaYSmBiRaQgbGqtgJQpxTUYMSxBCFmPysPrqk6Db3bbp1slgq4-u-dzbkLjeJ2vd2qS1erghV05vg53-zgl5f3pcLV7S5dvz62K-TCss-JByWjukOrdgBJNoaiutocZIW2pEKFFKSqU2hYWKuppzZ5w2teO6rKBmOU7I_fnuzvfHFIPa9HvfxZcKsKSIJYKIquysWuutVU3n-sHrKnZt26bqO-uauJ8jhzwXCBgNs7Oh8n0I3jq1802r_bcCqo4o1QmlOqFUEWV03P0G2ZvW1v_6P3D4A5PFby4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1370337318</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Two sampling techniques for game meat</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>van der Merwe, Maretha ; Jooste, Piet J ; Hoffman, Louw C ; Calitz, Frikkie J</creator><creatorcontrib>van der Merwe, Maretha ; Jooste, Piet J ; Hoffman, Louw C ; Calitz, Frikkie J</creatorcontrib><description>A study was conducted to compare the excision sampling technique used by the export market and the sampling technique preferred by European countries, namely the biotrace cattle and swine test. The measuring unit for the excision sampling was grams (g) and square centimetres (cm2) for the swabbing technique. The two techniques were compared after a pilot test was conducted on spiked approved beef carcasses (n = 12) that statistically proved the two measuring units correlated. The two sampling techniques were conducted on the same game carcasses (n = 13) and analyses performed for aerobic plate count (APC), Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus, for both techniques. A more representative result was obtained by swabbing and no damage was caused to the carcass. Conversely, the excision technique yielded fewer organisms and caused minor damage to the carcass. The recovery ratio from the sampling technique improved 5.4 times for APC, 108.0 times for E. coli and 3.4 times for S. aureus over the results obtained from the excision technique. It was concluded that the sampling methods of excision and swabbing can be used to obtain bacterial profiles from both export and local carcasses and could be used to indicate whether game carcasses intended for the local market are possibly on par with game carcasses intended for the export market and therefore safe for human consumption.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1019-9128</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2224-9435</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.4102/jsava.v84i1.536</identifier><identifier>PMID: 23718896</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>South Africa: African Online Scientific Information Systems (Pty) Ltd t/a AOSIS</publisher><subject>Animals ; Cattle ; Escherichia coli - isolation & purification ; Food ; Food Microbiology - methods ; Klebsiella - isolation & purification ; Meat - microbiology ; Meat inspection ; Methods ; Pilot Projects ; Safety and security measures ; Specimen Handling - veterinary ; Swine ; Testing</subject><ispartof>Journal of the South African Veterinary Association, 2013-01, Vol.84 (1), p.E1</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2013 African Online Scientific Information Systems (Pty) Ltd t/a AOSIS</rights><rights>Copyright AOSIS OpenJournals, A Division of AOSIS (Pty) Ltd 2013</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-40df30a5e1b8293bde9eb0bb9e7a3317399009ab6e1c0fd44fbfabdf4a7c1d253</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-40df30a5e1b8293bde9eb0bb9e7a3317399009ab6e1c0fd44fbfabdf4a7c1d253</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23718896$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>van der Merwe, Maretha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jooste, Piet J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoffman, Louw C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Calitz, Frikkie J</creatorcontrib><title>Two sampling techniques for game meat</title><title>Journal of the South African Veterinary Association</title><addtitle>J S Afr Vet Assoc</addtitle><description>A study was conducted to compare the excision sampling technique used by the export market and the sampling technique preferred by European countries, namely the biotrace cattle and swine test. The measuring unit for the excision sampling was grams (g) and square centimetres (cm2) for the swabbing technique. The two techniques were compared after a pilot test was conducted on spiked approved beef carcasses (n = 12) that statistically proved the two measuring units correlated. The two sampling techniques were conducted on the same game carcasses (n = 13) and analyses performed for aerobic plate count (APC), Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus, for both techniques. A more representative result was obtained by swabbing and no damage was caused to the carcass. Conversely, the excision technique yielded fewer organisms and caused minor damage to the carcass. The recovery ratio from the sampling technique improved 5.4 times for APC, 108.0 times for E. coli and 3.4 times for S. aureus over the results obtained from the excision technique. It was concluded that the sampling methods of excision and swabbing can be used to obtain bacterial profiles from both export and local carcasses and could be used to indicate whether game carcasses intended for the local market are possibly on par with game carcasses intended for the export market and therefore safe for human consumption.</description><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Cattle</subject><subject>Escherichia coli - isolation & purification</subject><subject>Food</subject><subject>Food Microbiology - methods</subject><subject>Klebsiella - isolation & purification</subject><subject>Meat - microbiology</subject><subject>Meat inspection</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Pilot Projects</subject><subject>Safety and security measures</subject><subject>Specimen Handling - veterinary</subject><subject>Swine</subject><subject>Testing</subject><issn>1019-9128</issn><issn>2224-9435</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNo9kM1rwzAMxc3YWEvX824jMHZMallOYh9L2RcUdunOxk7sLqVJOjvt2H8_t90mHQTiPenxI-QWaMaBstkm6IPODoI3kOVYXJAxY4ynkmN-ScZAQaYSmBiRaQgbGqtgJQpxTUYMSxBCFmPysPrqk6Db3bbp1slgq4-u-dzbkLjeJ2vd2qS1erghV05vg53-zgl5f3pcLV7S5dvz62K-TCss-JByWjukOrdgBJNoaiutocZIW2pEKFFKSqU2hYWKuppzZ5w2teO6rKBmOU7I_fnuzvfHFIPa9HvfxZcKsKSIJYKIquysWuutVU3n-sHrKnZt26bqO-uauJ8jhzwXCBgNs7Oh8n0I3jq1802r_bcCqo4o1QmlOqFUEWV03P0G2ZvW1v_6P3D4A5PFby4</recordid><startdate>20130101</startdate><enddate>20130101</enddate><creator>van der Merwe, Maretha</creator><creator>Jooste, Piet J</creator><creator>Hoffman, Louw C</creator><creator>Calitz, Frikkie J</creator><general>African Online Scientific Information Systems (Pty) Ltd t/a AOSIS</general><general>AOSIS (Pty) Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CWDGH</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20130101</creationdate><title>Two sampling techniques for game meat</title><author>van der Merwe, Maretha ; Jooste, Piet J ; Hoffman, Louw C ; Calitz, Frikkie J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-40df30a5e1b8293bde9eb0bb9e7a3317399009ab6e1c0fd44fbfabdf4a7c1d253</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Cattle</topic><topic>Escherichia coli - isolation & purification</topic><topic>Food</topic><topic>Food Microbiology - methods</topic><topic>Klebsiella - isolation & purification</topic><topic>Meat - microbiology</topic><topic>Meat inspection</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Pilot Projects</topic><topic>Safety and security measures</topic><topic>Specimen Handling - veterinary</topic><topic>Swine</topic><topic>Testing</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>van der Merwe, Maretha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jooste, Piet J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoffman, Louw C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Calitz, Frikkie J</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Middle East & Africa Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><jtitle>Journal of the South African Veterinary Association</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>van der Merwe, Maretha</au><au>Jooste, Piet J</au><au>Hoffman, Louw C</au><au>Calitz, Frikkie J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Two sampling techniques for game meat</atitle><jtitle>Journal of the South African Veterinary Association</jtitle><addtitle>J S Afr Vet Assoc</addtitle><date>2013-01-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>84</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>E1</spage><pages>E1-</pages><issn>1019-9128</issn><eissn>2224-9435</eissn><abstract>A study was conducted to compare the excision sampling technique used by the export market and the sampling technique preferred by European countries, namely the biotrace cattle and swine test. The measuring unit for the excision sampling was grams (g) and square centimetres (cm2) for the swabbing technique. The two techniques were compared after a pilot test was conducted on spiked approved beef carcasses (n = 12) that statistically proved the two measuring units correlated. The two sampling techniques were conducted on the same game carcasses (n = 13) and analyses performed for aerobic plate count (APC), Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus, for both techniques. A more representative result was obtained by swabbing and no damage was caused to the carcass. Conversely, the excision technique yielded fewer organisms and caused minor damage to the carcass. The recovery ratio from the sampling technique improved 5.4 times for APC, 108.0 times for E. coli and 3.4 times for S. aureus over the results obtained from the excision technique. It was concluded that the sampling methods of excision and swabbing can be used to obtain bacterial profiles from both export and local carcasses and could be used to indicate whether game carcasses intended for the local market are possibly on par with game carcasses intended for the export market and therefore safe for human consumption.</abstract><cop>South Africa</cop><pub>African Online Scientific Information Systems (Pty) Ltd t/a AOSIS</pub><pmid>23718896</pmid><doi>10.4102/jsava.v84i1.536</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1019-9128 |
ispartof | Journal of the South African Veterinary Association, 2013-01, Vol.84 (1), p.E1 |
issn | 1019-9128 2224-9435 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1370337318 |
source | MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals |
subjects | Animals Cattle Escherichia coli - isolation & purification Food Food Microbiology - methods Klebsiella - isolation & purification Meat - microbiology Meat inspection Methods Pilot Projects Safety and security measures Specimen Handling - veterinary Swine Testing |
title | Two sampling techniques for game meat |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-14T11%3A35%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Two%20sampling%20techniques%20for%20game%20meat&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20the%20South%20African%20Veterinary%20Association&rft.au=van%20der%20Merwe,%20Maretha&rft.date=2013-01-01&rft.volume=84&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=E1&rft.pages=E1-&rft.issn=1019-9128&rft.eissn=2224-9435&rft_id=info:doi/10.4102/jsava.v84i1.536&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA341558313%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1370337318&rft_id=info:pmid/23718896&rft_galeid=A341558313&rfr_iscdi=true |