Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2014-09
Vidas UP–Enzyme-Linked Fluorescent Immunoassay Based on Recombinant Phage Protein and Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization as Alternative Methods for Detection of Salmonella enterica Serovars in Meat
Several methods for the rapid and specific detection of Salmonella spp. in meat have been described. This study was conducted to evaluate the capability of the VIDAS® UP (SPT [Salmonella Phage Technology]), an enzyme-linked fluorescent immunoassay method, and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) to complement the International Organization for Standardization Method 6579 (ISO) in detecting Salmonella spp. from beef, pork, and poultry meat samples. The meat was inoculated with a mixture of Salmonella spp. on three levels of contamination. It was also checked that the tests did not produce cross-reactions with other Enterobacteriaceae rods. On the basis of the results, the relative specificity, relative accordance, and relative sensitivity of the method were determined. In meat samples, Vidas UP and FISH detection results were in substantial agreement with ISO, with relative specificity, accordance, and sensitivity rates of 90%, 96.3%, and 100%, respectively, for Vidas UP and 100%, 100%, and 99.4%, respectively, for FISH. This is the first report on the evaluation of both Vidas UP and FISH compared to ISO for the rapid detection of Salmonella enterica serovars in meat.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BishopR. Applications of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) in detecting genetic aberrations of medical significance. Biosci Horizons, 2010; 3:85–95.
ChristensenH, HansenM, SorensenJ. Counting and size classification of active soil bacteria by fluorescence in situ hybridization with an rRNA oligonucleotide probe. Appl Environ Microbiol, 1999; 65:1753–1761.
4.
CocolinL, DiezA, UrsoR, RantsiouK, ComiG, BergmaierI, BeimfohrC. Optimization of conditions for profiling bacterial populations in food by culture-independent methods. Int J Food Microbiol, 2007; 120:100–109.
5.
De MediciD, BeneduceF, FioreA, ScalfaroC, CrociL. Application of reverse transcriptase-nested-PCR for detection of poliovirus in mussels. Int J Food Microbiol, 1998; 40:51–56.
6.
[EFSA/ECDC] European Food Safety Authority, European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. The European Union Summary Report on Trends and Sources of Zoonoses, Zoonotic Agents and Food-borne Outbreaks in 2011. EFSA J, 2013; 11:1–250.
7.
EijkelkampJM, AartsHJM, Van Der Fels-KlerxHJ. Suitability of rapid detection methods for Salmonella in poultry slaughterhouses. Food Anal Meth, 2009; 2:1–13.
8.
JassonV, BaertL, UyttendaeleM. Detection of low numbers of healthy and sub-lethally injured Salmonella enterica in chocolate. Int J Food Microbiol, 2011; 145:488–491.
9.
KłębukowskaL, ZadernowskaA, Chajęcka-WierzchowskaW. Microbiological contamination of dried and lyophilized garlic as a potential source of food spoilage. J Food Sci Technol, 2013. doi: 10.1007/s13197-013-1169-6.
10.
LawsonTS, ConnallyRE, IredellJR, VemulpadS, PiperJA. Detection of Staphylococcus aureus with a fluorescence in situ hybridization that does not require lysostaphin. J Clin Lab Anal, 2011; 25:142–147.
11.
LewS, LewM, MieszczyńskiT, SzarekJ. Selected fluorescent techniques for identification of the physiological state of individual water and soil bacterial cells—Review. Folia Microbiol, 2010; 55:107–118.
12.
LiaoQX, QianYL, WangP. Update of hybridization-based methods for the rapid diagnosis of sepsis. Rev Med Microbiol, 2010; 21:80–83.
13.
LoonenAJM, JanszAR, KreeftenbergH, BruggemanCA, WolffsPFG, van den BruleAJC. Acceleration of the direct identification of Staphylococcus aureus versus coagulase-negative staphylococci from blood culture material: A comparison of six bacterial DNA extraction methods. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis, 2011; 30:337–342.
14.
McMahonWA, SchultzAM, JohnsonRL. Evaluation of VIDAS (R) Salmonella (SLM) immunoassay method with Rappaport–Vassiliadis (RV) medium for detection of Salmonella in foods: Collaborative study. J AOAC Int, 2004; 87:867–883.
15.
MøllerCO, IlgY, AaboS, ChristensenBB, DalgaardP, HansenTB. Effect of natural microbiota on growth of Salmonella spp. in fresh pork—A predictive microbiology approach. Food Microbiol, 2013; 34:284–295.
16.
MoterA, GöbelUF. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for direct visualization of microorganisms. J Microbiol Meth, 2000; 41:85–112.
17.
NordentoftS, ChristensenH, WegenerHC. Evaluation of a fluorescence-labelled oligonucleotide probe targeting 23S rRNA for in situ detection of Salmonella serovars in paraffin-embedded tissue sections and their rapid identification in bacterial smears. J Clin Microbiol, 1997; 35:2642–2648.
18.
ÖzerD, Kimiran-ErdemA. Comparison of different methods for the detection of Salmonella spp. in minced meat samples. Kafkas Univ Vet Fak Derg, 2013; 19:801–806.
19.
RathnayakaRMUSK. Effect of sample pre-enrichment and characters of food samples on the examination for the Salmonella by plate count method and fluorescent in-situ hybridization technique. Am J Food Technol, 2011; 6:851–856.
20.
ReiterMG, FioreseML, MorettoG, LópezMC, JordanoR. Prevalence of Salmonella in a poultry slaughterhouse. J Food Protec, 2007; 70:1723–1725.
21.
StefanisC, AlexopoulosA, VoidarouC, VaviasS, BezirtzoglouE. Principal methods for isolation and identification of soil microbial communities. Folia Microbiol, 2013; 58:61–68.
22.
TaskilaS, TuomolaM, OjamoH. Enrichment cultivation in detection of food-borne Salmonella. Food Control, 2012; 26:369–377.
23.
TemelliS, EyigorA, CarliKT. Salmonella detection in poultry meat and meat products by the Vitek immunodiagnostic assay system easy Salmonella method, a LightCycler polymerase chain reaction system, and the International Organization for Standardization method 6579. Poult Sci, 2012; 91:724–731.
24.
TomásD, RodrigoA, HernándezM, FerrúsMA. Validation of real-time PCR and enzyme-linked fluorescent assay-based methods for detection of Salmonella spp. in chicken feces samples. Food Anal Meth, 2009; 2:180–189.
25.
User's Manual. Application Guide of VIDAS® Biomerieux. 2011. Available at: https://techlib.biomerieux.com/wcm/techlib/techlib/applications/guidedSearch/cleverLink/CleverLink.jsp?productnumber=VIDAS, accessed September17, 2013.
26.
Vieira-PintoM, OliveiraM, BernardoF, MartinsC. Rapid detection of Salmonella sp. in pork samples using fluorescent in situ hybridization: A comparison with VIDAS®-SLM system and ISO 6579 cultural method. Braz J Vet Anim Sci, 2007; 59:1388–1393.
27.
Vieira-PintoM, OliveiraM, AranhaJ, MartinsC, BernardoF. Influence of an enrichment step on Salmonella sp. detection by fluorescent in situ hybridization on pork samples. Food Control, 2008; 19:286–290.
28.
Vieira-PintoM, OliveiraM, BernardoF, MartinsC. Evaluation of fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) as a rapid screening method for detection of Salmonella in tonsils of slaughtered pigs for consumption: A comparison with conventional culture method. J Food Safety, 2005; 25:109–119.
29.
ZadernowskaA, Chajęcka-WierzchowskaW, KłębukowskaL. Fluorescence in situ hybridization as an alternative screening method for Salmonella sp. occurrence in chicken meat. Food Sci Technol Qual, 2014a;1:92–102. (in Polish.)
30.
ZadernowskaA, Chajęcka-WierzchowskaW, Łaniewska-TrokenheimŁ. Yersinia enterocolitica: A dangerous, but often ignored, foodborne pathogen. Food Rev Int, 2014b;30:1, 53–70.
