Comparison of 2 culture methods and PCR assays for Salmonella detection in poultry feces

The present work compared 2 culture methods and the combinations of pre-enrichment and enrichment culture methods with PCR assays [buffered peptone water-PCR and tetrathionate-PCR or modified semisolid Rappaport-Vassiliadis (MSRV)-PCR] for motile and nonmotile Salmonella strain detection using artif...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Soria, Maria Cecilia, Soria, Mario, Bueno, Dante Javier
Formato: info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: Oxford Academic Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://academic.oup.com/ps/article/91/3/616/1555236
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/6466
https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2011-01831
_version_ 1855035680188530688
author Soria, Maria Cecilia
Soria, Mario
Bueno, Dante Javier
author_browse Bueno, Dante Javier
Soria, Maria Cecilia
Soria, Mario
author_facet Soria, Maria Cecilia
Soria, Mario
Bueno, Dante Javier
author_sort Soria, Maria Cecilia
collection INTA Digital
description The present work compared 2 culture methods and the combinations of pre-enrichment and enrichment culture methods with PCR assays [buffered peptone water-PCR and tetrathionate-PCR or modified semisolid Rappaport-Vassiliadis (MSRV)-PCR] for motile and nonmotile Salmonella strain detection using artificially contaminated poultry feces. The specificity and positive predictive values were equal to one in both culture methods. Specificity and positive predictive values, accuracy, sensitivity, and negative predictive values were higher for motile than nonmotile Salmonella strains in culture methods. Only Salmonellaenterica serovar Gallinarum was detected by the MSRV method with low accuracy, sensitivity, and negative predictive value. The detection level of motile strains was 2 ×100 to 22 × 102 cfu per 25 g for these methods, whereas it was 6.9 × 102 cfu per 25 g in culture methods for Salmonella Gallinarum. Extending the incubation time of the enrichment medium to 6 d in the TT method did not improve the isolation rates. In general, all selective plating media did not show any statistical differences in the parameters of performance studied. On the other hand, accuracy and sensitivity values were higher in MSRV-PCR and tetrathionate-PCR methods than in the buffered peptone water-PCR method. Specificity and positive predictive values were equal to one in most of the cases. In terms of detection limits, motile Salmonella strains were recovered from 5 × 100 cfu per 25 g in MSRV-PCR and tetrathionate-PCR methods, whereas the detection limit was better for nonmotile Salmonella in MSRV-PCR methods than in the tetrathionate-PCR method. Kappa coefficients showed that there was a very good agreement between tetrathionate and MSRV methods for motile Salmonella strains, whereas these methods did not show any concordance for nonmotile Salmonella strains. When buffered peptone water-PCR was compared with both tetrathionate-PCR and MSRV-PCR, agreement was poor for motile Salmonella strains and slight to fair for nonmotile Salmonella strains. The difference in isolation rate obtained with the methods used for motile and nonmotile Salmonella strains must be taken into account when a poultry fecal sample is considered negative for the presence of Salmonella.
format info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo
id INTA6466
institution Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA -Argentina)
language Inglés
publishDate 2019
publishDateRange 2019
publishDateSort 2019
publisher Oxford Academic Press
publisherStr Oxford Academic Press
record_format dspace
spelling INTA64662019-12-06T14:12:59Z Comparison of 2 culture methods and PCR assays for Salmonella detection in poultry feces Soria, Maria Cecilia Soria, Mario Bueno, Dante Javier Enfermedades de los Animales Aves de Corral Salmonella PCR Técnicas de Cultivo Heces Animal Diseases Poultry Culture Techniques Faeces The present work compared 2 culture methods and the combinations of pre-enrichment and enrichment culture methods with PCR assays [buffered peptone water-PCR and tetrathionate-PCR or modified semisolid Rappaport-Vassiliadis (MSRV)-PCR] for motile and nonmotile Salmonella strain detection using artificially contaminated poultry feces. The specificity and positive predictive values were equal to one in both culture methods. Specificity and positive predictive values, accuracy, sensitivity, and negative predictive values were higher for motile than nonmotile Salmonella strains in culture methods. Only Salmonellaenterica serovar Gallinarum was detected by the MSRV method with low accuracy, sensitivity, and negative predictive value. The detection level of motile strains was 2 ×100 to 22 × 102 cfu per 25 g for these methods, whereas it was 6.9 × 102 cfu per 25 g in culture methods for Salmonella Gallinarum. Extending the incubation time of the enrichment medium to 6 d in the TT method did not improve the isolation rates. In general, all selective plating media did not show any statistical differences in the parameters of performance studied. On the other hand, accuracy and sensitivity values were higher in MSRV-PCR and tetrathionate-PCR methods than in the buffered peptone water-PCR method. Specificity and positive predictive values were equal to one in most of the cases. In terms of detection limits, motile Salmonella strains were recovered from 5 × 100 cfu per 25 g in MSRV-PCR and tetrathionate-PCR methods, whereas the detection limit was better for nonmotile Salmonella in MSRV-PCR methods than in the tetrathionate-PCR method. Kappa coefficients showed that there was a very good agreement between tetrathionate and MSRV methods for motile Salmonella strains, whereas these methods did not show any concordance for nonmotile Salmonella strains. When buffered peptone water-PCR was compared with both tetrathionate-PCR and MSRV-PCR, agreement was poor for motile Salmonella strains and slight to fair for nonmotile Salmonella strains. The difference in isolation rate obtained with the methods used for motile and nonmotile Salmonella strains must be taken into account when a poultry fecal sample is considered negative for the presence of Salmonella. EEA Concepción del Uruguay Fil: Soria, Maria Cecilia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Concepción del Uruguay; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina Fil: Soria, Mario Alberto. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Concepción del Uruguay; Argentina Fil: Bueno, Dante Javier. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Concepción del Uruguay; Argentina 2019-12-06T14:10:52Z 2019-12-06T14:10:52Z 2012-03 info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion https://academic.oup.com/ps/article/91/3/616/1555236 http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/6466 0032-5791 1525-3171 https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2011-01831 eng info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) application/pdf Oxford Academic Press Poultry Science 91 (3) : 616–626 (March 2012)
spellingShingle Enfermedades de los Animales
Aves de Corral
Salmonella
PCR
Técnicas de Cultivo
Heces
Animal Diseases
Poultry
Culture Techniques
Faeces
Soria, Maria Cecilia
Soria, Mario
Bueno, Dante Javier
Comparison of 2 culture methods and PCR assays for Salmonella detection in poultry feces
title Comparison of 2 culture methods and PCR assays for Salmonella detection in poultry feces
title_full Comparison of 2 culture methods and PCR assays for Salmonella detection in poultry feces
title_fullStr Comparison of 2 culture methods and PCR assays for Salmonella detection in poultry feces
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of 2 culture methods and PCR assays for Salmonella detection in poultry feces
title_short Comparison of 2 culture methods and PCR assays for Salmonella detection in poultry feces
title_sort comparison of 2 culture methods and pcr assays for salmonella detection in poultry feces
topic Enfermedades de los Animales
Aves de Corral
Salmonella
PCR
Técnicas de Cultivo
Heces
Animal Diseases
Poultry
Culture Techniques
Faeces
url https://academic.oup.com/ps/article/91/3/616/1555236
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/6466
https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2011-01831
work_keys_str_mv AT soriamariacecilia comparisonof2culturemethodsandpcrassaysforsalmonelladetectioninpoultryfeces
AT soriamario comparisonof2culturemethodsandpcrassaysforsalmonelladetectioninpoultryfeces
AT buenodantejavier comparisonof2culturemethodsandpcrassaysforsalmonelladetectioninpoultryfeces