Elsevier

Food Control

Volume 32, Issue 1, July 2013, Pages 279-282
Food Control

Short communication
Variation in Campylobacter distribution on different sites of broiler carcasses

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2012.11.011Get rights and content

Abstract

Campylobacter is one of the most important agents of human bacterial enteritis in the western world, with handling and consumption of raw or undercooked chicken meat as the main source of infection. Until today, extensive quantitative data on Campylobacter distribution patterns on broiler carcasses is lacking in the published literature. This study therefore compared Campylobacter concentrations on six skin sites of broiler carcasses post-chilling.

Results obtained show that Campylobacter was distributed over the whole broiler carcass, though variation between skin sites was detected. Abdominal and back skin samples revealed a significantly lower occurrence of Campylobacter than other skin sites. Neck skin was one of the most Campylobacter positive carcass sites and contained the highest contamination levels (3.45 ± 1.10 log10 cfu/g). From all tested skin sites, breast and wing skin samples showed the highest correlated Campylobacter concentrations with the neck skin samples. In addition, analyzing only one carcass sampling site does not always reflect the high Campylobacter contamination level (≥3 log10 cfu/g) of a broiler carcass.

In conclusion, the variation in the Campylobacter concentrations between skin sites of broiler carcasses should be considered when Campylobacter enumeration data are interpreted and used in risk assessment models. Further, obtained results are useful both at a national and a community level to support decisions on setting microbiological criteria or on sampling strategies in the frame of Campylobacter monitoring and control programs.

Highlights

► The variation in Campylobacter numbers between skin sites on carcasses was assessed. ► Neck skin is one of the most positive and the highest contaminated carcass site. ► Analyzing one site does not always reflect a highly contaminated status of a carcass. ► Obtained results complements risk assessment models on campylobacteriosis. ► This study support decision making of Campylobacter monitoring and control.

Introduction

The food borne pathogen Campylobacter is the most commonly reported bacterial zoonosis in the European Union with 212,064 confirmed human cases in 2010 (European Food Safety Authority, 2012). Campylobacteriosis is characterized by mild to severe symptoms, including fever, diarrhea and abdominal pain (Butzler, 2004). Occasionally, infection can lead to sequelae such as reactive arthritis, meningitis, pneumonia, miscarriage and the life-threatening disease Guillain–Barré syndrome (Levin, 2007).

Campylobacter infections can be acquired from various sources, though handling, preparation and consumption of broiler meat may account for 20–30% of human cases of campylobacteriosis, while 50–80% may be attributed to the chicken reservoir as a whole (EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards, 2010). A number of sampling strategies have been applied to determine the Campylobacter contamination on broiler carcasses. Carcass rinsing (Cason & Berrang, 2002; Hansson, Pudas, Harbom, & Engvall, 2010; McCrea, Tonooka, Van, Atwill, & Schrader, 2008; Reich, Atanassova, Haunhorst, & Klein, 2008) or analyzing drip content (Chrystal, Hargraves, Boa, & Ironside, 2008; Simmons, Hiett, Stern, & Frank, 2008) have been used. Other methodologies focus on specific skin sites by swabbing the skin surface (Jeffrey, Tonooka, & Lozanot, 2001; McCrea et al., 2008; Potturi-Venkata, Backert, Vieira, & Oyarzabal, 2007) or by destructive sampling (European Food Safety Authority, 2010). However, it is still unclear how Campylobacter is distributed on broiler carcasses, which has an impact on the outcome of microbiological analysis, especially when swabbing or destructive sampling are used. Some studies have reported on Campylobacter detection at various sites on broiler carcasses (Jeffrey et al., 2001; Pepe et al., 2009), but no comprehensive data is yet available on Campylobacter concentrations at various skin sites. As Campylobacter concentration has shown to be correlated with the risk of food borne infection, with higher concentrations being more associated with the likelihood of illness (Nauta et al., 2009), quantitative analyses are needed. This study therefore describes the Campylobacter within-carcass distribution by enumerating campylobacters from various carcass skin sites post-chilling.

Section snippets

Sampling of broiler carcasses and quantification of thermotolerant Campylobacter

A total of 47 non-related broiler carcasses, originating from randomly selected batches slaughtered in two Belgian slaughterhouses, were collected. Each carcass was aseptically packed in a sterile plastic bag immediately after air-chilling before further processing. The carcasses were transported to the laboratory under cooled conditions.

Upon arrival at the laboratory, which was within 1 h after sampling, 10 g skin (if possible) were aseptically removed from the neck, breast, abdomen, wings,

Results and discussion

All carcasses (n = 47) tested positive for Campylobacter. From 38 of the carcasses (80.9%), campylobacters were detected on all tested sites, while for 9 carcasses no campylobacters could be retrieved from at least one skin site.

Overall, 92.9% of the skin samples (n = 282) tested positive for Campylobacter. The highest number of positive samples was recovered from leg skin samples (Table 1). Comparing the collective, positive/negative, results over the different sampled skin sites revealed a

Conclusions

The present study described the Campylobacter within-carcass distribution patterns by enumerating Campylobacter on six skin sites from post-chilled broiler carcasses. Campylobacter was distributed over the whole broiler carcass skin area. Variation in both Campylobacter occurrence and concentrations between skin sites was observed, with neck skin being one of the most Campylobacter positive and the highest contaminated carcass site. Those observations should be considered when Campylobacter

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by a grant from the Belgian Federal Public Services (FPS) Health, Food Chain Safety and Environment, DG4, Belgium. We thank the slaughterhouses involved for their valuable cooperation during this study. Many thanks are also due to C. Van Lancker for her technical support. We also thank Isabel De Boosere for her valuable comments on the manuscript.

References (26)

Cited by (23)

  • Changes of the bacterial community diversity on chicken carcasses through an Australian poultry processing line

    2020, Food Microbiology
    Citation Excerpt :

    Campylobacter can potentially survive various interventions throughout chicken processing, such as scalding, washing and chilling, despite that these measures are successful in reducing the bacterial counts on chicken carcasses (Guerin et al., 2010). There have been many studies that have investigated changes of the bacterial counts at a number of stages throughout processing lines (Althaus et al., 2017; Baré et al., 2013; Berghaus et al., 2013; Duffy et al., 2014; European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), 2010; Hamidi et al., 2014; Prachantasena et al., 2016; Seliwiorstow et al., 2015). However, the current industrial interventions are inadequate to completely inactivate Campylobacter.

  • Estimating the performance of four culture media used for enumeration and detection of Campylobacter species in chicken meat

    2020, LWT
    Citation Excerpt :

    It is now well established that Campylobacter spp. are important human foodborne pathogens and poultry meat is their main reservoir (Batz et al., 2012; Silva et al., 2011). However, campylobacters are not uniformly distributed over the whole carcass surface area since distribution of Campylobacter varies between the different sites of broiler carcasses (Baré et al., 2013) and depends on the presence of skin (Cook et al., 2012; Hansson, Nyman, Lahti, Gustafsson, & Olsson Engvall, 2015; Uyttendaele, De Troy, & Debevere, 1999). In the present study, samples consisted of chicken meat with skin obtained from the most heavily contaminated sites of broiler carcasses (neck, breast, wings) so as to assess the worst-case scenario of Campylobacter contamination (Baré et al., 2013).

  • Quantification of Campylobacter jejuni contamination on chicken carcasses in France

    2018, Food Research International
    Citation Excerpt :

    Campylobacter concentrations on leg and neck skin samples were shown to be the least highly correlated among other skin localizations such as breast, abdominal, back and wing skins (Baré et al., 2013). The assumptions made to explain the high level of Campylobacter contamination on neck skin are the drip-down of bacteria due to the gravity of the water flow during slaughter line hanging and the cross-contamination due to crop puller activities if the crop is compromised (Baré et al., 2013). Although consumers are more often exposed to leg samples than to neck skin, the neck skin was favored by EFSA to estimate the worst-case Campylobacter contamination level on carcasses.

  • Quantification of the Campylobacter contamination on broiler carcasses during the slaughter of Campylobacter positive flocks in semi-industrialized slaughterhouses

    2018, International Journal of Food Microbiology
    Citation Excerpt :

    All samples were placed in sterile plastic bags and transferred to a clean area in the slaughterhouse. There, approximately 10 g of breast skin was aseptically sampled for Campylobacter enumeration (Baré et al., 2013), placed in sterile plastic bags with filter (BagPage®, Interscience, Paris, France) and transported in an ice box to the laboratory within 2 h. From each of the 25 caeca, the content was aseptically pooled.

View all citing articles on Scopus
1

Present address: Bioresources Unit, Department of Health & Environment, AIT Austrian Institute of Technology GmbH, Tulln, Austria.

2

Present address: Laboratory Aquatic Biology, K.U.Leuven Campus Kortrijk, E. Sabbelaan 53, 8500 Kortrijk, Belgium.

View full text