AEM
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hayes, P S
Right arrow Articles by Broome, C V
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hayes, P S
Right arrow Articles by Broome, C V
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Hayes, P S
Right arrow Articles by Broome, C V

Next Article 

Appl Environ Microbiol. 1991 August; 57(8): 2109-2113

Comparison of cold enrichment and U.S. Department of Agriculture methods for isolating Listeria monocytogenes from naturally contaminated foods. The Listeria Study Group.

P S Hayes, L M Graves, G W Ajello, B Swaminathan, R E Weaver, J D Wenger, A Schuchat and C V Broome

Meningitis and Special Pathogens Branch, Centers for Disease Control, Atlanta, Georgia 30333.

ABSTRACT

We compared the cold enrichment (CE) and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) methods for isolating Listeria monocytogenes by examining 402 food samples. The food samples were collected from refrigerators of listeriosis patients as part of a multistate active surveillance project to determine the role of foods in sporadic listeriosis in the United States. L. monocytogenes was isolated from 51 food samples (13%). The USDA method was significantly better (P less than 0.001) than the CE method. The isolation efficiencies of the USDA and CE methods were 96 and 59%, respectively. Quantitation of L. monocytogenes in the food samples revealed that many food samples containing less than 0.3 CFU/g were negative as determined by the CE method but positive as determined by the USDA method.


Appl Environ Microbiol. 1991 August; 57(8): 2109-2113




This article has been cited by other articles:




Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
J. Bacteriol. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. Eukaryot. Cell All ASM Journals

Copyright © 1991 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.