Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Applied and Environmental Microbiology, February 2007, p. 1136-1145, Vol. 73, No. 4
0099-2240/07/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/AEM.01644-06
Copyright © 2007, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Department of Food and Environmental Hygiene,1 DNA Sequencing Laboratory,2 DNA Microarray Laboratory, Institute of Biotechnology, P.O. Box 56, FIN-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland3
Received 14 July 2006/ Accepted 18 November 2006
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
There are no data on sources of specific spoilage LAB in poultry slaughter and processing. Although incoming live broiler chickens introduce vast indigenous LAB populations to slaughterhouses, little is known about the LAB species variety associated with broilers. While the LAB in chicken gastrointestinal and respiratory tracts have been reported to belong mainly to the genera of Lactobacillus, Enterococcus, and Streptococcus (15, 17, 25), no research has focused on showing if psychrotrophic meat spoilage LAB belong to the microbiome of broilers. Since some spoilage LAB have been associated with meat products from certain animal species, the animal has been considered to be the source of contamination. The temperature of the chicken intestine (body temperature, 41 to 42°C) is too high to support the colonization of the intestinal mucosa by psychrotrophic LAB, which usually do not grow at temperatures exceeding 37°C (4, 20, 21, 23). However, it is not known if broiler skin, feathers, or mucous membranes of lower temperatures harbor psychrotrophic spoilage LAB.
The aim of this study was to determine whether the skin or mucous membranes of broilers harbor psychrotrophic LAB or whether, alternatively, products become contaminated with these bacteria during further processing stages. For the latter possibility, we chose monitoring of airborne LAB, since roof-attached hanging conveyers expose carcasses to airborne contamination. To allow the comparison between LAB in broilers, the processing environment, and products, psychrotrophic LAB from cold-stored, nonmarinated, late-shelf-life products were also characterized.
|
|
|---|
Enrichment of carcass samples for specific spoilage LAB.
Two
separate selective enrichment procedures were performed to target the
analysis at the meat-spoilage-associated LAB. Vancomycin was added to
MRS broth to select for leuconostocs, which have been identified as
spoilage organisms of marinated MAP poultry
(4,
31). Members of the genus
Leuconostoc are intrinsically resistant to vancomycin
(2), whereas in Finland
many other LAB, such as fecal enterococci, are generally susceptible to
vancomycin (27). A total
of 31 carcass samples, of which 5, 10, and 16 were from neck skin,
oropharynges, and feather shafts, respectively, were enriched
separately in MRS broth (Difco, Detroit, MI) supplemented with 10
µg/ml vancomycin (Sigma, St. Louis, MO) and incubated at
25°C for 16 h. If no growth occurred, incubation was
prolonged for as long as 5 days. In addition, prior to the experiment,
the ability of Leuconostoc gasicomitatum to grow in
vancomycin-containing MRS broth was checked with four
strains.
Another selective enrichment, for psychrotrophic LAB in general, was performed. Thirty-four carcass samples, of which 4, 10, and 20 were from neck skin, oropharynges, and feathers, respectively, were placed separately in MRS broth and incubated at 6°C for 38 days. After psychrotrophic incubation, the tubes were transferred to 25°C to show if any LAB were present. From each enriched broth showing growth, a loopful (10 µl) was streaked onto MRS agar (Oxoid, Basingstoke, United Kingdom) and incubated in an anaerobic atmosphere (sealed jars with AnaeroGen sachet; Oxoid) at 25°C for 5 days to produce individual colonies. Generally, one colony was streaked to purity on MRS plates. If clearly different colony morphologies were observed, more colonies were picked. Each colony was purified by subculturing in MRS broth and streaking onto MRS agar. For DNA isolation, the strains were inoculated into MRS broth to produce cell mass.
Sampling of airborne LAB.
Airborne LAB were
sampled using two Reuter centrifugal air samplers (RCS sampler; Biotest
AG, Dreieich, Germany) and a sampling time of 8 min (320 liters of
air). The air-sampling sites associated with carcass processing were
categorized as follows: the preprocessing area, the main processing
area, and the room for boned-product packaging. A total of 43 air
samples were taken, of which a total of 6, 29, 6, and 2 were from the
preprocessing area, the main processing area, the room for
boned-product packaging, and the corridor adjacent to the processing
areas, respectively. Samples from air-chilling and processing areas
were taken near the railed carcasses or conveyors, avoiding drips from
the carcasses or carcass portions. The RCS samplers were swabbed with
70% ethanol between measurements, and airborne LAB on each site were
sampled on a fresh MRS agar strip. The strips were incubated under an
anaerobic atmosphere at 25°C for 5 days. CFU were counted, and
the LAB levels were reported as CFU per square meter of air sampled. A
total of 122 colonies, 1 to 5 from each strip, were randomly picked and
cultured pure for DNA
isolation.
Sampling and enumeration of LAB in broiler products at the retail level.
Table
1 shows the numbers of packages analyzed, the product types included in
the study, and their manufacturer-defined shelf lives. Branded products
from three large-scale broiler product manufacturers (A, B,
and C) were purchased from retail stores during a 3-month period to
obtain products possessing typical quality for the retail market level.
Both skin-on and skinless broiler meat products, representing the main
types manufactured, were included (i.e., skin-on leg and breast cuts,
boned and skinned breast fillet cutlets and strips, and minced breast
meat). All manufacturers had applied an anaerobic modified atmosphere
with 80% CO2 and 20% N2 for packaging. The
packages were stored at 6°C until analysis.
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 1. LAB levels in MAP broiler meat products of three
manufacturersa
|
After microbiological sampling, the pH of each sample homogenate was measured using a WTW-530 digital pH meter (Wissenschaftliche-Technische Werkstätten, Weilheim, Germany).
Isolation of DNA, restriction endonuclease analysis, and restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) of the 16 and 23S rRNA-encoding genes for LAB species identification.
Cells
harvested from 1 to 2 ml of MRS broth culture were used for DNA
analyses. DNA was isolated by the guanidium thiocyanate method of
Pitcher et al. (28) as
modified by Björkroth and Korkeala
(5) with combined lysozyme
and mutanolysin (Sigma). Restriction endonuclease treatment of 8
µg of DNA was done by using the HindIII restriction enzyme (New
England Biolabs, Beverly, MA) as recommended by the manufacturer. DNA
fragments were separated by agarose gel electrophoresis and the
resulting fingerprint patterns transferred to a nylon membrane via
Southern blotting using a vacuum blotting device (Vacugene; Pharmacia,
Uppsala, Sweden). Ribotyping was performed using a cDNA probe reverse
transcribed (with avian myeloblastosis virus reverse
transcriptase; Promega, Madison, WI) from 16 and 23S rRNA
and digoxigenin labeled with a DIG DNA labeling kit (Roche Molecular
Biochemicals, Mannheim, Germany) as described by Blumberg et al.
(10). Membranes were
hybridized at 58°C overnight, and the digoxigenin-labeled
fragments (ribopatterns) were detected as recommended by Roche
Molecular Biochemicals.
LAB database and numerical pattern analysis.
The HindIII ribopatterns were
compared to the corresponding patterns in the previously established
LAB database of the Department of Food and Environmental Hygiene,
University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. This database comprises
patterns of all relevant food-associated LAB in the genera
Aerococcus, Carnobacterium, Enterococcus,
Lactobacillus, Lactococcus, Leuconostoc,
Pediococcus, Streptococcus, and Weissella
(3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
9,
19,
21,
26,
31). It utilizes 16 and
23S rRNA gene HindIII RFLP patterns of more than 300 type and reference
strains as operational taxonomic units in numerical analyses. The
isolates are identified based on the locations of type and reference
strains within the clusters. The reliability of the clusters for
distinguishing between different species has been evaluated in several
polyphasic taxonomy studies of LAB
(8,
18-21).
For the numerical analysis, the ribopatterns were scanned using a Hewlett-Packard (Boise, ID) ScanJet 4c/T scanner. The patterns were normalized based on the mobility of standards, and a similarity matrix was created using the BioNumerics (version 4.1) software package (Applied Maths, Sint-Martens-Latem, Belgium). The similarity between all pairs was expressed by Dice coefficient correlation, and UPGMA (unweighted-pair group method using arithmetic averages) clustering was used for the construction of the dendrogram. Based on the use of internal controls in the database, a pattern optimization and a band position tolerance of 0.5 and 1.5, respectively, were allowed.
16S rRNA gene sequence analysis of representative strains from the major LAB groups.
To confirm/obtain
the genus-level identification of the three major RFLP clusters, of
which two were considered to be carnobacteria and one was unknown, the
16S rRNA genes of eight isolates representing six different
ribopatterns (ribotypes VIh and IXd from the carnobacterial clusters
and ribotypes XVIc, XVIe, XIVf, and XVIh from the unknown cluster [Fig.
1 ]) were sequenced. Numerical analyses of the ribopatterns
considered unknown had not resulted in clustering with any of the type
strains. DNA was isolated as for the RFLP analysis. The nearly complete
(at least 1,400 bases sequenced) 16S rRNA gene was amplified by PCR
with the universal primer pair F8-27
(5'-AGAGTTTGATCCTGGCTGAG-3') and
R1541-1522
(5'-AAGGAGGTGATCCAGCCGCA-3'). The
purified (QIAquick PCR purification kit; QIAGEN, Venlo, Netherlands)
PCR product was sequenced from both directions by Sanger's
dideoxynucleotide chain termination method using primers F19-38
(5'-CTGGCTCAGGAYGAACGCTG-3'),
F926 (5'-AACTCAAAGGAATTGACGG-3'),
R519 (5'-GTATTACCGCGGCTGCTG-3'),
and R1541-1522. Samples were run in a Global IR2 sequencing
device with e-Seq (version 2.0) software (LiCor, Lincoln, NE) according
to the manufacturer's instructions. The consensus sequences of these
strains (created with AlignIR software; LiCor) and of
representative strains belonging to the same phylogenetic
group (retrieved from GenBank
[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]
using BLASTN 2.2.6 [1])
were aligned, and a phylogenetic tree (Fig.
2) was constructed based on the neighbor-joining method using the
BioNumerics (version 4.5) software package (Applied Maths,
Sint-Martens-Latem, Belgium).
![]() View larger version (26K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. HindIII
ribopatterns of LAB from modified-atmosphere-packaged poultry meat
products and of product-associated LAB sampled from processing plant
air. Products were analyzed at the end of shelf life. The numerical
analysis of pattern similarities is presented as a dendrogram and
converted to percentages for convenience. Bands on the left have high
molecular masses of <23 kbp; those on the right have low
molecular masses of >1,000 bp. The footnote a) indicates
genus-level identification based on 16S rRNA gene sequence
analysis.
|
![]() View larger version (38K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 2. Phylogenetic
tree based on homologies of almost-entire 16S rRNA gene sequences (at
least 1,450 bp) of lactococci, carnobacteria, and eight isolates
representing the main riboclusters obtained in the study. Bootstrap
probability values from 500 trees that were resampled are
given at the branch
points.
|
|
|
|---|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 2. Numbers
and species distribution of 85 LAB isolates obtained from broiler skin,
feather shaft, and oropharyngeal
samplesa
|
![]() View larger version (28K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 3. HindIII
ribopatterns of LAB obtained by vancomycin enrichment from broiler
skin, oropharynges, and feathers. The numerical analysis of pattern
similarities is presented as a dendrogram and converted to percentages
for convenience. Bands on the left have high molecular masses of
<23 kbp; those on the right have low molecular masses of
>1,000
bp.
|
Airborne LAB in the processing environment.
Airborne LAB
levels showed great variability depending on the area sampled. The
highest counts were detected inside the air-chilling area (>344
CFU/m3), while the counts obtained from the other areas were
generally very low (<30 CFU/m3) or the growth was
undetectable. Of the 122 LAB isolates randomly picked from the air
sample strips, 45% (55 of 122) represented species also detected in the
late-shelf-life broiler products. The number and species distribution
of these LAB are presented in Table
3, and the corresponding ribopatterns are
shown in Fig. 1. In
addition, air sampling yielded a total of 67 isolates representing
various ribotypes not associated with the products. Thirteen of the
latter isolates were assigned to the species Enterococcus
malodoratus (3 isolates), Enterococcus
pseudoavium (1 isolate), Leuconostoc citreum (3
isolates), Leuconostoc lactis (3 isolates), Leuconostoc
pseudomesenteroides (2 isolates), and P. acidilactici (1
isolate). Numerical analysis of the ribopatterns obtained from a total
of 54 isolates did not result in species-specific clusters by the RFLP
LAB database.
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 3. Numbers
and species distribution of 55 airborne LAB isolates associated with
productsa
|
Table 4 shows the species division of the 447 product-associated LAB isolates based on the RFLP database analysis. The dendrogram presenting clustering of the representative HindIIIribopatterns of these isolates is shown in Fig. 1. Carnobacterium divergens and Carnobacterium maltaromaticum were clearly the most abundant LAB identified in both skin-containing and skinless products of all three manufacturers (Table 4; Fig. 4), with the exception of L. curvatus, which was detected along with C. divergens in minced meat. Forty-three percent of all product isolates (191 of 447 isolates) were identified as C. divergens and 21% (96 of 447 isolates) as C. maltaromaticum. In harmony with the RFLP results, the phylogenetic tree deduced from the 16S rRNA gene sequences (Fig. 2) located the two strains MKJ37 and MARL15, representing the C. divergens and C. maltaromaticum RFLP clusters, respectively, in the same branches as the C. divergens and C. maltaromaticum type and reference strains.
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 4. Number
and species distribution of 447 LAB isolates from MAP broiler products
of manufacturers A, B, and C analyzed at the end of their
manufacturer-defined shelf
livesa
|
![]() View larger version (22K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 4. (a)
Proportions of the major LAB groups in
modified-atmosphere-packaged skin-containing broiler leg and breast
cuts manufactured by three plants, A, B, and C. Products were analyzed
on the last day of the manufacturer-defined shelf life. (b) Proportions
of the major LAB groups in modified-atmosphere-packaged skinless breast
fillet products of two manufacturers, A and B. Products were analyzed
on the last day of the manufacturer-defined shelf
life.
|
Other species detected in the late-shelf-life LAB populations were L. sakei (22 of 447 isolates), Lactobacillus oligofermentans (14 of 447 isolates), L. curvatus (13 of 447 isolates), and L. gasicomitatum (8 of 447 isolates).
|
|
|---|
Based on our results, skin, feathers, and mucous membranes of broilers were not major sources of psychrotrophic LAB associated with late-shelf-life MAP broiler products. The selective enrichment approaches used for recovery of specific spoilage LAB from carcass samples did not, with the exception of L. sakei, detect LAB species associated with meat spoilage. Other LAB detected by the two enrichment procedures belonged neither to species associated with products nor to those considered specific meat spoilage organisms. Moreover, in the cold-enriched carcass samples, no growth was observed in 38 days. However, when these samples were incubated at 25°C after cold enrichment, growth was detected in all samples, and nonpsychrotrophic species, mainly E. faecium and E. faecalis, were recovered. In a previous study (8), these species were commonly detected also in MAP marinated broiler legs of manufacturer B right after packaging but not within the spoilage LAB population after cold storage at 6°C for 17 days. These findings highlight the importance of determining specific spoilage organisms when the role of LAB contaminants in product shelf life stability is evaluated.
In contrast to the broiler carcasses, nearly half of the isolates (45%) obtained from processing plant air represented species associated with retail MAP broiler products and spoilage of MAP poultry in previous studies (4, 8). Carnobacterium spp. and L. gasicomitatum were detected from air sampled during the final processing operations, whereas lactococci were isolated mainly from early processing stages, such as air chilling. Our results show that the processing facilities are a more likely source of psychrotrophic LAB contamination than the broilers. At present, it is not known how these LAB enter the processing environment and how the air becomes contaminated. The products from different manufacturers possessed quite similar LAB diversities. Since manufacturing practices in modern plants are similar, it is tempting to theorize that the plant environment favors the survival of psychrotrophic LAB, resulting in similar in-house populations. On the other hand, product-associated LAB were recovered from corridors adjacent to the poultry meat processing areas, and it is also possible that these organisms are continuously introduced into the processing environment outside the plant as a result of airflows and employer activities.
In conclusion, the spoilage-associated LAB are not introduced to the processing environment or the plant air along with the broilers. However, the common detection of spoilage LAB in air emphasizes the role of processing facilities and manufacturing operations in product contamination. Further studies are needed to examine, and to design strategies to reduce, psychrotrophic LAB contamination during processing.
The financial support of the Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation (decision 440472/03) and the Academy of Finland (project 100479) is gratefully acknowledged.
Published ahead of print on 1 December 2006. ![]()
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»