SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of ISO 6579–1, VIDAS Easy SLM, and SureFast® Salmonella ONE Real-time PCR, for Salmonella Detection in Different Groups of Foodstuffs

  • Published:
Food Analytical Methods Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the European Union (EU), Salmonella was the causative agent responsible for almost one in three (30.7%) of all foodborne outbreaks reported by member states during 2018, causing 11,581 cases of illness, which represented an increase of 20.6% compared to 2017. Considering the importance of this foodborne zoonotic bacterium in food safety and human health, several strategies for the control and consequent detection of Salmonella in foodstuffs are continuously being developed. In this study, we have tested 137 food samples (78 potentially naturally contaminated, 21 artificially contaminated with high levels of Salmonella, and 38 artificially contaminated with low levels of Salmonella) in order to compare the results and performance of three Salmonella detection methods: standard conventional culture (ISO 6579–1), SureFast® Salmonella ONE real-time PCR, and VIDAS® (Vitek Immunodiagnostic Assay System) Easy SLM, an Enzyme Linked Fluorescent Assay (ELFA). Although SureFast® Salmonella ONE real-time PCR was the fastest, it showed more inconclusive results, due to PCR inhibition and false positive results. ISO and VIDAS® protocols gave identical results and proved to be more robust than SureFast® Salmonella ONE real-time PCR when testing different food matrices, despite its longer response times. SureFast® Salmonella ONE real-time PCR may be appropriate to be used when the objective is to test food matrices that are known not to interfere with PCR and expected to be negative for Salmonella. All the analytical tested methods have advantages and limitations and thus, depending on the situation, may be used as the elected method for Salmonella detection in foodstuffs in accordance with the purpose of the laboratorial analysis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Thailand)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

All the data regarding this study are presented in the manuscript.

Code Availability

Not applicable.

References

  • Ali L, Gill V, Hu L, Deng X, Adachi Y, Rand H, Hammack T, Zhang G (2017) Evaluation of three real-time PCR methods for detection of Salmonella from cloves. J Food Prot 80(6):982–989

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anonymous (2017) Microbiology of the food chain — horizontal method for the detection, enumeration and seroty** of Salmonella — part 1: detection of Salmonella spp., ISO 6579–1:2017, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.

  • Anonymous (2017) Microbiology of the food chain — preparation of test samples, initial suspension and decimal dilutions for microbiological examination — part 4: specific rules for the preparation of miscellaneous products, ISSO 6887–4: 2017. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrere V, Tompkins E, Armstrong M, Bird P, Bastin B, Goodridge L (2020) Optimization of Salmonella detection in garlic, onion, cinnamon, red chili pepper powders and green tea. Int J Food Microbiol. 316: 108440.

  • Bell RL, Jarvis KG, Ottesen AR, McFarland MA, Brown EW (2016) Recent and emerging innovations in Salmonella detection: a food and environmental perspective. Microb Biotechnol 9(3):279–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho I-H, Mauer L, Irudayaraj J (2014) In-situ fluorescent immunomagnetic multiplex detection of foodborne pathogens in very low numbers. Biosens Bielectron 57:143–148

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cinti S, Volpe G, Piermarini S, Delibato E, Palleschi G (2017) Electrochemical biosensors for rapid detection of foodborne Salmonella: a critical overview. Sensors (basel) 17(8):1910

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Crowley E, Bird P, Fisher K, Goetz K, Benzinger MJ, Agin J, Goins D (2011) Evaluation of VIDAS® Salmonella (SLM) easy salmonella method for the detection of Salmonella in a variety of foods: collaborative study. J AOAC Int 94(6):1821–1834

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dong K, Pan H, Yang D, Rao L, Zhao L, Wang Y, Liao X (2020) Induction, detection, formation, and resuscitation of viable but non-culturable state microorganisms. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf 19:149–183

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ed-dra A, Filali FR, Karraouan B, El Allaoui A, Aboulkacem A, Bouchrif B (2017) Prevalence, molecular and antimicrobial resistance of Salmonella isolated from sausages in Meknes, Morocco. Microb. Pathog 105:340–345.

  • Eguale T (2018) Non-typhoidal Salmonella serovars in poultry farms in central Ethiopia: Prevalence and antimicrobial resistance. BMC Vet Res 14(1):217

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • European Food Safety Authority (2019) Scientific report on the European Union One Health 2018 Zoonoses Report. EFSA Journal 17(12):5926, 276 pp.

  • Gal-Mor O (2019) Persistent infection and long-term carriage of typhoidal and nontyphoidal salmonellae. Clin Microbiol Rev 32(1):e00088-e118

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • He X, Carter JM, Brandon DL, Cheng LW, McKeon TA (2007) Application of a real time polymerase chain reaction method to detect castor toxin contamination in fluid milk and eggs. J Agric Food Chem 55(17):6897–6902

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Heymans R, Vila A, van Heerwaarden CAM, Jansen CCC, Castelijn GAA, van der Voort M, Biesta-Peters EG (2018) Rapid detection and differentiation of Salmonella species, Salmonella Typhimurium and Salmonella Enteritidis by multiplex quantitative PCR. PLoS One. 13(10): e0206316.

  • Hong Y-J, Bae Y-M, Moon B, Lee S-Y (2013) Inhibitory effect of cinnamon powder on pathogen growth in laboratory media and oriental-style rice cakes (Sulgidduk). J Food Prot 76(1):133–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hussain MA, Dawson CO (2013) Economic impact of food safety outbreaks on food businesses. Foods 2(4):585–589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jajere SM (2019) A review of Salmonella enterica with particular focus on the pathogenicity and virulence factors, host specificity and antimicrobial resistance including multidrug resistance. Vet World 12(4):504–521

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Magliulo M, Simoni P, Guardigli M, Michelini E, Luciani M, Lelli R, Roda A (2007) A rapid multiplexed chemiluminescent immunoassay for the detection of Escherichia coli O157: H7, Yersinia enterocolitica, Salmonella typhimurium, and Listeria monocytogenes Pathogen Bacteria. J Agric Food Chem 55:4933–4939

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nabavi SF, Lorenzo AD, Izadi M, Sobarzo-Sánchez E, Daglia M, Nabavi SM (2015) Antibacterial effects of cinnamon: from farm to food, cosmetic and pharmaceutical industries. Nutrients 7(9):7729–7748

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Newell DG, Koopmans M, Verhoef L, Duizer E, Aidara-Kane A, Sprong H, Opsteegh M, Langelaar M, Threfall J, Scheutz F, van der Giessen J, Kruse H (2010) Food-borne diseases the challenges of 20 years ago still persist while new ones continue to emerge. Int J Food Microbiol 139(1):S3–S15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paniel N, Noguer T (2019) Detection of Salmonella in food matrices, from conventional methods to recent aptamer-sensing technologies. Foods 8(9):371

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sahu B, Singh SD, Behera BK, Panda SK, Das A, Parida PK (2019) Rapid detection of Salmonella contamination in seafoods using multiplex PCR. Braz J Microbiol 50:807–816

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schneid AD, Rodrigues KL, Chemello D, Tondo EC, Ayub MAZ, Aleixo JAG (2006) Evaluation of an indirect ELISA for the detection of Salmonella in chicken meat. Braz J Microbiol 37:350–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schrader C, Schielke A, Ellerbroek L, Johne R (2012) PCR inhibitors- occurrence, properties and removal. J Appl Microbiol 113(5):1014–1026

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Scipioni A, Bourgot I, Mauroy A, Ziant D, Saegerman C, Daube G, Thiry E (2008) Detection and quantification of human and bovine noroviruses by a TaqMan RT-PCR assay with a control for inhibition. Mol Cell Probes 22(4):215–222

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Valdivieso-Garcia A, Desruisseau A, Riche E, Fukuda S, Tatsumi H (2003) Evaluation of a 24- hour bioluminescent enzyme immunoassay for the rapid detection of Salmonella in chicken carcass rinses. J Food Prot 66(11):1996–2004

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Velusamy V, Arshak K, Korostynska O, Oliwa K, Adley C (2010) An overview of foodborne pathogen detection: in the perspective of biosensors. Biotechnol Adv 28:232–254

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wang W, Liu L, Song S, Tang L, Kuang H, Xu C (2015) A highly sensitive ELISA and immunochromatographic strip for the detection of Salmonella typhimurium in milk samples. Sensors (basel) 15(3):5281–5292

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Widjojoatmodjo MN, Fluit AC, Torensma R, Verdonk GP, Verhoef J (1992) The magnetic immuno polymerase chain reaction assay for direct detection of salmonellae in fecal samples. J Clin Microbiol 30(12):3195–3199

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Witte AK, Bromberger B, Mester P, Robben C, Schoder D, Streit E, Rossmanith P (2020) Implementation of the DEP pooling approach for L monocytogenes detection over 25 months by two diagnostic laboratories of an Austrian dairy company. Food Control 118:107385

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zishiri OT, Mkhize N, Mukaratirwa S (2016) Prevalence of virulence and antimicrobial resistance genes in Salmonella spp. isolated from commercial chickens and human clinical isolates from South Africa and Brazil. Onderstepoort J. Vet. Res. 83(1):a1067

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank AMBIFOOD, Lda, for providing the reagent kits and all the necessary equipment for the PCR methodology.

Funding

This work was funded by Instituto Nacional de Saúde Dr. Ricardo Jorge.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departamento de Alimentação e Nutrição, Instituto Nacional de Saúde Dr. Ricardo Jorge, Av. Padre Cruz, 1649-016, Lisboa, Portugal

    R. Furtado, A. Coelho, M. Saraiva, C. B. Correia & R. Batista

  2. Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Campus da Caparica, 2829-516, Caparica, Portugal

    M. Morais & A. L. Leitão

  3. Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, MEtRICs, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Campus da Caparica, 2829-516, Caparica, Portugal

    A. L. Leitão

Authors
  1. R. Furtado
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Coelho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Morais
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. L. Leitão
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. M. Saraiva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. C. B. Correia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. R. Batista
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Furtado R, Coelho A, Morais M, and Batista R designed the project, performed most of the experimental work and data analyses; Batista R wrote the manuscript; Leitão AL, Saraiva M, and Correia CB had an advisory role in the project design and helped with the data analysis and manuscript writing. All the authors have read and contributed to the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. Batista.

Ethics declarations

Ethics Approval

Not applicable.

Consent to Participate

All authors have agreed to participate in this study.

Consent for Publication

All authors have read and agreed with the final version of the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest

Rosália Furtado declares that she has no conflict of interest. Anabela Coelho declares that she has no conflict of interest. Marisa Morais declares that she has no conflict of interest. Ana Lúcia Leitão declares that she has no conflict of interest. Margarida Saraiva declares that she has no conflict of interest. Cristina Belo Correia declares that she has no conflict of interest. Rita Batista declares that she has no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

R. Furtado and A. Coelho contributed equally to this study

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (PDF 595 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Furtado, R., Coelho, A., Morais, M. et al. Comparison of ISO 6579–1, VIDAS Easy SLM, and SureFast® Salmonella ONE Real-time PCR, for Salmonella Detection in Different Groups of Foodstuffs. Food Anal. Methods 15, 276–284 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12161-021-02114-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12161-021-02114-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation