1 / 40

OVERVIEW OF THE USDA ARS & FSIS FRANKFURTER STORAGE STUDY

OVERVIEW OF THE USDA ARS & FSIS FRANKFURTER STORAGE STUDY. John B. Luchansky, Ph.D. Agricultural Research Service Eastern Regional Research Center Microbial Food Safety Research Unit. Examples of Research on L. monocytogenes and Frankfurters.

astrid
Télécharger la présentation

OVERVIEW OF THE USDA ARS & FSIS FRANKFURTER STORAGE STUDY

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. OVERVIEW OF THE USDA ARS & FSIS FRANKFURTER STORAGE STUDY John B. Luchansky, Ph.D. Agricultural Research Service Eastern Regional Research Center Microbial Food Safety Research Unit

  2. Examples of Research onL. monocytogenes and Frankfurters • Efficacy of potassium lactate as an ingredient in batter • Porto et al., J. Food Prot. 65:308-315, 2002 with HQM • USDA/ARS Package Rinse Method for pathogen recovery • Luchansky et al., J. Food Prot. 65:567-570, 2002 • Effect of re-heating on viability • Porto et al., J. Food Prot. 67:71-76, 2004 • Use of PFGE to determine the persistence of a 5-strain cocktail • Porto et al., J. Food Prot. 69:4177-4182, 2003 • USDA frankfurter storage study • Wallace et al., J. Food Prot. 66:584-591, 2003 with FSIS, AMI, NFPA, NTF • Localization within naturally-contaminated packages • Wallace, Call, Luchansky et al., J. Food Prot., Published • Evaluation of frankfurter casings containing a biopreservative • Call/Luchansky et al., J. Food Prot., Published 2004 with Hatfield, Viskase & Rhodia

  3. USDA Frankfurter Storage Study Sample packages for Listeria monocytogenes during refrigerated storage: Part A = Determine package prevalence Part B = Estimate pathogen levels Part C = Establish pathogen types Wallace et al., 2003 J. Food Prot. 66:584-591.

  4. USDA Frankfurter Storage Study Part A: Package Prevalence!

  5. Distribution of Volunteer Plants • 300 processors contacted • 12 facilities volunteered to participate: • 9 large and 3 small plants as determined by HACCP classification • USDA/FSIS regions 1, 2, 3, and 4 • 8 USDA/FSIS districts in 10 states • ~2700 pounds/packages collected from each facility by a 3rd-party contractor

  6. Sample Size Considerations for an Estimated L. monocytogenes Prevalence of ~3% Dr. John G. Phillips, Statistician, USDA/ARS, NAA

  7. Terms and Conditions - Industry • No identification of plant name or location • No inspection activities • No regulatory actions or recalls • No “fingerprint” data added to PulseNet

  8. Terms and Conditions – USDA • Independent 3rd party interacts with plants • Collects product, shares results with participants • Normal production run, regular HACCP monitoring and GMP • No special sanitation prior to production • Refrigerated transport to ERRC • Temperature recorders placed in select shipping boxes

  9. Sampling Plan • Day 1 = 5 days post-production • 500 packages/pounds sampled • Remainder of packages stored at 4° and 10°C • Storage at 4°C • 200 packages tested on days 10, 20, 30, 45, and 60 • Product tested on days 120 and 150 for some plants • Storage at 10°C • 200 packages tested on days 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, and 30 • Product not tested on days 20 and 25 for some plants

  10. Sampling Strategy:USDA-ARS Package Rinse Method • Add 60 mL peptone water per package and rinse package contents • Analyze 25 mL - enrich, isolate, & confirm • Retain multiple isolates from each positive sample for subtyping • Retain 35 mL at -20°C – enumerate if possible • 3-tube MPN procedure (FDA/CFSAN)

  11. USDA/ARS Package Rinse Method • Six-fold more effective at recovery of L. monocytogenes than the approved USDA/FSIS product composite enrichment method because the package, the purge, and the product are tested • About twice as likely to recover the bacterium from: • rinse > purge > product composite • Less likely to cause product contamination and more likely to decrease the time required to sample the product because it requires less hands-on manipulation of the product Luchansky et al., 2002 J. Food Prot. 65:567-570.

  12. Proximate Composition • Six packages tested from each plant • 2 packages on initial sample day • Day 1 = 5 days after production • 2 packages after 30 days at 10°C • 2 packages after 60 days at 4°C • Portions of each package tested for nitrite, total phenolics, NaCl, pH, protein, moisture, ash, fat, carbohydrates, and lactic acid.

  13. USDA Frankfurter Storage Study Contains sodium diacetate** and/or potassium lactate* as an ingredient

  14. USDA Frankfurter Storage Study Package prevalence = 1.6% (543 of 32,800) Range = 0.07 to 16%

  15. Evidence against laboratory contamination • Non-disposable equipment, supplies, and laboratory surfaces decontaminated frequently • Separation of experiments/incubators to recover the organism from experiments/incubators to type it • Pattern and frequency of positive packages does not support carryover or cross contamination • Negative controls in place • Environmental swabs – all 30 negative • Glove samples - all 147 negative

  16. USDA Frankfurter Storage Study • Package prevalence – all 12 plants • 4°C – 314 of 19,100 (1.64%) • 10°C – 218 of 13,700 (1.59%) Did storage temperature affect recovery rate?

  17. USDA Frankfurter Study • Timeframe • August 17 of 2000 through July 3 of 2002 • Seasonal Distribution • Fall 3 of 12 plants – 2 positive plants • Winter 3 of 12 plants – 1 positive plant • Spring 4 of 12 plants – 3 positive plants • Summer 2 of 12 plants – 1 positive plant Did seasonality affect recovery rate?

  18. Recovery rate of L. monocytogenes from all packages during storage at 4°C Day Packages 1 6000 10 2400 20 2400 30 2400 45 2400 60 2400 120/150 1100

  19. Recovery rate of L. monocytogenes from all packages during storage at10°C Day Packages 5 2400 10 2400 15 2400 20 2200 25 1900 30 2400

  20. Lactic Acid Bacteria Levels • Limited number of packages from each manufacturer evaluated • 101 to 103 cfu/package on day 1 • 108 to 1010 cfu/package on day 30 following storage at 10EC • 105 to 107 cfu/package on day 60 following storage at 4EC

  21. Prevalence of Listeria monocytogenesin Ready-to-eat Foods • 1.6% (32,800) Franks USDA/ARS (2000-2002) • 1.8% (2,162) Sm. Diam. Sausage USDA/FSIS (1999) • 2.8% (31,009) All meat & poultry USDA/FSIS (1990-1999) • 3.6% (6,820) Sm. Dia. Sausage USDA/FSIS (1990-1999) • 7.6% (1,874) Franks – composite Lm Risk Assessment • 1.8%(31,700) RTE foods NFPA (2000-2002) • Levine et al., JFP 64:1188-1193, 2001. • www.foodsafety.gov/~dms/lmrisk.html • Wallace et al., JFP 66:584-591, 2003. • Gombas et al., JFP 66: April, 2003.

  22. USDA Frankfurter Storage Study Part B: Pathogen Levels!

  23. USDA-ARS Package Rinse Method:Sampling Strategy • Rinse package contents with 60 mL of peptone water to recover L. monocytogenes • Analyze 25 mL – determine presence and types • Retain 35 mL at -20°C – enumerate if possible

  24. Sampling Strategy:USDA-ARS Package Rinse Method • Retain 35 mL at -20°C – enumerate if possible • Perform 3-tube MPN test (FDA/CFSAN) • Tested 157 rinsates representing all plants • Rinsates held at -20oC for 1 to 23 months • Plate directly onto MOX agar • Tested 100 rinsates from plant 133 after 150 days at 4oC • Rinsates held at -20oC for 7 days

  25. Enumeration using a 3-tube MPN • Of the 157 package rinsates analyzed: • Most tested negative after storage at -20oC • 50 to 80% reduction within hours/days • 4.0 log10 reduction after weeks/months • 3 packages yielded 71, 95, and 191 MPN/package • Plant 367 packages held for 30 days at 10oC, contents rinsed, and rinsates stored at -20oC for 2 months prior to MPN

  26. Enumeration for L. monocytogenes by direct plating • 100 packages from plant 133 were tested following storage at 4°C for 150 days • 16 of 100 packages tested positive • Rinsates were stored at -20oC for 7 days and then plated onto MOX agar • Levels from < 10 up to 9.6 x 104 CFU/package

  27. Enumeration of L. monocytogenes from Plant 133 Following Storage at 4°C for 150 Days Rinsates were stored at -20oC for 7 days

  28. USDA Frankfurter Storage Study Part C: Pathogen Types!

  29. USDA Frankfurter Storage Study:Pathogen Types How many different “types” of L. monocytogenes were recovered? Among 1102 isolates typed: • >90% displayed ribotype “A" • all of these isolates were serotype 1/2a

  30. Molecular Subtyping Results • In most instances, multiple isolates from a single package and/or from a single producer displayed the same ribotype/serotype. • In some instances, it was possible to recover isolates displaying more than one ribotype/serotype from a given producer. • In rare instances, multiple isolates from a single package displayed a different ribotype/serotype.

  31. USDA Frankfurter Storage Study Part D: Concluding Remarks!

  32. Risk Management QuestionIntended to Answer What is the “true prevalence” of L. monocytogenes in a high-volume, higher risk, RTE meat? Package prevalence = 1.6% (543 of 32,800) Range = 0.07 to 16%

  33. Risk Management QuestionIntended to Answer How many L. monocytogenes are likely to be recovered from naturally-contaminated RTE meat? Levels ranged from 1 to 100,000 cfu/package

  34. Risk Management QuestionIntended to Answer What types of L. monocytogenes are likely to be recovered from naturally-contaminated RTE meat? Some strains predominate/persist within vacuum-sealed packages - most isolates were ribotype “A” and serotype 1/2a!

  35. Caveats! • Manufacturers were not selected at random and only a single lot from each was tested • Manufacturers were not reflective of all producers in USA • A more effective method (ARS package rinse) was used to sample product/packages • Numerous packages were sampled on several sampling days over extended storage of the product. • Information was not available about the order in which the packages were produced during a given production run • Enumeration was problematic because pathogen numbers decreased appreciably in rinsates during frozen storage

  36. Lessons Learned/Improvements! • What types are tolerable and under what situations? • Are there differences among strains in viability or virulence - how much insight can be provided by genomics/proteomics? • How often would a given plant be positive on consecutive and/or multiple visits? • What is the frequency and distribution of contamination across a positive lot? • Should more emphasis be placed on collecting data on pathogen levels in positive samples?

  37. Lessons Learned/Improvements! • Where does it reside and how long does it persist or predominate? • How many types are present and at what levels? • Where did it come from and where might it end up? • What is the ecology of the bacterium in the environment and on the product – how well does it respond to stress/cues? • Should more emphasis be placed on environmental sampling to compliment targeted testing of finished products?

  38. THANK YOU! • Partners: • National Food Processors Association • American Meat Institute • National Turkey Federation • USDA/FSIS • ERRC Special Projects Team • Morgan Wallace and Jeff Call • Anna Porto and Laura Wonderling • Gaylen Uhlich and Darrell Bayles

  39. Enhancing the Safety of Frankfurters

More Related