4.4 Article

Potential of houseflies to contaminate ready-to-eat food with anti biotic-resistant enterococci

Journal

JOURNAL OF FOOD PROTECTION
Volume 71, Issue 2, Pages 435-439

Publisher

INT ASSOC FOOD PROTECTION
DOI: 10.4315/0362-028X-71.2.435

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [T35-RR07064] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

It was shown previously that houseflies in fast-food restaurants commonly carry antibiotic-resistant and potentially virulent enterococci. In this study, the potential of field-collected houseflies to contaminate ready-to-eat (RTE) food with enterococci was assessed by laboratory bioassays. Houseflies were collected with a sweep net in a cattle feedlot and exposed in groups of 5, 10, 20, and 40 to a beef patty (from an RTE hamburger) for 0.5, 1.0, 3.0, and 24 h. The exposure of RTE food to flies resulted in 100% contamination with enterococci in all bioassays, regardless of the number of houseflies and the length of exposure time. In addition, with the increasing number of houseflies as well as with the increasing time exposure, the concentration of enterococci in RTE food increased. Even a short time exposure (0.5 h) resulted in food contamination, ranging from 3.1 x 10(3) CFU/g (5 houseflies) to 8.4 x 10(4) CFU/g (40 houseflies). The analysis of 23 randomly selected enterococcal isolates from RTE food after the fly exposure revealed a single species, Enterococcusfaecalis. In contrast, four Enterococcus species, including E. faecalis (57.1%), E. gallinarunt (19.1%), E. hirae (14.3%), and E. faecium (9.5%), represented 21 randomly selected and identified isolates from houseflies. Phenotypic screening showed that E. faecalis isolates from RTE food were resistant to ciprofloxacin (17.4%), tetracycline (13.0%), erythromycin (13.0%), and chloramphenicol (4.3%). This study demonstrates a great potential of houseflies from a cattle feedlot to contaminate RTE food with enterococci in a short time.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available