Survey of Salmonella in raw tree nuts at retail in the United States.
Salmonella
WGS
diversity
low moisture
low water activity
nuts
serotype
Journal
Journal of food science
ISSN: 1750-3841
Titre abrégé: J Food Sci
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0014052
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2021
Feb 2021
Historique:
received:
25
08
2020
revised:
17
11
2020
accepted:
19
11
2020
pubmed:
14
1
2021
medline:
14
5
2021
entrez:
13
1
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The objective of this survey was to estimate the prevalence, contamination level, and genetic diversity of Salmonella in selected raw, shelled tree nuts (Brazil nuts, cashews, hazelnuts, macadamia nuts, pecans, pine nuts, pistachios, and walnuts) at retail markets in the United States. A total of 3,374 samples of eight tree nuts were collected from different types of retail stores and markets nationwide between September 2015 and March 2017. These samples (375 g) were analyzed using a modified FDA's BAM Salmonella culture method. Of the 3,374 samples, 15 (0.44%) (95% confidence interval [CI] [0.25, 0.73]) were culturally confirmed as containing Salmonella; 17 isolates were obtained. Among these isolates, there were 11 serotypes. Salmonella was not detected in Brazil nuts (296), hazelnuts (487), pecans (510), pine nuts (500), and walnuts (498). Salmonella prevalence estimates in cashews (510), macadamia (278), and pistachios (295) were 0.20% (95% CI [<0.01, 1.09]), 2.52% (95% CI [1.02, 5.12]), and 2.37% (95% CI [0.96, 4.83]), respectively. The rates of Salmonella isolation from major/big-chain supermarkets (1381), small-chain supermarkets (328), discount/variety/drug stores (1329), and online (336) were 0.29% (95% CI [0.08, 0.74]), 0.30% (95% CI [0.01, 1.69]), 0.45% (95% CI [0.17, 0.98]), and 1.19% (95% CI [0.33, 3.02]), respectively. Salmonella prevalence in organic (530) and conventional (2,844) nuts was not different statistically (P = 0.0601). Of the enumerated samples (15), 80% had Salmonella levels ≤0.0092 most probable number (MPN)/g. The highest contamination level observed was 0.75 MPN/g. The prevalence and contamination levels of Salmonella in the tree nuts analyzed were generally comparable to previous reports. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, serotype, and sequencing data all demonstrated that Salmonella population in nuts is very diverse genetically. PRACTICAL APPLICATION: The prevalence, contamination level, and genetic diversity of Salmonella in eight types of tree nuts (3,374 samples collected nationwide) revealed in this survey could help the development of mitigation strategies to reduce public health risks associated with consumption of these nuts.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33438200
doi: 10.1111/1750-3841.15569
pmc: PMC7898309
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
495-504Informations de copyright
Published 2021. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA. Journal of Food Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Institute of Food Technologists.
Références
J Food Prot. 2016 Jul;79(7):1143-53
pubmed: 27357033
J Food Prot. 2016 Aug;79(8):1304-15
pubmed: 27497117
Foodborne Pathog Dis. 2010 Jul;7(7):863-6
pubmed: 20184453
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2010 Jun;76(11):3723-31
pubmed: 20363782
Microbiol Res. 2018 Jan;206:60-73
pubmed: 29146261
J Food Prot. 2009 Apr;72(4):853-5
pubmed: 19435237
J Food Prot. 2008 Feb;71(2):402-4
pubmed: 18326195
J Food Prot. 2010 Nov;73(11):1986-92
pubmed: 21219709
J Food Prot. 2018 Mar;81(3):400-411
pubmed: 29446686
J Food Prot. 2017 Mar;80(3):459-466
pubmed: 28207311
J Food Sci. 2012 Jan;77(1):M42-7
pubmed: 22260116
J Food Prot. 2012 Aug;75(8):1394-403
pubmed: 22856562
Epidemiol Infect. 2014 Dec;142(12):2567-71
pubmed: 24534462
Foodborne Pathog Dis. 2017 Dec;14(12):742-754
pubmed: 29106298
J Food Prot. 2007 Apr;70(4):820-7
pubmed: 17477248
J Food Prot. 2015 Aug;78(8):1547-53
pubmed: 26219369
Int J Food Microbiol. 2018 Dec 20;287:3-9
pubmed: 29246458
BMC Genomics. 2012 Jan 19;13:32
pubmed: 22260654
J Food Prot. 2013 Oct;76(10):1668-75
pubmed: 24112565
J Clin Microbiol. 2007 Feb;45(2):536-43
pubmed: 17151203
Int J Med Microbiol. 2004 Sep;294(2-3):95-102
pubmed: 15493819
Genome Biol Evol. 2013;5(11):2109-23
pubmed: 24158624
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 May 30;15(6):
pubmed: 29849011
J Clin Microbiol. 1999 Jul;37(7):2176-82
pubmed: 10364582
Int J Food Microbiol. 2013 Sep 16;166(3):341-8
pubmed: 24026009
J Food Prot. 2018 Jun;81(6):1001-1014
pubmed: 29757010
J Food Prot. 2017 May;80(5):879-885
pubmed: 28414256
PLoS One. 2010 Mar 10;5(3):e9490
pubmed: 20224823
BMC Genomics. 2011 Aug 22;12:425
pubmed: 21859443
Bioinformatics. 2015 Sep 1;31(17):2877-8
pubmed: 25913206
Euro Surveill. 2017 Jun 8;22(23):
pubmed: 28662764
J Food Prot. 2017 Oct 4;:1791-1805
pubmed: 28981375
J Clin Microbiol. 2016 Aug;54(8):1975-83
pubmed: 27008877
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2011 Apr;77(8):2734-48
pubmed: 21378057
BMC Bioinformatics. 2009 Dec 15;10:421
pubmed: 20003500
J Food Prot. 2013 Apr;76(4):575-9
pubmed: 23575117
Clin Microbiol Rev. 2004 Jan;17(1):14-56
pubmed: 14726454
J Food Prot. 2016 Mar;79(3):352-60
pubmed: 26939644