شناسایی گونه‌های سالمونلا در فرآورده‌های خام مرغ با استفاده از کاوشگر اختصاصی به کمک روش Real Time PCR

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

• کبری تاجیک طوغان ¹
• محمد رضا عدالتیان دوم ²
• سید علی مرتضوی ²
• علی جوادمنش ³

¹ گروه علوم و صنایع غذایی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران

² گروه علوم و صنایع غذایی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران.

³ گروه علوم دامی دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران.

https://doi.org/10.22067/ifstrj.2022.74447.1129

چکیده

هدف از انجام این پژوهش، شناسایی گونه‌های سالمونلا در فرآورده‌های مرغ با تکیه بر روش Real time PCR است. بدین منظور، تعداد 45 نمونه از فرآورده‌های ماکیان که شامل سینه، کبد و سنگدان مرغ بودند از نقاط مختلف شهر مشهد و از شرکت‌های گوناگون خریداری و با رعایت موازین بهداشتی به آزمایشگاه انتقال داده شدند. طبق استانداردهای ایران و بین‌المللی، در 25 گرم از ماده غذایی، نباید هیچ سالمونلایی وجود داشته باشد. بدین منظور، 25 گرم از هر یک از نمونه‌ها جدا شده و تحت شرایط استریل به‌خوبی هموژن شدند و استخراج DNA صورت گرفت. به‌منظور تایید، DNA استخراج شده توسط الکتروفورز ژل آگارز مورد ارزیابی قرار گرفت. خلوص و کمیت DNA استخراج شده هر یک از نمونه‌ها توسط طیف‌سنجی نوری مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. در مرحله بعد به‎منظور شناسایی جنس سالمونلا، نمونه‎ها ‎توسط روشReal time PCR  مورد بررسی قرار گرفتند. نتایج حاصل از Real time PCR نشان داد که از مجموع 45 نمونه، 9 نمونه آلوده به جنس سالمونلا می‌باشد. سپس این 9 نمونه، از نظر آلودگی به گونه‌های سالمونلا تیفی موریوم و سالمونلا انتریتیدیس مورد ارزیابی قرار گرفتند که برای این منظور از روش PCR معمولی استفاده شد. نتایج نشان داد از تعداد 9 نمونه که در تست Real time PCR مثبت تشخیص داده شده بود، تعداد 7 نمونه آلوده به سالمونلا تیفی موریوم بوده که از این 7 نمونه، 5 مورد مربوط به سینه مرغ و 2 مورد مربوط به کبد بود و از نظر آلودگی به سالمونلا انتریتیدیس از تعداد 9 نمونه، تنها یک نمونه آلوده بود که مربوط به سینه مرغ می‌باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

• سالمونلا
• سالمونلا تیفی موریوم
• سالمونلا انتریتیدیس
• گوشت مرغ
• Real Time PCR

موضوعات

• زیست فناوری مواد غذایی

عنوان مقاله [English]

Detection of Salmonella spp. in raw chicken products using specific primer-probe set by Real time-PCR method

نویسندگان [English]

• Kobra Tajik Toughan ¹
• Mohammad Reza Edalatian Dovom ²
• Seyed Ali Mortazavi ²
• Ali Javadmanesh ³

¹ Department of Food Science and Technology, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad.

² Department of Food Science and Technology, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

³ Department of Food Science and Technology, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad.

چکیده [English]

[1]Introduction: Poultry and meat products are the largest sources of non-typhoid salmonella infections in most countries. Studies have shown that raw foods of animal origin, especially poultry and its products, are the main source of contamination of kitchens and restaurants. In terms of growth conditions, these microorganisms are resilient bacteria and easily adapt to their environmental conditions. Salmonella has been known to cause intestinal disease for many years and has been reported as the most important cause of food poisoning. According to Iranian and international standards, there should be no S. enteritidis or S. typhimurium in 25 grams of food. DNA-based methods for the identification and differentiation of Salmonella serovars have been designed and applied using specific primers at the genus and serovar levels. Therefore, they can be used as useful and rapid screening tests, as well as to supplement or replace conventional biochemical and serological tests. Real-time PCR, with the most accurate and reliable results using a fluorescence probe, which of course has a high cost. In this method, sequence specific fluorescence probes are used, and as a result, in the target molecule, screening and determination the presence or even the concentration of specific sequences is possible. Therefore, even in the presence of other types of nucleic acid molecules, the results are obtained quickly and have a high level of specificity. Under these conditions, if specific probes with different florescence dyes are used, even multiple targets can be detected in a single PCR reaction. The aim of this study was to identify S. enteritidis or S. typhimurium by PCR and Salmonella spp. by real time PCR method in poultry products.
 Material and Method: In total, 45 samples of poultry products, including chicken breast, liver and gizzard (15 samples each) were purchased from different regions of Mashhad and from various companies and transferred to the laboratory in accordance with hygienic standards. For each sample, 25 g of tissue was isolated and homogenized under sterile conditions and DNA extraction was then performed using a DNA extraction kit. The extracted DNA was evaluated by agarose gel electrophoresis. The purity and quantity of DNA extracted from each sample was examined by spectrophotometry method. In the next step, in order to identify the genus Salmonella, the samples were examined by real time PCR. In this method we used an internal control to ensure that negative results are not false negative due to inhibitors. The results of real time PCR showed that out of 45 samples, nine samples were infected with Salmonella. Then, these nine samples were evaluated for Salmonella typhimurium and Salmonella enteritidis infection by conventional PCR method. Result and Discussion: The results showed that out of nine samples that were positive in real time PCR test, seven samples were contaminated with Salmonella typhimurium, of which five samples were related to chicken breast and two to liver. Regarding Salmonella enteritidis infection, out of nine samples, only one sample was contaminated, which was related to chicken breast. Conventional methods have been traditionally used to enumerate target bacteria in food. However, these methods have some limitations and require considerable time and labor. Previous studies have already shown that real time PCR is more effective than conventional bacteriological methods for the detection of Salmonella spp. In a study by Whyte et al. (2002) The presence of Salmonella was assessed by traditional culture methods and by a Salmonella-specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. Salmonella was recovered from 16% of samples using traditional culture methods. In contrast, the PCR assay proved to be more sensitive and detected Salmonella DNA in 19% of the examined samples (Whyte et al. 2002). Results of PCR with specific primers showed that reactions in real time PCR with general primers of Salmonella spp. were done correctly. Despite of accuracy and speed of real time PCR to detect DNA of microorganisms, further studies are developed to have more advantages. Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) showed a higher sensitivity of Salmonella detection in compare to qPCR (Vichaibun & Kanchanaphum, 2020). Although LAMP could detect trace amount of Salmonella DNA but primer design for this reaction is very difficult. However, it is important to highlight that non-viable cells can be detected by real time PCR or other DNA-based methods, which does not occur in traditional methods of culture and isolation that require viable cells for quantification (Zeng et al., 2016).
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

• Salmonella typhimurium
• Salmonella enteritidis
• Chicken breast
• Real time PCR

مراجع

1. Alcamo, E. (1997): Fundamentals of microbiology. 5th edit. P: 235-238.
2. Andrews H and Hammack, T. S. “Chapter 5: Salmonella,” in (Food and Drug Administration) Bacteriological Analytical Manual Online, (2003), http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/∼ebam/bam-5.html.
3. Apfalter, P., Barousch, W., Nehr, M., Makristathis, A., Willinger, B., Rotter, M., & Hirschl, A. M. (2003). Comparison of a new quantitative ompA-based real-time PCR TaqMan assay for detection of Chlamydia pneumoniae DNA in respiratory specimens with four conventional PCR assays. Journal of clinical microbiology, 41(2), 592-600. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.41.2.592-600.2003
4. Azizpour, A., Judri, S. (2018), investigating the prevalence of Salmonella serotypes in animal feed and their drug resistance to common antibiotics in medical centers. Comparative pathobiology, scientific research, year 16, spring, number 1, pp. 2758-2751. (In Persian)
5. Bejai Al-Zhaibi, A., Yahya Raiit, R., Neyri Fasai, B., Qalianchi Langroudi, A., Zahrai Salehi, T., (2018), identification and differentiation of serovars of Salmonella enteritidis, Salmonella pleurum, Salmonella gallinarum and Salmonella Dublin using Genome-specific multiplexing test. Iranian Journal of Veterinary Medicine. Volume 13, pp. 131-142. (In Persian)
6. Ben Hassena, A., Barkallah, M., Fendri, I., Grosset, N., Ben Neila, I., Gautier, M., Gdour, R. (2015). Real time PCR gene profiling and detection of Salmonella using a novel target: The siiA Journal of Microbiological Methods. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mimet.2014.11.018
7. Bennet, A. R., Greenqood, D., Tannant, C., Banks, J. G., Betts, R. R. (1998). Rapid and definitive detection of salmonella in foods By PCR. Lett .microbial. 26 .437.441. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1472-765X.1998.00368.x
8. Borges, K. A., Martelo, E. B., Dos Santos, L. A., Furian, T. Q., Cisco, I. C., Manto, L., & Dos Santos, L. R. (2019). Detection and quantification of Salmonella spp. in poultry slaughterhouses of southern Brazil. The Journal of Infection in Developing Countries, 13(05), 455-460.
9. Boyd, E. F., Li, J., Ochman, H., & Selander, R. K. (1997). Comparative genetics of the inv-spa invasion gene complex of Salmonella enterica. Journal of Bacteriology, 179, 1985–1991. https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.179.6.1985-1991.1997
10. Chen, S., Wang, F., Beaulieu, J. C., Stein, R. E., & Ge, B. (2011). Rapid detection of viable Salmonellae in produce by coupling propidium monoazide with loop-mediated isothermal amplification. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 77, 4008–4016. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.00354-11
11. Chen, S., Yee, A., Griffiths, M., Larkin, C., Yamashiro, C. T., Behari, R., .. & Stephanie, A. (1997). The evaluation of a fluorogenic polymerase chain reaction assay for the detection of Salmonella species in food commodities. International journal of food microbiology, 35(3), 239-250.
12. Cheng, C. M., Lin, W., Van, K. T., Phan, L., Tran, N. N., & Farmer, D. (2008). Rapid detection of Salmonella in foods using real-time PCR. Journal of food protection, 71(12), 2436-2441.
13. Cowden, J. M., O'mahony, M., Bartlett, C. L. R., Rana, B., Smyth, B., Lynch, D., ... & Kilsby, D. C. (1989). A national outbreak of Salmonella typhimurium DT 124 caused by contaminated salami sticks. Epidemiology & Infection, 103(2), 219-225. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0950268800030569
14. D’Aoust, J.Y and Purvis, U. (1998). Isolation an identification of salmonella from foods. MFHPB-20. Health Protection Branch, Health Canada, Ottawa, Canada. p:145-230.
15. Davis, R. H., Nicholas, R. A,. Mclaren, L. M., Corkish ,J. D., Laning, D, G., Wary, C. (1998). Bacteriologcal and serological investigation of persistent Salmonella enteritidis infection in an integrated poultry organization. Vet. Microb. 58(2-4):277-293. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1135(97)00157-0
16. Doran, J. L., Collinson, S. K., Burian, J., Sarlos, G., Todd, E. C., Munro, C. K., ... & Kay, W. W. (1993). DNA-based diagnostic tests for Salmonella species targeting agfA, the structural gene for thin, aggregative fimbriae. Journal of clinical microbiology, 31(9), 2263-2273. https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.31.9.2263-2273.1993
17. EC, C. R. (2005). Microbiological criteria for foodstuffs. Official Journal of the European Union, 338, 1-29.
18. EFSA and ECDC (European Food Safety Authority and European Centre for Disease Prevention and, & Control). (2015). Trends and sources of zoonoses, zoonotic agents and food-borne. EFSA Journal, 13(1), 162.
19. Ferretti, R., Mannazzu, I., Cocolin, L., Comi, G., & Clementi, F. (2001). Twelve-hour PCR-based method for detection of Salmonella spp. in food. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 67(2), 977-978. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.67.2.977-978.2001
20. Galán, J. E., & Curtiss 3rd, R. (1991). Distribution of the invA,-B,-C, and-D genes of Salmonella typhimurium among other Salmonella serovars: invA mutants of Salmonella typhi are deficient for entry into mammalian cells. Infection and immunity, 59(9), 2901-2908. https://doi.org/10.1128/iai.59.9.2901-2908.1991.
21. Hashimoto, Y., Itho, Y., Fujinaga, Y., Khan, A. Q., Sultana, F., Miyake, M., ... & Ezaki, T. (1995). Development of nested PCR based on the ViaB sequence to detect Salmonella typhi. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 33(3), 775-777. https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.33.3.775-777.1995.
22. Hoorfar, J., Ahrens, P., & Rådstrom, P. (2000). Automated 5′ nuclease PCR assay for identification of Salmonella enterica. Journal of clinical microbiology, 38(9), 3429-3435.
23. Iida, K., Abe, A., Matsui, H., Danbara, H., Wakayama, S., & Kawahara, K. (1993). Rapid and sensitive method for detection of Salmonella strains using a combination of polymerase chain reaction and reverse dot-blot hybridization. FEMS microbiology letters, 114(2), 167-172. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6968.1993.tb06568.x.
24. Josephson, K. L., Gerba, C. P., & Pepper, I. (1993). Polymerase chain reaction detection of nonviable bacterial pathogens. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 59(10), 3513-3515. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.59.10.3513-3515.1993
25. Knutsson, R., Löfström, C., Grage, H., Hoorfar, J., & Rådström, P. (2002). Modeling of 5′ nuclease real-time responses for optimization of a high-throughput enrichment PCR procedure for Salmonella enterica. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 40(1), 52-60. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.40.1.52-60.2002
26. Kurowski, P. B., Traub-Dargatz, J. L., Morley, P. S., & Gentry-Weeks, C. R. (2002). Detection of Salmonella spp in fecal specimens by use of real-time polymerase chain reaction assay. American journal of veterinary research, 63(9), 1265-1268.
27. Le Minor, L. (1981).The Genus salmonella, In M.P.Stolp(ed), The Prokaryotes Springer-Verlag,New York, N. Y. P:1148-1156.
28. Liljebjelke, K. A., Hofacre, C. L., Liu, T., White, D. G., Ayers, S., Young, S., & Maurer, J. J. (2005). Vertical and horizontal transmission of Salmonella within integrated broiler production system. Food borne Pathogens & Disease, 2(1), 90-102. https://doi.org/10.1089/fpd.2005.2.90
29. Mahon, J., & Lax, A. J. (1993). A quantitative polymerase chain reaction method for the detection in avian faeces of salmonellas carrying the spvR gene. Epidemiology & Infection, 111(3), 455-464. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0950268800057186.
30. Malorny, B., Hoorfar, J., Bunge, C., & Helmuth, R. (2003). Multicenter validation of the analytical accuracy of Salmonella PCR: towards an international standard. Applied and environmental microbiology, 69(1), 290-296. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.69.1.290-296.2003
31. Malorny, B., Hoorfar, J., Hugas, M., Heuvelink, A., Fach, P., Ellerbroek, L., ... & Helmuth, R. (2003). Interlaboratory diagnostic accuracy of a Salmonella specific PCR-based method. International journal of food microbiology, 89(2-3), 241-249. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1605(03)00154-5.
32. Malorny, B., Paccassoni, E., Fach, P., Bunge, C., Martin, A., & Helmuth, R. (2004). Diagnostic real-time PCR for detection of Salmonella in food. Applied and environmental microbiology, 70(12), 7046-7052. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.70.12.7046-7052.2004
33. McGuinness, S., Barry, T., & O'Grady, J. (2010). Development and preliminary validation of a real-time RT-PCR based method targeting tmRNA for the rapid and specific detection of Salmonella. Food Research International, doi:10.1016/j.foodres.2010.08.012.
34. Moghadam, A., Nazarian, Sh., Amani, J. 2017. Identification and investigation of Salmonella Typhimurium, Infantis and Enteritidis serotypes in clinical samples from medical centers in Kerman province. Iranian Journal of Medical Microbiology, 11(2), pp. 1-8. (In Persian).
35. Momtaz H, Ghaedamini M, Momeni M. Detection of virulence factors in Salmonella typhimurium and Salmonella enteritidis serotypes isolated from chicken meat in Chaharmahal va Bakhtiari Province of Iran. J food Microbiol. 2014; 1(1): 17-22.
36. Monadi, M., Kargar, M., Naghiha, A., and Mohammadi, R. 2012. Determining Salmonella contamination of native eggs in Kohgiluyeh and Boyer Ahmad provinces using PCR technique and evaluating drug resistance. Armaghane Danesh, 19(2), pp. 179-187. (In Persian).
37. Morsali, H., Asaadi, H., Yazdansetad, S., & Najafpour, R. (2017). Optimization of a Multiplex PCR for Simultaneous Detection of Foodborne Pathogens Salmonella spp. and Escherichia coli O157: H7 and Contamination Prevalence Assay in Meat Products. Journal of Arak University of Medical Sciences, 20(6), 83-93.
38. Mortazavi, A., Kashani-nejad, M., Zia-ul-Haq, S. H. 1993. Food Microbiology. pp. 184 to 185. (In Persian).
39. Navarro, E., Serrano-Heras, G., Castaño, M. J., & Solera, J. J. C. C. A. (2015). Real-time PCR detection chemistry. Clinica chimica acta, 439, 231-250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2014.10.017
40. Paião G, ArisitidesI L.G.A, MurateI L.S, Vilas-BôasII G.T, Vilas-BoasII L.A., ShimokomakiI M. 2013.Detection of Salmonella spp, Salmonella Enteritidis and Typhimurium in naturally infected broiler chickens by a multiplex PCR-based assay. Brazilian Journal of Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1517-83822013005000002
41. Rad, M; Kalidri, Gh; Kurdjezi, Sh. Identification of different species of Salmonella in the center of domestic chicken breeding. Research and construction. 2008, period 21, number 4. pp. 87 to 93. (In Persian)
42. Riyaz-Ul-Hassan, S., Verma, V., & Qazi, G. N. (2004). Rapid detection of Salmonella by polymerase chain reaction. Molecular and cellular probes, 18(5), 333-339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcp.2004.05.003
43. Rodríguez-Lázaro, D., Cook, N., & Hernández, M. (2013). Real-time PCR in food science: PCR diagnostics. Current Issues in Molecular Biology, 15(2), 39-44. https://doi.org/10.21775/cimb.015.039
44. Sachse, K. 2003. Specificity and performance of diagnostic PCR assays. Methods Mol. Biol. 216:3–29. https://doi.org/10.1385/1-59259-344-5:03
45. SD, Shashidhar. R, Karani. M, Bandekar. JR, Rapid, sensitive, and validated method for detection of Salmonella in food by an enrichment broth culture - nested PCR combination assay. Mol Cell Probes. 2008; 22(3): 201-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcp.2008.02.002
46. Siala, M., Barbana, A., Smaoui, S., Hachicha, S., Marouane, C., Kammoun, S., ... & Messadi-Akrout, F. (2017). Screening and detecting Salmonella in different food matrices in Southern Tunisia using a combined enrichment/real-time PCR method: correlation with conventional culture method. Frontiers in microbiology, 8, 2416. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2017.02416
47. Soradeghi Topkanlou, A., Shahidi, F., Javadmanesh, A., Mortazavi, A., Veridi, M., J., Roshank, S. 2021. Isolation and identification of microbial agents causing yellow spot in chicken sausage by culture and molecular methods. Iranian journal of food science and industry. 18 (114): pp. 1 to 14. (In Persian)
48. Vichaibun, V., & Kanchanaphum, P. (2020). Quantitative LAMP and PCR Detection of Salmonella in Chicken Samples Collected from Local Markets around Pathum Thani Province, Thailand. International journal of food science, 8833173. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/8833173
49. Whyte P, Mc Gill K, Collins JD, Gormley E. (2002). The prevalence and PCR detection of Salmonella contamination in raw poultry. Vet Microbiol. 2;89(1):53-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1135(02)00160-8
50. Zeng, D., Chen, Z., Jiang, Y., Xue, F., & Li, B. (2016). Advances and Challenges in Viability Detection of Foodborne Pathogens. Frontiers in microbiology, 7, 1833. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2016.01833