Campylobacter and Salmonella in raw red meats in the United Kingdom: Prevalence, characterization and antimicrobial resistance pattern, 2003-2005

C. L. Little*, J. F. Richardson, R. J. Owen, E. de Pinna, E. J. Threlfall

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    131 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    The prevalence of Campylobacter and Salmonella was assessed in 3959 raw red meats in the UK during 2003-2005. Meats were more frequently contaminated with Campylobacter (7.2%) than with Salmonella (2.4%). Lamb and other meats (e.g. mutton, rabbit) exhibited the highest contamination from Campylobacter (12.6% and 19.8%, respectively), compared with pork (6.3%) and beef (4.9%). Pork however had the highest contamination from Salmonella (3.9%), followed by lamb (2.0%), other meats (2.0%) and beef (1.3%). Offal samples (36.6%) were more frequently contaminated with Campylobacter or Salmonella than muscle tissue (7.0%). C. jejuni predominated in all meat types. C. coli isolates were more likely to exhibit antimicrobial drug resistance, including quinolones, than C. jejuni. Salmonella typhimurium was the most frequent Salmonella serotype isolated from meats; S. typhimurium DT104/104b isolates exhibited higher rates of multiple drug resistance than other serotypes. The findings reinforce the importance of adequate cooking of meat and good hygiene to avoid cross-contamination. Crown

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)538-543
    Number of pages6
    JournalFood Microbiology
    Volume25
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - May 2008

    Bibliographical note

    Copyright:
    Copyright 2008 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

    Keywords

    • Campylobacter
    • Food safety
    • Prevalence
    • Red meat
    • Salmonella

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Campylobacter and Salmonella in raw red meats in the United Kingdom: Prevalence, characterization and antimicrobial resistance pattern, 2003-2005'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this