Comparison of two standards for detection of two types of Campylobacter jejuni in seafood

Abstract

Abstract: Objective To detect the positive rate of Campylobacter jejuni in shellfish samples by GB 4789.9-2014 National Food Safety Standard Food Microbiological Examination Examination of Campylobacter jejuni（hereinafter referred to GB 4789.9 method） and T/CPMA 006-2019 Examination of Campylobacter jejuni and Campylobacter coli（hereinafter referred to T/CPMA 006 method）,discuss the differences in the minimum detection concentration and detection rate of Campylobacter jejuni between two methods with artificially contaminated samples. Methods From November to December 2020,39 shellfish samples were collected from a market in Shenzhen City,and the Campylobacter jejuni was detected by GB 4789.9 method and T/CPMA 006 method. The negative samples were artificially contaminated with 10⁰,10¹,10²,10³,10⁴ and 10⁵ CFU/g Campylobacter jejunifor the simulation experiment,three samples for each concentration,to analyze and compare the minimum detection concentration of two standard methods. According to the minimum detection concentration,the samples were contaminated with 10³ and 10⁴ CFU/g Campylobacter jejuni,10 samples for each concentration,to compare the detection rate of two standard methods. The matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry（MALDI-TOF） and fluorescent polymerase chain reaction（PCR） were used for the colony validation and auxiliary testing. Results Among 39 original samples,the positive rate of Campylobacter jejuniby T/CPMA 006 method was 2.6%（1/39）,and on sample was detected by GB4789.9 method. Among the artificially contaminated samples,the minimum detection concentration by GB 4789.9 method and T/CPMA 006 method was 10³ and 10¹ CFU/g,and the minimum detection concentration of T/CPMA 006 was 2 orders of magnitude lower than that of GB 4789.9. When the final concentration of Campylobacter jejuni was 10³ and 10¹ CFU/g,the detection rate by GB 4789.9 was 10%（1/10） and 20%（2/10） respectively,while the detection rate of filtration culture method were both 100%（10/10）. Conclusions The Campylobacter jejuni pollution exists in seafood,which has not been reported in China previously. Compared with GB 4789.9 method,the T/CPMA 006 method significantly improves the detection rate of Campylobacter jejuniin seafood,and reduced the minimum detection concentration by 2 orders of magnitude.

Key words: Campylobacter jejuni, Seafood, Matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry, Fluorescence PCR

CLC Number:

R117

LIU Chuyun, MA Yanping, DUAN Yongxiang, ZHANG Maojun, HE Jiaoming, JU Changyan. Comparison of two standards for detection of two types of Campylobacter jejuni in seafood. [J]OCCUPATION AND HEALTH, 2023, 39(18): 2494-2498.

References

[1] COSTA D,IRAOLA G.Pathogenomics of Emerging Campylobacter Species[J].Clin Microbiol Rev,2019,32(4):e00072-8.
[2] RAHMAN M A,PAUL P R,HOQUE N,et al.Prevalence and Antimicrobial Resistance of Campylobacter Species in Diarrheal Patients in Mymensingh,Bangladesh[J].Biomed Res Int,2021,2021:9229485.
[3] CONTRERAS-OMAÑA R,ESCORCIA-SAUCEDO A E,VELARDE-RUIZV J.Prevalence and impact of antimicrobial resistance in gastrointestinal infections:A review[J].Rev Gastroenterol Mex,2021,86(3):265-275.
[4] LEE H,YOON Y.Etiological Agents Implicated in Foodborne Illness World Wide[J].Food Sci Anim Resour,2021,41(1):1-7.
[5] DONNER V,CROXATTO A,TISSOT F.Invasive Campylobacter infections[J].Rev Med Suisse,2021,17(734):722-725.
[6] JACKSON B R,ZEGARRA J A,LÓPEZ-GATELL H,et al.Binational outbreak of Guillain-Barré syndrome associated with Campylobacter jejuni infection,Mexico and USA,2011[J].Epidemiol Infect,2014,142(5):1089-1099.
[7] SHAHRIZAILA N,LEHMANN H C,KUWABARA S.Guillain-Barré syndrome[J].Lancet,2021,397(10280):1214-1228.
[8] 邓晖,吴江,杨薇,等.长春市双阳区群发吉兰-巴雷综合征临床资料分析[J].中华神经科杂志,2009,42(1):30-33.
[9] JARAMILLO-VALVERDE L,LEVANO K S,VILLANUEVA I,et al.Guillain-Barre syndrome outbreak in Peru:Association with polymorphisms in IL-17,ICAM1,and CD1[J].Mol Genet Genomic Med,2019,7(10):e960.
[10] 国家卫生和计划生育委员会.食品安全国家标准食品微生物学检验空肠弯曲菌检验:GB 4789.9—2014[S].北京:中国标准出版社,2014:1-5.
[11] 吴平芳,贺连华,刘涛,等.深圳市肉类食品空肠弯曲菌的污染情况调查[J].热带医学杂志,2007,17(4):368-369.
[12] 巢国祥,徐勤,朱炳炎,等.扬州市2002—2003食源性致病菌监测研究[J].中国卫生检验杂志,2004,14(4):484-486.
[13] 中国预防医学会.空肠弯曲菌、结肠弯曲菌检验方法(T/CPMA 006-2019)[J].中国流行病学杂志,2019,40(9):1-8.
[14] 李颖,梁昊,王苗,等.北京市顺义区零售鸡胴体中弯曲菌分布与分子特征研究[J].中国食品卫生杂志,2019,31(4):351-355.
[15] 吴洁,金玉娟,刘丽红,等.深圳市龙岗区空肠弯曲菌感染状况及耐药性分析[J].热带医学杂志,2019,22(4):497-501.
[16] 鞠长燕,马艳萍,张茂俊,等.深圳市腹泻患者、禽源和牛源空肠弯曲菌的脉冲场凝胶电泳分析[J].中国热带医学,2018,18(11):1123-1128.
[17] LEBLANC-MARIDOR M,BEAUDEAU F,SEEGERS H,et al.Rapid identification and quantification of Campylobacter coli and Campylobacter jejuni by real-time PCR in pure cultures and in complex samples[J].BMC Microbiol,2011,11:113.
[18] 炊慧霞,吴玲玲,李艳芬,等.2016年河南省市售生禽肉沙门菌和弯曲杆菌污染状况调查[J].中国家禽,2017(11):77-80.
[19] 周倩,唐梦君,张小燕,等.江苏省禽源空肠弯曲杆菌的分离鉴定及耐药性研究[J].中国人兽共患病学报,2017(6):495-500.
[20] 赵世铭. 质谱技术应用于临床微生物检测中的研究进展[J].中国医疗器械信息,2020(17):28-29.
[21] 韩硕. 全自动快速微生物质谱检测系统鉴定流感嗜血杆菌及其可靠性分析[J].名医,2020(8):138-139.
[22] 沈玲,白欢,李丽,等.AUTOF MS 1000质谱鉴定系统对临床实验室常见菌株鉴定能力的评估[J].现代检验医学杂志,2020,35(3):100-102.
[23] 左瑞菊. 质谱技术在微生物检测和鉴定中的应用[J].医学食疗与健康,2020(21):180-181.
[24] 李振,汪丙松,王昭俐,等.质谱法与聚合酶链式反应检测法检测百日咳鲍特菌[J].中国临床医生杂志,2020,48(1):92-94.
[25] 屠博文,吉俊敏,杜强,等.基质辅助激光解析飞行质谱法检测空肠弯曲菌及李斯特菌[J].食品科学. 2017,38(20):262-267.