Abstract
Four miniaturized multiple test systems were compared with tube methodology used to identify Enterobacteriaceae encountered in foods. Identification aids supplied with each system were used to assign names to isolates at the species level. For the 129 strains tested, the Minitek system demonstrated a 96.9 percent agreement with reactions in tubed media. The Inolex, Analytab, and PathoTec test systems exhibited 94.3, 93.8, and 92.7 percent agreement, respectively. Analytab identified 96.1 percent of the isolates to the species level, whereas the Minitek, PathoTec, and Inolex systems were able to identify 78.3, 32.6, and 27.1 percent, respectively. The results indicate that the Analytab and Minitek systems are acceptable substitutes for the tube methodology routinely employed in identifying enterics from foods. Although the PathoTec system might be used to screen isolates for their identity, neither the presently available PathoTec nor the Inolex systems should be substituted for current methodology when definitive identification of foodborne organisms is required.
Publisher
American Society for Microbiology
Subject
Ecology,Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology,Food Science,Biotechnology
Reference18 articles.
1. Evaluation of the PathoTec "Rapid ID System;Blazevic D. J.;Appl. Microbiol.,1973
2. Edwards P. R. and W. H. Ewing. 1972. Identification of Enterobacteriaceae 3rd ed. Burgess Publishing Co. Minneapolis.
3. Differentiation of Enterobacteriaceae of biochemical reactions;Ewing W. H.;CDC Publication,1973
4. Ewing W. H. and B. R. Davis. 1970. Media and tests for differentiation of Enterobacteriaceae. Center for Disease Control Atlanta.
5. Frazier W. C. 1958. Food microbiology. McGraw-Hill Book Co. Inc. New York.
Cited by
19 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献