TAVUK ETİNDE HAREKETLİ AEROMONAS TÜRLERİNİN İZOLASYONU, TANIMLANMASI VE ANTİBİYOTİK DİRENÇLİLİĞİ

Year 2011, Volume: 27 Issue: 3, 252 - 258, 01.06.2011

Özlem Turgay Edip Çifçi

Abstract

Çalışmada, Kahramanmaraş’ın farklı süpermarket ve kasaplarından toplanan 20’si but, 20’si kanat ve 10’u göğüs olmak üzere toplam 50 tavuk eti örneğinde hareketli Aeromonas türlerinin izolasyonu, tanımlanması ve antibiyotik dirençliliği araştırılmıştır. İncelenen 20 tavuk but örneğinin 11’inde (%55), 20 tavuk kanat örneğinin 12’sinde (%60) ve 10 tavuk göğüs örneğinin 6’sında (%60) olmak üzere toplam 50 örneğin 29’undan (%58) hareketli Aeromonas türleri izole edilmiştir. Hareketli Aeromonas türleri ile kontamine olduğu saptanan 11 but örneğinin 5’inde (%45.4) Aeromonas hydrophila, 3’ünde (%27.3) Aeromonas caviae, 3’ünde (%27.3) Aeromonas sobria, 12 kanat örneğinin 6’sında (%50) A. hydrophila, 4’ünde (%33.3) A. caviae, 2’sinde (%16.7) A. sobria ve 6 göğüs örneğinin 3’ünde (%50) A. hydrophila, 2’sinde (%33.3) A. caviae, 1’inde (%16.7) A. sobria tanımlanmıştır. Tanımlanan 29 Aeromonas suşlarının antibiyotik dirençliliği 23 farklı antibiyotiğe karşı disk difüzyon metodu ile belirlenmiştir.

Keywords

Tavuk eti, hareketli Aeromonas türleri, A. hydrophila, A. caviae. A. sobria, antibiyotik dirençliliği

Isolation, identification and antibiotic resistance of motile Aeromonas species in chicken meat

Abstract

Isolation, identification and antibiotic resistance of motile Aeromonas species were investigated in 50 chicken meat samples including 20 legs, 20 wings and 10 breasts purchased from different supermarkets and butchers in Kahramanmaraş. According to the findings, motile Aeromonas species were isolated from 11 leg samples (55%), 12 wing samples (60%), 6 breast samples (60%) comprising 58% of all chicken meat samples. Aeromonas hydrophila was identified in 5 samples (45.4%), Aeromonas caviae in 3 samples (27.3%) and Aeromonas sobria in 3 samples (27.3%) out of 11 leg samples known to be infected by motile Aeromonas species. In 12 infected wing samles six A. hydrophila (50%), four A. caviae (33.3%) and two A. sobria (16.7%) were identified. On the other hand in six infected breast samples, three A. hydrophila (50%), two A. caviae (33.3%) and one A. sobria (16.7%) species was identified. Antibiotic resistance of 29 Aeromonas strains was determined by the disc diffusion method using 23 different antibiotic discs.

Keywords

Chicken meat, motile Aeromonads, A. hydrophila, A. caviae A. sobria, antibiotic resistance

References

• Adams, M.R., Moss, M.O., Bacterial agents of foodborne illness”Aeromonas hydrophila” in: Food Microbiology, pp. 156-158, The Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, 1997.
• Akan, M., et al, Motile Aeromonads in the feces and carcasses of broiler chickens in Turkey, J.Food Protect., 61, 113-115, 1998.
• Akan, M., Hayvanlardan ve Çevresel Kaynaklardan Izole Edilen Hareketli Aeromonas Türlerinin Biyokimyasal, Toksijenik, Enzimatik ve Yüzey Özellikleri. Doktora Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Saglik Bilimleri Enstitüsü, 1993.
• Akinbowale, O.L.,et al, Antimicrobial resistance in bacteria isolated from aquaculture sources in Australia, J. Appl. Microbiol., 26, 1364-5072, 2005.
• Anonim, CCFRA Microbiological Methods Manual. In: Compendium of Microbiological Methods for the Analysis of Food and Agricultural Products. Published by AOAC International, 2000.
• Arslan, A. Et Muayenesi ve Et Ürünleri Teknolojisi,pp. 169-221, Özkan Matbaacilik Ltd. Sti. Ankara, 2002.
• Boonyaratpalin, S., Bacterial pathogens involved in epizootic ulcerative syndrome in fish in Southeast Asia, Journal of Aquatic animal Health, 1, 272-276, 1989.
• Buchanan, R.L., Palumbo, S.A., Aeromonas hydrophila and Aeromonas sobria as potential food poisoning species, A review, J. Food Safety., 7, 15-29, 1985.
• Burke, V., et al, Biotyping and virulence factors in clinical and environmental isotibes of Aeromonas spp., Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 47, 1146-1149, 1984.
• Collier, P.W., et al, Food Poisoning in Hospitals in Scotland, 1978-1987, Epidem. Inf., 101, 661- 667,1988.
• El-Sharef, N., et al, Bacteriological quality of ice cream in Tripoli, Libya, Food Control, 17, 637-341, 2005.
• Gobat, P.F., Jemni, T., Distribution of mesophilic Aeromonas species in raw and ready to-eat fish and meat products in Switzerland, Int. J. Food Microbiol., 20, 117-120, 1993.
• Hasipek, S., Aktaú, N., Ülkemizde Tavuk Eti ve Yumurtanin Beslenmemizdeki Yeri ve Önemi. Uluslararasi Tavukçuluk Sempozyumu, Istanbul, 22-25 Mayis, 1991.
• Hudson, J.A., et al, Incidence and coincidence of Listeria spp., motile Aeromonads and Yersinia enterocolitica on ready to eat flesh foods, Int. J. Food Microbiol., 16, 99-108, 1992.
• Isonhood, J.H., Drake, M., Aeromonas species in foods. Review, J. Food Protect., 65: 575-582, 2002.
• Janda, J.M. 1991. Recent advances in the study of the taxonomy, pathogenicity and infectious syndromes associated with the genus Aeromonas, J. Clin. Microbiol. Rev., 4: 397-410.
• Kelley, T.R., et al, Antibiotic resistance of bacterial litters isolates, Poultry Science, 77, 243-247, 1998.
• Khurana, R., Kumar, A., Prevalence of motile Aeromonads in foods of animal origin, J. Food Sci. Technol., 34, 228-229, 1997.
• Kirov, S.M., et al, A note on Aeromonas spp. from chickens as possible food-borne pathogens. J. Appl. Bacteriol., 68, 327- 334, 1990.
• Mead, G.C., Fresh and further-processed poultry, pp. 445-471, in The Microbiological Safety and Quality of Food, An Aspen Publication, 2000.
• Mullerat, J., et al, Efficacy of Salmide, a sodium chlorite-based oxy-halogen disinfectant, to inactivate bacterial pathogens and extend shelf-life of broiler carcass, J. Food Protection, 57, 596-603, 1994.
• Okrend A.J.G., et al, Incidence and toxigenicity of Aeromonas species in retail poultry, beef and pork, J. Food Protect., 50, 509-513, 1987.
• Palumbo, S.A, et al, Aeromonas hydrophila Group, In: Compendium of Methods for the Microbiological Examination of Foods, pp.497-515, APHA, Washington D.C., 1992
• Palumbo, S.A., et al, Influence of temperature, NaCI and pH on the growth of Aeromonas hydrophila, J. Food Protect., 50, 1417-1421, 1985.
• Palumbo, S.A., et al, The Aeromonas hydrophila Group, In The Microbiological Safety and Quality of Food., pp. 1011-1027, Aspen publication, 2000.
• Pin, C., et al, Incidence of Aeromonas spp. in foods, Microbiologia, 10, 257-262, 1994.
• Sachan, N., Agarwal, R. K., Selective enrichment broth for the isolation of Aeromonas spp. from chicken meat, Int. J. Food Microbiol., 60, 65-74, 2000.
• SarÕmehmeto÷lu, B., Küplülü, Ö., Isolation and identification of motile Aeromonas species from chicken, Dtsch.Tierärztl.Wschr., 108, 465-467, 2001.
• Singh, U., Isolation and identification of Aeromonas spp. from ground meats in Eastern Canada, J. Food Protect., 60, 125-130, 1997.
• Sinha, S., et al, Prevalence, serotype distribution, antibiotic susceptibility and genetic profiles of mesophilic Aeromonas species isolated from hospitalized diarrhoeal cases in Koklata, India. J. Med. Microbiol., 53: 527-534, 2004.
• Topçu, S., Ankara’da Satiúa Sunulan Döner Kebap Çeúitlerinden Listeria monocytogenes, Staphylococcus aureus, Aeromonas hydrophila izolasyonu ve Çeúitli Antibiyotiklere Dirençlilikleri, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara, 2006.
• Ünlütürk, A., Turantaú, F., Gida Mikrobiyojisi, pp.22-35. Mengi Tan Basimevi, Izmir, 1998.
• Waites, W.M., et al, Microbial food poisoning, Problems and solutions. British Food Journal, 93, 4-9, 1991.
• Yücel, N., et al, Prevalence and antibiotic resistance to antibiotics Aeromonas species from retail fish in Turkey, J. Food Quality, 28, 313-324, 2005