Microbiological assessment at slaughter of chicken carcasses from commercial, backyard and semi-backyard production systems

Authors

  • Débora Tamanaha Garcia Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Uberlândia, Umuarama Campus, Minas Gerais state, Brazil
  • Yago Fernandes Nascimento School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science – UNESP, Botucatu Campus, São Paulo state, Brazil
  • Sthefany da Cunha Dias School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science – UNESP, Botucatu Campus, São Paulo state, Brazil
  • Amanda Oliveira Moura Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Uberlândia, Umuarama Campus, Minas Gerais state, Brazil
  • Priscila Cristina Costa Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Uberlândia, Umuarama Campus, Minas Gerais state, Brazil
  • Alexandre Bicalho do Amaral Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Uberlândia, Umuarama Campus, Minas Gerais state, Brazil
  • Phelipe Augusto Borba Martins Peres Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Uberlândia, Umuarama Campus, Minas Gerais state, Brazil
  • Kênia de Fátima Carrijo Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Uberlândia, Umuarama Campus, Minas Gerais state, Brazil
  • Marcus Vinícius Cossi Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Uberlândia, Umuarama Campus, Minas Gerais state, Brazil

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3855/jidc.14882

Keywords:

Carcass quality, Broilers, Salmonella, Free range, Microbiology

Abstract

Introduction: Smaller scale, alternative, chicken production systems are gaining popularity globally. However, this brings public health and market confidence concerns, especially where there are no established standards of production. The aim of this study was to carry out a microbiological analysis of chicken carcasses from the commercial, backyard and semi-backyard production systems, slaughtered in the same slaughterhouse.

Methodology: Samples of 102 chicken carcasses were taken in two steps of the slaughter (A: after bleeding; and B: after chiller tank) and were subjected to aerobic mesophilic, coliforms at 35 °C and coliforms at 45 °C counts, and Salmonella spp. detection. Salmonella spp. isolates were subjected to antimicrobial resistance analysis.

Results: At slaughter step A, carcasses from the backyard system had less contamination than carcasses from the commercial system, with a difference of 0.7 log10 CFU/mL. Salmonella was identified in carcasses of all production systems and in both slaughter steps. Nine chicken carcasses were positive for Salmonella and no significant difference was observed in the occurrence of Salmonella amongst the carcasses from different production systems. Two Salmonella isolates, that presented the highest resistance profiles (one isolate was resistant to eight and the other to six out of ten tested antibiotics), were identified on carcasses from the semi-backyard system.

Conclusions: Carcasses from the backyard system had a lower microbial count at the initial step of the slaughter process than the commercial production system. In addition, greater resistance to antimicrobials was observed in Salmonella isolates from semi-backyard system.

Downloads

Published

2021-12-31

How to Cite

1.
Garcia DT, Nascimento YF, Dias S da C, Moura AO, Costa PC, Amaral AB do, Peres PABM, Carrijo K de F, Cossi MV (2021) Microbiological assessment at slaughter of chicken carcasses from commercial, backyard and semi-backyard production systems. J Infect Dev Ctries 15:1891–1898. doi: 10.3855/jidc.14882

Issue

Vol. 15 No. 12: December 2021

Section

Original Articles

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC