猪肉生产环节中沙门菌的污染调查及关键点的消减控制

doi:10.11843/j.issn.0366-6964.2025.10.033

畜牧兽医学报 ›› 2025, Vol. 56 ›› Issue (10): 5137-5147.doi: 10.11843/j.issn.0366-6964.2025.10.033

猪肉生产环节中沙门菌的污染调查及关键点的消减控制

孟闯¹^,²^,³(), 金宣辰¹^,³, 彭通通¹^,³, 翟贤月¹^,²^,³, 康喜龙¹^,²^,³, 焦新安¹^,²^,³, 潘志明¹^,²^,³^,*()

1. 扬州大学, 江苏省人兽共患病学重点实验室, 扬州 225009
2. 扬州大学, 江苏高校动物重要疫病与人兽共患病防控协同创新中心, 扬州 225009
3. 扬州大学, 农业农村部农产品质量安全生物性危害因子(动物源)控制重点实验室, 扬州 225009

收稿日期:2025-01-03 出版日期:2025-10-23 发布日期:2025-11-01
通讯作者: 潘志明 E-mail:mengchuang@yzu.edu.cn;zmpan@yzu.edu.cn
作者简介:孟闯(1985-), 男, 江苏徐州人, 副教授, 博士, 主要从事沙门菌防控研究, E-mail: mengchuang@yzu.edu.cn
基金资助:
国家重点研发计划项目(2022YFC2604203);扬州大学科技创新团队(2016)资助项目

Investigation of Salmonella Contamination in Pork Production Process and Reduction Control of Key Points

MENG Chuang¹^,²^,³(), JIN Xuanchen¹^,³, PENG Tongtong¹^,³, ZHAI Xianyue¹^,²^,³, KANG Xilong¹^,²^,³, JIAO Xinan¹^,²^,³, PAN Zhiming¹^,²^,³^,*()

1. Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Zoonoses, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China
2. Jiangsu Co-Innovation Center for Prevention and Control of Important Animal Infectious Diseases and Zoonoses, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China
3. Key Laboratory of Prevention and Control of Biological Hazard Factors (Animal Origin) for Agrifood Safety and Quality of Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China

Received:2025-01-03 Online:2025-10-23 Published:2025-11-01
Contact: PAN Zhiming E-mail:mengchuang@yzu.edu.cn;zmpan@yzu.edu.cn

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

本研究旨在调查猪养殖场、屠宰场和猪肉销售市场这一猪肉生产链中沙门菌的流行情况并结合分子分型探明沙门菌污染的关键控制点, 评估关键控制点相关干预措施对沙门菌的消减防控作用。采集有供应链关系的猪养殖场、屠宰场和猪肉市场相关样品进行沙门菌的分离和血清型鉴定, 利用脉冲场凝胶电泳(PFGE)方法对沙门菌分离株进行分子分型和溯源, 分析沙门菌污染的关键控制点并评价增加淋洗次数对沙门菌消减的作用。结果表明, 采集的950份不同类型样品中分离出沙门菌417株, 总分离率为43.9%, 其中, 养殖场粪便样品80份, 分离率为28.8%;屠宰场猪胴体和环境擦拭样品470份, 分离率为35.5%, 不同屠宰环节中劈半后样品的分离率最高, 达51.0%, 冷却后的样品分离率显著降低至23.0%(P < 0.05);超市猪肉样品400份, 分离率为56.8%;沙门菌分离株包含9种血清型, 其中, 德尔卑沙门菌(39.6%)、鼠伤寒沙门菌(38.1%)、伦敦沙门菌(10.3%)和里森沙门菌(8.4%)为优势血清型。67株德尔卑沙门菌分离株的PFGE分型结果显示, 共分为32个脉冲型, 其中屠宰场样品的脉冲型分布最广泛, 同一批次样品分离株会出现在同一种脉冲型中, 存在相似度>95%的屠宰场、养殖场、市场环节分离株, 显示其沿生产链传播的特点。在劈半后、修饰前环节增加2次淋洗操作, 每次淋洗1 min, 使后续环节沙门菌的平均分离率从增加淋洗前的41.7%显著降低至20.0%(P < 0.01)。综上, 沙门菌可通过交叉污染沿猪肉生产链传播, 屠宰过程中的劈半环节是污染的关键控制点之一, 增加劈半后的淋洗处理能有效降低猪肉中的沙门菌污染, 为猪肉中沙门菌防控提供重要指导。

关键词: 猪肉, 生产链, 沙门菌, 脉冲场凝胶电泳, 关键控制点

Abstract:

This study aims to explore the prevalence and critical control points of Salmonella within the pork production chain, encompassing pig farms, slaughterhouses, and pork markets, through Salmonella isolation and molecular typing. Samples from pig farm, slaughterhouse and pork markets with interconnected were collected for Salmonella isolating and serotyping. Pulsed field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) methods were used for molecular typing of Salmonella isolates to analyze critical control points of contamination. The effect of increase washing times on Salmonella depletion was evaluated by comparing the changes of Salmonella isolation. The results showed that 417 Salmonella strains were isolated from 950 different types of samples with a total isolation rate of 43.9%. Among of them, 80 fecal samples from farm, 470 pig carcasses and environmental wipe samples from slaughterhouse and 400 pork samples from supermarkets showed isolation rate of 28.8%, 34.5% and 56.8%, respectively. In different slaughtering stages, samples after splitting showed the highest separation rate of 51.0% while the separation rate of the samples after chilling was significantly reduced to 23.0% (P < 0.05). Nine different serotypes were identified from the Salmonella isolates, and the predominant serovars were Salmonella Derby (39.6%), Salmonella Typhimurium (38.1%), Salmonella London (10.3%) and Salmonella Rissen (8.4%). There were 32 pulsotypes were identified in 67 Salmonella Derby isolates by PFGE analysis, of which the isolates from slaughterhouse samples contain the most widely pulsotypes distribution. The isolates from the same sampling visiting appeared in the same pulsotypes, and there were pulsotypes contains isolates from farms, slaughterhouse, and markets with similarity more than 95%, indicating the characteristic of spreading along the production chain. Two times more washing operations for 1 min were added after splitting, which significantly reduced the average isolation rate of Salmonella from 41.7% to 20.0% (P < 0.01) in the subsequent slaughtering process. These results indicate that Salmonella can be spread along the pork production chain via cross-contamination at critical control points such as splitting, offering vital insights and guidance for the prevention and control of Salmonella in pork.

Key words: pork, production chain, Salmonella, PFGE, critical control point

中图分类号:

S852.61

孟闯, 金宣辰, 彭通通, 翟贤月, 康喜龙, 焦新安, 潘志明. 猪肉生产环节中沙门菌的污染调查及关键点的消减控制[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2025, 56(10): 5137-5147.

MENG Chuang, JIN Xuanchen, PENG Tongtong, ZHAI Xianyue, KANG Xilong, JIAO Xinan, PAN Zhiming. Investigation of Salmonella Contamination in Pork Production Process and Reduction Control of Key Points[J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2025, 56(10): 5137-5147.

图/表 5

表 1

表 2

表 3

图 1

图 2

参考文献 39

1	BESSER J M . Salmonella epidemiology: A whirlwind of change[J]. Food Microbiol, 2018, 71, 55- 59. doi: 10.1016/j.fm.2017.08.018
2	SHI C L , SINGH P , RANIERI M , et al. Molecular methods for serovar determination of Salmonella[J]. Crit Rev Microbiol, 2015, 41 (3): 309- 325. doi: 10.3109/1040841X.2013.837862
3	KNODLER L A , ELFENBEIN J R . Salmonella enterica[J]. Trends Microbiol, 2019, 27 (11): 964- 965. doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2019.05.002
4	PRADHAN D , DEVI N V . Stress-induced adaptations in Salmonella : A ground for shaping its pathogenesis[J]. Microbiol Res, 2019, 229, 126311. doi: 10.1016/j.micres.2019.126311
5	KURTZ J R , GOGGINS J A , MCLACHLAN J B . Salmonella infection: Interplay between the bacteria and host immune system[J]. Immunol Lett, 2017, 190, 42- 50. doi: 10.1016/j.imlet.2017.07.006
6	罗郑, 彭忠, 杨迪, 等. 2018年湖北省猪源沙门菌的分离鉴定及耐药性分析[J]. 中国兽医学报, 2020, 40 (6): 1147- 1152.
	LUO Z , PENG Z , YANG D , et al. Isolation and antimicrobial resistance of porcine Salmonella isolates from Hubei Province in 2018[J]. Chinese Journal of Veterinary Science, 2020, 40 (6): 1147- 1152.
7	BONARDI S . Salmonella in the pork production chain and its impact on human health in the European Union[J]. Epidemiol Infect, 2017, 145 (8): 1513- 1526. doi: 10.1017/S095026881700036X
8	BUTAYE P , HALLIDAY-SIMMONDS I , VAN SAUERS A . Salmonella in pig farms and on pig meat in Suriname[J]. Antibiotics (Basel), 2021, 10 (12): 1495. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics10121495
9	PIRES S M , VIGRE H , MAKELA P , et al. Using outbreak data for source attribution of human salmonellosis and campylobacteriosis in Europe[J]. Foodborne Pathog Dis, 2010, 7 (11): 1351- 1361. doi: 10.1089/fpd.2010.0564
10	SHER A A , MUSTAFA B E , GRADY S C , et al. Outbreaks of foodborne Salmonella enteritidis in the United States between 1990 and 2015:An analysis of epidemiological and spatial-temporal trends[J]. Int J Infect Dis, 2021, 105, 54- 61. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2021.02.022
11	SNYDER T R , BOKTOR S W , M'IKANATHA N M . Salmonellosis outbreaks by food vehicle, serotype, season, and geographical location, United States, 1998 to 2015[J]. J Food Prot, 2019, 82 (7): 1191- 1199. doi: 10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-18-494
12	FERRARI R G , ROSARIO D K A , CUNHA-NETO A , et al. Worldwide epidemiology of Salmonella serovars in animal-based foods: a Meta-analysis[J]. Appl Environ Microbiol, 2019, 85 (14): e00591- 19.
13	SMID J H , VAN HOEK A H , AARTS H J , et al. Quantifying the sources of Salmonella on dressed carcasses of pigs based on serovar distribution[J]. Meat Sci, 2014, 96 (4): 1425- 1431. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2013.12.002
14	PESCIAROLI M , CUCCO L , DE LUCA S , et al. Association between pigs with high caecal Salmonella loads and carcass contamination[J]. Int J Food Microbiol, 2017, 242, 82- 86. doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2016.11.021
15	ARGUELLO H , ALVAREZ-ORDOÑEZ A , CARVAJAL A , et al. Role of slaughtering in Salmonella spreading and control in pork production[J]. J Food Prot, 2013, 76 (5): 899- 911. doi: 10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-12-404
16	ZHOU Z H , JIN X C , ZHENG H J , et al. The prevalence and load of Salmonella, and key risk points of Salmonella contamination in a swine slaughterhouse in Jiangsu Province, China[J]. Food Control, 2018, 87, 153- 160. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2017.12.026
17	ISSENHUTH-JEANJEAN S , ROGGENTIN P , MIKOLEIT M , et al. Supplement 2008-2010 (No. 48) to the White-Kauffmann-Le Minor scheme[J]. Res Microbiol, 2014, 165 (7): 526- 530. doi: 10.1016/j.resmic.2014.07.004
18	ZHOU Z H , LI J W , ZHENG H J , et al. Diversity of Salmonella isolates and their distribution in a pig slaughterhouse in Huaian, China[J]. Food Control, 2017, 78, 238- 246. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2017.02.064
19	TIAN Y Q , GU D , WANG F , et al. Prevalence and characteristics of Salmonella spp. from a pig farm in Shanghai, China[J]. Foodborne Pathog Dis, 2021, 18 (7): 477- 488. doi: 10.1089/fpd.2021.0018
20	CHIOU C S , TORPDAHL M , LIAO Y S , et al. Usefulness of pulsed-field gel electrophoresis profiles for the determination of Salmonella serovars[J]. Int J Food Microbiol, 2015, 214, 1- 3. doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2015.07.016
21	FERRARI R G , PANZENHAGEN P H N , CONTE-JUNIOR C A . Phenotypic and genotypic eligible methods for Salmonella Typhimurium source tracking[J]. Front Microbiol, 2017, 8, 2587. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2017.02587
22	高远, 王兰茜, 张丽娜, 等. 广州市农贸市场猪肉源伦敦沙门菌的流行情况及耐药性分析[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2021, 52 (2): 488- 497. doi: 10.11843/j.issn.0366-6964.2021.02.021
	GAO Y , WANG L Q , ZHANG L N , et al. Characterization of prevalence and antimicrobial resistance of Salmonella enterica serovar London from markets in Guangzhou[J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2021, 52 (2): 488- 497. doi: 10.11843/j.issn.0366-6964.2021.02.021
23	蒋增海, 姚璐璐, 张超君, 等. 河南省猪产业链中耐头孢菌素沙门菌对β-内酰胺类和喹诺酮类药物的耐药机制分析[J]. 中国兽医学报, 2023, 43 (11): 2274- 2280.
	JIANG Z H , YAO L L , ZHANG C J , et al. Analysis of mechanisms of resistance to β-lactams and quinolones for cephalosporin-resistant Salmonella isolates from pig-borne food chain of Henan Province[J]. Chinese Journal of Veterinary Science, 2023, 43 (11): 2274- 2280.
24	XU Z , CHEN X Y , TAN W , et al. Prevalence and antimicrobial resistance of Salmonella and Staphylococcus aureus in fattening pigs in Hubei Province, China[J]. Microb Drug Resist, 2021, 27 (11): 1594- 1602. doi: 10.1089/mdr.2020.0585
25	BJORK K E , FIELDS V , GARBER L P , et al. Factors associated with Salmonella prevalence in U.S. swine grower-finisher operations, 2012[J]. Foodborne Pathog Dis, 2018, 15 (8): 489- 497. doi: 10.1089/fpd.2017.2364
26	HOMANN C , ECKEY I , CHUPPAVA B , et al. Rye and rye bran as components of diets in piglet production-effects on Salmonella prevalence[J]. Animals (Basel), 2023, 13 (14): 2262.
27	ZENG H , RASSCHAERT G , DE ZUTTER L , et al. Identification of the source for Salmonella contamination of carcasses in a large pig slaughterhouse[J]. Pathogens, 2021, 10 (1): 77. doi: 10.3390/pathogens10010077
28	VAN HOEK A H , DE JONGE R , VAN OVERBEEK W M , et al. A quantitative approach towards a better understanding of the dynamics of Salmonella spp. in a pork slaughter-line[J]. Int J Food Microbiol, 2012, 153 (1-2): 45- 52. doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2011.10.013
29	SHEN W , CHEN H , GENG J , et al. Prevalence, serovar distribution, and antibiotic resistance of Salmonella spp.isolated from pork in China: A systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Int J Food Microbiol, 2022, 361, 109473. doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2021.109473
30	KUUS K , KRAMARENKO T , SÕGEL J , et al. Prevalence and serotype diversity of Salmonella enterica in the Estonian meat production chain in 2016-2020[J]. Pathogens, 2021, 10 (12): 1622. doi: 10.3390/pathogens10121622
31	BROADWAY P R , BROOKS J C , MOLLENKOPF D F , et al. Prevalence and antimicrobial susceptibility of Salmonella serovars isolated from U.S. retail ground pork[J]. Foodborne Pathog Dis, 2021, 18 (3): 219- 227. doi: 10.1089/fpd.2020.2853
32	SOLIANI L , RUGNA G , PROSPERI A , et al. Salmonella infection in pigs: Disease, prevalence, and a link between swine and human health[J]. Pathogens, 2023, 12 (10): 1267. doi: 10.3390/pathogens12101267
33	HARRISON O L , LI K , GEBHARDT J T , et al. Investigation of the environmental presence of Salmonella spp. in finishing pigs at commercial swine farms in Kansas (USA)[J]. Lett Appl Microbiol, 2023, 76 (6): ovad065. doi: 10.1093/lambio/ovad065
34	PLUMB I D , BROWN A C , STOKES E K , et al. Increased multidrug-resistant Salmonella enterica I serotype 4, [5], 12: i: - infections associated with pork, United States, 2009-2018[J]. Emerg Infect Dis, 2023, 29 (2): 314- 322.
35	WANG Z , GU D , HONG Y , et al. Microevolution of Salmonella 4,[J]. Cell Rep, 2023, 42 (10): 113227. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.113227
36	TRAGLIA G M , BETANCOR L , YIM L , et al. Genotypic and phenotypic analysis of Salmonella enterica serovar Derby, looking for clues explaining the impairment of egg isolates to cause human disease[J]. Front Microbiol, 2024, 15, 1357881. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2024.1357881
37	European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) , European Centre For Disease Prevention And Control (ECDC) . The European Union one health 2022 zoonoses report[J]. EFSA J, 2023, 21 (12): e8442.
38	BONARDI S , BOLZONI L , BRINDANI F , et al. Salmonella detection and counting on pig carcasses and cutting lines in Italian slaughterhouses[J]. Foodborne Pathog Dis, 2018, 15 (6): 339- 345. doi: 10.1089/fpd.2017.2375
39	NTAKIYISUMBA E , LEE S , WON G . Identification of risk profiles for Salmonella prevalence in pig supply chains in South Korea using meta-analysis and a quantitative microbial risk assessment model[J]. Food Res Inter, 2023, 170, 112999. doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2023.112999

采样环节 Sampling stages	样品数量Number of samples (阳性率/% Positive rate)
采样环节 Sampling stages	Visit 1	Visit 2	Visit 3	Visit 4	Visit 5	Visit 6	Visit 7	Visit 8	Visit 9	Visit 10	合计Total
养殖场Farm
粪便Feces	0	0	0	0	0	0	20 (30.0%)	20 (30.0%)	20 (35.0%)	20 (20.0%)	80 (28.8%)
屠宰场 Slaughterhouse
待宰圈 Holding pens	10 (50.0)	10 (70.0)	10 (60.0)	10 (30.0)	10 (40.0)	10 (60.0)	10 (40.0)	10 (50.0)	10 (40.0)	10 (30.0)	100 (47.0)
劈半后Splitting	10 (30.0)	10 (60.0)	10 (30.0)	10 (70.0)	10 (40.0)	10 (50.0)	10 (70.0)	10 (50.0)	10 (50.0)	10 (60.0)	100 (51.0)
修饰后Dressing	10 (40.0)	10 (40.0)	10 (50.0)	10 (30.0)	10 (60.0)	10 (30.0)	10 (30.0)	10 (20.0)	10 (10.0)	10 (20.0)	100 (33.0)
冷却后Chilling	10 (30.0)	10 (0.0)	10 (20.0)	10 (30.0)	10 (30.0)	10 (30.0)	10 (20.0)	10 (30.0)	10 (30.0)	10 (10.0)	100 (23.0)
环境设备 Equipments	0	0	0	0	15 (40.0)	15 (26.7)	10 (0)	10 (0)	10 (10.0)	10 (20.0)	70 (18.6)
超市Supermarkets
肉样Pork	40 (65.0)	40 (80.0)	40 (52.5)	40 (60.0)	40 (50.0)	40 (57.5)	40 (62.5)	40 (55.0)	40 (45.0)	40 (40.0)	400 (56.8)
合计Total	80 (51.3)	80 (61.3)	80 (46.3)	80 (50.0)	95 (45.3)	95 (46.3)	110 (40.9)	110 (39.1)	110 (35.5)	110 (34.5)	950 (43.9)

序号 Number	血清型 Serotypes	菌株数量Number of strains			合计Total
序号 Number	血清型 Serotypes	养殖场 Farm	屠宰场 Slaughterhouse	市场 Market	合计Total
1	德尔卑沙门菌S. Derby	4	54	107	165
2	鼠伤寒沙门菌S. Typhimurium	2	53	104	159
3	伦敦沙门菌S. London	2	31	10	43
4	罗森沙门菌S. Rissen	2	27	6	35
5	里定沙门菌S. Reading	5	1	0	6
6	病牛沙门菌S. Bovismorficans	3	0	0	3
7	汤普逊沙门菌S. Thompson	3	0	0	3
8	肠炎沙门菌S. Enteritidis	2	0	0	2
9	阿贡纳沙门菌S. Agona	0	1	0	1
合计Total		23	167	227	417

[1]	赵秋云, 沈焕钧, 宋厚辉, 蒋红霞, 许成钢. 一株携带耐药基因bla_CTX-M-27沙门菌P1-CTX噬菌体-质粒的分离及生物学特性分析[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2025, 56(7): 3519-3527.
[2]	董娇娇, 丁虹, 张寅梁, 张冉, 刘华格, 臧素敏, 张振红, 周荣艳, 李兰会. 鸡白痢沙门菌感染太行鸡盲肠菌群的差异及功能分析[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2025, 56(6): 2741-2751.
[3]	葛雷, 仇汝龙, 范志宇, 胡波, 魏后军, 陈萌萌, 宋艳华, 李一鸣, 徐为中, 王芳. 鼠伤寒沙门菌ompW基因缺失株与回补株的构建及其生物学特性[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2025, 56(4): 1865-1875.
[4]	刘炜, 马嘉怡, 耿浩宇, 谢添, 苗苏南, 廖宗杰, 耿士忠. 一株广谱沙门菌噬菌体的分离鉴定及其生物学特性[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2024, 55(9): 4061-4068.
[5]	郑琳, 魏炳栋, 滑峰, 陈龙, 丁媛. 裂解性噬菌体对肉仔鸡感染肠炎沙门菌的治疗效果[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2024, 55(3): 1314-1327.
[6]	王栋, 柳可欣, 何炎峻, 邓守翔, 刘云, 马卫明. 饲粮中添加腐殖酸钠对鼠伤寒沙门菌感染肉鸡肝组织炎症和抗氧化能力的影响[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2024, 55(2): 629-639.
[7]	李兆龙, 孔祥瑞, 林锋强, 王秀萍, 赵冉, 彭小莉, 陈常颂. 冠突散囊菌Ec-12上清抑制小鼠的伤寒沙门菌机制的初步分析[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2024, 55(2): 739-750.
[8]	蔡梦雷, 赵东旭, 张政钢, 刘东海, 姜婷婷, 苏士炫, 闫雪敏, 薛晓阳, 崔国林. GreA蛋白对肠炎沙门菌生物学特性及致病力影响[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2024, 55(11): 5173-5182.
[9]	彭娜娜, 宁慧敏, 陈玉豪, 李欣颖, 祝福强, 于国滨, 董伟. 肠炎沙门菌菌毛重组蛋白对其细胞黏附的竞争性阻断效应[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2024, 55(11): 5183-5190.
[10]	张萍, 庄林林, 张笛, 董永毅, 盛中伟, 王成明, 徐步, 窦新红, 龚建森. 沙门菌分子检测方法的研究进展[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2023, 54(8): 3217-3229.
[11]	张倩文, 刘玉梅, 石丽辉, 梁文军, 李梦云, 王玉琴, 张自强. 生产母兔沙门菌感染的病理学变化及其药物敏感性分析[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2023, 54(8): 3510-3518.
[12]	陈松彪, 尚珂, 杜付熙, 余祖华, 李静, 贾艳艳, 廖成水, 张春杰, 丁轲, 程相朝. 沙门菌VI型分泌系统组装、结构特征和分泌调控网络的研究进展[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2023, 54(6): 2252-2263.
[13]	孙瑜凡, 于盼元, 陈虹宇, 谭怡青, 陈夏冰, 张腾飞, 高婷, 周锐, 黎璐. 二甲酸钾预防沙门菌感染小鼠的效果评价及对肠道菌群的影响[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2023, 54(5): 2101-2113.
[14]	秦蕾, 吴慧敏, 徐琦琦, 陈万昭, 王东, 李宏博, 夏盼盼, 刘泽鹏, 夏利宁. 外源MDR鼠伤寒沙门菌对健康小鼠肠道菌群的影响[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2023, 54(5): 2158-2169.
[15]	田艳红, 于江旭, 焦宇洲, 高东阳, 蔡旭旺. 沙门菌脂多糖的结构修饰及其效应的研究进展[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2023, 54(4): 1392-1402.

猪肉生产环节中沙门菌的污染调查及关键点的消减控制

Investigation of Salmonella Contamination in Pork Production Process and Reduction Control of Key Points

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 5

参考文献 39

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

序号 Number	血清型 Serotypes	菌株数Number of strains										合计 Total	阳性率/% Rate
序号 Number	血清型 Serotypes	Visit 1	Visit 2	Visit 3	Visit 4	Visit 5	Visit 6	Visit 7	Visit 8	Visit 9	Visit 10	合计 Total	阳性率/% Rate
1	德尔卑沙门菌S. Derby	18	17	15	22	16	19	24	14	13	7	165	39.6
2	鼠伤寒沙门菌S. Typhimurium	12	22	18	15	11	13	9	20	18	21	159	38.1
3	伦敦沙门菌S. London	4	7	1	2	13	6	5	4		1	43	10.3
4	罗森沙门菌S. Rissen	6	2	3		3		8	3	5	5	35	8.4
5	里定沙门菌S. Reading				1				2	3		6	1.4
6	病牛沙门菌S. Bovismorficans						3					3	0.7
7	汤普逊沙门菌S. Thompson						3					3	0.7
8	肠炎沙门菌S. Enteritidis	1	1									2	0.5
9	阿贡纳沙门菌S. Agona							1				1	0.2
合计Total		41	49	37	40	43	44	47	43	39	34	417	100.0