Typing of Listeria monocytogenes isolates originating from the food processing industry with automated ribotyping and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis

Kaarina Aarnisalo, Tiina Autio, Anna-Maija Sjöberg, Janne Lunden, Hannu Korkeala, Maija-Liisa Suihko (Corresponding Author)

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

61 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A total of 486 Listeria monocytogenes isolates originating from 17 Finnish food processing plants (representing meat, poultry, fish, and dairy production) were collected and typed by automated ribotyping using EcoRI as the restriction enzyme. The isolates were divided into 16 different ribotypes (RTs). Some of these isolates (121), representing all EcoRI types and 16 food plants, were subjected to ribotyping with the PvuII enzyme, to pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) typing with AscI and SmaI restriction enzymes, and to serotyping with O-antigen antisera. Nineteen ribotypes were generated with PvuII, 42 macrorestriction patterns were generated with AscI and 24 with SmaI, and three serotypes were generated with antisera. When the results were combined, the overall number of RTs was 23, and that of the PFGE types was 46. Thus, the overall discrimination power of PFGE was higher (discrimination index [DI] 0.966) than that of ribotyping (DI 0.906). The most common serotype (90.1% of the isolates) was 1/2, and isolates of serotype 4 (3.3%) were rare. There was no connection between food sectors and RTs or PFGE types, but PFGE indicated the single plants (78.3% of the types) better than ribotyping (56.5%). On the basis of its automation and on the availability of identification databases, automated ribotyping had some advantages over PFGE. Overall, automated ribotyping can be considered a practical and rapid tool when Listeria contamination is suspected and when screening a large number of isolates is necessary, e.g., when tracing contamination sources. However, in cases of outbreaks, the identical patterns must be confirmed by PFGE, which is a more discriminatory method.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)249-255
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Food Protection
Volume66
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2003
MoE publication typeA1 Journal article-refereed

Fingerprint

Food-Processing Industry
Ribotyping
Pulsed Field Gel Electrophoresis
Listeria monocytogenes
pulsed-field gel electrophoresis
DNA fingerprinting
food industry
ribotypes
serotypes
asci
antiserum
Edible Plants
enzymes
food processing plants
Immune Sera
fish production
poultry production
meat production
Enzymes
Listeria

Cite this

Aarnisalo, Kaarina ; Autio, Tiina ; Sjöberg, Anna-Maija ; Lunden, Janne ; Korkeala, Hannu ; Suihko, Maija-Liisa. / Typing of Listeria monocytogenes isolates originating from the food processing industry with automated ribotyping and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. In: Journal of Food Protection. 2003 ; Vol. 66, No. 2. pp. 249-255.
@article{f3fce8450f074e4ea683514afad42a18,
title = "Typing of Listeria monocytogenes isolates originating from the food processing industry with automated ribotyping and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis",
abstract = "A total of 486 Listeria monocytogenes isolates originating from 17 Finnish food processing plants (representing meat, poultry, fish, and dairy production) were collected and typed by automated ribotyping using EcoRI as the restriction enzyme. The isolates were divided into 16 different ribotypes (RTs). Some of these isolates (121), representing all EcoRI types and 16 food plants, were subjected to ribotyping with the PvuII enzyme, to pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) typing with AscI and SmaI restriction enzymes, and to serotyping with O-antigen antisera. Nineteen ribotypes were generated with PvuII, 42 macrorestriction patterns were generated with AscI and 24 with SmaI, and three serotypes were generated with antisera. When the results were combined, the overall number of RTs was 23, and that of the PFGE types was 46. Thus, the overall discrimination power of PFGE was higher (discrimination index [DI] 0.966) than that of ribotyping (DI 0.906). The most common serotype (90.1{\%} of the isolates) was 1/2, and isolates of serotype 4 (3.3{\%}) were rare. There was no connection between food sectors and RTs or PFGE types, but PFGE indicated the single plants (78.3{\%} of the types) better than ribotyping (56.5{\%}). On the basis of its automation and on the availability of identification databases, automated ribotyping had some advantages over PFGE. Overall, automated ribotyping can be considered a practical and rapid tool when Listeria contamination is suspected and when screening a large number of isolates is necessary, e.g., when tracing contamination sources. However, in cases of outbreaks, the identical patterns must be confirmed by PFGE, which is a more discriminatory method.",
author = "Kaarina Aarnisalo and Tiina Autio and Anna-Maija Sj{\"o}berg and Janne Lunden and Hannu Korkeala and Maija-Liisa Suihko",
year = "2003",
doi = "10.4315/0362-028X-66.2.249",
language = "English",
volume = "66",
pages = "249--255",
journal = "Journal of Food Protection",
issn = "0362-028X",
publisher = "International Association for Food Protection",
number = "2",

}

Typing of Listeria monocytogenes isolates originating from the food processing industry with automated ribotyping and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. / Aarnisalo, Kaarina; Autio, Tiina; Sjöberg, Anna-Maija; Lunden, Janne; Korkeala, Hannu; Suihko, Maija-Liisa (Corresponding Author).

In: Journal of Food Protection, Vol. 66, No. 2, 2003, p. 249-255.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Typing of Listeria monocytogenes isolates originating from the food processing industry with automated ribotyping and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis

AU - Aarnisalo, Kaarina

AU - Autio, Tiina

AU - Sjöberg, Anna-Maija

AU - Lunden, Janne

AU - Korkeala, Hannu

AU - Suihko, Maija-Liisa

PY - 2003

Y1 - 2003

N2 - A total of 486 Listeria monocytogenes isolates originating from 17 Finnish food processing plants (representing meat, poultry, fish, and dairy production) were collected and typed by automated ribotyping using EcoRI as the restriction enzyme. The isolates were divided into 16 different ribotypes (RTs). Some of these isolates (121), representing all EcoRI types and 16 food plants, were subjected to ribotyping with the PvuII enzyme, to pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) typing with AscI and SmaI restriction enzymes, and to serotyping with O-antigen antisera. Nineteen ribotypes were generated with PvuII, 42 macrorestriction patterns were generated with AscI and 24 with SmaI, and three serotypes were generated with antisera. When the results were combined, the overall number of RTs was 23, and that of the PFGE types was 46. Thus, the overall discrimination power of PFGE was higher (discrimination index [DI] 0.966) than that of ribotyping (DI 0.906). The most common serotype (90.1% of the isolates) was 1/2, and isolates of serotype 4 (3.3%) were rare. There was no connection between food sectors and RTs or PFGE types, but PFGE indicated the single plants (78.3% of the types) better than ribotyping (56.5%). On the basis of its automation and on the availability of identification databases, automated ribotyping had some advantages over PFGE. Overall, automated ribotyping can be considered a practical and rapid tool when Listeria contamination is suspected and when screening a large number of isolates is necessary, e.g., when tracing contamination sources. However, in cases of outbreaks, the identical patterns must be confirmed by PFGE, which is a more discriminatory method.

AB - A total of 486 Listeria monocytogenes isolates originating from 17 Finnish food processing plants (representing meat, poultry, fish, and dairy production) were collected and typed by automated ribotyping using EcoRI as the restriction enzyme. The isolates were divided into 16 different ribotypes (RTs). Some of these isolates (121), representing all EcoRI types and 16 food plants, were subjected to ribotyping with the PvuII enzyme, to pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) typing with AscI and SmaI restriction enzymes, and to serotyping with O-antigen antisera. Nineteen ribotypes were generated with PvuII, 42 macrorestriction patterns were generated with AscI and 24 with SmaI, and three serotypes were generated with antisera. When the results were combined, the overall number of RTs was 23, and that of the PFGE types was 46. Thus, the overall discrimination power of PFGE was higher (discrimination index [DI] 0.966) than that of ribotyping (DI 0.906). The most common serotype (90.1% of the isolates) was 1/2, and isolates of serotype 4 (3.3%) were rare. There was no connection between food sectors and RTs or PFGE types, but PFGE indicated the single plants (78.3% of the types) better than ribotyping (56.5%). On the basis of its automation and on the availability of identification databases, automated ribotyping had some advantages over PFGE. Overall, automated ribotyping can be considered a practical and rapid tool when Listeria contamination is suspected and when screening a large number of isolates is necessary, e.g., when tracing contamination sources. However, in cases of outbreaks, the identical patterns must be confirmed by PFGE, which is a more discriminatory method.

U2 - 10.4315/0362-028X-66.2.249

DO - 10.4315/0362-028X-66.2.249

M3 - Article

VL - 66

SP - 249

EP - 255

JO - Journal of Food Protection

JF - Journal of Food Protection

SN - 0362-028X

IS - 2

ER -