Abstract
Microbial analyses of pork loin surfaces and minced beef samples were done using aerobic plate count (APC) and spiral plate (Spiral) methods and manual counting (MC) and laser counting (LC) procedures.
Connecting APC and Spiral techniques together was convenient, when analyzing pork surface swab samples. If APC plates were "too numerous to count," Spiral plates could be used to get an estimation of the microbial numbers/cm2. Conversely when microbial numbers were too low for the Spiral technique, APC plates were easy to count.
Good correlation was found among Spiral and APC plates counted manually and with the laser for both sample materials. For minced beef samples, Spiral‐MC and Spiral‐LC methods gave higher numbers than APC‐MC (63% of samples) and APC‐LC (49% of samples) (not significant at 0.05 level). When APC and Spiral results for minced beef samples were analyzed, LC gave higher microbial numbers compared to MC: 65% of the APC‐LC results were higher than APC‐MC results (statistically significant at 0.05 level), and 56% of Spiral‐LC results were higher than Spiral‐MC results (not significant at 0.05 level). Most minced beef results by all combinations of methods (APC‐MC / APC‐LC / Spiral‐MC / Spiral‐LC) were within a ± 0.5 logarithmic range, and all were within a ± 1.0 range.
Connecting APC and Spiral techniques together was convenient, when analyzing pork surface swab samples. If APC plates were "too numerous to count," Spiral plates could be used to get an estimation of the microbial numbers/cm2. Conversely when microbial numbers were too low for the Spiral technique, APC plates were easy to count.
Good correlation was found among Spiral and APC plates counted manually and with the laser for both sample materials. For minced beef samples, Spiral‐MC and Spiral‐LC methods gave higher numbers than APC‐MC (63% of samples) and APC‐LC (49% of samples) (not significant at 0.05 level). When APC and Spiral results for minced beef samples were analyzed, LC gave higher microbial numbers compared to MC: 65% of the APC‐LC results were higher than APC‐MC results (statistically significant at 0.05 level), and 56% of Spiral‐LC results were higher than Spiral‐MC results (not significant at 0.05 level). Most minced beef results by all combinations of methods (APC‐MC / APC‐LC / Spiral‐MC / Spiral‐LC) were within a ± 0.5 logarithmic range, and all were within a ± 1.0 range.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 117-131 |
| Journal | Journal of rapid methods and automation in microbiology |
| Volume | 1 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1992 |
| MoE publication type | A1 Journal article-refereed |