COMPARISON OF RAPID TESTS USED TO DETECT ANTIBIOTIC RESIDUES IN MILK

被引:33
|
作者
SENYK, GF [1 ]
DAVIDSON, JH [1 ]
BROWN, JM [1 ]
HALLSTEAD, ER [1 ]
SHERBON, JW [1 ]
机构
[1] CORNELL UNIV,DEPT FOOD SCI,ITHACA,NY 14853
关键词
D O I
10.4315/0362-028X-53.2.158
中图分类号
Q81 [生物工程学(生物技术)]; Q93 [微生物学];
学科分类号
071005 ; 0836 ; 090102 ; 100705 ;
摘要
Five rapid methods for detection of antibiotics in milk were compared. The Bacillus stearothermophilus var. calidolactis disc assay was also performed on the same samples. The rapid methods were: Angenics Spot Test, Charm II, Delvotest P, Penzyme Farm, and Penzyme Lab III. Ten antibiotics (penicillin G, cephapirin, cloxacillin, ampicillin, streptomycin, chloramphenicol, erythromycin, novobiocin, tetracycline, and gentamicin) were used individually to spike eight raw milk samples at five levels of antibiotic. Antibiotic levels were chosen that would result in zones of <16 mm, 16 mm, and >16 mm on the disc assay. Only the disc assay, Charm II and Delvotest P were compared on nonbeta-lactam antibiotics. A small percentage of milks with no antibiotic added tested positive with the Charm II and Penzyme Lab III. On combined data for penicillin G, cephapirin, and cloxacillin, for which all methods were compared, the percent correctly categorized as pass (below actionable) for the <16 mm zone spiked level, reject or caution at the 16 mm zone level, and reject or caution at the >16 mm zone level were: Angenics 79, 83, 100; Charm II 66, 92, 100; Delvotest P 74, 93, 100; Disc Assay 100, 74, 100; Penzyme Farm 93, 61, 92; Penzyme Lab III 81,78, 100 respectively. In most cases, the rapid methods showed greater apparent sensitivity than the disc assay and did not fail to reject milks spiked with antibiotic in excess of the 16 mm zone level. Copyright © International Association of Milk, Food and Environmental Sanitarians.
引用
收藏
页码:158 / 164
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Short communication: Rapid antibiotic screening tests detect antibiotic residues in powdered milk products
    Kneebone, J.
    Tsang, P. C. W.
    Townson, D. H.
    JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2010, 93 (09) : 3961 - 3964
  • [2] TESTING THE TESTS INTENDED TO DETECT ANTIBIOTIC RESIDUES IN MILK
    CULLOR, JS
    VETERINARY MEDICINE, 1994, 89 (05) : 462 - &
  • [3] EVALUATION OF METHODS USED TO DETECT ANTIBIOTIC RESIDUES IN MILK
    MACAULAY, DM
    PACKARD, VS
    JOURNAL OF FOOD PROTECTION, 1981, 44 (09) : 696 - 698
  • [4] Alternatives for validation of diagnostic assays used to detect antibiotic residues in milk
    Gardner, IA
    Cullor, JS
    Galey, FD
    Sischo, W
    Salman, M
    Slenning, B
    Erb, HN
    Tyler, JW
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1996, 209 (01) : 46 - 52
  • [5] Quality milk and tests for antibiotic residues
    Sischo, WM
    JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 1996, 79 (06) : 1065 - 1073
  • [6] A review on the most frequently used methods to detect antibiotic residues in bovine raw milk
    Vercelli, Cristina
    Amadori, Michela
    Gambino, Graziana
    Re, Giovanni
    INTERNATIONAL DAIRY JOURNAL, 2023, 144
  • [7] Albendazole residues in goat's milk: Interferences in microbial inhibitor tests used to detect antibiotics in milk
    Romero, Tamara
    Althaus, Rafael
    Javier Moya, Vicente
    del Carmen Beltran, Maria
    Reybroeck, Wim
    Pilar Molina, Maria
    JOURNAL OF FOOD AND DRUG ANALYSIS, 2017, 25 (02) : 302 - 305
  • [8] PERFORMANCE OF VARIOUS TESTS USED TO SCREEN ANTIBIOTIC RESIDUES IN MILK SAMPLES FROM INDIVIDUAL ANIMALS
    CULLOR, JS
    VANEENENNAAM, A
    GARDNER, I
    PERANI, L
    DELLINGER, J
    SMITH, WL
    THOMPSON, T
    PAYNE, MA
    JENSEN, L
    GUTERBOCK, WM
    JOURNAL OF AOAC INTERNATIONAL, 1994, 77 (04) : 862 - 870
  • [9] USE OF A SIMPLE FERMENTATION TEST TO DETECT ANTIBIOTIC RESIDUES IN MILK
    JURDI, DA
    ASMAR, JA
    JOURNAL OF FOOD PROTECTION, 1981, 44 (09) : 674 - 676
  • [10] ANTIBIOTIC RESIDUES IN MEAT IN THE UNITED-KINGDOM - AN ASSESSMENT OF SPECIFIC TESTS TO DETECT AND IDENTIFY ANTIBIOTIC RESIDUES
    SMITHER, R
    LOTT, AF
    DALZIEL, RW
    OSTLER, DC
    JOURNAL OF HYGIENE, 1980, 85 (03) : 359 - 369