当前位置: X-MOL 学术J. Microbiol. Methods › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Impact of swab material on microbial surface sampling.
Journal of Microbiological Methods ( IF 1.7 ) Pub Date : 2020-07-25 , DOI: 10.1016/j.mimet.2020.106006
Linda Jansson 1 , Yasmine Akel 1 , Ronnie Eriksson 2 , Moa Lavander 2 , Johannes Hedman 1
Affiliation  

Efficient microbial sampling from surfaces for subsequent detection and quantification is crucial in fields such as food safety and hygiene monitoring. Cotton swabs are traditionally used for sample collection, but today there are numerous swabs of alternative material and different sizes available. Recovery efficiencies of swabs for different applications have been compared in several studies. However, the results are often contradictory. We have compared 15 different swabs made of cotton (n = 5), flocked nylon (n = 3) and foam (n = 7), for sampling of Listeria monocytogenes and mengovirus on small (4 cm2) and large (100 cm2) areas of window glass, ridged plastic and absorbing wood. Molecular quantification methods (qPCR and RT-qPCR) were applied, and all sampling and sample processing were standardized. Specific swabs gave higher DNA/RNA yields than others, depending on both the surface characteristics and the collected target. The highest DNA yields were achieved by applying Selefa or Puritan cotton swabs for Listeria sampling on 4 cm2 areas of window glass and ridged plastic. Certain foam swabs (Critical swab with medium head and Macrofoam) gave the highest yields when sampling Listeria on 4 cm2 areas of wood and on 100 cm2 areas of ridged plastic and wood. Most foam swabs, and especially Sigma Virocult, were advantageous for virus sampling, regardless of surface. Nylon-flocked swabs showed poor recovery regardless of surface characteristics. The recovery varied substantially between swabs made of the same material, suggesting that a single swab may not be representative for a certain swab material.



中文翻译:

拭子材料对微生物表面采样的影响。

在食品安全和卫生监控等领域,从表面进行有效的微生物采样以进行后续检测和定量至关重要。传统上使用棉签收集样品,但如今有许多替代材料和不同尺寸的棉签可供选择。在几项研究中已比较了拭子针对不同应用的回收效率。但是,结果通常是矛盾的。我们比较了棉(n = 5),植绒尼龙(n = 3)和泡沫(n = 7)制成的15种不同拭子,分别在小样本(4 cm 2)和大样本(100 cm 2)上取样单核细胞增生李斯特菌)窗户玻璃,山脊塑料和吸收木材的区域。应用了分子定量方法(qPCR和RT-qPCR),并对所有采样和样品处理进行了标准化。根据表面特征和收集的靶标,特定的拭子比其他拭子产生更高的DNA / RNA产量。通过将Selefa或Puritan棉签在4 cm 2的窗户玻璃和脊状塑料区域上进行李斯特菌采样,可获得最高的DNA产量。当在4 cm 2的木材区域和100 cm 2的木材上取样李斯特菌时,某些泡沫棉签(具有中等水头和Macrofoam的临界棉签)产量最高。隆起的塑料和木材区域。大多数泡沫棉签,特别是Sigma Virocult,无论表面如何,都有利于病毒采样。无论表面特征如何,植绒尼龙棉签的回收率均较差。在相同材料制成的棉签之间,回收率差异很大,这表明单个棉签可能无法代表某种棉签材料。

更新日期:2020-08-08
down
wechat
bug