Genotypic analysis of Escherichia coli recovered from product and equipment at a beef-packing plant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To identify sources of Escherichia coli on beef by characterizing strains of the organism on animals, equipment and product at beef-packing plant. METHODS AND RESULTS: Generic E. coli were recovered from hides, carcasses, beef trimmings, conveyers and ground beef during the summer of 2001 (750 isolates) and winter of 2002 (500 isolates). The isolates were characterized by Random Amplification of Polymorphic DNA (RAPD). The numbers of E. coli recovered from dressed carcasses were less than the numbers recovered from hides. The numbers recovered from chilled carcasses were too few for meaningful analysis of the strains present on them but the numbers recovered from trimmings and ground beef were larger. The RAPD patterns showed that the majority of isolates from hides, carcasses, beef trimmings, conveyers and ground beef were of similar RAPD types, but a few unique RAPD types were recovered from only one of those sources. The E. coli populations present on the hides of incoming animals and in the beef-processing environment were highly diverse. Randomly selected E. coli isolates from each of the five sources were further characterized by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE). Most genotypes of E. coli defined by PFGE corresponded to the E. coli types defined by RAPD. CONCLUSIONS: The hides of the incoming animals appeared to be only one of the sources of the E. coli on trimmings and in ground beef, as additional sources were apparently present in equipment used for carcass breaking. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: This study indicates that hazardous microbiological contamination of meat may occur after the dressing of carcasses at commercial beef-packing plants, which suggests that attention should be given to the control of the contamination of meat during carcass breaking as well as during the dressing of carcasses.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".