IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bjc/journl/v7y2020i9p120-128.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative Studies on Bacteriology and Antibiogram of Isolates from Ready-To-Eat and Raw Meat Samples

Author

Listed:
  • N.P.Akani

    (Department of Microbiology, Rivers State University, Nkpolu- Oroworukwo, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria.)

  • Chinonyerem Chikwendu Jr

    (Department of Microbiology, Rivers State University, Nkpolu- Oroworukwo, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria.)

  • S.A. Wemedo

    (Department of Microbiology, Rivers State University, Nkpolu- Oroworukwo, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria.)

Abstract

This research looks at the comparative studies on bacteriology and antibiogram of isolates from raw and ready-to-eat (RTE ) meat samples in Port Harcourt Nigeria. Ninety (90) samples were collected from three markets in Port Harcourt and subjected to microbiological procedures. The results recorded no significant difference (p˃0.05) of Total heterotrophic bacteria count (THBC) in RTE from various locations. THBC ranged between 7.50±1.94 and 5.74±1.35 at Mile 1 market and 6.98±2.15 and 6.04±1.55 at Rumueme market. The Salmonella-Shigella count of the ready to eat meat ranged from 3.26±.69 to 3.16±.98 at Mile 3 market and 2.40±.66 to 2.04±.84 at Rumueme market and indicates no significant difference (p˃0.05) The coliform count of beef across the location showed significant differences (p≤0.05). While counts of beef in Rumueme market was higher and ranges (3.38±.86 -2.20±.78) than those of the Mile 1 and Mile 3 market. Total Staphylococcal count (TSC) showed no significant difference (p≥0.05) with counts of RTE ranging Mile 1 market ( 7.50±1.94to 7.22±2.25) Mile 3 (7.68±1.60 to 7.02±2.00) and Rumueme (6.98±2.15 to 6.04±1.55) and a total of 52 bacterial isolates with vary percentage of occurance such as Staphylococcus sp 12(23.07%), Bacillus sp 9(17.30%), E. coli 5(9.61%) ,Enterobacter sp 4(7.69%), Jeotgalicoccus pinnipedialis 7(13.46%), Macrocuccus caseolyticus 2(3.38%), Klebsiella sp 3(5.76%), Morganella morgani 3(5.76%), Pragia fontium 3(5.76%), Tatumella ptyseos 2(3.84%), Pectobacterium wasabiae 2 (3.84%). Consequently, Staphylococcus sp, Bacillus sp, E. coli, and Enterobacter sp showed high resistance to antibiotics such as, Augumentin, vancomycin, ceftazidine, cloxacillin, Erytromycin, cefuroxine, and ceftriaxone while Staphylococcus was susceptible at (66.67%) to gentamycin and ofloxacin (88.33%) and other isolates were 100% susceptible to ofloxacin. Molecular identification of 3 isolate using PCR confirmed S. aureus at 65.8% and Lycinibacillus macroides at 100%. The megaA, and VanB genes were indentified in 2 Staphylococcus spp while AAIC gene was identified in Lycinibacillus macrolides. All three isolates had plasmid at 10kbp. The 52 isolates had 100% multidrug resistance index of more than 0.2. and were 100% multidrug resistant. Public health awareness campaigns are advocated to sensitize meat sellers and consumers in order to mitigate or eliminate several health issues emanating from unhygienic meat slaughtering, preparation and consumption.

Suggested Citation

  • N.P.Akani & Chinonyerem Chikwendu Jr & S.A. Wemedo, 2020. "Comparative Studies on Bacteriology and Antibiogram of Isolates from Ready-To-Eat and Raw Meat Samples," International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation, International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation (IJRSI), vol. 7(9), pages 120-128, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bjc:journl:v:7:y:2020:i:9:p:120-128
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rsisinternational.org/journals/ijrsi/digital-library/volume-7-issue-9//120-128.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.rsisinternational.org/virtual-library/papers/comparative-studies-on-bacteriology-and-antibiogram-of-isolates-from-ready-to-eat-and-raw-meat-samples/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bjc:journl:v:7:y:2020:i:9:p:120-128. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Dr. Renu Malsaria (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://rsisinternational.org/journals/ijrsi/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.