Quantitative detection of tetracycline-resistant microorganisms in conventional and organic beef, pork and chicken meat

Figures & data

Table 1. Mean counts of mesophilic aerobic bacteria (MA), Enterobacteriaceae (EB), TC-resistant mesophilic aerobic bacteria (MATE) and TC-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (EBTE) and the total counts of bacteria harbouring the tet genes in organic and conventional chicken meat, beef and pork, expressed in log CFU g⁻¹.

Tabla 1.  Medias de los recuentos de bacterias aerobias mesófilas (MA), Enterobacteriaceae (EB), bacterias aerobias mesófilas resistentes a tetraciclina (MATE), Enterobacteriaceae resistentes a tetraciclina (EBTE) y recuento total de bacterias con los genes tet en carne ecológica y convencional de pollo, ternera y cerdo, expresados en log CFU g⁻¹.

Production method	Meat samples	Counts (log CFU g^−1)
		EB^a	EBTE^a	MA^a	MATE^a	tet(A)^b	tet(B)^b	tet(A) + tet(B)^b
Organic	Chicken (30)	2.8	1.8	4.7	3.7	2.7	1.8	2.8
	Beef (30)	3.4	1.8	5.9	5.1	2.4	2.9	3.2
	Pork (40)	2.8	1.7	5.1	4.2	2.7	2.7	3.1
Conventional	Chicken (31)	3.7	2.1	5.3	4.3	2.8	2.8	3.3
	Beef (30)	3.0	1.8	5.0	4.0	2.8	2.7	3.3
	Pork (40)	3.0	1.7	4.7	4.0	2.5	3.2	3.4

Note: ^aPlate count technique; ^bqPCR.

Figure 1. Counts of TC-resistant bacteria in conventional and organic meat samples. This graphic shows a comparison of the counts of TC-resistant mesophilic aerobic bacteria (MATE), TC-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (EBTE) and bacteria harbouring the tet(A) and/or tet(B) genes between organic and conventional beef, pork and chicken meat (expressed in log CFU g⁻¹).

Figura 1. Recuentos de bacterias resistentes a tetraciclina en carne convencional y ecológica. Los gráficos muestran una comparación de recuentos de bacterias aerobias mesófilas resistentes a tetraciclina (MATE), Enterobacteriaceae resistentes a tetraciclina (EBTE) y de bacterias portadoras de los genes tet(A) y/o tet(B)entre carnes convencionales y ecológicas de ternera, cerdo y pollo (expresados en log CFU g^–1).

Table 2. The number and percentages of samples with bacteria harbouring tet(A), tet(B) and both tet genes, over the LOD, in organically and conventionally produced pork, beef and chicken meat.

Tabla 2.     Número y porcentaje de muestras con bacterias portadoras de los tet(A), tet(B) y ambos genes, por encima del LOD, en carne de cerdo, ternera y pollo producidas de forma convencional y ecológica.

Genes	tet(A)		tet(B)		tet(A) + tet(B)
Meat samples	Organic	Conventional	Organic	Conventional	Organic	Conventional
Pork (40 O; 40 C)	17 (42.5)	18 (45.0)	14 (35.0)	27 (67.5)	23 (57.5)	40 (100.0)
Beef (30 O; 30 C)	11 (36.7)	11 (36.7)	19 (63.3)	16 (53.3)	22 (73.3)	24 (80.0)
Chicken (30 O; 31 C)	13 (43.3)	13 (41.9)	2 (6.7)	18 (58.1)	12 (40.0)	28 (90.2)

Note: O = organic; C = conventional.