Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the antimicrobial neutralizing ability of BPW versus nBPW on broiler carcasses inoculated with a mixture of antibiotic-resistant Salmonella enterica serovars.
Methods: Young broiler carcasses were collected and inoculated with a Salmonella inoculum containing serovars Typhimurium, Enteritidis, and Heidelberg, resistant to 100.0 µg/ml rifampicin, at 6.0±0.4 log CFU/ml. Inoculated carcasses were treated by peracetic acid (PAA; 0.2%) or cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC; 0.8%) rinse, or a CPC rinse followed by 80 min ice-water bath (CPC80; 0.8%) (n=5). Following antimicrobial application and a water rinse (50±5 ml), carcasses were drip-dried for one minute and rinsed in 100 ml BPW or nBPW. After rinsing, rinse fluids were collected and subjected to USDA-prescribed Salmonella detection procedures.
Results: Only 53.3% of the PAA-BPW-treated carcasses were presumptively positive for Salmonella, while all other treatments (PAA-nBPW, CPC-BPW, CPC-nBPW, CPC80-BPW, CPC80-nBPW) returned 100% of samples Salmonella-positive. The effectiveness of BPW was lower (P<0.001) than nBPW in capacity to neutralize antimicrobials on broiler carcasses. The rinse fluid by antimicrobial intervention combination BPW-PAA had lower (P<0.001) Salmonella detection than all other combinations of rinse fluids and antimicrobials.
Significance: Use of nBPW is anticipated to increase pathogen detection from poultry carcasses treated with antimicrobial interventions, though food safety impacts of nBPW use in routine testing remain unknown.