Author
Abstract
Food borne illnesses are common in both developed as well as developing countries. The majority of foodborne diseases are caused by consuming contaminated meat products. This study aimed to evaluate the microbial contamination in different meat samples. Chicken (n=20), Mutton (n=20) and beef (n=20) samples were collected from 10 towns. Total viable count (TVC) and Total coliform count (TCC) in different meat samples were checked. Microscopic, macroscopic and biochemical profiling of isolates (n=108) was done. It was observed that E. coli was the more common (34%) pathogenic bacteria found in raw chicken followed by Salmonella (28%), Staphylococcus (25%), Shigella (8%), Enterobacter (2%), and Bacillus (3%). In Beef Samples E. coli (39%) was more common followed by Salmonella (30%), Staphylococcus (18%) and Enterobacter (8%), and Shigella (5%). While in Mutton Samples E. coli (32%), Salmonella (32%), Staphylococcus (12%), Shigella (12%), Enterobacter (9%), and Bacillus (3%). Antibacterial activity of natural preservatives i.e., Ginger, Garlic, and Radish, and commonly used synthetic preservatives i.e., Sodium nitrite was also checked on isolated strains. It was observed that Ginger and Garlic showed maximum antibacterial activity at the highest concentration used up to 0.8g/ml. Radish showed no antibacterial activity at any concentration. Antibacterial activity of Sodium nitrite was also higher at the maximum concentration used (0.006mM). The renowned harmful effects of Sodium nitrite, make it necessary to devise the use of natural preservatives. It was observed that ginger and garlic may serve as natural preservatives for meat preservation without any side-effect. However, more research is required for the implementation of natural preservatives for meat storage and safety.
Suggested Citation
Rabia Rehman, Sumaira Mazhar*, Mawra Gohar, 2022.
"Evaluation of Microbial Contamination in Meat and its Control Using Preservatives,"
International Journal of Innovations in Science & Technology, 50sea, vol. 4(2), pages 404-415, April.
Handle:
RePEc:abq:ijist1:v:4:y:2022:i:2:p:404-415
Download full text from publisher
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:abq:ijist1:v:4:y:2022:i:2:p:404-415. 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: Iqra Nazeer (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.