Meat + Poultry - September 2008 - 95

RAPID TESTING

processing plants
an option to see
quantitative results, which provides customers
more information. This information allows
them to ﬁnd and focus on potential problem areas or entry
points of Listeria."

Looking ahead
How will detection methods and rapid
tests for pathogens likely evolve...and
why? "The test result is only as good as
the sample that was taken," says AMIF's
Huffman. "We need to continue to see
improvements in our ability to have scientiﬁcally-justiﬁed sampling plans."
Foss is expanding the portfolio of tests
for its existing solution and doing research
and development in new technology areas that could speed-up the screening
process dramatically, Baek says.
Food processors must select test
methods that provide accurate and reproducible results, iterates 3M's Habas.
"There are many other variables that
can affect a microbiological test result
including complicated food matrices, the
number of transfer steps, complexity of
interpreting the test, sample size required
for the test and the level of competing
background ﬂora," he adds.
"Cost effectiveness is another critical factor for food processors and includes many variables including enrichment media, equipment required,
reagents and assay costs. Relying on
a competent technical support team
should also be considered to reduce
any downtime in the lab."
Future research will be aimed at
ﬁnding ways to grow pathogens faster
and to concentrate them more effectively from enrichments in order to shorten
the time to result even further, say DuPont Qualicon's DeMarco and Wallace.
"We will also continue to improve the
ability to detect multiple pathogens or
genetic markers in a single assay," they
predict. The evolution of rapid testing
will also lean towards ﬁnding ways to
make food testing more convenient and

France-based bioMérieux's VIDAS
and mini VIDAS, multi-parameter
instruments use ELFA (Enzyme
Linked Fluorescent Assay) technology.
(Photo courtesy of bioMérieux)

affordable, such as producing quicker
and smaller testing devices, they said.

"Integrated systems that combine automated sample preparation and detection will become more important over
time, as this will greatly decrease the
potential for human error in testing
and lead to more accurate and consistent results," they conclude.
Industry might someday be able to
get real-time results from rapid testing;
Warren-Serna says, however, several
barriers related to sample preparation
will need to be addressed prior to using
them effectively in the marketplace.
"Food represents a very challenging
matrix - there are a lot of variables, depending on the food type, that directly
interfere with the ability to efﬁciently deliver foodborne pathogens to a detection
system," she says. "Moreover, delivery of
a target that is generally in low concentration and not evenly distributed requires
that the detection system is extremely
sensitive. At the same time, the detection
system must be able to differentiate signal
from noise at very low levels."
Technologies are improving, but sample preparation techniques have not yet
evolved to the point where such technologies (e.g. biosensors) can effectively
ﬁnd the targets, she concludes.
There is a continued drive to increase sensitivity and speciﬁcity, reduce
time to result and keep costs low, says
3M's Habas. "There are numerous development programs in government,
academia and industry focusing on
molecular pathogen tests for the foodprocessing industry," he adds.
We would like to hear from you - to comment on
this story or to request reprints, contact us by
e-mail at: meatpoultry@sosland.com.

Meat + Poultry - September 2008

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Meat + Poultry - September 2008