Antibiogram of Bacteria Isolated from Roasted Bush Meat and Chicken Samples Sold in Afikpo, Nigeria
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/4c2mwg52Keywords:
bacteria, bush meat, chicken, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pnuemoniae, roasted, Salmonella, Shigella, sites, StaphylococalAbstract
This study was to determine the antibiogram of bacteria isolated from roasted chicken and bush meat sold in Afikpo North L.G.A. The sampling sites emplored in this study were Afikpo (site 1), Amasiri(site 2), Oziza(site 3), Uwana(site 4), Enohia (site 5). The bacteria isolated from bush meat were Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pnuemoniae, Shigella and Salmonella species while the chicken samples bacteria isolated were Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Streptococcus fecalis, Proteus vulgaris, P.mirabilis Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pnuemoniae, Shigella and Salmonella species. The chicken samples had more bacteria contamination than the bush meat and this could be due to the moisture content, temperature and pH. Moisture content had a range of 86-95(%) while the bush meat had a moisture content of 83-88(%). The pH on the chicken sample ranged from 6.5-7.7 while the bush meat had a pH value range of 6.8-7.4. The temperature had a range of 30-38(oC), while the bush meat had a temperature range of 33- 54(oC). The different microbial groups were enumerated and for the roasted chicken samples, Total aerobic count had a range of 6.6 x 106- 12.4 x 106 cfu/ml, Total coliform count 5.0x105 – 9.2x105 cfu/ml, total fecal coliform count had a range of 3.0x105 - 4.9x105 cfu/ml, total Salmonella and Shigella count, 1.6x104 - 4.0x104 cfu/ml and total Staphylococal count had a range of 0.8x104-3.6x104 cfu/ml while for the bush meat samples, Total aerobic count was 7.9x105-12.4x106 Cfu/ml, total coliform count 5.8x105 – 8.9x105 Cfu/ml, total fecal coliform count 1.9x105 – 5.5x105 cfu/ml, total Salmonella and Shigella count, 0.8x104 - 4.5x104 cfu/ml and total Staphylococal count had a range of 0.5x104-4.1x104 cfu/ml .there was no significant difference (p<0.05) between the chicken and bush meat samples in the same location but there was a significant difference(p<0.05) between the microbial loads on the chicken and bush meat samples at the 5 different sites. Antimicrobial susceptibility test showed that the gram negative bacteria were more resistant than the gram positive bacteria and the isolates from the chicken were more resistant than the bacteria from the bush meat. Ciprofloxacin and perfloxacin showed the most sensitivity to the bacteria isolated from both samples while most drug they were resistant to were septrin (SXT), Ampicillin (AM) and Septromycin(S). This study therefore show that improper hygienic practices and exposure of roasted chicken and meat popularly sold in Afikpo could pose as a public health threat to the consumers.
Keywords- , ,,, ,, , , ,
Downloads
References
1. R. D.May ,R, Margesin ,E. Klingbichel , E.D. Harhugen,D.Yenewe , F. Schiner & I.T. Mark . Rapid detection of meat spoilage by measuring volatile organic compounds by using proto transferreaction mass spectrophotometry. Appl. Env. Microbiol. 69: 4697-4705, 2003.
2. H. B. Hedrick, E.D Aberle, Y.C. Fore and R.A. Merkel Principles of meat science. 3rd Kendall Hunt Publishing D. Ugugue Iowa, 1994.
3. K.A. Odusole , and O.O. Akinyanju . Red suya syndrome –acute intravascular Adminstration and control.
Consumer safety bulletin. 2(2): 20-24, 2003.
4. D.G.H. Anihouvi, A.P.P. Kayode,V.B.Anihouvi, P. Azokpota, S.O. Kotchoni & D.J Hounhouigan.Microbial contamination associated with the processing of tchachanga, a roasted meat product. Afr. J. Biotechnol., 12: 2449-2455, 2013.
5. A.C. Anderson, D. Jonas, I. Huber, L. Karygianni & J. Wolber. Enterococcus faecalis from food, clinical specimens and oral sites: Prevalence of virulence factors in association with biofilm formation. Front. Microbiol., 6. 10.3389, 2016.
6. M.D. Salihu , A.U. Junaidu & A.A. Magaji . Bacteriological quality of traditionally prepared fried ground beef (Dambun nama) in Sokoto, Nigeria. Advance Journal of Food Science and Technology. 2(3):145–147, 2010.
7. T.R. Mulvaney. In: Cunniff P, ed. Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International. 16th ed. Arlington, Va.; 42-1-42-2, 1995.
8. A. Reda , B. Seyoum &J. Yimam J. Antibiotic susceptibility patterns of Salmonella and Shigella isolates in Harer, Eastern Ethiopia. Journal of Infectious Diseases and Immunity., 3:34–39, 2011.
9. A.U. Nnachi &C.O Ukaegbu . Microbial quality of raw meat sold in Onitsha, Anambra State, Nigeria.
International Journal of Scientific Research. 3:214–218, 2014.
10. M.B. Batz, M.P. Doyle, J.G. Morris & R. Singh. Attributing illness to food. Emerg. Infect. Dis., 11: 993-999, 2005.
11. AOAC. Official methods of analyses. Association of official Analytical chemist, Washington D.C. Pp 808, 831-835, 1113, 1995.
12. M. Cheesbrough. District laboratory practice in tropical countries. Part 2. p. 62-70 Cambridge University Press, Great Britain, 2004.
13. MRS. S ABIRAMASUNDARI, GAYATHIRI D, MEHALA K, SIVARANJINI S, KOUSALYA R.
"DESIGN OF SMART TOLL CASH COLLECTION USING NFC READER." International Journal of
Communication and Computer Technologies 7 (2019), 19-23. doi:10.31838/ijccts/07.SP01.04
14. Popp, F.-A.Consciousness as evolutionary process based on coherent states (2008) NeuroQuantology, 6 (4),
pp. 431-439.
15. Benítez-King, G., Ramírez-Rodríguez, G., Ortíz-López, L. Altered microtubule associated proteins in schizophrenia (2007) NeuroQuantology, 5 (1), pp. 58-61.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
