Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-d8cs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T16:48:19.092Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A study of the relative efficiencies of three commercially available dehydrated Rappaport–Vassiliadis media

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2009

Elaine Quail ,
Loraine McGibbon  and
C. R. Fricker
Elaine Quail
Affiliation:
Department of Bacteriology, Stobhill General Hospital, Glasgow, G21 3UW
Loraine McGibbon
Affiliation:
Department of Bacteriology, Stobhill General Hospital, Glasgow, G21 3UW
C. R. Fricker*
Affiliation:
Department of Bacteriology, Stobhill General Hospital, Glasgow, G21 3UW
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed at: Department of Microbiology, University of Reading, London Road, Reading RG1 5AQ
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The relative efficiencies of three commercially available dehydrated Rappaport–Vassiliadis media have been compared with a similar medium prepared from individual constituents in our own laboratory. An inoculation ratio of 1 : 100 was found to be optimal for each of the media tested. Laboratory produced RV-medium was significantly better than the three commercial preparations after 24 h incubation. However, when the duration of incubation was extended to 48 h, there was no significant difference in the number of salmonella isolates obtained when using our own RV medium and that produced by Oxoid Ltd and Difco Ltd (P > 0·05). All of these three media were, however, significantly more effective than the medium produced by Lab.M.(P <0·01).

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 96 , Issue 3 , June 1986 , pp. 425 - 429
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

References

REFERENCES

Anonymous (1975). Meat and meat products – detection of salmonellae (Reference Method). International Standard ISO 3565 Geneva, Switzerland. International Organization for Standardization.Google Scholar
Edel, W. & Kampelmacher, E. H. (1973). Comparative studies on the isolation of sublethaly injured salmonellae in nine European laboratories. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 48, 167–174.Google Scholar
Fricker, C. R. (1984a). A comparison of methods for the isolation of salmonellae from sewage sludge. Zentralblatt für Bakteriologie, Mikrobologie und Hygiene, I. Abt Originale B. 179, 170–178.Google ScholarPubMed
Fricker, C. R. (1984b). A comparison of isolation procedures for salmonellas from polluted water using two forms of Rappaport's medium. Journal of Applied Bacteriology 56, 305–309.Google Scholar
Fricker, C. R. & Girdwood, R. W. A. (1984). The effect of the use of different selective media on the ability to recover salmonellae from seagull faeces. Journal of Hygiene 93, 35–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fricker, C. R., Girdwood, R. W. A. (1985). A note on the isolation of salmonellas from environmental samples using three formulations of Rappaport's broth. Journal of Applied Bacteriology 58, 343–346.Google Scholar
Fricker, C. R., Girdwood, R. W. A. & Munro, D. (1983). A comparison of enrichment media for the isolation of salmonellae from seagull cloacal swabs. Journal of Hygiene 91, 53–5.Google Scholar
Fricker, C. R., Quail, E., McGibbon, L. & Girdwood, R. W. A. (1985). An evaluation of commercially available dehydrated Rappaport-Vassiliadis medium for the isolation of salmonellae from poultry. Journal of Hygiene 95, 337–344.Google Scholar
Harvey, R. W. S., Price, T. H. & Crone, P. B. (1975). Quality control tests of two salmonella enrichment media using different inocula. Journal of Hygiene 74, 375–384.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Juven, B. J., Cox, N. A., Bailey, J. S., Thomson, J. E., Charles, O. W. & Shutze, J. V. (1984). Recovery of Salmonella from artificially contaminated poultry feeds in non-selective and selective broth media. Journal of Food Protection 47, 299–302.Google Scholar
McGibbon, L., Quail, E. & Fricker, C. R. (1984). Isolation of salmonellae using two forms of Rappaport–Vassiliadis medium and brilliant green agar. International Journal of Food Microbiology 1, 171–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Schothorst, M. & Renaud, A. M. (1983). Dynamics of Salmonella isolation with modified Rappaport's medium (RIO). Journal of Applied Bacteriology 54, 209–215.Google Scholar
Vassiliadis, P. (1983). The Rappaport–Vassiliadis (RV) enrichment medium for the isolation of salmonellas: An overview. Journal of Applied Bacteriology 54, 69–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vassiliadis, P., Pateraki, E., Papaiconomou, N., Papadakis, J. & Trichopoulos, D. (1976). Nouveau procede d'enrichissement de Sahnonella. Annales de Microbiologie, Institut Pasteur 127 B, 195–200.Google Scholar
Watson, D. C. & Walker, A. P. (1978). A modification of brilliant green agar for improved isolation of Salmonella. Journal of Applied Bacteriology 45, 195–204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wray, C. & Callow, R. J. (1985). A note on the potential hazards to animals grazing on pasture improperly treated with sewage sludge. Journal of Applied Bacteriology 58, 257–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar