These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

124 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19241527)

  • 1. Comparison of swabbing and destructive methods for microbiological pig carcass sampling.
    Ghafir Y; Daube G
    Lett Appl Microbiol; 2008 Oct; 47(4):322-6. PubMed ID: 19241527
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Experimental comparison of excision and swabbing microbiological sampling methods for carcasses.
    Pepperell R; Reid CA; Solano SN; Hutchison ML; Walters LD; Johnston AM; Buncic S
    J Food Prot; 2005 Oct; 68(10):2163-8. PubMed ID: 16245724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Hygiene indicator microorganisms for selected pathogens on beef, pork, and poultry meats in Belgium.
    Ghafir Y; China B; Dierick K; De Zutter L; Daube G
    J Food Prot; 2008 Jan; 71(1):35-45. PubMed ID: 18236660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Microbiological sampling of swine carcasses: a comparison of data obtained by swabbing with medical gauze and data collected routinely by excision at Swedish abattoirs.
    Lindblad M
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2007 Sep; 118(2):180-5. PubMed ID: 17706823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. An in vitro system for the comparison of excision and wet-dry swabbing for microbiological sampling of beef carcasses.
    Cenci-Goga BT; Miraglia D; Ranucci D; Branciari R; Budelli L; McCrindle CM; Cioffi A; Mammoli R
    J Food Prot; 2007 Apr; 70(4):930-6. PubMed ID: 17477263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A survey of the microbiological quality of feral pig carcasses processed for human consumption in Queensland, Australia.
    Eglezos S; Stuttard E; Huang B; Dykes GA; Fegan N
    Foodborne Pathog Dis; 2008 Feb; 5(1):105-9. PubMed ID: 18260821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Impact of the sampling method and chilling on the Salmonella recovery from pig carcasses.
    Vanantwerpen G; De Zutter L; Berkvens D; Houf K
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2016 Sep; 232():22-5. PubMed ID: 27236225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effects of experience with swabbing procedures on the numbers of bacteria recovered from carcasses by swabbing with sponges.
    Gill CO; Badoni M
    J Food Prot; 2010 Apr; 73(4):747-51. PubMed ID: 20377966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Incidence of Salmonella on beef carcasses relating to the U.S. meat and poultry inspection regulations.
    Sofos JN; Kochevar SL; Reagan JO; Smith GC
    J Food Prot; 1999 May; 62(5):467-73. PubMed ID: 10340666
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Sources and extent of microbiological contamination of beef carcasses in seven United States slaughtering plants.
    Sofos JN; Kochevar SL; Bellinger GR; Buege DR; Hancock DD; Ingham SC; Morgan JB; Reagan JO; Smith GC
    J Food Prot; 1999 Feb; 62(2):140-5. PubMed ID: 10030632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. An evaluation of sampling methods for the detection of Escherichia coli and Salmonella on Turkey carcasses.
    McEvoy JM; Nde CW; Sherwood JS; Logue CM
    J Food Prot; 2005 Jan; 68(1):34-9. PubMed ID: 15690801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Microbiological baseline study of poultry slaughtered in provincially inspected abattoirs in Alberta, Canada.
    Bohaychuk VM; Checkley SL; Gensler GE; Barrios PR
    Can Vet J; 2009 Feb; 50(2):173-8. PubMed ID: 19412397
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Microbiological sampling of carcasses by excision or swabbing with three types of sponge or gauze.
    Martínez B; Celda MF; Anastasio B; García I; López-Mendoza MC
    J Food Prot; 2010 Jan; 73(1):81-7. PubMed ID: 20051208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A comparison of swab and maceration methods for bacterial sampling of pig carcasses.
    Morgan IR; Krautil F; Craven JA
    J Hyg (Lond); 1985 Oct; 95(2):383-90. PubMed ID: 3905957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Microbial contamination occurring on lamb carcasses processed in the United States.
    Duffy EA; Belk KE; Sofos JN; LeValley SB; Kain ML; Tatum JD; Smith GC; Kimberling CV
    J Food Prot; 2001 Apr; 64(4):503-8. PubMed ID: 11307887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Microbiological contamination of reindeer carcass during slaughter.
    Vaarala A; Korkeala H
    Acta Vet Scand; 1994; 35(4):383-8. PubMed ID: 7676921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effect of slaughterhouse and day of sample on the probability of a pig carcass being Salmonella-positive according to the Enterobacteriaceae count in the largest Brazilian pork production region.
    Corbellini LG; Júnior AB; de Freitas Costa E; Duarte AS; Albuquerque ER; Kich JD; Cardoso M; Nauta M
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2016 Jul; 228():58-66. PubMed ID: 27107299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Microbiological consequences of skin removal prior to evisceration of broiler carcasses.
    Berrang ME; Buhr RJ; Cason JA; Dickens JA
    Poult Sci; 2002 Jan; 81(1):134-8. PubMed ID: 11885893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A comparison of wet-dry swabbing and excision sampling methods for microbiological testing of bovine, porcine, and ovine carcasses at red meat slaughterhouses.
    Hutchison ML; Walters LD; Avery SM; Reid CA; Wilson D; Howell M; Johnston AM; Buncic S
    J Food Prot; 2005 Oct; 68(10):2155-62. PubMed ID: 16245723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Risk factors for Salmonella and hygiene indicators in the 10 largest Belgian pig slaughterhouses.
    Delhalle L; De Sadeleer L; Bollaerts K; Farnir F; Saegerman C; Korsak N; Dewulf J; De Zutter L; Daube G
    J Food Prot; 2008 Jul; 71(7):1320-9. PubMed ID: 18680928
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.