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 *

70 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3905957)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Destructive and nondestructive procedures to obtain chicken carcass samples for Escherichia coli and Salmonella spp. detection.
    Cossi MV; de Almeida MV; Dias MR; de Arruda Pinto PS; Nero LA
    Foodborne Pathog Dis; 2011 Dec; 8(12):1303-7. PubMed ID: 21854266
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Excision vs sponge swabbing - a comparison of methods for the microbiological sampling of beef, pork and lamb carcasses.
    Pearce RA; Bolton DJ
    J Appl Microbiol; 2005; 98(4):896-900. PubMed ID: 15752336
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Control of the contamination of pig carcasses by Escherichia coli from their mouths.
    Gill CO; Jones T
    Int J Food Microbiol; 1998 Oct; 44(1-2):43-8. PubMed ID: 9849783
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Two sampling techniques for game meat.
    van der Merwe M; Jooste PJ; Hoffman LC; Calitz FJ
    J S Afr Vet Assoc; 2013 Mar; 84(1):E1-6. PubMed ID: 23718896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Quantitative distribution of Salmonella spp. and Escherichia coli on beef carcasses and raw beef at retail establishments.
    Martínez-Chávez L; Cabrera-Diaz E; Pérez-Montaño JA; Garay-Martínez LE; Varela-Hernández JJ; Castillo A; Lucia L; Ávila-Novoa MG; Cardona-López MA; Gutiérrez-González P; Martínez-Gonzáles NE
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2015 Oct; 210():149-55. PubMed ID: 26125489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Bacterial populations on dressed pig carcasses.
    Morgan IR; Krautil FL; Craven JA
    Epidemiol Infect; 1987 Feb; 98(1):15-24. PubMed ID: 3549337
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Prediction of Salmonella carcass contamination by a comparative quantitative analysis of E. coli and Salmonella during pig slaughter.
    Nauta M; Barfod K; Hald T; Sørensen AH; Emborg HD; Aabo S
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2013 Sep; 166(2):231-7. PubMed ID: 23973833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Microbiological carcass sampling methods to achieve compliance with 2001/471/EC and new hygiene regulations.
    Byrne B; Dunne G; Lyng J; Bolton DJ
    Res Microbiol; 2005; 156(1):104-6. PubMed ID: 15636754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of cotton swab versus algiante swab sampling method in the bacteriological examination of broiler chickens.
    Notermans S; Hindle V; Kampelmacher EH
    J Hyg (Lond); 1976 Oct; 77(2):205-10. PubMed ID: 789765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Salmonella Detection and Counting on Pig Carcasses and Cutting Lines in Italian Slaughterhouses.
    Bonardi S; Bolzoni L; Brindani F; Scaltriti E; Cavallini P; Giuseppe C; Pongolini S
    Foodborne Pathog Dis; 2018 Jun; 15(6):339-345. PubMed ID: 29723045
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Isolation of salmonellae from pork carcasses.
    Carpenter JA; Elliot JG; Reynolds AE
    Appl Microbiol; 1973 May; 25(5):731-4. PubMed ID: 4577175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Salmonella in slaughter pigs in Northern Ireland: prevalence and use of statistical modelling to investigate sample and abattoir effects.
    McDowell SW; Porter R; Madden R; Cooper B; Neill SD
    Int J Food Microbiol; 2007 Sep; 118(2):116-25. PubMed ID: 17683820
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.