2015年-2017年北京市食源性副溶血性弧菌监测结果分析
|
摘要
目的了解北京市食源性副溶血性弧菌污染状况,为预防与控制食源性疾病发生提供依据。方法对2015年-2017年北京市1 148份食品样品开展副溶血性弧菌监测。结果 1 148份食品样品中副溶血性弧菌检出率为11.0%(126/1 148)。2015年-2017年检出率分别为12.9%、9.8%、10.0%。淡水产品副溶血性弧菌检出率为13.8%,海产品为11.8%。淡水甲壳类检出率为28.9%,高于淡水鱼(12.4%)。软体动物、甲壳类、鱼类中副溶血性弧菌检出率分别为14.1%、12.9%、9.5%;常温、冰鲜、冷冻下副溶血性弧菌检出率分别为12.9%、9.6%、3.7%。流通环节检出率为12.7%,高于餐饮环节(5.8%)。第3季度副溶血性弧菌检出率最高(13.8%)。结论淡水产品和海产品受副溶血性弧菌污染程度相当,流通环节样品污染程度高于其他环节,温度是副溶血性弧菌生长的潜在影响因素。
Objective To supervise the foodborne Vibrio parachaemolyticus pollution status in food samples of Beijing, so as to provide basis for the prevention and control of foodborne disease. Methods A total of 1 148 food samples from 2005 to 2016 in Beijing were monitored for Vibrio parachaemolyticus. Results The total detection rate of 1 148 food samples was 11.0%(126/1 148). The detection rates for 2015-2017 were 12.9%, 9.8%, and 10.0%, respectively. The detection rate of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in freshwater products and seafood was 13.8% and 11.8%. The detection rate of freshwater crustaceans was 28.9%, which was higher than that of freshwater fish(12.4%)(P<0.05). The detection rate of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in seafood was 14.1% for molluscs, 12.9% for crustaceans, and 9.5% for fishes. The detection rate of Vibrio parahaemolyticus at different storage temperatures was 12.9% at room temperature, 9.6% at chilled, and 3.7% at freezing(P<0.05). The detection rate of Vibrio parahaemolyticus was 12.7% in circulation, which was higher than that of catering units(5.8%)(P<0.05). In the third quarter, the detection rate of Vibrio parahaemolyticus was 13.8%. Conclusion Freshwater production and seafood products were all contaminated with Vibrio parahaemolyticus. Contamination levels in circulation samples are higher than other links. Temperature is a potential influence factor for the growth of Vibrio parahaemolyticus.
Objective To supervise the foodborne Vibrio parachaemolyticus pollution status in food samples of Beijing, so as to provide basis for the prevention and control of foodborne disease. Methods A total of 1 148 food samples from 2005 to 2016 in Beijing were monitored for Vibrio parachaemolyticus. Results The total detection rate of 1 148 food samples was 11.0%(126/1 148). The detection rates for 2015-2017 were 12.9%, 9.8%, and 10.0%, respectively. The detection rate of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in freshwater products and seafood was 13.8% and 11.8%. The detection rate of freshwater crustaceans was 28.9%, which was higher than that of freshwater fish(12.4%)(P<0.05). The detection rate of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in seafood was 14.1% for molluscs, 12.9% for crustaceans, and 9.5% for fishes. The detection rate of Vibrio parahaemolyticus at different storage temperatures was 12.9% at room temperature, 9.6% at chilled, and 3.7% at freezing(P<0.05). The detection rate of Vibrio parahaemolyticus was 12.7% in circulation, which was higher than that of catering units(5.8%)(P<0.05). In the third quarter, the detection rate of Vibrio parahaemolyticus was 13.8%. Conclusion Freshwater production and seafood products were all contaminated with Vibrio parahaemolyticus. Contamination levels in circulation samples are higher than other links. Temperature is a potential influence factor for the growth of Vibrio parahaemolyticus.
引文
[1] 裴晓燕, 余波, 张秀丽, 等. 中国内陆6省(自治区)淡水鱼养殖、销售和餐饮环节常见嗜盐性弧菌污染调查[J]. 中国食品卫生杂志, 2016, 28(1): 79-83.
[2] 郑文龙, 王卓, 马洁, 等. 副溶血性弧菌病原学和分子流行病学流行特征研究进展[J]. 疾病监测, 2015, 30(4): 337-339.
[3] 马蕊, 王超, 吴阳博, 等. 2014年北京市食源性疾病暴发事件监测流行病学分析[J]. 卫生研究, 2017, 46(5): 841-846.
[4] 中华人民共和国国家卫生和计划生育委员会. GB 4789.7—2013 食品安全国家标准食品微生物学检验副溶血性弧菌检验[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2013.
[5] 李海麟, 何洁仪, 梁伯衡, 等. 广州市2009年-2014年生食水产品副溶血性弧菌监测结果分析[J]. 中国卫生检验杂志, 2016, 26(19): 2830-2833.
[6] 李涛, 黎明, 苗艳芳, 等. 2016年成都市淡水鱼及其生长环境中致病性弧菌分布及毒力基因特征分析[J]. 应用预防医学, 2017, 23(6): 469-474.
[7] 张铮, 陈飒, 沈托, 等. 陕西省水产品及养殖环境中副溶血性弧菌监测分析[J]. 中国卫生检验杂志, 2018, 28(1): 93-105.
[8] 陈佳璇, 邓志爱, 和鹏, 等. 2013年广州市生吃水产品中副溶血性弧菌污染情况调查分析[J]. 中国卫生检验杂志, 2015, 25(16): 2795-2799.
[9] 胡元玮, 吴斌, 陈志清, 等. 水产鱼中致病性弧菌的主动监测及危险分析[J]. 中国卫生检验杂志, 2015, 25(21): 3726-3730.
[10] 谢思柔, 杜田, 张金金, 等. 深圳市福田区2011-2016年水产品中副溶血性弧菌监测结果[J]. 中国热带医学, 2017, 17(12): 1225-1228.
[11] 熊素平. 天津市水产品中副溶血性弧菌污染情况调查[J]. 职业与健康, 2013, 29(8): 969-970.
[12] 陈朱, 吴南卫, 陈人强, 等. 三亚市主动监测海产品副溶血性弧菌血清分型、毒力基因及耐药性研究[J]. 中国卫生检验杂志, 2014, 24(14): 2112-2115.
[13] Sobrinho Pde S, Destro MT, Franco BD, et al. Correlation between environmental factors and prevalence of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in oysters harvested in the southern coastal area of Sao Paulo State, Brazil[J]. Appl Environ Microbiol, 2010, 76(4): 1290-1293.
[14] 姜照, 张桂芳, 伍海燕, 等. 2012-2016年烟台市627份海产品副溶血性弧菌监测结果分析[J]. 现代预防医学, 2017, 44(17): 3125-3149.
[15] 秦磊, 王建红, 高静, 等. 2016年河北省唐山市淡水养殖环节中副溶血性弧菌监测结果分析[J]. 医学动物防制, 2018, 34(4): 307-310.
[2] 郑文龙, 王卓, 马洁, 等. 副溶血性弧菌病原学和分子流行病学流行特征研究进展[J]. 疾病监测, 2015, 30(4): 337-339.
[3] 马蕊, 王超, 吴阳博, 等. 2014年北京市食源性疾病暴发事件监测流行病学分析[J]. 卫生研究, 2017, 46(5): 841-846.
[4] 中华人民共和国国家卫生和计划生育委员会. GB 4789.7—2013 食品安全国家标准食品微生物学检验副溶血性弧菌检验[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2013.
[5] 李海麟, 何洁仪, 梁伯衡, 等. 广州市2009年-2014年生食水产品副溶血性弧菌监测结果分析[J]. 中国卫生检验杂志, 2016, 26(19): 2830-2833.
[6] 李涛, 黎明, 苗艳芳, 等. 2016年成都市淡水鱼及其生长环境中致病性弧菌分布及毒力基因特征分析[J]. 应用预防医学, 2017, 23(6): 469-474.
[7] 张铮, 陈飒, 沈托, 等. 陕西省水产品及养殖环境中副溶血性弧菌监测分析[J]. 中国卫生检验杂志, 2018, 28(1): 93-105.
[8] 陈佳璇, 邓志爱, 和鹏, 等. 2013年广州市生吃水产品中副溶血性弧菌污染情况调查分析[J]. 中国卫生检验杂志, 2015, 25(16): 2795-2799.
[9] 胡元玮, 吴斌, 陈志清, 等. 水产鱼中致病性弧菌的主动监测及危险分析[J]. 中国卫生检验杂志, 2015, 25(21): 3726-3730.
[10] 谢思柔, 杜田, 张金金, 等. 深圳市福田区2011-2016年水产品中副溶血性弧菌监测结果[J]. 中国热带医学, 2017, 17(12): 1225-1228.
[11] 熊素平. 天津市水产品中副溶血性弧菌污染情况调查[J]. 职业与健康, 2013, 29(8): 969-970.
[12] 陈朱, 吴南卫, 陈人强, 等. 三亚市主动监测海产品副溶血性弧菌血清分型、毒力基因及耐药性研究[J]. 中国卫生检验杂志, 2014, 24(14): 2112-2115.
[13] Sobrinho Pde S, Destro MT, Franco BD, et al. Correlation between environmental factors and prevalence of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in oysters harvested in the southern coastal area of Sao Paulo State, Brazil[J]. Appl Environ Microbiol, 2010, 76(4): 1290-1293.
[14] 姜照, 张桂芳, 伍海燕, 等. 2012-2016年烟台市627份海产品副溶血性弧菌监测结果分析[J]. 现代预防医学, 2017, 44(17): 3125-3149.
[15] 秦磊, 王建红, 高静, 等. 2016年河北省唐山市淡水养殖环节中副溶血性弧菌监测结果分析[J]. 医学动物防制, 2018, 34(4): 307-310.