7 Y Y E. coli Serotyping O157:H7 O104:H4 O26:H11 Lipopolysaccharide (LPS)= H antigen= O antigenFlagellaH1-H56O1-O173YY
8 Pathogenicity Not all E. coli strains are pathogenic. To be pathogenic, a strain must have the necessary properties to cause disease in human.These properties are called “virulence factors.”Exactly what virulence factors are required is unknown.
9 PathogenicityE. coli can cause human disease when they possess stx1 or stx2.Individuals infected with strains producing stx2 are more likely to develop severe disease than those infected with strains carrying Shiga toxin 1.It is commonly thought that E. coli must contain stx1 or stx2 and eae (intimin) and its substitutes to have the highest chance of causing disease in humans – of course there are always exceptions.
16 Juice, apple cider, berries Food commodities implicated outbreaks of non-O157 STEC infections with known food commodity,CommodityNumber outbreaksFood itemsFruit-nuts3Juice, apple cider, berriesDairy2Cheese, margarineLeafy vegetables1LettuceNo outbreaks due to beef
17 But it all changed in 2010 with the recall of ground beef because of human illness associated with O26 contamination
18 Will Non-O157 STECs Get Adulterant Designation? It is a matter of when and not if any moreLess than 12 months
23 Prevalence of Non-O157 STEC Commercial fed cattle processing plantsCommercial fed cattle processing plants as a function of the season of the yearCommercial cow/bull processing plantsCommercial lamb processing plantsImported raw ground beef material (trim)National ground beef supplyWe are very appreciative of the U.S. meat industry for allowing us to use their facilities as our laboratory.
24 Final (after all interventions) ResultsPre-evisceration(No intervention)Final (after all interventions)E. coli O15744.4%(144/324 carcasses)1.8%(6/326 carcasses)Non-O157 STEC54%(180/334 carcasses)8.3%(27/326 carcasses)
25 STEC Prevalence in Imported and Domestic Boneless Beef Trim Used for Ground Beef
26 STEC Frequency of STEC isolation in boneless beef trim by country of origin
27 Serotypes of STEC isolated by country Underlined serotypes have been associated with human illness.Bolded serotypes have been associated with Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome (HUS).
28 A National Survey of the Prevalence of non-O157 Shiga toxin-producing E. coli in Ground Beef
29 BIFSCo Database Microbiological Regions 15482673
30 Ground Beef Non-O157 STEC 4133 samples Supplies by ground beef manufacturersover a 24 months period24.3% (1006/4133) of the samples were positive for Shiga toxin (stx1 or stx2).In all, 0.2% of the samples (10/4133) could be considered a food safety threat.
31 Control Hide is the principal source of most pathogens. An effective control in order ofsignificance is:1st - Dressing practices2nd - Effective interventionsEffective – scientific supportWorks in your hands – validationMust make contact the potential pathogens3rd - Effective test and hold
32 Summary and Conclusions STEC are a natural part of the animal microflora.Some Non-O157 STEC can cause severe disease in humans.Non-O157 STEC is found at high frequency in pre-harvest samples (feces and hides).The prevalence on carcass depends on the adequacy of dressing practices.
33 Summary and Conclusions A thoughtful and comprehensive approach should be used to develop a national policy with respect to the control of non-O157 STEC.This approach should be such that remove the most virulent E. coli from the food supply not just some and not just any.In this way we are truly reducing the burden to public health of pathogenic E. coli without undue economic hardship.
34 Mike MullenCorporate Account ManagerFor more information contact:or
35 The Sinful Six Interventions to Minimize the Risk for Beef Processors: A Research and Application UpdateHarshavardhan Thippareddi, Ph.D.Associate Professor andExtension Food Safety MicrobiologistDept. of Food Science and TechnologyUniversity of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583
36 Outline Introduction Prevalence of STECs Antimicrobial Interventions for STECsNon-O157 STEC Challenges for the processorNon-intact Beef – STECsSummary
37 Innovative Interventions Developed and Applied by the Beef Industry 1993 E. coli O157:H7 Pacific NorthwestKnife trimming and water washing2009 – Multiple meat processing interventionsSequentialHurdle TechnologiesPrimary and SecondaryAt all phases of meat processing
38 Outline Introduction Prevalence of STECs Antimicrobial Interventions for STECsNon-O157 STEC Challenges for the processorNon-intact Beef – STECsSummary
39 Non-O157 Shiga toxin producing E. coli – From FSIS Public Meeting, 2007 Cattle STEC prevalence data varies:0-19%, dairy cattle1,2,3,419.4 – 56.3% 5, beef cattle feces/hidesFood prevalence data very limited:Pre-evisceration beef carcasses >50%5,6Retail ground beef, 2.3%71Wachsmuth et al., Wells et al., Cray et al., Thran et al., 20015Barkocy-Gallagher, et al., Arthur et al., Samadpour et al., 2006Dr. Hagen, 2007
40 Outline Introduction Prevalence of STECs Antimicrobial Interventions for STECsNon-O157 STEC Challenges for the processorNon-intact Beef – STECsSummary
41 Antimicrobial Interventions for Slaughter, Fabrication and Grinding
42 Antimicrobial Agents: Classification Direct Food AdditivesSod. or Pot. Lactates, Buffered sodium citrate, sod. Diacetate and Lactoferrin, IrradiationConsidered ingredients, need to be labeled as suchSecondary Direct Food AdditivesPeroxy acids, ASC, OzoneNo labeling requirement
43 Antimicrobial Interventions Slaughter:Chemical dehairingHot water rinsesSteam pasteurizationSteam vacuumChemical rinsesLactoferrin
45 Antimicrobial Interventions Trim for Grinding:Organic acid rinsesOzonePer-acetic acidASCMultiple hurdle technologyHigh Pressure ProcessingGround Beef:Irradiation
46 Chemical Rinses Chlorine, Organic acids most commonly used Organic acids – lactic, acetic, citricImproves microbiological quality of carcassesOther chemicals include Per-oxy acetic acid, Acidified sodium chlorite, CPC
47 Antimicrobials - Variety High InoculumLow InoculumSurvivalReductionNon-Trt5.8-220.127.116.11.50.6AC, 0.001%18.104.22.168.8AA, 2%4.21.62.02.1LA,22.214.171.124.1LB, 1%126.96.36.199PAA, 0.02%188.8.131.52ASC, 0.02%3.91.9CPC, 0.5%1.04.80.5Boneless beef short plates & Lean tissue pieces; E. coli O157:H7Ransom et al., 2003
48 Antimicrobial Interventions for Non-intact Beef Oklahoma State / Ross (2010) study compared 10 different antimicrobials for efficacy on surface inoculated beef subprimalsCourtesy:Arun Ramabadran,Spray Systems Co., Wheaton, ILCytoGuard is a registered trademark of A&B Ingredients
49 Outline Introduction Prevalence of STECs Antimicrobial Interventions for STECsNon-O157 STEC Challenges for the processorNon-intact Beef – STECsSummary
50 Non-O157 STEC Challenges for the Beef Processor Biology and characteristics of the organisms are unknownCharacteristics of SignificanceThermal resistanceAcid resistanceDehydration – AwIrradiationBehavior to antimicrobial interventions traditionally used in beef processing
51 Characteristics of Significance in Meat Processing – Growth @ 10°C Strain O26:H11 survived, but did not growLPD h to 39.4 hGrowth rate – to log CFU/g/hO145 and O157 had shorter LPD compared to O45, O103, and O121 (O111 had intermediate LPD)After end of LPD, no difference in growth rate(Chatzikyriakidiu et al., 2011)
52 Characteristics of Significance in Meat Processing – Growth (Thippareddi et al., Unpublished)
53 Characteristics of Significance in Meat Processing – Thermal Resistance L. monocytogenesSalmonella spp.LeanFatty125°F81.371.161-6254.3135°F184.108.40.206145°F0.61.20.54Z Value9.311.410STECsBrothGround Beef130°F (54.4°C)140°F (60°C)150°F (65.5°C)(Fain et al., 2009; Leong et al., 2011, Vasan et al., 2011)
54 Characteristics of Significance in Meat Processing – Acid Resistance E. coli O157:H7 reductions of >7.70 log CFU/ml was observed in lemon and lime juices* within 72 h at 22°CSTECs (six serotypes) reduction of >6 log within 72 h at 22°C in lemon and lime juices*Lemon Juice: 6.8° Brix; 2.62 pH; 4.62 TA*Lime Juice: 7.4° Brix; 2.54 pH; 4.82 TA(Enache et al., 2009; Kataoka et al., 2011)
55 Non-O157 STECs – Properties of Significance, Acid Resistance The present study shows that the process used in the manufacture of French sausages results in a complete destruction of NAR STEC strains after 60 days, but it does not have the same effect on the AR STEC strains.Montet et al., 2009
56 Outline Introduction Prevalence of STECs Antimicrobial Interventions for STECsNon-O157 STEC Challenges for the processorNon-intact Beef – STECsSummary
57 Translocation and Thermal Inactivation of Shiga Toxin-Producing E Translocation and Thermal Inactivation of Shiga Toxin-Producing E. coli in Blade and Chemically Tenderized BeefLuchansky, J. B., J. E. Call, R. K. Phebus, and H. Thippareddi Translocation of surface inoculated Escherichia coli O157:H7 into beef subprimals following blade tenderization. J. Food Prot. 71:Luchansky, J. B., A. C. S. Porto-Fett, B. Shoyer, R. K. Phebus, H. Thippareddi, and J. E. Call Thermal inactivation of Escherichia coli O157:H7 in blade tenderized beef steaks cooked on a commercial open-flame gas grill. J. Food Prot. 72:Luchansky, J. B., A. C. S. Porto-Fett, B. A. Shoyer, J. E. Call, W. Schlosser, W. Shaw, N. Bauer, and H. Latimer Inactivation of Shiga toxin-producing O157:H7 and non-O157:H7 Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli in brine-injected, gas-grilled steaks. J. Food Prot. 74:Luchansky, J. B., A. C. S. Porto-Fett, B. A. Shoyer, J. E. Call, W. Schlosser, W. Shaw, N. Bauer, and H. Latimer Fate of Shiga toxin-producing O157:H7 and non-O157:H7 Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli in blade tenderized beef steaks cooked on a commercial open-flame gas grill. J. Food Prot., Submitted
58 STEC and ECOH behave similarly! No discernible differences in translocation between ECOH and STEC following blade tenderization or chemical injection of beef sub-primalsMajority of cells to top-most 1 cmMore transfer via single pass and lean side inoculation and tenderization than double pass and fat side inoculation and tenderization (NCBA Study)Courtesy: Dr. John Luchansky & the ARS Non-Intact Team
59 STEC and ECOH behave similarly! No discernible differences in thermal resistance between STEC and ECOH following cooking of blade tenderized or chemically-injected steaksHigher temperatures generated greater lethalityNo difference in lethality based on steak thickness (1.0 or 1.5 in.)Subtle differences in thermal resistance between steaks injected with lactate-containing brine compared to brine without lactate that were cooked at 140FCourtesy: Dr. John Luchansky & the ARS Non-Intact Team
60 Outline Introduction Prevalence of STECs Antimicrobial Interventions for STECsNon-O157 STEC Challenges for the processorNon-intact Beef – STECsSummary
61 SummarySTECs seem to be similar in characteristics to E. coli O157:H7 based on current researchVery few interventions eliminate the E. coli O157:H7 and non-O157 STEC riskNovel technologies such as carcass irradiation and HPP should be optimized and validated to assure safety of intact as well as non-intact beef products
62 Together, we can reduce E. coli O157. Dr Together, we can reduce E. coli O157. Dr. Brad Morgan, Food Safety Specialist Pfizer Animal HealthThe beef industry has made significant strides in reducing risks and costs associated with foodborne pathogens.However, food safety remains a significant concern due to increasing media and regulatory scrutiny.E. coli O157 is naturally occurring in animals and the environment, which makes it an ever-present challenge.The beef industry has a good track record for safety, but there is always room to improve.Now there is a tool available to your suppliers that can help reduce E. coli O157 before it enters the packing plant — in the cattle, at the feedlot — thereby helping reduce E. coli O157 throughout the beef processing chain.Escherichia Coli Bacterial Extract vaccine* with SRP® technology is the only conditionally licensed product that can help reduce E. coli O157** carrier state prevalence and shedding at the source — in the cattle. Reducing the amount of E. coli O157 coming into the plant can give other interventions in place an opportunity to be as effective as possible.The goal for us at Pfizer Animal Health is to help ensure continued confidence in the industry to help keep demand for our products strong.* This product license is conditional. Efficacy and potency test studies are in progress.** Escherichia coli O157:H7 bacterial strain1Woerner DR, Ransom JR, Sofos JN, Dewell GA, Smith GC, Salman MD, et al. Determining the Prevalence of Escherichia coli O157 in Cattle and Beef from the Feedlot to the Cooler. J Food Prot 2006;69:
63 E.COLI: Legal Issues and the Big Six Robert G. HibbertK&L Gates LLP
64 E.coli 0157:H7 Precedent 1994 Policy Statement Texas Food Industry v. Espy (1994)Extension to other products – trim, non-intactAvoidance of rulemakingIntegration with HACCP
65 E.coli Precedent (continued) Commercial responseTechnological responsesException proves the rule-labeling and product handling distinctions
70 FOR MORE INFORMATIONMohammad Koohmaraie, Ph.D.:Harshavardhan Thippareddi, Ph.D.:Robert G. Hibbert:Mike Fielding:Bill McDowell:Ecolab:Pfizer Animal Health:Webinar recording and PowerPoint presentation will be ed to you within 48 hours. For more information: