论文部分内容阅读
目的参加能力验证活动,评价实验室检测奶粉中阪崎肠杆菌的技术水平和能力,比较不同方法的检测效果。方法参考GB/T 4789.40-2010《食品微生物学检验-阪崎肠杆菌检验》和FDA/CFSAN:2002阪崎肠杆菌检测方法,对所提供的3份能力验证样品进行传统方法检测,同时采用LAMP方法和PCR方法进行验证。结果 3种检测方法结果相吻合,均显示3份样品中有2份检出阪崎肠杆菌(编号分别为2#和3#),1份未检出(编号为1#)。3种方法相比,LAMP方法检测时间最短,仅需8h就可以提供检测结果,且操作更简单方便;PCR方法需要12～15h;而传统方法需要3～5d。结论通过参加此次能力验证,提升了实验室检测奶粉中阪崎肠杆菌的能力,通过比较3种方法的检测结果和周期,认为LAMP和PCR方法可以作为实验室传统验证方法的有效补充。
Objective To take part in proficiency testing activities to evaluate the technical level and ability of Enterobacter sakazakii in the laboratory to detect milk powder and to compare the detection results of different methods. Methods Reference to GB / T 4789.40-2010 “food microbiology test - Enterobacter sakazakii test” and FDA / CFSAN: 2002 Enterobacter sakazakii detection methods, the three proficiency testing samples provided by the traditional method of detection, using LAMP Methods and PCR methods to verify. Results The results of the three methods were in good agreement. The results showed that two of the three samples were positive for Enterobacter sakazakii (2 # and 3 #, respectively) and 1 was not detected (# 1). Compared with the three methods, the LAMP method has the shortest detection time and can provide the test result only in 8 hours, and the operation is simple and convenient; the PCR method needs 12 to 15 hours; and the traditional method takes 3 to 5 days. Conclusions By participating in this proficiency testing, the ability of laboratories to detect Enterobacter sakazakii in milk powder was enhanced. By comparing the results of the three methods and the cycle, LAMP and PCR methods can be considered as effective complement to the traditional laboratory verification methods.