Coxiella burnetii DNA in milk, milk products, and fermented dairy products
Artikel-Kategorie: Review article
Online veröffentlicht: 20. Okt. 2021
Seitenbereich: 441 - 447
Eingereicht: 29. März 2021
Akzeptiert: 04. Okt. 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jvetres-2021-0055
Schlüsselwörter
© 2021 L. Valkovska et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.
The zoonotic disease Q fever is widespread globally, and poses a serious threat to human health in Europe. The disease-causing agent is
In the period of 2015–2019, the total number of confirmed human cases of Q fever in the European Union ranged from 822 to 950 per year, corresponding to 0.19 cases per 100,000 population (13). One to three human cases per year were registered in Latvia during the years 2008–2015. Human cases of Q fever were not reported during the more recent period of 2016–2019; however, one case was identified in the first quarter of 2020 (8).
Few data on human Q fever infections conclusively proven to have been
In some European countries, shedding of this pathogen
Dairy products besides milk have been tested for the presence of
In the production of fermented sour milk products (yogurts, yogurt drinks and kefir), one of two pasteurisation regimes can be used: 85–87°C for 5–10 min or 90–95°C for 2–8 min. Sour cream is obtained from cream after milk separation and pasteurisation at 84–88°C for 2–10 min or 85–98°C for 20 s, depending on the fat content, and after treatment with lactic acid bacteria cultures. A homogenisation step can also be used at 50–70°C and 6–12.5 MPa. During the cottage cheese production process, the pasteurisation is carried out at 76–80°C for 15–20 s. In Latvia, the lowest pasteurisation temperatures are used for the raw milk in the cheese production process: 72–76°C for 15–20 s (29). Goat’s milk is usually pasteurised at 72°C for 15 s (5).
There are around 40 milk processing companies operating in Latvia (18), but raw milk can be sold directly to consumers as well. For milk sold unprocessed, the current microbiological quality requirements according to Regulation No. 73 of the Cabinet of Ministers of Latvia “The requirements for small-scale circulation of raw cow’s and goat’s milk” (for production on a scale of less than 1000 t per year) are as follows: the total number of bacteria at a temperature of 30°C must be ≤ 100,000 mL−1, the number of somatic cells ≤ 400,000 mL−1, the number of
In summary, the quality of milk and milk products depends on the combination of various factors, namely animal health, milk microbiological quality, and the technological processes of food production. Assuming that raw milk must be obtained only from healthy animals and its quality is compliant with requirements of the Latvian and European Union legislation, whether these stipulations as the existing quality criteria are sufficient to exclude the presence of
Taking into account that paediatric cases of alimentary infection with Q fever have been described in some countries (25) and dairy products are an important part of the human diet in Latvia from as early as six months of age (39), special attention was paid to yogurts and other fermented products with added ingredients, which are often consumed by children as well as adults (24, 38). The present study focused on unpasteurised and pasteurised milk samples and fermented dairy products with added ingredients from the retail market in Latvia and assessed the presence of
The total number of samples tested was 213. The 187 samples which were from Latvia originated from 41 producers: milk processing companies, individual farms or artisanal producers. Thirty-two samples represented 18 individual cattle or goat farms selling raw milk and milk products. The herd size of the cattle farms ranged from 5 to 500 cows, and that of the goat farms ranged from 100 to 300 animals. Milk processing companies were the origin of 155 samples: 17 pasteurised milk samples with fat content of 1.5–4.0% as indicated on the label, 28 yogurt and yogurt drink samples (mainly with fruit, berries and other ingredients), 40 cottage cheese and home-style cheese samples made from skimmed or whole milk with fat content of 0.5 or 9.0%, respectively, and 68 other cow’s milk products. Among the 41 domestic producers sampled, the four largest Latvian dairy processing companies were represented with 10 to 31 samples each. Twenty-six samples originating from other countries (Estonia (1), France (1), Germany (4), Greece (1), Italy (1), Lithuania (10), the Netherlands (2), Poland (5), and Spain (1)) were also included in the study. Nine samples were UHT products: three were cream, three were protein drinks, two goat’s milk, and one pasteurised milk.
Sixty four fermented products and three pasteurised milk samples (in total n = 67) contained various added ingredients for flavour. Special attention was paid to products that could be more attractive to children with chocolate, cacao, berries and other fruit (n = 56). Dill, garlic, dried garlic, dried onions, leeks, parsley, natural herbal flavouring, wheat sprouts, paprika, seed mixture, spices and ham were also constituents of some fermented milk products tested (n = 11). The total number of fermented products was 160. The sample size variation and other information are given in Table 1.
The overview of the analysed samples
Product type | Producers | Number of samples originating from Latvia/those with additives | Number of samples from foreign sources/those with additives | Sample size |
---|---|---|---|---|
Cow’s milk products | ||||
Unpasteurised milk | Individual farms | 15/0 | 0/0 | 20–1,000 mL |
Heat-treated milk | Milk processing companies | 3/0 | 0/0 | 500–1,000 mL |
Pasteurised milk | Milk processing companies | 17/3 | 2/0 | 200–1,000 mL |
Yogurts, yogurt drinks | Milk processing companies, individual farms | 28/23 | 4/4 | 100–700 g |
Cottage cheese, home-style cheese, and desserts | Milk processing companies | 40/17 | 4/2 | 35–400 g |
Cheese (hard, semi-hard, smoked, and cheese spread) | Milk processing companies | 23/6 | 2/0 | 30–342 g |
Cream, coffee cream, and sour cream | Milk processing companies, individual farms | 2 |
2 |
100–600 g or 20– 200 mL |
Kefir, ryazhenka, pure culture fermented milk, buttermilk, and sour milk | Milk processing companies | 19/4 | 3/2 | 150–1,000 g |
Protein drink | Brewery, milk processing companies | 6 (3 |
0/0 | 250–460 mL |
Goat’s milk products | ||||
Pasteurised goat’s milk | Milk processing companies, individual farms | 1/0 | 2 |
500–1,000 mL |
Goat’s cheese | Milk processing companies, individual farms | 8/1 | 7/0 | 100–200 g |
TOTAL | 187/59 | 26/8 |
Ct – cycle threshold
Amplification of
Overall, 60.56% (129/213) of the samples were positive for the presence of
Summary of results for all samples tested
Product type | Number of samples from Latvian producers (positive) | Percentage of positive samples | Average Ct of positive samples | Number of samples from foreign producers (positive) | Percentage of positive samples | Average Ct of positive samples |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Unpasteurised milk | 15 (4) | 26.67 | 30.45 | 0 | - | - |
Heat-treated milk | 3 (0) | 0.00 | - | 0 | - | - |
Pasteurised milk | 17 (13) | 76.47 | 30.41 | 2 (2) | 100.00 | 34.72 |
Yogurts, yogurt drinks | 28 (15) | 53.57 | 31.75 | 4 (2) | 50.00 | 33.99 |
Cottage cheese, home cheese, and desserts | 40 (31) | 77.50 | 31.08 | 4 (3) | 75.00 | 29.65 |
Cheese | 23 (20) | 86.96 | 29.84 | 2 (2) | 100.00 | 28.40 |
Cream, coffee cream, and sour cream | 27 (15) | 55.56 | 34.06 | 2 (1) | 50.00 | 35.07 |
Kefir, ryazhenka, pure culture fermented milk, buttermilk, sour milk | 19 (11) | 57.89 | 32.97 | 3 (2) | 66.67 | 33.33 |
Protein drink | 6 (5) | 83.33 | 34.21 | 0 | - | |
Pasteurised goat milk | 1 (0) | 0.00 | - | 2 (1) | 50.00 | 32.26 |
Goat’s cheese | 8 (0) | 0.00 | - | 7 (2) | 28.57 | 30.72 |
TOTAL | 187 (114) | 60.96 | - | 26 (15) | 57.69 | - |
Only 26.67% (n = 4/15) of unpasteurised cow’s milk samples obtained from individual farms were positive. This result was statistically significantly lower than those for the pasteurised milk produced by Latvian milk processing companies, where 76.47% of the samples (n = 13/17) were positive (χ2 = 6.06 with Yates correction, P = 0.01). Three heat-treated milk samples from a milk processing company, as well as goat’s milk and goat’s cheese samples from individual farms were found to be free from
The results for products from the four most-represented milk processing companies in Latvia are given in Table 3. Statistically significant differences were obtained between companies C and A (χ2 = 11.39 with Yates correction, P = 0.0007) and C and B (χ2 = 6.47 with Yates correction, P = 0.01).
Results of the analysis of the pasteurised milk and milk product samples from the four largest milk processing companies in Latvia
Company | Number of samples tested / number of positive samples (%) |
---|---|
A | 31/27 (87.10) |
B | 24/19 (79.17) |
C | 13/4 (30.77) |
D | 10/6 (60.00) |
In the present study, 86.96% (n = 20/23) of cow’s milk cheese samples of Latvian origin were positive: nine semi-hard ripened, four unripened/smoked, and seven cheese spread. None of the four domestic goat’s milk cheese samples was positive and only two out of seven (28.57%) goat’s milk cheese samples of foreign origin were.
The largest part of the positive samples were low bacterial burden samples because the real-time PCR Ct values were ≥ 30. Only 46 of the positive cow’s milk products had Ct ≤ 30, mainly unpasteurised milk (2 samples), pasteurised milk (9), yogurts (4), cheese (14), cottage cheese (14) and protein drinks (2) that originated from Latvia and Lithuania, as well as one goat’s cheese sample from Spain. Among the nine UHT products, seven were positive (77.78%) with Ct ≥ 30. The average Ct values and range of variation are given in Table 2.
Fermented milk products were positive in 63.13% of cases (Table 4). Of the samples with sweeteners and fruit ingredients 71.43% were positive (40/56). Products with spices and meat were less contaminated at 66.67% (7/11).
Results of the analysis of the unfermented and fermented products
Unfermented products | Fermented products (number of positive samples/ total number of samples, percentage of positive samples) |
|||
---|---|---|---|---|
Without fermenting cultures | With fermenting cultures | With fermenting cultures and probiotics | ||
Individual farms | 5/18, 27.78% | 0/2, 0% | 1/9, 11.11% | 0/6, 0% |
Milk companies processing | 23/35, 65.71% | 10/13, 76.92% | 70/99, 70.71 % | 20/31, 64.52% |
Total | 28/53, 52.83% | 10/15, 66.67% | 71/108, 65.74% | 20/37, 54.05% |
Some studies led researchers to assume that people were infected with
The infection route from food to human in the case of Q fever has been neglected in several studies focusing on the One Health approach (29, 33). However,
Samples of Latvian origin were positive in 60.96% (114/187) of cases, while samples of foreign origin were in 57.69% (15/26) of cases. Among the 10 products of Lithuanian origin, seven samples (75%) were positive: three samples of cottage cheese, one of yogurt, one of buttermilk, and two of cheese. Such a high proportion of positive test results in food samples from Lithuania can be explained by the relatively high prevalence of infected dairy cattle herds (52.15%) in that country (34).
Only 26.67% (n = 4/15) of unpasteurised cow’s milk samples obtained from individual farms were positive, compared to 76.47% (n = 13/17) of positive pasteurised cow’s milk samples produced by dairy processing companies. Unpasteurised cow’s milk containing
Overall, the products from individual farms were positive in 12.5% of cases, compared to 70.96% positivity in samples from dairy processing companies. The proportion of positive samples depended on the company (Table 3). In previous studies from France, Spain and Hungary more frequent positive results were also obtained from industrial dairy producers than from small-scale producers (11, 17, 19). This can be explained by the smallness of the batches in which unpasteurised milk produced from a few cows by individual farms is processed and by the direct nature of the sale of that milk, which contrasts with the practice of large dairy processing companies of collecting milk from a wide area, making it possible for milk from a few infected herds to contaminate the entire production chain (11).
In the present study, 86.96% (n = 9) of Latvian cow’s milk cheese samples tested positive. This percentage was significantly higher than the result of an investigation carried out in southern Italy, where only 39% of cow’s milk cheese samples were positive (7). Among the product types in the current investigation, various hard, semi-hard, and smoked cheeses and cheese spread gave the highest percentages of positive tests, probably due to the relatively low temperature of pasteurisation.
None of the four domestically produced goat’s cheese samples was positive and only two out of seven (28.57%) goat’s cheese samples of foreign origin were. This incidence was lower than in a study from Italy, where 65.38% of industrially produced goat’s cheese samples were positive (17).
The majority of the positive samples (64.34%) in this study can be treated as low bacterial burden samples, because the real time PCR Ct values were ≥30 as evaluated in a previous study (17). However, 46 (35.66%) of the positive cow’s milk products had Ct ≤ 30. Taking into account the quantification results of the present study, Ct values ≥ 29.71 ± 1.05 corresponded to ≤1.0 × 104
Paediatric infection from dairy products has been described (25); in general, children can be frequently infected with
The present study generally indicates that the incidence of
According to the results of this investigation, we suggest that shedding of viable