A comparison of three methods for the isolation of Arcobacter spp. from retail raw poultry in Northern Ireland

Recent evidence suggests that arcobacters, especially Arcobacter butzleri, are potential foodborne pathogens, but standardized detection methods have yet to be established. A study was undertaken to determine which of three isolation methods was the most effective for the isolation of Arcobacter spp. from fresh raw poultry. Method I was microaerobic and involved a membrane filtration step followed by plating onto blood agar. Method 2 was also microaerobic and involved enrichment and plating media containing a five-antibiotic cocktail. Method 3 was aerobic and was based on enrichment in a charcoal-based broth containing two antibiotics. Retail poultry samples (n = 50) were obtained from supermarkets in Northern Ireland; the European Community license number was recorded to ensure sample diversity. Presumptive arcobacters were identified using genus-specific and species-specific primers. Method I resulted in the lowest recovery of arcobacters (28% of samples positive). The detection rate for method 2 (68%) was higher than that for method 3 (50%), but the difference was not significant (P > 0.05). Modification of method 3 by plating the enrichment broth at 24 h, as well as at 48 It, increased recovery to 68%. Use of methods 2 and 3 together increased the number of positive samples detected by approximately 25% compared with use of either method alone. A. butzleri was the most commonly isolated species using all methods. Method 3 detected Arcobacter cryaerophilus in more samples (if = 3) than did methods I and 2 (n = 1). Arcobacter skirrowii was detected by only method 3 (it = 1). In terms of sensitivity, ease of use, and diversity of species recovered, modified method 3 was the overall method of choice