Research – Listeria monocytogenes prevalence varies more within fields than between fields or over time on conventionally farmed New York produce fields

JFP

Past studies have shown that the on-farm distribution of Listeria monocytogenes is affected by environmental factors (e.g., weather). However, the majority of studies were conducted at large scales (e.g., across farms), while few studies examined drivers of L. monocytogenes prevalence at smaller scales (e.g., within a single field). This study was performed to address this knowledge gap by (i) tracking L. monocytogenes distribution in two fields on one farm over a growing season, and (ii) identifying factors associated with L. monocytogenes isolation from drag swab, soil, and agricultural water samples. Overall, L. monocytogenes was detected in 78% (21/27), 19% (7/36), and 8% (37/486) of water, drag swab, and soil samples, respectively. All isolates were characterized by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE). Of the 43 PFGE types identified, 14 were isolated on multiple sampling visits and/or from multiple sample types, indicating persistence in or repeated introduction into the farm environment during the study. Our findings also suggest that L. monocytogenes prevalence, even at the small spatial scale studied here, (i) was not uniform, and (ii) varied more within fields than between fields or over time. This is illustrated by the fact that plot (in-field variation), field (between field variation), and sampling visit (time) accounted for 18%, 2% and 3% of variance in odds of isolating L. monocytogenes, respectively. Moreover, according to random forest analysis, water-related factors were among the top-ranked factors associated with L. monocytogenes isolation from all sample types. For example, the likelihood of isolating L. monocytogenes from drag and soil samples increased monotonically as rainfall increased. Overall, findings from this single-farm study suggests that mitigation strategies for L. monocytogenes in produce fields should focus on water-associated risk factors (e.g., rain, distance to water), and be tailored to specific high-risk in-field areas.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s