Cited by 154Food Safety and HygieneListeria monocytogenes in Food SafetySalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology

Microbiological hazard identification and exposure assessment of street food vending in Johannesburg, South Africa

Mosupye, Francina M., von Holy, Alexander·2000·International Journal of Food Microbiology

Abstract

One hundred and thirty-two samples of beef, chicken, salad and gravy were collected from two street vendors over eleven replicate surveys to assess microbiological safety and quality. For each food type samples were collected during preparation and holding. Dish water was also collected and food preparation surfaces swabbed during preparation and display. Standard methods were used to determine aerobic plate counts, Enterobacteriaceae counts, coliform counts and spore counts. Six hundred and seventy-five predominant colonies were isolated from aerobic plate counts of all samples and characterised. The incidence of selected foodborne bacterial pathogens and non-pathogenic E. coli 1 was also determined. In most cases mean bacterial counts of the raw materials were significantly higher (P < 0.05) than those of corresponding cooked foods. No significant differences (P > 0.05) in all count types were observed between food samples collected during cooking and those collected during holding. In addition, no significant differences (P > 0.05) in all count types were observed between prepared salads and their raw materials. Mean bacterial counts of water and swab samples collected from vendor 1 were lower than those of water and swab samples collected from vendor 2.The predominant populations isolated from the aerobic plate counts were Bacillus spp., Staphylococcus spp., Enterobacteriaceae and Alcaligenes spp. Bacillus cereus was detected in 17%, Clostridium perfringens in 1%, Staphylococcus aureus in 3% and Vibrio metchnikovii in 2% of the food samples. Campylobacter jejuni, Listeria monocytogenes, and Escherichia coli O157:H7 were not detected. Non-pathogenic E. coli 1 was detected in 13% of food samples, in 86 and 36% of dish water samples collected from vendors 1 and 2, respectively, and in 36% of surface swab samples from vendor 2.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0168-1605(00)00264-6

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mosupye, F. M., & von Holy, A.
Affiliations
University of the Witwatersrand (ZA)
Venue
International Journal of Food Microbiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-11
Volume
61
Issue
2-3
Pages
137-145
ISSN
0168-1605 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2001775820
Cited by
154
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 6
FWCI
2.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Food Microbiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Safety and Hygiene
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Biotechnology › Listeria monocytogenes in Food Safety
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Salmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology
Keywords
street food vending, microbiological food safety, foodborne pathogens, Bacillus cereus, Staphylococcus aureus, Clostridium perfringens, Enterobacteriaceae, total plate count
MeSH terms
Animals, Bacteria, Aerobic, Cattle, Chickens, Consumer Product Safety, Data Collection, Food Handling, Food Microbiology, Food Preservation, Meat, South Africa, Temperature, Vegetables, Colony Count, Microbial

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review