Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 267

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Incidence of Mycobacterium paratuberculosis in Bulk Raw and Commercially Pasteurized Cows' Milk from Approved Dairy Processing Establishments in the United Kingdom

Open access
Grant, Irene R., Ball, Hywel J., Rowe, Michael T.·2002·Applied and Environmental Microbiology

Abstract

Over a 17-month period (March 1999 to July 2000), a total of 814 cows' milk samples, 244 bulk raw and 567 commercially pasteurized (228 whole, 179 semiskim, and 160 skim), from 241 approved dairy processing establishments throughout the United Kingdom were tested for the presence of Mycobacterium paratuberculosis by immunomagnetic PCR (to detect all cells living and dead) and culture (to detect viable cells). Overall,M. paratuberculosis DNA was detected by immunomagnetic PCR in 19 (7.8%; 95% confidence interval, 4.3 to 10.8%) and 67 (11.8%; 95% confidence interval, 9.0 to 14.2%) of the raw and pasteurized milk samples, respectively. Confirmed M. paratuberculosis isolates were cultured from 4 (1.6%; 95% confidence interval, 0.04 to 3.1%) and 10 (1.8%; 95% confidence interval, 0.7 to 2.8%) of the raw and pasteurized milk samples, respectively, following chemical decontamination with 0.75% (wt/vol) cetylpyridinium chloride for 5 h. The 10 culture-positive pasteurized milk samples were from just 8 (3.3%) of the 241 dairy processing establishments that participated in the survey. Seven of the culture-positive pasteurized milk samples had been heat treated at 72 to 74°C for 15 s; the remainder had been treated at 72 to 75°C for the extended holding time of 25 s. When typed by restriction fragment length polymorphism and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis methods, some of the milk isolates were shown to be types distinct from those of laboratory strains in regular use within the testing laboratory. From information gathered at the time of milk sample collection, all indications were that pasteurization had been carried out effectively at all of the culture-positive dairies. That is, pasteurization time and temperature conditions complied with the legal minimum high-temperature, short-time process; all pasteurized milk samples tested phosphatase negative; and postprocess contamination was considered unlikely to have occurred. It was concluded that viable M. paratuberculosis is occasionally present at low levels in commercially pasteurized cows' milk in the United Kingdom.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/aem.68.5.2428-2435.2002

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 267

Metadata

Authors
Grant, I. R., Ball, H. J., & Rowe, M. T.
Venue
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
Published
2002-05
Volume
68
Issue
5
Pages
2428-2435
ISSN
  • 0099-2240 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-5336
OpenAlex
W2171671180
Cited by
267
References
0
FWCI
11.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Incidence of Mycobacterium paratuberculosis in Bulk Raw and Commercially Pasteurized Cows' Milk from Approved Dairy Processing Establishments in the United Kingdom. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aem.68.5.2428-2435.2002
The paper
Grant, I. R., Ball, H. J., & Rowe, M. T. (2002). Incidence of Mycobacterium paratuberculosis in Bulk Raw and Commercially Pasteurized Cows' Milk from Approved Dairy Processing Establishments in the United Kingdom. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.68.5.2428-2435.2002

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.