ArticleParasitology research2015
Effect of temperature on the survival of Alaria alata mesocercariae.
Article in Parasitology research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Effectiveness of Postharvest Processing on Microbiological Safety of Game Meat-A Systematic Review.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2026Pooled it
- A Comprehensive Review ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Pooled it
- A Review onAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Review
- Review
- Prevalence and intensity of Alaria alata (Goeze, 1792) in water frogs and brown frogs in natural conditions.Parasitology research · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent findings of Alaria alata mesocercariae in wild boars and other animals in Europe reinforced the concern about the public health risk posed by this parasite especially if the game meat is insufficiently heated during preparation. Cooking and freezing are effective methods for the inactivation of parasites in meat whereas refrigeration is considered as an essential part of the Good Hygiene Practice. Additionally, microwave dielectric heating may represent an equally effective tool for parasite inactivation. Therefore, isolated vital mesocercariae were examined with respect to their resilience against heating, refrigeration, freezing, and microwave heating. A. alata mesocercariae stored in Ringer's solution do not survive heating temperatures that exceed 60.0 °C. Similarly, exposure to microwave heating ensured an inactivation of all parasite developmental stages after 90 s of treatment. In contrast, the parasites' tolerance towards cold is far higher as the mesocercariae survived refrigeration temperatures (4.0 ± 2 °C) in Ringer's solution for up to 13 days. An effective inactivation by cold is therefore only guaranteed if the infested game meat is frozen to a core temperature of -13.7 °C for a minimum of 2 h at least. Game meat should be handled with the same or even higher caution than meat of husbandry animals since wild animals may be infected with parasites or other zoonotic agents that are not common in livestock. It is therefore of crucial importance that appropriate temperature time protocols are used for the reliable inactivation of these zoonotic agents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.