ArticleMicrobiome2024
In-depth characterization of food and environmental microbiomes across different meat processing plants.
Article in Microbiome, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Environmental microbial community signatures associated withApplied and environmental microbiology · 2026Article
- Article
- Application of Meat-Derived Lactic Acid Bacteria Strains to Improve the Quality of Organic Fermented Beef Sausages.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Insects shape the cadaver decomposition microbiome and postmortem interval estimation accuracy.mSystems · 2026Article
- Occurrence and Antimicrobial Resistance ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Microbiota and quality profiling of fermented goat meat sausages (sucuk) under nitrite-reduced and mixed-culture strategies.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2026Article
- Dry-Aged Beef: A Global Review of Meat Quality Traits, Microbiome Dynamics, Safety, and Sustainable Strategies.Journal of food science · 2025Review
- Total Culturable Microbial Diversity of Food Contact Surfaces in Poultry and Fish Processing Industries After the Pre-Operational Cleaning Process.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Review
- Fresh pork microbiota is temporally dynamic and compositionally diverse across meat, contact surfaces, and processing lines in a pork processing facility.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2025Article
- Article
- Next-generation sequencing applications in food science: fundamentals and recent advances.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Phenotypic and genotypic characterization of antibiotic-resistant bacteria from Swiss ready-to-eat meat products.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- The resistome of the food chain: A One Health perspective.Microbial biotechnology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProcessing environments can be an important source of pathogenic and spoilage microorganisms that cross contaminate meat and meat products. The aim of this study was to characterize the microbiome of raw materials, processing environments and end products from 19 facilities producing different meat products.
resultsThe taxonomic profiles of the microbial communities evolved along processing, from raw materials to end products, suggesting that food contact (FC) surfaces play an important role in modulating the microbiome of final products. Some species persisted with the highest relative abundance in raw materials, food processing environments and/or in the final product, including species from the genera Pseudomonas, Staphylococcus, Brochothrix, Acinetobacter and Psychrobacter. Processing environments showed a very diverse core microbiota, partially shared with the products. Pseudomonas fragi and Pseudomonas sp. Lz4W (in all sample and facility types) and Brochothrix thermosphacta, Psychrobacter sp. and Psychrobacter sp. P11F6 (in raw materials, FC surfaces and end products) were prominent members of the core microbiota for all facilities, while Latilactobacillus sakei was found as a dominant species exclusively in end products from the facilities producing fermented sausages. Processing environments showed a higher amount of antimicrobial resistance genes and virulence factors than raw materials and end products. One thousand four hundred twenty-one medium/high-quality metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs) were reconstructed. Of these, 274 high-quality MAGs (completeness > 90%) corresponded to 210 putative new species, mostly found in processing environments. For two relevant taxa in meat curing and fermentation processes (S. equorum and L. sakei, respectively), phylogenetic variation was observed associated with the specific processing facility under study, which suggests that specific strains of these taxa may be selected in different meat processing plants, likely contributing to the peculiar sensorial traits of the end products produced in them.
conclusionsOverall, our findings provide the most detailed metagenomics-based perspective up to now of the microbes that thrive in meat, meat products and associated environments and open avenues for future research activities to better understand the microbiome functionality and potential contribution to meat quality and safety. Video Abstract.
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.