ArticleVeterinary world2024
Analysis of species adulteration in beef sausage using real-time polymerase chain reaction in Makassar, Indonesia.
Article in Veterinary world, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aim: Adulteration, or the inclusion of meats not declared on the label of processed meat products, constitutes a fraudulent practice that poses a threat to public health. Sausages, which are processed meats derived from a blend of minced meats that obscure the original muscle's morphological features, are particularly prone to adulteration, making the visual detection of fraud more challenging. The research aimed to detect and measure the proportion of pork, chicken, buffalo, and beef DNA in commercially available processed meat packaged, labeled, and sold as "beef sausages" in Makassar, Indonesia. Materials and Methods: A total of 30 beef sausage samples were collected from traditional and modern markets as well as tourist attractions in Makassar. DNA was isolated and the species were identified using quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Results: The findings revealed that all sausage samples contained not only beef DNA, as indicated on their labels but also undeclared DNA from chicken and buffalo. Notably, pork DNA was not detected in the samples. The frequencies of chicken and buffalo meat were 9.2% and 10%, respectively, whereas it was 0.85% for beef in the beef sausage samples. Conclusion: The discovery of chicken and buffalo species in beef sausage samples indicates adulteration, potentially posing severe quality risks.
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.