Global Journal of Medical Research, G: Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine, Volume 21 Issue 2

Table 6: Range of total viable bacteria, coliform, salmonella, and campylobacter count in poultry meats obtained from the Nirala at Khulna City Corporation, the Dumuria, and the Fultola markets. Source Examine TVC TCC TSC TCpC Max Min Av. Max Min Av. Max Min Av. Max Min Av. Nirala Market Meat Meat Meat 6.5 4.80 5.65 6.40 3.90 5.19 3.80 2.50 3.15 2.60 2.0 2.30 Dumuria Market 6.59 5.30 5.94 4.92 4.20 4.56 3.78 3.22 3.50 2.90 2.20 2.55 Fultola market 6.80 5.90 6.35 5.25 4.10 4.68 4.00 3.00 3.50 3.10 2.1 2.60 All counts expressed in logarithms and CFU/gm of meat; Av. = Average Table 7: Cultural prevalence of E. coli in the selected retail market No. of retail market Type of sample No. of samples Positive for E. coli Percentage 3 Thigh meat 24 9 37.50(n=24) Breast meat 24 21 87.50(n=24) Total 48 30 62.20(n=48) a) Isolation of E. coli from the selected retail market E. coli isolated and identified from the samples after cultivation on NA, EMB agar, and MC agar. E. coli detected from total of 48 samples. Among them, 30 samples were found positive for E. coli, and the prevalence of E. coli in that study was 62.20% (Table 7). Table 9: Cultural prevalence of Salmonella spp in the selected retail market No. of retail market Type of sample No. of samples Positive for Salmonella Percentage 3 Thigh 24 7 29.16(n=24) Breast 24 16 66.66(n=24) Total 48 23 49.91(n=48) b) Isolation of Salmonella spp from the selected retail market Salmonella spp. isolated and identified from the samples after cultivation on NA, MC agar, EMB agar, SS agar, BGA medium. Salmonella spp. detected from total of 48 samples 23 were found positive for Salmonella spp , and the prevalence of salmonella spp in that study was 49.91% (Table 9). The positive samples collected from the Fultola market. IV. C onclusion The findings of this study provide valuable data about the hygienic level for retail markets. The presence of Escherichia coli, Salmonella spp, and Campylobacter spp in meat must receive particular attention. These organisms are food-borne pathogens and highly responsible for causing a hazard to public health. It also reflects the poor hygienic quality of poultry meat. So the need for microbial assessment of fresh meats for human consumption is emphasized and recommended to reduce the possible hazards. Also, use of antibiotics should be considered as many strains get resistant to common antibiotics. The evidence suggests that efforts to improve food safety in poultry production should start at the village level with simple regulations directed towards addressing the most prominent deficiencies in the food-safety system into the food chain. A cknowledgements We acknowledge the laboratory support from Quality Feed Lab, Khulna, Bangladesh. Conflict of Interest None of the authors have a conflict of interest to declare. 1. Adu-Gyamfi A, Torgby-Tetteh W and Appiah V. 2012. Microbiological Quality of Chicken Sold in Accra and Determination of D10-Value of E. coli. Food and Nutrition Sciences, 3: 693-698. 2. Alam ST, Howard Mb, Fatema K and Haque KMF. 2015. Antibiogram of pre-processed raw chicken meat from different supershops of dhaka city, Bangladesh. Daffodil International University Journal of Allied Health Sciences. 2: 45–52. 3. Bhandari N, Nepali DB and Paudyal S. 2013. Assessment of bacterial load in broiler chicken meat from the retail meat shops in Chitwan, Nepal. Int J Infect Microbiol; 2(3):99-104. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/ 10.3126/ijim.v2i3.8671 4. Bintsis T. 2017. Foodborne Pathogens. AIMS Microbiol. 3(3): 529-563. doi: 10.3934/microbiol. 2017.3.529. Year 2021 Global Journal of Medical Research Volume XXI Issue II Version I ( D ) G © 2021 Global Journals 12 Microbiological Evaluation of Poultry Meat Obtained from Different Retail Markets in Khulna District 5. Bjorkroth KJ, Geisen R, Schillinger U, Weiss N, De-Vos P, Holzapfel WH, Korkeala HJ and Vandamme P. 2000. Characterization of R eferences