A Practical Framework for the Construction of a Biotracing Model: Application toSalmonellain the Pork Slaughter Chain

Risk Analysis

Volumn 31, Issue 9, 2011, Pages 1434-1450

  Smid, J H ^a,b   Swart, A N ^a   Havelaar, A H ^a,b   Pielaat, A ^a  

^a NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT   (Netherlands)

^b UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Bayesian network; Biotracing; Pork; Risk assessment; Salmonella

Indexed keywords

BACKWARD REASONING; BIOTRACING; DISCRETE NUMBERS; FOOD CHAIN; FOOD PRODUCTION; GLOBAL PARAMETERS; MICROBIAL CONTAMINATION; MODEL-BASED OPC; MODULAR PROCESS; MONTE CARLO MODEL; MONTE CARLO SIMULATION; OBSERVATIONAL DATA; PORK; PROBABILISTIC QUANTIFICATION; PRODUCTION CHAIN; QUANTITATIVE MICROBIAL RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MODELING;

BAYESIAN NETWORKS; KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEMS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; MEATS; MONTE CARLO METHODS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SALMONELLA; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS;

COMPUTER SIMULATION;

BAYESIAN ANALYSIS; FOOD CHAIN; FOOD PROCESSING; FOOD PRODUCTION; FOOD QUALITY; INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION; MEAT; MICROBIAL ACTIVITY; MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS; NUMERICAL MODEL; PATHOGEN; POLLUTANT SOURCE; PROBABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; FOOD CONTROL; ISOLATION AND PURIFICATION; MEAT; MICROBIOLOGY; PROBABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SALMONELLA; SWINE; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ANIMALS; BAYES THEOREM; FOOD MICROBIOLOGY; MEAT PRODUCTS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PROBABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SALMONELLA; SWINE;

NETHERLANDS;

SALMONELLA;

EID: 80053386109     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: 15396924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01591.x     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Nauta MJ. A modular process risk model structure for quantitative microbiological risk assessment and its application in an exposure assessment of Bacillus cereus in a REPFED. Bilthoven, the Netherlands: RIVM Report, 2001.
2. Lindqvist R, Sylven S, Vagsholm I. Quantitative microbial risk assessment exemplified byStaphylococcus aureusin unripened cheese made from raw milk. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 2002; 78(1-2):155-70.
3. Rosenquist H, Nielsen NL, Sommer HM. Quantitative risk assessment of human campylobacteriosis associated with thermophilic Campylobacter species in chickens. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 2003; 83(1):87-103.
4. Cassin MH, Lammerding AM, Todd EC. Quantitative risk assessment forEscherichia coliO157:H7 in ground beef hamburgers. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 1998; 41(1):21-44.
5. Nauta M. The Modular Process Risk Model (MPRM): A structured approach to food chain exposure assessment. Pp. 99-136 in Microbial Risk Analysis of Foods. Washington, DC ASM Press, 2008.
6. EFSA Quantitive Microbial Risk Assessment onSalmonellain Slaughter and Breeder Pigs. Final Report, CFP/EFSA/BIOHAZ/2007/01, March 9, 2009.
7. Barker GC, Gomez N, Smid J. An introduction to biotracing in food chain systems. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 2009; 20(5):220-226.
8. Pearl J. Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems. Networks of Plausible Inference. San Francisco, CA Morgan Kaufmann Editors, 1988.
9. Albert I, Grenier E, Denis JB. Quantitative risk assessment from farm to fork and beyond: A global Bayesian approach concerning food-borne diseases. Risk Analysis, 2008; 28(2):557-571.
10. Binter C, Straver JM, Haggblom P. Transmission and control of Salmonella in the pig feed chain: A conceptual model. International Journal of Food Microbiology, Epub 2010.
11. Cullen AC, Frey HC. Probabilistic Techniques in Exposure Assessment. New York P Press, 1999.
12. Frey HC, Mokhtari A, Tanwir D. Evaluation of Selected Sensitivity Analysis Methods Based upon Applications to Two Food Safety Process Risk Models. Raleigh, NC Report Prepared for Office of Risk Assessment and Cost-Benefit Analysis, U.S, 2003.
13. Smid JH, Verloo D, Barker GC. Strengths and weaknesses of Monte Carlo simulation models and Bayesian belief networks in microbial risk assessment. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 2010; 139:S57-S63.
14. Jensen FV. Introduction to Bayesian Networks. New York Springer-Verlag, 1996.
15. Lauritzen SL, Spiegelhalter DJ. Local computations with probabilities on graphical structures and their application to expert systems. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 1988; 50(2):157-224.
16. Gilks WR, Richardson S, Spiegelhalter DJ. Markov Chain Monte Carlo in Practice: Interdisciplinary Statistics. Boca Raton, FL Chapman&Hall/CRC, 1996.
17. Soudant D, Beliaeff B, Thomas G. Dynamic linear Bayesian models in phytoplankton ecology. Ecological Modelling, 1997; 99(2-3): 161-169.
18. Needham CJ, Bradford JR, Bulpitt AJ. A primer on learning in Bayesian networks for computational biology. PLOS Computational Biology, 2007; 3(8):1409-1416.
19. Spiegelhalter D, Lauritzen SL. Sequential updating of conditional probabilities on directed graphical structures. Networks, 1990; 20: 579-605.
20. Coupé VMH, Van Der Gaag LC. Practicable sensitivity analysis of Bayesian belief nets. Pp. 81-86 in Joint Session of the 6th Prague Syposium of Asymptotic Statistics and the 13th Prague Conference on Information Theory, Statistical Decision Functions and Random Processes. Prague 1998.
21. Kjaerulff UB, Madsen AL. Bayesian Networks and Influence Diagrams. New York Springer, 2008.
22. Coupé VMH, Gaag LC, Habbema JDF. Sensitivity analysis: An aid for belief-network quantification. Knowledge Engineering Review, 2000; 15(3):215-232.
23. Warriss PD. Optimal lairage times and conditions for slaughter pigs: A review. Veterinary Record, 2003; 153(6):170-176.
24. Borch E, Nesbakken T, Christensen H. Hazard identification in swine slaughter with respect to foodborne bacteria. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 1996; 30(1-2):9-25.
25. Berends BR, Van Knapen F, Snijders JMA. Identification and quantification of risk factors regarding Salmonella spp. on pork carcasses. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 1997; 36(2-3):199-206.
26. Pearce RA, Bolton DJ, Sheridan JJ. Studies to determine the critical control points in pork slaughter hazard analysis and critical control point systems. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 2004; 90(3):331-339.
27. Morgan IR, Krautil FL, Cravel JA. Bacterial-populations on dressed pig carcasses. Epidemiology and Infection, 1989; 1:15-24.
28. Eustace I, Midgley J. An alternative process for cleaning knives used on meat slaughter floors. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 2007; 113(1):23-27.
29. Swanenburg M, Berends BR, Urlings HAP, Snijders JMA, Knapen FV. Epidemiological investigations into the sources of Salmonella contamination of pork. Berliner und Muenchener Tieraerztliche Wochenschrift, 2001; 114:356-359.
30. Hanssen EJM, Swanenburg M, Berends BR, Urlings HAP, Snijders JMA, Knapen F, Van Maassen CBM. The Dutch Salmonella monitoring programme for pigs and some recommendations for control plans in the future. Pp. 169-172 in SafePork. Verona, 2007.
31. Jessen B. Biofilm and disinfection in meat processing plants. In International Symposium on Disinfection & Hygiene. Wageningen, 2001.
32. Joseph B, Otta SK, Karunasagar I. Biofilm formation by salmonella spp. on food contact surfaces and their sensitivity to sanitizers. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 2001; 64(3):367-372.
33. Peel B, Simmons GC. Factors in the spread of Salmonellas in meatworks with special reference to contamination of knives. Australian Veterinary Journal, 1978; 54:106-110.
34. Warriner K, Aldsworth TG, Kaur S. Cross-contamination of carcasses and equipment during pork processing. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 2002; 93(1):169-177.
35. Donald M, Cook A, Mengersen K. Bayesian network for risk of diarrhea associated with the use of recycled water. Risk Analysis, 2009; 29(12):1672-1685.
36. Olesen KG, Lauritzen SL, Jensen FV. aHUGIN: A system creating adaptive probabilistic networks. Pp. 223-229 in Eighth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Stanford, CA 1992.