Next Article in Journal
The Impact of Natural Elements on Environmental Comfort in the Iranian-Islamic Historical City of Isfahan
Previous Article in Journal
Quantitative Assessment of the State of Threat of Working on Construction Scaffolding
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Distribution of Salmonella Serovars in Humans, Foods, Farm Animals and Environment, Companion and Wildlife Animals in Singapore

1
National Centre for Food Science, Singapore Food Agency, Singapore 718837, Singapore
2
Nanyang Technological University Food Technology Centre (NAFTEC), Singapore 637551, Singapore
3
School of Chemical and Biomedical Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 637551, Singapore
4
School of Biological Sciences, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 637551, Singapore
5
National Public Health Laboratory, National Centre for Infectious Diseases, Singapore 308442, Singapore
6
Ministry of Health, Singapore 169854, Singapore
7
Centre for Animal & Veterinary Sciences, Animal and Veterinary Services, National Parks Board, Singapore 718827, Singapore
8
Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, 1871 Frederiksberg C, Denmark
9
Environmental Health Institute, National Environment Agency, Singapore 138667, Singapore
10
National Centre for Infectious Diseases, Singapore 308442, Singapore
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(16), 5774; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17165774
Submission received: 30 June 2020 / Revised: 25 July 2020 / Accepted: 3 August 2020 / Published: 10 August 2020

Abstract

:
We analyzed the epidemiological distribution of Salmonella serovars in humans, foods, animals and the environment as a One-Health step towards identifying risk factors for human salmonellosis. Throughout the 2012–2016 period, Salmonella ser. Enteritidis was consistently the predominating serovar attributing to >20.0% of isolates in humans. Other most common serovars in humans include Salmonella ser. Stanley, Salmonella ser. Weltevreden, Salmonella ser. Typhimurium and Salmonella ser. 4,5,12:b:-(dT+). S. Enteritidis was also the most frequent serovar found among the isolates from chicken/chicken products (28.5%) and eggs/egg products (61.5%) during the same period. In contrast, S. Typhimurium (35.2%) and Salmonella ser. Derby (18.8%) were prevalent in pork/pork products. S. Weltevreden was more frequent in seafood (19.2%) than others (≤3.0%). Most isolates (>80.0%) from farms, companion and wildlife animals belonged to serovars other than S. Enteritidis or S. Typhimurium. Findings demonstrate the significance of a One-Health investigative approach to understand the epidemiology Salmonella for more effective and integrated surveillance systems.

1. Introduction

Salmonella is one of the major foodborne bacterial pathogens worldwide. It causes gastroenteritis (known as salmonellosis) in humans with clinical manifestations including diarrhea, fever, abdominal cramps, and occasionally invasive infection in humans. It can be typically acquired through consumption of contaminated food, and infrequently through person-to-person contact and contacts with companion animals and wildlife reservoirs [1,2,3]. Salmonella enterica represents the most pathogenic species and there are >2600 serovars identified with some showing restricted host selectivity, whereas vast majority of the serovars have broad host spectrum and pose public health risks and can also infect a broad range of animals [2].
In Singapore, the incidence of non-typhoidal salmonellosis has been showing a steadily rising trend, especially since 2008 when the mandatory reporting requirement of salmonellosis was implemented [4]. In 2016, the reported incidence rate of non-typhoidal salmonellosis (39.4 per 100,000 population) was approximately three times higher than that reported in 2008 (14.8 per 100,000 population) [4]. Salmonellosis cases continued to show an uptrend with a significant rise from 2018 (334 cumulative cases at first 13 weeks) to 2019 (536 cumulative cases at first 13 weeks) [5]. Identification of the important serovars, sources and risk factors potentially associated with the infection is important to prioritize food safety and public health measures.
Raw poultry and eggs are generally regarded as the most common vehicles of Salmonella [6,7]. In Singapore, the estimated occurrence of Salmonella, ranging from 2.7% to 41.3%, was reported in various types of poultry meat across the food chain. While Salmonella was rarely found in retail food (0.08%, 17/21,428), the majority of cooked or ready-to-eat food samples detected with Salmonella contained poultry meat or eggs [5,8]. The current knowledge therefore suggests poultry and eggs as relatively high-risk ingredients for Salmonella contamination. The risk can be further increased by improper hygiene practices at retails such as suboptimal storage conditions, improper heat treatment, post-cooking handling and cross-contamination.
In addition to raw poultry and eggs, other food products such as raw meat and raw seafood can serve as alternative vehicles of Salmonella [9,10]. Continued analysis of Salmonella serovars over time is important to describe the trends in distribution of Salmonella in various ecological sectors in order to identify their relative importance to human health.
To better understand the epidemiology of Salmonella, this retrospective study aimed to analyze and describe the distribution of Salmonella serovars isolated from humans, foods, farm animals and environment, companion and wildlife animals samples in Singapore. Findings from this multi-agencies’ collaborative study would offer useful insights to enhance our understanding on the epidemiology of Salmonella for more effective and integrated surveillance systems.

2. Materials and Methods

Data on Salmonella isolates obtained during a 5-year study period of 2012 to 2016 were collated from Singapore’s national reference laboratories for public health, food safety, animal health and environmental health: National Public Health Laboratory (NPHL), National Centre for Food Science (NCFS) (former Veterinary Public Health Centre (VPHC)), Centre for Animal & Veterinary Sciences (CAVS) (former Animal Health Laboratory) and Environmental Health Institute (EHI) respectively.
A total of 8004 isolates obtained from humans (4462), foods (2529), chicken and quail layer farms (945), and companion and wildlife animal (68) samples were included for analysis. Sample categories are as shown in Table 1. Human isolates were submitted to NPHL under the Infectious Disease Act (Singapore) by public hospital laboratories. Food isolates were obtained through routine surveillance and monitoring programs, with food samples collected from points of import, wholesalers, slaughterhouses, local produce and food processing establishments in Singapore. The food samples were imported as live, chilled, frozen, or in processed forms. Isolates from farms (chicken and quail layers), companion and wildlife animals were obtained from samples submitted for routine animal health surveillance and monitoring programs or for laboratory diagnostic testing.
All human isolates confirmed to be Salmonella spp. by matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF-MS, Bruker, MA, USA) were subjected to serotyping according to the Kauffman-White scheme [11]. PCR and sequencing of flagellin genes fliB and fliC were carried out to determine phase variation. Biochemical testing and PCR were performed for differentiation of d-tartrate fermentation. For food isolates, Salmonella spp. was isolated from 25 g of raw food sample following enrichment in buffered peptone water. Shell eggs were screened serologically for Salmonella spp. antibodies and positive consignments were then tested for the presence of S. Enteritidis only. Pathogen identification was performed using the Vitek 2 (BioMérieux, Marcy-l’Étoile, France) biochemical system. All food isolates obtained were serotyped by the slide agglutination method according to the Kauffman-White scheme [11]. Samples from farms, companion and wildlife animals were primarily screened for S. Enteritidis and S. Typhimurium as the target serovars of the different surveillance programs.
Descriptive epidemiological analysis was conducted to identify the most frequently reported serovars in various sample categories. Their significance to public health was evaluated in comparison to the serovars found in human isolates.

3. Results

3.1. Human Isolates

Since 2012, S. Enteritidis was the predominant serovar attributing to >20.0% of all Salmonella isolates in humans (Table 2). S. Stanley was among the top five serovars detected in humans since 2012. S. Weltevreden ranked third (2012–2014) and second (2015–2016). S. Typhimurium was not among the top three serovars in the years studied. The monophasic Salmonella enterica serovar 4,5,12:b:−(dT+) was ranked fourth (2012) and fifth (2013–2016). Salmonella ser. Saintpaul and Salmonella ser. Brancaster were reported for the first time among the top 10 prevalent serovars in 2015 and 2016, respectively (Table 2).

3.2. Food Isolates

Overall, distribution patterns of dominant serovars in foods were relatively more heterogeneous than that in human cases (Table 2). Analysis of serovar occurrence in various food commodities showed that S. Enteritidis (28.5%) and Salmonella ser. Heidelberg (21.7%) were the two predominant serovars found in chicken and chicken products (Table 3).
S. Typhimurium was the main serovar in duck (43.9%) and poultry other than chicken (21.0%). Similarly, isolates from pork and pork products were dominated by S. Typhimurium (35.2%), followed by S. Derby (18.8%). S. Enteritidis and S. Typhimurium were more frequently isolated from fresh than frozen chicken meat (Table 4). S. Heidelberg was the predominant serovar in frozen chicken meat except in 2015 (ranked 3rd), and this serovar was not among the top five serovars in fresh chicken.
Similar to human isolates, S. Saintpaul and S. Brancaster were found to appear among the top 10 prevalent serovars among food samples from 2015. A limited number of isolates obtained from other food products (frog, crocodile, turtle, beef and mutton) represented different serovars (Table 3). Of the 26 isolates obtained from eggs and egg products, 61.5% were identified as S. Enteritidis. S. Weltevreden was the most frequently found in seafood (19.2%) but less frequently isolated from other food commodities (≤3.0%).

3.3. Farm, Companion and Wildlife Animal Isolates

Of the 945 isolates obtained from chicken and quail layer farms, 10.5% and 6.2% were S. Enteritidis and S. Typhimurium respectively while the majority (>80.0%) of the isolates were non-S. Enteritidis and non-S. Typhimurium serovars. Similarly, most (>90.0%) of the 68 companion and wildlife animal isolates were identified to be non-S. Enteritidis and non-S. Typhimurium (Table 3). Serovar level of these non-S. Enteritidis and non-S. Typhimurium isolates were not identified as the surveillance programs conducted primarily screened for S. Enteritidis and S. Typhimurium as the target serovars.

4. Discussion

In this study, S. Enteritidis was found to be the most consistently prevalent serovar associated with human cases since 2012. This is generally in agreement with the global trend of serovars associated with human salmonellosis reported by the US Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention and European Food Safety Authority [12,13]. Global increase in the incidence of S. Enteritidis was first noticed in the 1980´s and seems associated with consumption of eggs and poultry [14,15]. S. Enteritidis was the most frequent serovar found in chicken and eggs/egg products in our study. In accordance with human isolates, S. Enteritidis was consistently found to be the prevalent serovar in both fresh and frozen chicken meat samples from 2012 to 2016. The serovar also appeared among the top ten most frequently isolated serovars in other sample categories, such as duck, seafood, and other types of poultry meat, although at relatively lower frequencies. Compared with companion and wildlife animal samples (1.5%), the serovar was more frequently found in chicken and quail layer farm samples (10.5%).
Chicken is the most common type of meat consumed by the Singaporean population at approximately 34 kg of chicken per capita annually, compared to pork (22 kg), duck (2 kg), mutton (2 kg) and beef (3 kg) [16]. Further, each person consumes an average of 358 eggs annually, a food category where S. Enteritidis was the most frequently detected serovar (61.5% of the isolates from eggs and egg products were S. Enteritidis) in this study. However, it should be noted that the total number of eggs and egg products tested and analyzed accounted for only 1.0% of the total number of food samples analyzed. Sampling of domestic and imported eggs and egg products should be increased to generate further information about the relative importance of these different products to human salmonellosis. Finding of S. Enteritidis being the most frequently detected among the isolates from chicken/chicken products and eggs/egg products reiterates the importance of proper handling and thorough cooking, or to use pasteurized eggs/egg products for food requiring raw or lightly cooked eggs [17]. Further assessment, for instance, risk assessment and source attribution modelling can be applied to estimate the relative contribution of different food categories to human salmonellosis for prioritization of effective intervention strategies in Singapore [6].
Since 2012, there has been an overall downward trend in the relative occurrence of S. Enteritidis in food products in Singapore. We surmise that this reduction could be related to improving safety standards of imported foods as a result of Singapore’s regulatory measures on Salmonella contamination, particularly upon S. Enteritidis detection. These measures include deterring the affected batches from sale, imposing administrative requirements involving targeted testing of potentially affected products, and possible loss of accreditation status for the source farm. Nevertheless, S. Enteritidis remains the predominant serovar associated with sporadic and suspected outbreak cases of human salmonellosis in Singapore [5,18]. Further investigations using genomic tools are recommended to describe the lineages of S. Enteritidis across sectors to determine the transmission pathway of the serovar.
In recent years, S. Typhimurium has been reported as a dominant serovar in humans in European countries where it is often linked to consumption of raw or undercooked pork and pork products [10]. In contrary, our findings showed that S. Typhimurium was not among the top three ranked serovars associated with human salmonellosis throughout the study period and less frequently found in clinical samples in 2015 and 2016 when compared with previous years. S. Typhimurium was less frequent in chicken and egg products, but the predominant serovar in other foods, i.e., duck, pork and pork products, and other poultry where the serovar accounted for 43.9%, 35.2%, and 21.0% of the isolates, respectively. These findings are in agreement with other studies which reported S. Typhimurium as the principal serovar detected in dairy, pork, beef and mutton [16,19]. Detection of S. Typhimurium in chicken meat was low (9.4%) however relatively more frequent in fresh than frozen chicken meat. Besides various raw food categories, S. Typhimurium was previously found in domestic and wildlife animals in Singapore and elsewhere, suggesting their possible roles in the epidemiology of human salmonellosis [20,21,22].
S. Heidelberg (21.7%) was identified as the second most common serovar in chicken/chicken products. However, unlike S. Enteritidis, it was not often associated with human illness in Singapore. S. Heidelberg was predominantly found in frozen chicken meat, whereas S. Enteritidis was found in both fresh and frozen chicken meat. S. Heidelberg was one of the main serovars implicated in large multistate outbreaks in humans in the United States, reportedly associated with the consumption of contaminated poultry and poultry products [7]. In South America, an increased occurrence of S. Heidelberg in poultry slaughterhouses was reported by the Brazilian government control programs [23]. In line with this, the European Commission also reported the detection of S. Heidelberg in frozen chicken liver imported from Brazil [24].
Chilled/fresh chicken may be preferred over frozen chicken by the Singaporean population, and dietary preference may explain in part the phenomenon that S. Heidelberg was not usually associated with human illness in Singapore from 2012 to 2016. This further underline the necessity of assessing the risk of salmonellosis associated with different food commodities. Quantitative microbial risk assessment can be applied to model the exposure and probability of salmonellosis associated with consumption of poultry commodities, for strategizing of mitigation measures to reduce Salmonella infection burden [25].
Serovar 4,5,12:b:-(dT+) was one of the most common serovars associated with human salmonellosis over the 5-year study period, but did not appear as a common serovar in all food and animal-related sample categories in this study. Serovar 4,5,12:b:-(dT+) is a d-tartrate fermenting variant of S. Paratyphi B which can cause gastroenteritis in humans [26]. It has been reported that Salmonella isolates belonging to 4,5,12:b:-(dT+) are genetically highly diverse. The serovar has been isolated from a wide variety of sources including poultry, reptiles, fish, mushrooms and turtles [27]. Two monophasic strains belonging to the MLST sequence types ST42 and ST423 were isolated in Singapore from local wild birds (black bittern and crow) in 2012 [28]. In 2018, the serovar 4,5,12:b:-(dT+) was reported to be responsible for a multistate outbreak of Salmonella infection due to consumption of products containing Kratom, a tropical plant native to Southeast Asia [29]. In Germany, the serovar contributed to 0.02% (96/50, 705) of human salmonellosis, with potential sources identified to be most likely mushrooms–with linkage to an import from Asia, and fish/shellfish [27]. In this study, the monophasic serovar 4,5,12:b:-(dT+) was not detected among food and animal isolates. Serovar 4,5,12:b:-(dT+) was reported to be polyphyletic and could be identified as S. Paratyphi B or S. Abony [27]. It was noted that neither S. Paratyphi B nor S. Abony was detected among the food and animal isolates as a frequent serovar. We propose further studies on serovar 4,5,12:b:-(dT+), to investigate if this serovar may have originated from other sources not covered in this study.
S. Stanley was the second most prevalent serovar associated with human cases in the 2012–2014 period. S. Stanley is endemic to Asia and infections are frequently associated with travel to Southeast Asian countries [30]. Other non-travel-related outbreaks have been linked to contaminated alfalfa sprouts, peanuts, soft cheese and turkey in Europe [31,32,33,34]. In this study, S. Stanley was identified in nearly all food categories (chicken, duck, other poultry, pork, beef, mutton and other meats) in varying detection rates (1.3–7.9%). It was the most common species detected in frog, crocodile and turtle meat samples. However, the sample size of the food sub-category was relatively small. With the current limited evidence, it is difficult to draw a conclusion on the principal vehicle of S. Stanley. In addition to foods, wild birds residing in the local environment were previously identified as reservoirs for S. Stanley. In Singapore’s endeavors towards urban rewilding, assimilation of nature elements into the city promotes closer proximity between wildlife and human habitats which could possibly play a role in the local epidemiology of zoonosis and reverse zoonosis [28]. Further studies complemented with whole genome sequencing may allow better epidemiologic insights into human acquisition of diseasing-causing S. Stanley in Singapore, and subsequent mitigation of the public health risk of transmission from potential reservoirs to humans.
S. Weltevreden was identified as the third-most prevalent serovar among human isolates. The serovar was the most frequently isolated in seafood in this study, contributing to approximately 20.0% of all seafood isolates from 2012 to 2016. Fish and seafood consumption by the population is relatively high (21 kg per capita per annual) and cooking methods may vary (raw consumption or to avoid overcooking seafood), allowing the survival of bacteria. S. Weltevreden is increasingly associated with human infections and outbreaks in Southeast Asia where it appears to be an emerging foodborne pathogen [35,36,37]. It is known to be wide-spread in water-related environments, possibly due to its ability to persist and multiply in tropical aquatic environments [9,38,39,40]. In Singapore, S. Weltevreden was also isolated from retail cooked or ready-to-eat food as well as from wild birds, suggesting its ability to survive and colonize in different types of host and environment [28]. An increased and targeted sampling of different types of seafood and risk assessment studies complemented with molecular epidemiological comparison studies of human S. Weltevreden isolates are recommended to identify main seafood types associated with human S. Weltevreden infections.
Two other serovars, S. Brancaster and S. Saintpaul, which recently appeared among the top 10 most prevalent serovars in humans and foods in 2015 and 2016, were primarily found in fresh chicken meat. In 2018, a study in Singapore reported that S. Brancaster (21.2%) and S. Saintpaul (32.7%) were among the most prevalent serovars found in fresh retail chicken meat in markets and supermarkets [8]. Similarly, S. Brancaster was identified as one of the three predominant serovars in poultry meat collected from slaughterhouses, small-scale poultry processing plants and wet markets in Malaysia from 2013 to 2017 [41,42]. In the same country, S. Saintpaul was reported to be recovered from indigenous vegetables including Vietnamese coriander and water spinach [43,44]. S. Saintpaul was one of the serovars contributing to more than half of the fresh produce-related outbreaks associated with fruits, vegetables and sprouts from 2001 to 2016 in Australia [45]. These previous reports suggest that, compared to other food categories, S. Saintpaul could more commonly be associated with fresh produce which is usually consumed raw and is a food category not routinely covered in the surveillance programs included in this study. The recent findings of S. Brancaster and S. Saintpaul in clinical cases highlight the need for continuous close monitoring of the distribution of these serovars in potential sources, e.g., poultry and fresh produce, which are possible food vehicles contributing to the increasing incidence of human salmonellosis.
Among Salmonella isolates found in pork and pork products, S. Derby was the second most frequent serovar after S. Typhimurium, accounting for nearly 20.0% of all isolates in this food category. In Europe and the United States, S. Derby was the most abundant serovar isolated from pork and was also frequently isolated from human clinical samples [46]. It can colonize and persist in swine populations and pig production environments and has been reportedly linked to several human salmonellosis outbreaks [46,47,48,49]. On the contrary, like S. Heidelberg, S. Derby was not often associated with human salmonellosis and did not appear to be a major public health concern in Singapore at the time the study was being carried out.
This study presents One-Health agencies’ combined retrospective data on Salmonella in foods and animals as a step towards identifying factors potentially contributing to human salmonellosis in Singapore. The study was however limited by several factors. Firstly, data were extracted from various surveillance programs which might be subjected to inherent sampling bias. For instance, food samples were collected on a risk-based schedule, taking into consideration factors such as risk category, compliance history, origin of source and importers’ track records, and additional sampling of the ‘problem source’ would be triggered upon initial detection, which might result in an inherently biased sampling. Furthermore, clinical isolates included in the study were from selected public hospitals and might not represent the complete case data. It should also be noted that human isolates associated with outbreak cases might affect the serovar estimation analysis due to close relatedness of the outbreak isolates. Secondly, the screening of specific Salmonella serovars was dependent on surveillance program. For instance, imported shell eggs and veterinary samples were primarily screened for S. Enteritidis and S. Typhimurium which were the target serovars of the respective national surveillance programs. Hence, this might limit the potential to estimate the full-range diversity of all possible serovars and therefore, information on the diversity of serovars in these samples might be less complete than that of other sample categories. Thirdly, sample sizes in certain food product sub-categories such as frog, crocodile, turtle, beef and mutton were limited for inference drawing about trend over the study period. Lastly, the conventional serotyping method might have limited discriminatory power which prevented further delineation between isolates of the same serovar. For instance, re-sampling at the same farm or premise as part of monitoring control may result in collection of isolates originating from the same source which could plausibly lead to overestimation/underestimation of serovars. An alternative typing method with higher resolution such as whole genome sequencing may be further applied for assessment of genetic relatedness between isolates of the same serovar from the same isolation source. These gaps are well-recognized and currently being reviewed to enhance Salmonella surveillance programs in various sectors.

5. Conclusions

This is the first study that collectively describes the distribution of Salmonella serovars in humans, foods, and animals in a One-Health approach for enhanced understanding of the epidemiology of human salmonellosis in Singapore. S. Enteritidis was predominantly isolated from human cases. The same serovar was the most frequently identified serovar in poultry/poultry products and eggs/egg products. Findings also revealed the distribution of Salmonella serovars and possible various transmission pathways associated with humans are proposed. Findings from this study reiterate the importance of good hygiene and food preparation practices to limit the spread of Salmonella from potential reservoirs as well as the need for continuous monitoring. Finally, with the joint effort of health protection framework involving One-Health, this study provides useful insights for designing and implementing more effective and integrated surveillance systems for Salmonella.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, K.T.A., A.D., J.S. and Y.N.L.; data curation, K.T.A., W.C.K., S.O., A.Y., J.L., P.P.C., G.L., W.K.W., B.Z.Y.T. and L.C.N.; analysis and interpretation, all authors; writing—original draft, K.T.A.; writing—review & editing, K.T.A., W.C.K., S.O., A.Y., B.Z.Y.T., J.S., A.D., L.C.N. and Y.N.L. All authors approved the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by the Singapore Food Agency, the Ministry of Health Singapore, the National Parks Board Singapore and the National Environment Agency Singapore.

Acknowledgments

Authors thanked past and present colleagues from the Singapore Food Agency, the Ministry of Health, the National Parks Board and the National Environment Agency who have worked on, and contributed data to, the corresponding national surveillance programs.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Silva, C.; Calva, E.; Maloy, S. One health and food-borne disease: Salmonella transmission between humans, animals and plants. Microbiol. Spectr. 2014, 2, OH-0020-2013. [Google Scholar]
  2. Jajere, S.M. A review of Salmonella enterica with particular focus on the pathogenicity and virulence factors, host specificity and antimicrobial resistance including multidrug resistance. Vet. World 2019, 12, 504–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Steere, A.; Hall, W.; Wells, J.; Craven, P.; Leotsakis, N.; Farmer, J.; Gangarosa, E. Person-to-person spread of Salmonella typhimurium after a hospital common-source. Lancet 1975, 1, 319–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Ministry of Health, Singapore. Communicable Diseases Surveillance in Singapore 2016. Available online: https://www.moh.gov.sg/docs/librariesprovider5/resources-statistics/reports/full-version.pdf (accessed on 7 December 2019).
  5. Lin, Y.N.; Fong, R.; Leo, J.; Kwan, W.W.; Ye, A.; Chan, P.P.; Chong, N.; Lim, G.; Octavia, S.; Lin, M.; et al. Distribution of Salmonella spp. along the food chain in Singapore, 2008–2016. Epidemiol. News Bull. 2019, 45, 44–54. [Google Scholar]
  6. Pires, S.; Vieira, A.; Hald, T.; Cole, D. Source attribution of human salmonellosis: An overview of methods and estimates. Foodborne Pathog. Dis. 2014, 11, 667–676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  7. Antunes, P.; Mourao, J.; Campos, J.; Peixe, L. Salmonellosis: The role of poultry meat. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2016, 22, 110–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  8. Zwe, Y.H.; Tang, V.C.Y.; Aung, K.T.; Gutierrez, R.A.; Ng, L.C.; Yuk, H.-G. Prevalence, sequence types, antibiotic resistance and, gyrA mutations of Salmonella isolated from retail fresh chicken meat in Singapore. Food Control 2018, 90, 233–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Ponce, E.; Khan, A.A.; Cheng, C.-M.; Summage-West, C.; Cerniglia, C.E. Prevalence and characterization of Salmonella enterica serovar Weltevreden from imported seafood. Food Microbiol. 2008, 25, 29–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Bonardi, S. Salmonella in the pork production chain and its impact on human health in the European Union. Epidemiol. Infect. 2017, 145, 1513–1526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Grimont, P.; Weill, F. Antigenic Formulas of the Salmonella Serovars, 9th ed. World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Reference and Research on Salmonella. 2007. Available online: http://www.pasteur.fr/sante/clre/cadrecnr/salmoms/WKLM_2007.pdf (accessed on 7 December 2019).
  12. European Food Safety Authority. The European Union summary report on trends and sources of zoonoses, zoonotic agents and foodborne outbreaks in 2017. EFSA J. 2018, 16, 5500. [Google Scholar]
  13. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Enteric Disease Surveillance: Salmonella Annual Reports. Centers for Disease Conrol and Prevention, Atlanta, GA. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/nationalsurveillance/pdfs/2016-Salmonella-report-508.pdf (accessed on 20 March 2020).
  14. Rodrigue, D.; Tauxe, R.; Rowe, B. International increase in Salmonella enteritidis: A new pandemic? Epidemiol. Infect. 1990, 105, 21–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Guard-Petter, J. The chicken, the egg and Salmonella enteritidis. Environ. Microbiol. 2001, 3, 421–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority of Singapore. AVA Annual Report 2018/2019. Available online: https://www.sfa.gov.sg/files/annualreport/AR2018-19/ (accessed on 16 March 2020).
  17. National Environment Agency. Food Safety Bulletin: 2nd Issue. National Environment Agency: Singapore. Available online: https://www.sfa.gov.sg/docs/default-source/our-services/nea-food-hygiene-newsletter-2014-issue-2.pdf (accessed on 17 March 2020).
  18. Octavia, S.; Ang, M.; La, M.; Zulaina, S.; Saat, Z.; Tien, W.; Han, H.; Ooi, P.; Cui, L.; Lin, R. Retrospective genome-wide comparisons of Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis from suspected outbreaks in Singapore. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2018, 61, 229–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Simpson, K.; Hill-Cawthorne, G.; Ward, M.; Mor, S. Diversity of Salmonella serotypes from humans, food, domestic animals and wildlife in New South Wales, Australia. BMC Infect. Dis. 2018, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Mather, A.E.; Lawson, B.; de Pinna, E.; Wigley, P.; Parkhill, J.; Thomson, N.R.; Page, A.J.; Holmes, M.A.; Paterson, G.K. Genomic analysis of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium from wild passerines in England and Wales. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2016, 82, 6728–6735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Skov, M.; Madsen, J.; Rahbek, C.; Lodal, J.; Jespersen, J.; Jorgensen, J.; Dietz, H.; Chriel, M.; Baggesen, D. Transmission of Salmonella between wildlife and meat-production animals in Denmark. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2008, 105, 1558–1568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Harris, J.; Bergmire-Sweat, D.; Schlegel, J.; Winpisinger, K.; Klos, R.; Perry, C.; Tauxe, R.; Sotir, M. Multistate outbreak of Salmonella infections associated with small turtle exposure, 2007–2008. Pediatrics 2009, 124, 1388–1394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Webber, B.; Borges, K.; Furian, T.; Rizzo, N.; Tondo, E.; Santos, L.; Rodrigues, L.; Nascimento, V. Detection of virulence genes in Salmonella Heidelberg isolated from chicken carcasses. Rev. Inst. Med. Trop. São Paulo 2019, 61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Joseph, J. Countries Continue to Find Salmonella in Brazillian Meat. 4 July 2017. FoodNavigator-USA. Available online: https://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Article/2017/07/05/Brazil-No-Salmonella-found-in-EU-poultry-exports# (accessed on 16 March 2020).
  25. Xiao, X.; Wang, W.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, J.; Liao, M.; Yang, H.; Zhang, Q.; Rainwater, C.; Li, Y. Modeling the reduction of Salmonella spp. on chicken breasts and wingettes during scalding for QMRA of the poultry supply chain in China. Microorganisms 2019, 7, 165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Han, K.H.; Choi, S.Y.; Lee, J.H.; Lee, H.; Shin, E.H.; Agtini, M.D.; von Seidlein, L.; Ochiai, R.L.; Clemens, J.D.; Wain, J.; et al. Isolation of Salmonella enterica subspecies enterica serovar Paratyphi B dT+, or Salmonella Java, from Indonesia and alteration of the d-tartrate fermentation phenotype by disrupting the ORF STM 3356. J. Med. Microbiol. 2006, 55, 1661–1665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Toboldt, A.; Tietze, E.; Helmuth, R.; Junker, E.; Fruth, A.; Malorny, B. Population structure of Salmonella enterica serovar 4,[5],12:b:- strains and likely sources of human infection. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2013, 79, 5121–5129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  28. Aung, K.T.; Chen, H.J.; Chau, M.L.; Yap, G.; Lim, X.F.; Humaidi, M.; Chua, C.; Yeo, G.; Yap, H.M.; Oh, J.Q.; et al. Salmonella in retail food and wild birds in Singapore—prevalence, antimicrobial resistance, and sequence types. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 4235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  29. The U. S. Food and Drug Adminstration. FDA Investigated Multistate Outbreak of Salmonella Infections Linked to Products Reported to Contain Kratom. Available online: https://www.fda.gov/food/outbreaks-foodborne-illness/fda-investigated-multistate-outbreak-salmonella-infections-linked-products-reported-contain-kratom (accessed on 16 March 2020).
  30. Hendriksen, R.S.; Le Hello, S.; Bortolaia, V.; Pulsrikarn, C.; Nielsen, E.M.; Pornruangmong, S.; Chaichana, P.; Svendsen, C.A.; Weill, F.-X.; Aarestrup, F.M. Characterization of isolates of Salmonella enterica serovar Stanley, a serovar endemic to Asia and associated with travel. J. Clin. Micribiol. 2011, 50, 709–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  31. Werner, S.; Boman, K.; Einemo, I.; Erntell, M.; de Jong, B.; Lindqvist, A.; Lofdahl, M.; Lofdahl, S.; Meeuwisse, A.; Ohlen, G.; et al. Outbreak of Salmonella Stanley in Sweden associated with alfalfa sprouts, July–August 2007. Eurosurveillance 2007, 12, 3291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kirk, M.; Little, C.; Lem, M.; Fyfe, M.; Genobile, D.; Tan, A.; Threlfall, J.; Paccagnella, A.; Lightfoot, D.; Lyi, H.; et al. An outbreak due to peanuts in their shell caused by Salmonella enterica serotypes Stanley and Newport: Sharing molecular information to solve international outbreaks. Epidemiol. Infect. 2004, 132, 571–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Pastore, R.; Schmid, H.; Altpeter, E.; Baumgartner, A.; Hachler, H.; Imhof, R.; Sudre, P.; Boubaker, K. Outbreak of Salmonella serovar Stanley infections in Switzerland linked to locally produced soft cheese, September 2006–February 2007. Eurosurveillance 2008, 13, 18979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Kinross, P.; van Alphen, L.; Martinez, U.J.; Struelens, M.; Takkinen, J.; Coulombier, D.; Makela, P.; Bertrand, S.; Mattheus, W.; Schmid, D.; et al. Multidisciplinary investigation of a multicountry outbreak of Salmonella Stanley infections associated with turkey meat in the European Union, August 2011 to January 2013. Eurosurveillance 2014, 19, 20801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Makendi, C.; Page, A.J.; Wren, B.W.; Phuong, T.L.T.; Clare, S.; Hale, C.; Goulding, D.; Klemm, E.J.; Pickard, D.; Okoro, C.; et al. A phylogenetic and phenotypic analysis of Salmonella enterica serovar Weltevreden, an emerging agent of diarrheal disease in tropical regions. PLoS Neglect. Trop. Dis. 2016, 10, e0004446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Saikia, L.; Sharma, A.; Nath, R.; Choudhury, G.; Borah, A. Salmonella Weltevreden food poisoning in a tea garden of Assam: An outbreak investigation. Indian J. Med. Microbiol. 2015, 33, 503–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Hassan, R.; Tecle, S.; Adcock, B.; Kellis, M.; Weiss, J.; Saupe, A.; Sorenson, A.; Klos, R.; Blankenship, J.; Blessington, T.; et al. Multistate outbreak of Salmonella Paratyphi B variant L(+) tartrate(+) and Salmonella Weltevreden infections linked to imported frozen raw tune: USA, March-July 2015. Epidemiol. Infect. 2018, 146, 1461–1467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Thong, K.; Goh, Y.; Radu, S.; Noorzaleha, S.; Yasin, R.; Koh, Y.; Lim, V.; Rusul, G.; Puthucheary, S. Genetic diversity of clinical and environmental strains of Salmonella enterica serotype Weltevreden isolated in Malaysia. J. Clin. Micribiol. 2002, 40, 2498–2503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  39. Noor Uddin, G.; Larsen, M.; Barco, L.; Minh Phu, T.; Dalsgaard, A. Clonal occurence of Salmonella Weltevreden in cultured shrimp in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0134252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  40. Heinitz, M.L.; Ruble, R.D.; Wagner, D.E.; Tatini, S.R. Incidence of Salmonella in fish and seafood. J. Food. Prot. 2000, 63, 579–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Rejab, S.; Shariruzi, H.; Desa, Z.; Abidin, S. Retrospective study on persistent Salmonella serotypes in meat samples tested in the veterinary public health section, regional of veterinary laboratory Bukit Tengah, Penang. Mal. J. Anim. Sci. 2019, 10, 34–42. [Google Scholar]
  42. Nidaullah, H.; Abiranmi, N.; Shamila-Syuhada, A.; Chuah, L.; Nurul, H.; Tan, T.; Abidin, F.; Rusul, G. Prevalence of Salmonella in poultry processing environments in wet markets in Penang and Perlis, Malaysia. Vet. World 2017, 10, 286–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Yoke-Kqueen, C.; Learn-Han, L.; Noorzaleha, A.; Son, R.; Sabrina, S.; Jiun-HHorng, S.; Chai-Hoon, K. Characterization of multiple-antimicrobial-resistant Salmonella enterica Subsp. enterica isolated from indigenous vegetables and poultry in Malaysia. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2008, 46, 318–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Salleh, N.; Rusul, G.; Hassan, Z.; Reezal, A.; Hajar, I.; Nishibuchi, M.; Son, R. Incidence of Salmonella spp. in raw vegetables in Selangor, Malaysia. Food Control 2003, 14, 475–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Ford, L.; Moffatt, C.; Fearnley, E.; Miller, M.; Gregory, J.; Sloan-Gardner, T.; Polkinghorne, B.; Bell, R.; Franklin, N.; Williamson, D.; et al. The epidemiology of Salmonella enterica outbreaks in Australia, 2001–2016. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2018, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Sevellec, Y.; Vignaud, M.-L.; Granier, S.A.; Lailler, R.; Feurer, C.; Hello, S.L.; Mistou, M.-Y.; Cadel-Six, S. Polyphyletic nature of Salmonella enterica serotype Derby and lineage-specific host-association revealed by genome-wide analysis. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 891–904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Campos, J.; Mourao, J.; Peixe, L.; Antunes, P. Non-typhoidal Salmonella in the pig production chain: A comprehensive analysis of its impact on human health. Pathogens 2019, 8, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Ebuchi, S.; Baba, A.; Uryu, K.; Hiwaki, H. Two outbreaks caused by Salmonella Derby and S. Anatum at grilled-meat restaurants in Fukuoka city. Jpn. J. Infect. Dis. 2006, 59, 405–406. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  49. Arnedo-Pena, A.; Sabater-Vidal, S.; Herrera-Leon, S.; Bellido-Blasco, J.; Silvestre-Silvestre, E.; Meseguer-Ferrer, N.; Yague-Munoz, A.; Gil-Fortuno, M.; Romeu-Garcia, A.; Moreno-Munoz, R. An outbreak of monophasic and biphasic Salmonella Typhimurium, and Salmonella Derby associated with the consumption of dried pork sausage in Castellon (Spain). Enferm. Infec. Micr. Clin. 2016, 34, 544–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Table 1. Number of Salmonella isolates included in this study (2012–2016).
Table 1. Number of Salmonella isolates included in this study (2012–2016).
 Sample Categoryn%
 Human—clinical4462-
 Food2529-
  Chicken and chicken products153860.8
  Pork and pork products42116.6
  Duck2238.8
  Seafood1204.7
  Other poultry1004.0
  Frog, crocodile and turtle632.5
  Beef and mutton381.5
  Eggs and egg products 261.0
 Farms
  Chicken and quail layers945-
 Companion and wildlife animals68-
Table 2. Frequency of Salmonella serovars in humans, farms, foods, companion and wildlife animal samples in Singapore from 2012 to 2016.
Table 2. Frequency of Salmonella serovars in humans, farms, foods, companion and wildlife animal samples in Singapore from 2012 to 2016.
Sample Source 20122013201420152016
RankSerovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%
Humans1Enteritidis16121.8Enteritidis27132.0Enteritidis26927.6Enteritidis20022.2Enteritidis25125.0
2Stanley9112.3Stanley10712.6Stanley15115.5Weltevreden10011.1Weltevreden10410.4
3Weltevreden8111.0Weltevreden738.6Weltevreden979.9Saintpaul9610.7Stanley10010.0
44,5,12:b:(dT+)476.4Typhi566.6Typhimurium727.4Stanley808.9Saintpaul808.0
5Typhimurium425.74,5,12:b:(dT+)526.14,5,12:b:(dT+)626.44,5,12:b:(dT+)495.44,5,12:b:(dT+)606.0
6Typhi 364.9Typhimurium445.2Albany 343.5Typhi 384.2Typhi 474.7
7Bareilly 324.3Bareilly 263.1Typhi333.4Typhimurium 364.0Bareilly 353.5
8Albany 233.1Javiana 222.6Bareilly 232.4Paratyphi B Var Java 283.1Hvittingfoss313.1
9Paratyphi A 202.7Paratyphi B var Java 182.1Javiana 222.3Albany 242.7Typhimurium292.9
10Javiana 192.6Braenderup 172.0Hvittingfoss 222.3Bareilly 232.6Brancaster252.5
Others 18525.1Others 16119.0Others 19019.5Others22725.2Others24024.0
Total737 Total847 Total975 Total901 Total1002
FoodsRankSerovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%
1Typhimurium13522.8Typhimurium9518.9Typhimurium5415.2Brancaster6514.8Brancaster3212.3
2Heidelberg13222.3Enteritidis9118.1Albany3911.0Albany6514.8Typhimurium3011.5
3Enteritidis9516.0Heidelberg6813.5Enteritidis349.6Enteritidis6013.7Heidelberg228.4
4Albany345.7Minnesota316.2Heidelberg298.1Typhimurium276.2Enteritidis207.7
5Stanley244.0Albany306.0Minnesota236.5Mbandaka245.5Stanley 197.3
6Kentucky233.9Stanley265.2Braenderup164.5Heidelberg153.4Saintpaul145.4
7Anatum/ var 15122.0Infantis244.8Corvallis133.7Corvallis143.2Mbandaka103.8
8Weltevreden111.9Mbandaka214.2Istanbul123.4Saintpaul122.7Potsdam93.4
9Schwarzengrund101.7Weltevreden/var15102.0Kentucky123.4Stanley112.5Weltevreden/var1593.4
10Derby101.7Braenderup 91.8Derby113.1Derby92.1Derby62.3
Others10718.0Others9819.5Others 11331.7Others 13631.1Others 9034.5
Total 593 Total503 Total356 Total438 Total261
Chicken layer farmsRankSerovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%
1Enteritidis44.7Enteritidis86.7Enteritidis7124.4Enteritidis76.0Enteritidis921.4
2Others8295.3Typhimurium86.7Typhimurium124.1Typhimurium21.7Others 3378.6
Others10386.6Others 20871.5Others 10792.2
Total 86 Total119 Total291 Total116 Total42
Quail layer farmsRankSerovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%
1Typhimurium1520.5Typhimurium1111.5Typhimurium46.3Typhimurium510.6Typhimurium216.7
2Others5879.5Others8588.5Others 5993.7Others 4289.4Typhimurium (monophasic)18.3
Others 975.0
Total 73 Total96 Total63 Total47 Total12
Companion and wildlife animalsRankSerovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%
1Typhimurium15.6Typhimurium214.3Typhimurium00.0Typhimurium00.0Typhimurium17.1
2Enteritidis00.0Enteritidis17.1Enteritidis00.0Enteritidis00.0Enteritidis00.0
Others1794.4Others1178.6Others 10100.0Others 12100.0Others 1392.9
Total 18 Total14 Total10 Total12 Total14
The n represents the number of isolates related to each serovar, whereas % represents the relative occurrence of serovars within the sample category.
Table 3. Frequency of Salmonella serovars in various sample categories (2012–2016).
Table 3. Frequency of Salmonella serovars in various sample categories (2012–2016).
RankHuman—ClinicalChicken and Chicken ProductsPork and Pork Products
Serovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%
1Enteritidis115225.8Enteritidis43828.5Typhimurium14835.2
2Stanley52911.9Heidelberg33321.7Derby7918.8
3Weltevreden45510.2Typhimurium1459.4Infantis225.2
44,5,12:b:(dT+)2706.1Albany1036.7Stanley184.3
5Typhimurium2235.0Minnesota805.2Anatum/var71.7
6Typhi 2104.7Kentucky603.9Saintpaul61.4
7Saintpaul1763.9Corvallis422.7Agona51.2
8Bareilly 1393.1Stanley402.6Bovismorbificans51.2
9Albany 811.8Schwarzengrund372.4Minnesota30.7
10Javiana 631.4Braenderup281.8Braenderup30.7
Other116426.1Other23215.0Other12529.7
Total4462 Total1538 Total421
RankDuckSeafoodOther poultry (quail, turkey)
Serovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%
1Typhimurium9843.9Weltevreden/var15+2319.2Typhimurium2121.0
2Hadar209.0Typhimurium1310.8Infantis1313.0
3Enteritidis177.6Brancaster65.0Agona44.0
4Anatum/var94.0Stanley43.3Weltevreden/var15+33.0
5Kentucky52.2Mbandaka43.3Heidelberg22.0
6Infantis52.2Albany21.7Stanley22.0
7Albany41.8Corvallis21.7Corvallis22.0
8Corvallis41.8Braenderup21.7Enteritidis11.0
9Weltevreden/var15+41.8Bovismorbificans21.7Mbandaka11.0
10Stanley31.3Enteritidis10.8Hadar11.0
Other5424.2Other6150.8Other5050.0
Total223 Total120 Total100
RankOther meat
(frog, crocodile and turtle)
Beef and muttonEggs and egg products
Serovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%
1Stanley57.9Typhimurium615.8Enteritidis1661.5
2Braenderup46.3Bovismorbificans513.2Typhimurium415.4
3Typhimurium34.8Infantis410.5Braenderup27.7
4Corvallis23.2Stanley25.3Mbandaka13.8
5Anatum/var23.2Mbandaka25.3Other311.5
6Albany11.6Other1950.0
Other4673.0
Total63 Total38 Total26
RankChicken and quail layer farmsCompanion and wildlife animals
Serovarn%Serovarn%
1Enteritidis9910.5Typhimurium45.9
2Typhimurium596.2Enteritidis11.5
3Typhimurium (monophasic)10.1Other6392.6
Other78683.2
Total945 Total68
The n represents the number of isolates related to each serovar, whereas % represents the relative occurrence of serovars within the sample category.
Table 4. Top five most common Salmonella serovars found in chicken samples from 2012 to 2016.
Table 4. Top five most common Salmonella serovars found in chicken samples from 2012 to 2016.
Sample Source 20122013201420152016
RankSerovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%
Fresh chicken1Enteritidis 1629.1Enteritidis4255.3Albany721.9Albany821.6Brancaster927.3
2Albany 1527.3Albany 1722.4Corvallis721.9Brancaster616.2Saintpaul927.3
3Typhimurium814.5Braenderup56.6Typhimurium412.5Enteritidis513.5Typhimurium412.1
4Stanley712.7Typhimurium45.3Enteritidis39.4Corvallis513.5Enteritidis412.1
5Corvallis 23.6Stanley 45.3Braenderup39.4Saintpaul38.1Mbandaka26.1
Others712.7Others45.3Others825.0Others1027.0Others515.2
Total55 Total76 Total32 Total37 Total33
Frozen chickenRankSerovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%Serovarn%
1Heidelberg12848.9Heidelberg6849.6Heidelberg2925.9Enteritidis4634.8Heidelberg2247.8
2Typhimurium4216.0Minnesota3122.6Minnesota2017.9Albany2922.0Enteritidis36.5
3Enteritidis3914.9Enteritidis118.0Enteritidis1513.4Heidelberg1511.4Schwarzengrund 36.5
4Kentucky207.6Infantis53.6Albany98.0Virchow96.8Stanley36.5
5Schwarzengrund 72.7Schwarzengrund 42.9Braenderup76.3Liverpool53.8Kentucky24.3
Others269.9Others1813.1Others3228.6Others2821.2Others1328.3
Total262 Total137 Total112 Total132 Total46
The n represents the number of isolates related to each serovar, whereas % represents the relative occurrence of serovars within the sample category.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Aung, K.T.; Khor, W.C.; Octavia, S.; Ye, A.; Leo, J.; Chan, P.P.; Lim, G.; Wong, W.K.; Tan, B.Z.Y.; Schlundt, J.; et al. Distribution of Salmonella Serovars in Humans, Foods, Farm Animals and Environment, Companion and Wildlife Animals in Singapore. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 5774. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17165774

AMA Style

Aung KT, Khor WC, Octavia S, Ye A, Leo J, Chan PP, Lim G, Wong WK, Tan BZY, Schlundt J, et al. Distribution of Salmonella Serovars in Humans, Foods, Farm Animals and Environment, Companion and Wildlife Animals in Singapore. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(16):5774. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17165774

Chicago/Turabian Style

Aung, Kyaw Thu, Wei Ching Khor, Sophie Octavia, Agnes Ye, Justina Leo, Pei Pei Chan, Georgina Lim, Wai Kwan Wong, Brian Zi Yan Tan, Joergen Schlundt, and et al. 2020. "Distribution of Salmonella Serovars in Humans, Foods, Farm Animals and Environment, Companion and Wildlife Animals in Singapore" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 16: 5774. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17165774

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop