1. Food Monitoring Lab Requirements & System Implications Shaun Kennedy Associate Director National Center for Food Protection & Defense Center for Animal Health & Food Safety University of Minnesota June 9, 2005

2. Food Testing Objectives Food quality Food safety Process and cost control Nutritional content Identity verification

3. Required Laboratory Capabilities Chemical composition/nutrition –Wet chemistry –Chemical characterization –Microbiological characterization

4. Required Laboratory Capabilities Identity verification –Molecular verification –Microbiological verification –Genetic verification

5. Required Laboratory Capabilities Food safety assessment –Atomic identification –Molecular identification –Organism identification/typing –Toxicology

6. Wide Range of Capabilities Needed Atomic Adsorption Spectroscopy (AA) Gas Chromatography (GC) High Pressure Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) Enzyme Linked Immunosorbant Assay (ELISA) Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) Enzyme Linked Fluorescent Assay (ELFA) Reverse Passive Latex Agglutination (RLPA) Hydrophobic Grid Membrane Fluorescence (HGMF) High Pressure Liquid Chromotography (HPLC) Adenosine Triphosphate Luminescence (ATP) ABI 7900HT RealTime PCR Taqman Beckman Biomek FX Fluidic workstation

7. Food Monitoring Approaches Firm level –Quality, cost and process control internal drivers –Regulatory compliance and safety internal/external drivers –Methods must fit into the production management plan Speed Specificity

8. Food Monitoring Approaches Regulatory level –Compliance/safety confirmation key focus area –Incident investigation/attribution critical –Not a distribution control option for most foods

9. Food Safety: Control of Hazards Reasonably Likely to Occur Impact Exposure Likelihood LowMediumHigh Severe Moderate Mild

10. Contamination Testing Approaches Probable/anticipated contaminant focus –Known potential contaminants –Generic testing techniques Chemical/biochemical kits –Agent specific testing techniques Chemical/biochemical kits High end diagnostics High specificity and high sensitivity

11. Food Protection and Defense: Control of Low Likelihood, Severe Impact Events Impact Exposure Likelihood LowMediumHigh Severe Moderate Mild

12. Contamination Testing Approaches Unanticipated/intentional contamination –“Finger printing” the only realistic control oriented approach Potentially expensive Limited applicability due to normal variability –Likely not identifiable until after outbreak detection

13. Challenges For Food Monitoring Goal is to prevent distribution of contaminated food –Usually only realistic if done at firm level –Microorganism testing usually too slow Culture and rapid methods still 48-72 hours –Chemical methods feasible if the contaminant is known

14. The Lettuce Timeline 1234567891011121314 Harvest/Processing Detection Started In Distribution In Retail In Home Enrichment Detection Pathogen Identified Recall Initiated Consumed First Illness Consumption Stops? Remaining Lettuce Disposed Of Note: If not identified on the food, epidemiological investigation >>14 days

15. Food Monitoring Laboratories Critical link in controlling unintentional and intentional contamination Technology limited for interventional control in many cases Pushing some responsibility to producers critical for speed of detection Intentional contamination a more significant challenge