RESUMO
In the coming decade, Europe will dedicate billions of euros to the necessary research and innovation (R&I) to support a transition to safe and sustainable food systems. EU Agencies, individually and even more so collectively, can make a difference in supporting the European research agenda. EU Agencies are knowledge centres, bringing together know-how to inform policy makers. EU Agencies that have traditionally dealt with aspects of human health, animal health, plant health and ecosystem health in silos, now need to take a broader perspective and move towards a One Health (OH) approach. In this paper, the authors highlight the need for more transdisciplinary cooperation in support of the One Health approach, identify challenges in strengthening interagency cooperation and provide recommendations to address them. EU Agencies are natural bridges between the scientific community and policy-makers and need to dedicate time and effort in fostering this dialogue, e.g. by engaging with relevant initiatives, research projects and European Partnerships. Research generates evidence that can be used also for regulatory science, in support of policy-making. It is urgent to define transdisciplinary research needs and formulate a One Health research agenda. This would be facilitated by establishing transdisciplinary One Health Research & Innovation governance, both at national and EU levels. Ongoing large initiatives, such as the One Health European Joint Programme, have demonstrated that active dialogue with national ministries and EU agencies is beneficial for all parties. Involvement of EU Agencies in the programming of the EU Research Framework programmes is beneficial, because of their regulatory science perspective, their expertise and current or future tasks on research topics. It is timely for EU Agencies to demonstrate leadership in moving the One Health agenda forward and it is encouraging that EU Agencies have committed to establish a cross-agency task force on One Health.
RESUMO
The efficiency of the International Dairy Federation (IDF) Listeria detection method (IDF Standard 143:1990) was compared to that of a colorimetric nucleic acid hybridization assay. Out of 250 naturally contaminated cheese and environmental samples tested, the IDF method revealed 153 and the Gene-Trak assay 144 positive samples, respectively. Hence, the Gene-Trak assay gave a false-negative rate of 5.9%. False-positive samples could not be detected. When Oxford and LPM agar were compared for suitability as the streaking medium for the Gene-Trak assay, more satisfactory results were obtained with the Oxford agar. Both the overall number of positive samples and the mean optical density values of the Gene-Trak-positive samples were higher with Oxford than with LPM agar. The extension of sample enrichment time from 1 d (Gene-Trak-assay), and 2 d (IDF method), respectively, to 7 d resulted in a small increase in the number IDF method-positive samples but led to a drastic decrease in the number of Gene-Trak-positive samples.