Comments on the Detection of Salmonella SMPR
2
7
This sentence seems to suggest that
verification data and validation data are
equivalent, but this is not the case.
Agreed that verification and validation are
different which is the reason the different
types of evaluations are identified. The
document does not make any inference that
verification and validation are equivalent, only
that information from the SMPR can be used if
applicable.
No change proposed.
19
It remains unclear how this document outlines
specific requirements for method for field use.
Agreed. The "Intended User" sattement is not
quite right.
Revised in version 14.
21-22
Although pre-harvest field samples appear to
be the impetus for this document, this is the
only time it is mentioned. It is unclear how the
pre-harvest perspective has influenced the
requirements as set out in this document.
All of the performance parameters were based
on "pre-harvest" samples. This was a primary
consideration through out the deliberation of
the SMPR. For example, the inclusivity panel
included serovars known to occur in leafy
greens. However, suggestions to improve the
document are welcomed.
No change proposed.
28
Suggest deleting the footnote. All of the text is
present in the text below.
Agreed the text is redundant.
Revised in version 14
37-38
Delete sentence since already covered in
footnote 1.
Agreed.
Revised in version 14
Footnote 2 correct 'mircobiology' typo.
Agreed.
Revised in version 14
49
Shouldn't the harvesting time period of
Romaine be indicated for completeness?
Agreed.
Revised in version 14
56
Suggest to include a reference to Annex III
Agreed. Add reference to Annex III.
Revised in version 14
72-73
Significance of LPOD(o) in context of text not
clear. Why not LPOD(c) where c =
concentration?
Agreed. Use "LPOD" and designate
concentration.
Revised in version 14
73
"AOAC" - Is this a reference?
"AOAC" was a place-holder to remind us to
include a reference.
Revised in version 14
75-76 LCL usually means lower confidence limit.
Agreed.
Revised in version 14
79
Additional precision may be required. If you
haven’t harvested anything, how is there
sample available for testing?
Technicians go out to the fields to take "pre-
harvest" samples which are brought back to a
laboratory for testing. The term is common
and understood by the leafy green community.
No change proposed, but suggestions are
welcomed.
No change proposed.
88
double periods
Agreed.
Revised in version 14
