The study was carried out in the Saaba district in Burkina Faso from August 1, to October 31, 2023. Saaba is one of six rural municipalities of Ouagadougou. It is located in the north east of Kadiogo province. It is bounded by the parallel 12˚2'37" north latitude and the meridians 1˚25'15" west longitude.

Sheep meat sales sites were assessed in the Saaba municipality. The samples were located in three villages: Borgo, Nioko 1, and Wamtenga (Dapoya) ( Figure 1 ).

Microbiological analyzes were carried out at the Laboratory of the “Ecole Nationale de l’Elevage et de la Santé Animale (ENESA)” in the Food Microbiology Section in Ouagadougou.

A survey was carried out among 100 meat sellers in Saaba, which were selected according to a randomized process. During this survey, a standardized questionnaire was administered. It included an interview with sellers and a visual observation of the cleanliness of the butchers. The parameters considered during the survey were: preservation methods, species marketed, meat sellers’ knowledge of good hygiene practices, premises hygiene, equipment hygiene, and staff hygiene and the working conditions of this staff.

A two-stage random sampling method was used. The first stage involved the identification of the sales outlets, while the second involved the actual sampling of the meat. Due to the absence of an exhaustive list of meat sales outlets in the study area, the procedure adopted was first a preliminary survey consisting of an assessment of hygiene and the sampling of meat in butcher shops. This survey allowed us to identify a total of 100 butchers in the district who met the criteria based on the regularity of their slaughterings and their willingness to participate in the study. The study involved 25 samples of sheep meat sampled from 25 butchers in three villages in the municipality of Saaba (Borgo, 10 samples; Nioko 1, 10 samples, and Wemtenga, 05 samples). All parts of the carcass were sampled. Once the meat had been sampled, they were placed in sterile ziplock bags, kept in a cooler containing carbohydrate ice, and finally sent to the laboratory (ENESA) for microbiological analysis.

The meat samples were analyzed immediately after collection and arrival at the laboratory. Stock suspension was obtained by weighing 10 g of sample in a sterile stomacher bag and adding 90 g of sterile peptone water. The whole mixture was stomached for 2 minutes, followed by serial decimal dilutions. The mass inoculation method was used for inoculation. The groups of microorganisms tested were: total aerobic mesophilic flora (TAMF), total coliforms (TCB), thermotolerant coliforms (TTCB), presumed pathogenic Staphylococci (PPS), yeasts and molds (Y/M) and Salmonella. Parameters analyzed, culture media used, and the incubation conditions are as indicated in Table 1 .

The results were interpreted according to a 3-class plan for TAMF, TTCB, PPS, and yeast and molds, taking into account the criteria. A sample was considered satisfactory microbiological quality (SMQ) if the flora (F) was less than or equal to m; acceptable microbiological quality (AMQ) if F was between m and 10 m, and unsatisfactory microbiological quality (USQ) if F was greater than 10 m; m being the numerical value representing satisfactory concentrations of microorganisms per gram of meat ( Table 2 ).

Legend: TAMF: Total Aerobic Mesophilic Flora; TCB: Total Coliform Bacteria; TTCB: Thermotolerant coliform bacteria; PPS: Presumed Pathogenic Staphylococci.

For Salmonella, the interpretation was based on a two-class plan. The presence of Salmonella indicated that the sample was QMNS. The sample was QMS if they were absent.

Data were entered using Epidata^® software and processed using Epidata Analysis^® software. Interest variables, coded as presence/absence, were the presence of the microorganisms investigated. Excel version 2016 was used to draw tables and figures.

Version 4.4.1 of R was used to determine the principal component analysis and draw figures. Fisher’s exact test with Chi-square tests was used to evaluate significant differences with 95% as the confidence interval between microorganism contamination.

For the survey results, 100% of our respondents were men from all over the city. Of these men, 13% had attended secondary school, 46% had attended primary school, and 41% were illiterate. Of the total, only 7% received hygiene training, compared to 93% who were not trained. As for the premises, 1/4 or 25 premises comply with hygiene standards. This gives us a total of 96% of our respondents who have not received hygiene training. The meat commonly sold in these butchers’ shops in Saaba is either beef or sheep. Some other categories of meat are not commonly available and can only be ordered as, for example, donkey and horse meat.

Samples, stock suspension, and serial decimal dilutions were prepared according to the instructions in international standard ISO 6887-1 (1997). Samples were analyzed immediately after collection. The stock suspension was obtained by weighing 10 g of sample in a sterile stomacher bag, topped up to 100 g with sterile peptone water. The entire mixture was stomached for 2 minutes, followed by a series of successive decimal dilutions. The mass inoculation method was used for inoculation. The parameters analyzed, the culture medium used, and the incubation conditions are indicated in Table 1 .

One hundred percent (100%) of the raw sheep were of unsatisfactory quality for TAMF, with an average of 8.93 × 10⁶ microorganisms per gram ( Table 2 and Table 3 ).

The average contamination of the products by TCB was 3.12 × 10⁵ microorganisms per gram of the product for raw sheep with a 100% unsatisfactory quality of 100% ( Table 2 and Table 3 ).

The average contamination of the products by TLC was 3.12 × 10⁵ microorganisms per gram of product for raw sheep with a 100% unsatisfactory quality of 100% ( Table 2 and Table 3 ).

Legend: TAMF: Total Aerobic Mesophilic Flora; TCB: Total Coliform Bacteria; TTCB: Thermotolerant Coliform Bacteria; PPS: Presumed Pathogenic Staphylococci.

The average contamination of the products by presumed pathogenic staphylococci was 3.69 × 10⁶ microorganisms per gram for raw sheep, with a percentage of unsatisfactory quality of 100% ( Table 2 and Table 3 ).

The average contamination of the products by yeast and molds was 6.74 × 10³ CFU microorganisms per gram for raw sheep with a 100% satisfactory quality ( Table 2 and Table 3 ).

The average Salmonella contamination of the products was 0 microorganisms per gram for the raw sheep with a satisfactory quality of 100% ( Table 2 and Table 3 ).

One hundred percent (100%) of the raw meat analyzed was of unsatisfactory microbiological quality for all parameters studied ( Figure 2 ).

The principal component analysis (PCA) showed that the microorganisms isolated from meat taken from the 3 localities (Borgo, Nioko 1 and Wentenga) ( Figure 3 ) have similar characteristics, i.e. the microbiological concentrations of meat from the 3 localities are not very different.

ANOVA analysis (Fisher (LSD)) of the differences between the modalities with a 95% confidence interval showed that there was a statistically significant difference between TAMF, TCB isolated from Nioko 1 and Borgo mutton meat, and Nioko 1 and Wemtenga mutton meat. Regarding PPS and the yeasts and molds, no statistically significant difference was observed ( Table 4 ).

Legend: TAMF: Total Aerobic Mesophilic Flora; TCB: Total Coliform Bacteria; TTCB: Thermotolerant Coliform Bacteria; PPS: Presumed pathogenic Staphylococci. Values with different letter indices are significantly different (Fisher LSD). Values in the same column with the same letter indices are not statistically different at the p = 0.05 confidence level (Fisher LSD).

The results of the study revealed many shortcomings in the construction of the premises as well as the equipment used.

This could be due to the poor management of equipment and premises, and similarly inadequate knowledge on the rules of hygiene among the meat sellers could be a potential source of contamination. In terms of working methods, the good hygiene practices recommended by the committee [11] were not applied properly. This poor hygiene could be related to illiteracy, lack of training, and lack of awareness among staff. Contamination depends on several factors: 1) the animal’s state of health and fatigue [12] , 2) the animal’s cleanliness, and 3) compliance with slaughtering procedures [4] (e.g., compliance with the waiting time between the last administration of a veterinary medicine and the slaughter of an animal for consumption).

The percentage of meat contaminated with TAMF was 100%, with an average of 8.93 × 10⁶ CFU/g. This result was significantly higher than the standard value of 5 × 10⁶ CFU/g. These average values found in the present study showed a fairly high degree of contamination in the carcasses sampled. They were higher than those found at the Constantine abattoir by Denna et al. [4] , who worked on 30 sheep carcasses [5] . The relatively high figure found in the present study could be explained by the poor state of the premises, poor handling, and lack of compliance with hygiene conditions.

Compared to CTBs (bacterial species belonging to the Enterobacteria or optional anaerobic family), they are microorganisms indicating the microbial quality of the water because it contains bacteria of fecal origin. Their presence on carcasses indicates poor hygiene during slaughtering operations and recent fecal contamination. These bacteria were present in the meat, with an average of 3.12 × 10⁵ CFU/g. These results differed from those of Hamad (2009), who found 13.6 CFU/g at the El-Oued abattoir on sheep carcasses from different regions of Willaya in Morocco. In fact, the high result reported by Hamad [13] could essentially be due to the hygienic behavior of the handlers, since their samples were taken immediately after skinning and before evisceration. Regarding the TTCB, only Staphylococci, yeasts, and molds were isolated, with 3.69 × 10⁶ and 6.74 × 10³ CFU germs per gram, respectively, in the mutton. Hammoudi et al. [14] in Algeria found 1.9 log CFU/cm² of thermotolerant coliforms in their study.

The presence of contamination indicators in sheep meat can be explained by: 1) lack of hygiene during handling or poor storage conditions; 2) contamination during slaughter, transport of carcasses, the environment and staff, and washing of the animal. These germs come from a variety of sources: animals, water, and even direct contact through hides, feet, hooves, or the digestive tract.

Microbiological analysis of yeasts and molds showed that the average contamination of the products by microorganisms was 6.74 × 10³ CFU/g of meat. These results were lower than those of Saleh et al. [15] who found an average of 8.6 × 10³ CFU/g on sheep carcasses in Egypt. Regarding the analysis of presumed pathogenic Staphylococci, the results obtained showed that the average contamination of the products by these bacteria was 3.69 × 10⁶ CFU/g germs for raw meat. These results were lower than those obtained by Bouzid et al. [16] who obtained an average of 4.45 × 10⁶ CFU/g. This high value obtained by Bouzid et al. [16] could be explained, on the one hand, by poor handling during analysis and, on the other hand, during the transport of the samples.

Regarding Salmonella spp. sought during this study, none were found in our samples. These results were in agreement with those of Ilboudo et al. [17] who did not detect Salmonella spp. at ovine samples in the same abattoir in Burkina Faso.) The absence of Salmonella in this study could be explained by the very low prevalence of this bacteria in the sheep meet. The absence of Salmonella spp. in this study does not mean that there was no subsequent contamination at slaughterhouses. In contrast to the AFO results, Salifou et al. [18] showed that Salmonella spp. is common in carcasses at the Cotonou-Porto-Novo slaughterhouses. These results proved that the carcass surface contains Salmonella spp., which may vary depending on the site of contamination or sampling [19] .

In our opinion, this difference could be due to transportation to the sales outlets and the conditions under which it is kept once in the butcher’s or sales outlet. In Burkina Faso, some butchers transport meat on motorbikes and even bicycles without any protection. At the point of sale, the meat is not protected against flies and dust, which leads to contamination by microorganisms. These arguments could justify the difference between microbial loads in meat from different localities.

It is strongly recommended to protect meat and thus to decrease the risk of foodborne diseases caused by enteric pathogenic. This also indicates poor hygiene and sanitation practices and fecal contamination during meat transportation, production, and distribution.