Table 6.

Campylobacter spp. counts (log CFU/mL) on each of the ten locations during the evisceration process under normal process interventions (CX) and low-chemical process interventions (RC) on chicken rinses.

Location	Campylobacter spp. Counts (Log CFU/mL)
	Chemical (CX)			Reduced Chemical (RC)
	Mean ± SE 1	Mean + 3SE	n	Mean ± SE	Mean + 3SE	n
Live Receiving 2	5.23 ± 0.16 a	5.72	70	5.23 ± 0.16 a	5.72	70
Rehanger	2.05 ± 0.18 cd	2.58	40	2.00 ± 0.12 bc	2.37	90
Post Eviscerator	2.18 ± 0.18 c	2.71	30	2.23 ± 0.12 b	2.59	90
Post Cropper	2.34 ± 0.12 bc	2.70	50	2.00 ± 0.11 bc	2.33	90
Post NB	2.57 ± 0.12 b	2.92	50	2.25 ± 0.11 b	2.57	90
Post IOBW#1	1.75 ± 0.12 d	2.10	50	1.54 ± 0.10 cd	1.85	90
Post IOBW#2	1.36 ± 0.10 e	1.67	50	1.38 ± 0.09 cd	1.65	89
Pre Chilling	1.23 ± 0.11 e	1.56	50	1.18 ± 0.10 d	1.47	98
Post Chilling	0.18 ± 0.07 f	0.39	40	0.13 ± 0.05 f	0.27	106
Parts (Wings)	0.27 ± 0.07 f	0.48	50	0.57 ± 0.06 e	0.76	92

¹ Standard error of the mean; ² For Live Receiving location, there was no treatment applied (CX nor RC); therefore, the same values are reported for each treatment on the table; ^a–f For each Location, with each treatment (CX and RC), Different Letters are Significantly Different according to Krustal–Wallis test at p-value < 0.01.