Table 1.

Comparison of different PCR techniques for detecting viable foodborne pathogens.

Type	Material	Time	Target	LOD	Effect	References
RNA-based RT-PCR	RNA reverse transcriptase	2016	Mycobacterium tuberculosis	-	Shorter detection time, fewer detection steps and easier operation	[6]
		2020	Cronobacter sakazakii	501 CFU/mL	Dynamic range was 2.4 × 107 CFU/mL–3.84 × 104 CFU/mL	[8]
		2021	Pseudomonas aeruginosa	1 cell/mL in blood and 100 cells/g in stool	The method can directly and rapidly quantify PA in clinical samples within 6 h without cross-reaction	[19]
DNA-based vPCR	EMA	2017	Escherichia coli	-	Reduced sensitivity when detecting UV-treated samples	[20]
		2021	Legionella pneumophila	-	EMA has no dye toxicity to VBNC bacteria	[21]
	PMA	2021	Salmonella	100 per gram of soil	High specificity (92%)	[22]
		2022	Salmonella spp., Escherichia coli, and Staphylococcus aureus	Salmonella:100 E. coli:100 S. aureus:10 CFU/mL	Multiplex detection	[13]
	DyeTox13	2018	P. aeruginosa PAO1 and Enterococcus faecalis v583	-	Accurate assessment of the survival status of both Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria	[14]
		2022	Salmonella typhimurium	-	It accurately detects the number of viable bacteria in UV-sterilized samples	[15]
	TOMA	2019	Escherichia coli	1000 CFU/mL	It can work in the extreme conditions such as strong radiation	[16]
		2022	Klebsiella pneumoniae	2.3 × 104 CFU/mL	It can be completed within 40 min at a constant temperature	[17]