Literature DB >> 12414165

How to substantiate eradication of bovine brucellosis when aspecific serological reactions occur in the course of brucellosis testing.

Jacques Godfroid1, Claude Saegerman, Vincent Wellemans, Karl Walravens, Jean-Jacques Letesson, Anne Tibor, Alastair Mc Millan, Steve Spencer, Moëz Sanna, Douwe Bakker, Régis Pouillot, Bruno Garin-Bastuji.   

Abstract

Collaborative work was financed by the EU to develop and assess new diagnostic tools that can differentiate between bovine brucellosis and bovine infections due to Yersinia enterocolitica O:9 either in conjunction with, or as an alternative to, the classical serological, bacteriological or allergic skin tests. Sixteen heifers were experimentally infected with Brucella abortus biovar 1 (five heifers), Brucella suis biovar 2 (two heifers), Y. enterocolitica O:9 (six heifers) and Y. enterocolitica O:3 (three heifers). Four heifers, naturally infected with Y. enterocolitica O:9 that presented aspecific brucellosis serological reactions were also included in the experiment. A self-limited infection was induced in cattle by B. suis biovar 2. All the brucellosis serological tests used, i.e. the slow agglutination test (SAW), the Rose Bengal test (RB), the complement fixation test (CFT), indirect and competitive ELISA's, lacked specificity when used to analyze sera from Y. enterocolitica O:9 infected animals. A Yersinia outer membrane proteins (YOPs)-ELISA was also used and although the test is able to detect a Yersinia group infection, it provided no evidence of whether or not there is a possible brucellosis infection when dual infections are present. The brucellergen IFN-gamma test showed a lack of specificity also. The only test that was proven to be specific is the brucellergen skin test. All brucellosis serological tests, except the indirect ELISA, were limited in their ability to detect B. abortus persistently infected animals. Based on these experimental studies, a strategy was implemented as part of the year 2001 Belgian Brucellosis Eradication Program to substantiate the eradication of bovine brucellosis. Epidemiological inquiries have identified risk factors associated with aspecific serological reactions, possible transmission and infection of cattle by B. suis biovar 2 from infected wild boars; and both legal and administrative measures taken by the veterinary services. No cases of bovine brucellosis have been confirmed in Belgium since March 2000. Copyright 2002 Elsevier Science B.V.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12414165     DOI: 10.1016/s0378-1135(02)00230-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vet Microbiol        ISSN: 0378-1135            Impact factor:   3.293


  36 in total

1.  Validated 5' nuclease PCR assay for rapid identification of the genus Brucella.

Authors:  T Bogdanovich; M Skurnik; P S Lübeck; P Ahrens; J Hoorfar
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Improvement in the diagnosis of Brucella abortus infections in naturally infected water buffaloes (Bubalus bubalis) using an ELISA with a Protein-G-based indicator system.

Authors:  Manish Kumar; Puran Chand
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2011-03-27       Impact factor: 1.559

3.  Assessment of milk ring test and some serological tests in the detection of Brucella melitensis in Syrian female sheep.

Authors:  Ayman Al-Mariri; Lila Ramadan; Rand Akel
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2011-01-14       Impact factor: 1.559

4.  Protective effect of the Nramp1 BB genotype against Brucella abortus in the water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis).

Authors:  Rosanna Capparelli; Flora Alfano; Maria Grazia Amoroso; Giorgia Borriello; Domenico Fenizia; Antonio Bianco; Sante Roperto; Franco Roperto; Domenico Iannelli
Journal:  Infect Immun       Date:  2006-12-04       Impact factor: 3.441

5.  Real-time PCR carried out on DNA extracted from serum or blood sample is not a good method for surveillance of bovine brucellosis.

Authors:  Arvind Tiwari; Vijai Pal; Prachiti Afley; Deepak Kumar Sharma; Chandra Shekhar Bhatnagar; Bhupendra Bhardwaj; Ganga Prasad Rai; Subodh Kumar
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2014-09-04       Impact factor: 1.559

6.  Prevalence of antibodies to Brucella spp. and individual risk factors of infection in traditional cattle, goats and sheep reared in livestock-wildlife interface areas of Zambia.

Authors:  J B Muma; K L Samui; V M Siamudaala; J Oloya; G Matop; M K Omer; M Munyeme; C Mubita; E Skjerve
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 1.559

7.  Seroprevalence and risk factors of brucellosis in goats in selected states in Nigeria and the public health implications.

Authors:  A J Ogugua; V O Akinseye; M C Ayoola; O O Oyesola; F K Shima; A O Tijjani; Aderemi N A Musa; H K Adesokan; Lorraine Perrett; Andrew Taylor; Judy A Stack; I Moriyon; S I B Cadmus
Journal:  Afr J Med Med Sci       Date:  2014-09

8.  Differentiation between serological responses to Brucella suis and Yersinia enterocolitica serotype O:9 after natural or experimental infection in pigs.

Authors:  G Jungersen; V Sørensen; S B Giese; J A Stack; U Riber
Journal:  Epidemiol Infect       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 2.451

9.  Mannose-binding lectin haplotypes influence Brucella abortus infection in the water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis).

Authors:  R Capparelli; M Parlato; M G Amoroso; S Roperto; R Marabelli; F Roperto; D Iannelli
Journal:  Immunogenetics       Date:  2008-03-11       Impact factor: 2.846

10.  IS711-based real-time PCR assay as a tool for detection of Brucella spp. in wild boars and comparison with bacterial isolation and serology.

Authors:  Vladimira Hinić; Isabelle Brodard; Andreas Thomann; Milena Holub; Raymond Miserez; Carlos Abril
Journal:  BMC Vet Res       Date:  2009-07-14       Impact factor: 2.741

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.