AIMS: To compare different analytical methods for detecting Salmonella in Dermanyssus gallinae. METHODS AND RESULTS: The detection limit of three Salmonella detection methods [Vitek immunodiagnostic assay (VIDAS) Salmonella immuno-concentration/immunoassay, FTA filter-based PCR, and Salmonella detection and identification medium (SM ID) preceded by a pre-enrichment step] was evaluated by crushing mites in serial dilutions of pure cultures of Salmonella enterica ssp. Enterica serotype Enteritidis. Each method was then compared for its ability to detect Salmonella in artificially contaminated mites. In 105 mites artificially engorged with Salm. Enteritidis-contaminated blood, Salmonella was isolated from 68 samples of the samples cultured on SM ID and tests were positive for Salmonella using FTA filter-based PCR and VIDAS in 77 and 65 samples, respectively. Using SM ID as our reference method, specificities and sensitivities were 97% and 94% and 73% and 98.5% for VIDAS and PCR, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Each method allowed the detection of Salmonella in contaminated mites and is usable for screening mites. PCR is more sensitive but less specific than VIDAS for detecting Salmonella. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: This is the first time that the VIDAS has been used to detect pathogens in vectors. The development of analytical methods for Salmonella detection in mites is a necessary step in the study of the role of D. gallinae as a vector of salmonellae and to check the contamination of D. gallinae in poultry facilities.
AIMS: To compare different analytical methods for detecting Salmonella in Dermanyssus gallinae. METHODS AND RESULTS: The detection limit of three Salmonella detection methods [Vitek immunodiagnostic assay (VIDAS) Salmonella immuno-concentration/immunoassay, FTA filter-based PCR, and Salmonella detection and identification medium (SM ID) preceded by a pre-enrichment step] was evaluated by crushing mites in serial dilutions of pure cultures of Salmonella enterica ssp. Enterica serotype Enteritidis. Each method was then compared for its ability to detect Salmonella in artificially contaminated mites. In 105 mites artificially engorged with Salm. Enteritidis-contaminated blood, Salmonella was isolated from 68 samples of the samples cultured on SM ID and tests were positive for Salmonella using FTA filter-based PCR and VIDAS in 77 and 65 samples, respectively. Using SM ID as our reference method, specificities and sensitivities were 97% and 94% and 73% and 98.5% for VIDAS and PCR, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Each method allowed the detection of Salmonella in contaminated mites and is usable for screening mites. PCR is more sensitive but less specific than VIDAS for detecting Salmonella. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: This is the first time that the VIDAS has been used to detect pathogens in vectors. The development of analytical methods for Salmonella detection in mites is a necessary step in the study of the role of D. gallinae as a vector of salmonellae and to check the contamination of D. gallinae in poultry facilities.
Authors: Kathryn Bartley; Harry W Wright; Robert S Bull; John F Huntley; Alasdair J Nisbet Journal: Parasit Vectors Date: 2015-06-26 Impact factor: 3.876
Authors: Claire Valiente Moro; Carlos J De Luna; Alexander Tod; Jonathan H Guy; Olivier A E Sparagano; Lionel Zenner Journal: Exp Appl Acarol Date: 2009-02-11 Impact factor: 2.380