Literature DB >> 25266772

Evaluation of the sensitivity of faecal sampling for detection of monophasic Salmonella Typhimurium and other Salmonella in cattle and pigs.

M E Arnold1, R J Gosling2, F Martelli2, D Mueller-Doblies2, R H Davies2.   

Abstract

There has been a rapid rise in the prevalence of cases of monophasic Salmonella Typhimurium (mST) in both humans and farm animals, and it has been found in pigs, cattle and poultry. It is therefore vital to have a good understanding of how to efficiently detect infected farms. The objective of this project was to determine sample type sensitivity in the detection of Salmonella to detect infected groups of animals on both pig (breeder, grower and finisher sites) and cattle (beef and dairy) farms, using data collected from a study investigating farms that were positive for mST, and to explore any variation between different age groups and management practices. A Bayesian approach in the absence of a gold standard was adopted to analyse the individual and pooled faecal sample data collected from each epidemiological group on each of the farms. The sensitivity of pooled sampling depended on the prevalence of infection in the group being sampled, with a higher prevalence leading to higher sensitivity. Pooled sampling was found to be more efficient at detecting positive groups of animals than individual sampling, with the probability of a random sample from a group of animals with 5% prevalence testing positive being equal to 15·5% for immature pigs (3·6% for an individual faecal sample, taking into account the sensitivity and infection prevalence), 7·1% for adult pigs (1·2% for individual sampling), 30% for outdoor cattle (2% for individual sampling) and 34% for indoor cattle (1% for individual sampling). The mean prevalence of each epidemiological group was higher in outdoor farms than indoor for both pigs and cattle (mean within-farm prevalence of 29·4% and 38·7% for outdoor pigs and cattle, respectively, compared to 19·8% and 22·1% for indoor pigs and cattle).

Entities:  

Keywords:  surveillance

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25266772      PMCID: PMC9507225          DOI: 10.1017/S0950268814002453

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Epidemiol Infect        ISSN: 0950-2688            Impact factor:   4.434


  24 in total

1.  Relationship between sample weight, homogeneity, and sensitivity of fecal culture for Salmonella enterica.

Authors:  Rob M Cannon; Terry J Nicholls
Journal:  J Vet Diagn Invest       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 1.279

2.  Quantification and prevalence of Salmonella in beef cattle presenting at slaughter.

Authors:  N Fegan; P Vanderlinde; G Higgs; P Desmarchelier
Journal:  J Appl Microbiol       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.772

Review 3.  Shedding light on Salmonella carriers.

Authors:  Smita Gopinath; Sarah Carden; Denise Monack
Journal:  Trends Microbiol       Date:  2012-05-14       Impact factor: 17.079

4.  Sample size calculations for disease freedom and prevalence estimation surveys.

Authors:  Adam J Branscum; Wesley O Johnson; Ian A Gardner
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2006-08-15       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Bacteriophage-typing designations of Salmonella typhimurium.

Authors:  E S Anderson; L R Ward; M J Saxe; J D de Sa
Journal:  J Hyg (Lond)       Date:  1977-04

6.  Risk factors for Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica shedding by market-age pigs in French farrow-to-finish herds.

Authors:  P-A Beloeil; P Fravalo; C Fablet; J-P Jolly; E Eveno; Y Hascoet; C Chauvin; G Salvat; F Madec
Journal:  Prev Vet Med       Date:  2004-04-30       Impact factor: 2.670

7.  Comparison of individual, pooled, and composite fecal sampling methods for detection of Salmonella on U.S. dairy operations.

Authors:  J E Lombard; A L Beam; E M Nifong; C P Fossler; C A Kopral; D A Dargatz; B A Wagner; M M Erdman; P J Fedorka-Cray
Journal:  J Food Prot       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 2.077

8.  Estimation of sample sizes for pooled faecal sampling for detection of Salmonella in pigs.

Authors:  M E Arnold; A J C Cook
Journal:  Epidemiol Infect       Date:  2009-05-06       Impact factor: 2.451

9.  Investigation into the effectiveness of pooled fecal samples for detection of verocytotoxin-producing Escherichia coli O157 in cattle.

Authors:  Mark E Arnold; Johanne Ellis-Iversen; Alasdair J C Cook; Robert H Davies; Ian M McLaren; Anthony C S Kay; Geoff C Pritchard
Journal:  J Vet Diagn Invest       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 1.279

10.  Comparison of culture, ELISA and PCR techniques for salmonella detection in faecal samples for cattle, pig and poultry.

Authors:  Erik Eriksson; Anna Aspan
Journal:  BMC Vet Res       Date:  2007-09-22       Impact factor: 2.741

View more
  3 in total

1.  How do pig farms maintain low Salmonella prevalence: a case-control study.

Authors:  R P Smith; V Andres; T E Cheney; F Martelli; R Gosling; E Marier; A Rabie; D Gilson; R H Davies
Journal:  Epidemiol Infect       Date:  2018-08-13       Impact factor: 4.434

2.  Evaluation of an enhanced cleaning and disinfection protocol in Salmonella contaminated pig holdings in the United Kingdom.

Authors:  Francesca Martelli; Mark Lambert; Paul Butt; Tanya Cheney; Fabrizio Antonio Tatone; Rebecca Callaby; André Rabie; Rebecca J Gosling; Steve Fordon; Graham Crocker; Robert H Davies; Richard Piers Smith
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-06-08       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Bayesian Source Attribution of Salmonella Typhimurium Isolates From Human Patients and Farm Animals in England and Wales.

Authors:  Mark Arnold; Richard Piers Smith; Yue Tang; Jaromir Guzinski; Liljana Petrovska
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2021-01-28       Impact factor: 5.640

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.