| Literature DB >> 25492129 |
Andreu Colom-Cadena1, Roser Velarde2, Jesús Salinas3, Carmen Borge4, Ignacio García-Bocanegra5, Emmanuel Serrano6,7, Diana Gassó8, Ester Bach9, Encarna Casas-Díaz10, Jorge R López-Olvera11, Santiago Lavín12, Luís León-Vizcaíno13, Gregorio Mentaberre14.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In 2010, an Iberian ibex (Capra pyrenaica hispanica) stock reservoir was established for conservation purposes in north-eastern Spain. Eighteen ibexes were captured in the wild and housed in a 17 hectare enclosure. Once in captivity, a caseous lymphadenitis (CLA) outbreak occurred and ibex handlings were carried out at six-month intervals between 2010 and 2013 to perform health examinations and sampling. Treatment with a bacterin-based autovaccine and penicillin G benzatine was added during the third and subsequent handlings, when infection by Corynebacterium pseudotuberculosis was confirmed. Changes in lesion score, serum anti-C. pseudotuberculosis antibodies and haematological parameters were analyzed to assess captivity effects, disease emergence and treatment efficacy. Serum acute phase proteins (APP) Haptoglobin (Hp), Amyloid A (SAA) and Acid Soluble Glycoprotein (ASG) concentrations were also determined to evaluate their usefulness as indicators of clinical status. Once in captivity, 12 out of 14 ibexes (85.7%) seroconverted, preceding the emergence of clinical signs; moreover, TP, WBC, eosinophil and platelet cell counts increased while monocyte and basophil cell counts decreased. After treatment, casualties and fistulas disappeared and both packed cell volume (PCV) and haemoglobin concentration significantly increased. Hp, SAA and ASG values were under the limit of detection or showed no significant differences.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25492129 PMCID: PMC4280031 DOI: 10.1186/s13028-014-0083-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Vet Scand ISSN: 0044-605X Impact factor: 1.695
Result of the clinical examination performed in every ibex (ID) at each handling time (t0-t5) expressed as lesion status: FL: Presence of fistulas; GLS: generalized lymph node swelling; LLS: Local lymph node swelling; NL: No apparent affectation; ND: No data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| NL | Died during transport | ||||
|
| NL | Died into enclosure | ||||
|
| NL | Escaped from enclosure | ||||
|
| NL | |||||
|
| NL | NL | Euthanatized into the enclosure | |||
|
| NL | FL | ||||
|
| NL | FL | NL | NL | NL | NL |
|
| NL | GLS | NL | NL | NL | NL |
|
| NL | GLS | NL | NL | NL | NL |
|
| NL | GLS | GLS | LLS | NL | NL |
|
| NL | LLS | LLS | LLS | NL | NL |
|
| NL | LLS | LLS | NL | NL | NL |
|
| NL | LLS | GLS | LLS | NL | NL |
|
| NL | ND | FL | GLS | NL | NL |
|
| NL | ND | LLS | LLS | NL | NL |
|
| NL | LLS | LLS | LLS | NL | NL |
|
| NL | ND | FL | GLS | LLS | ND |
|
| NL | GLS | ND | LLS | NL | NL |
|
| New born | NL | LLS | LLS | LLS | GLS |
|
| LLS | LLS | LLS | NL | ND | |
Figure 1Diagram of the handlings dates with the corresponding treatment and location of the ibexes at each handling time.
Lesions score: Number of clinical examinations performed in every handling divided by four lesion status: FL: Presence of fistulas; GLS: generalized lymph node swelling; LLS: Local lymph node swelling; NL: No apparent affectation; ND: No data
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| t0 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 0 | |
| t1 | 16 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 3 | |
| t2 | 14 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 3 | 1 | |
| t3 | 14 | 0 | 2 | 8 | 4 | 0 | |
| t4 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 12 | 0 | |
| t5 | 14 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 11 | 2 | |
| Period | Wild (t0) | 18 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18(100%) | |
| Captivity (t1-t5) | 16 | 4(6.5%) | 9(14%) | 21(34%) | 32(52%) | ||
| Treatment | Before (t1-t2) | 16 | 4(18%) | 6(27%) | 11(50%) | 5(23%) | |
| After (t3-t5) | 14 | 0 | 3(7.5%) | 10(25%) | 27(67.5%) | ||
|
| Negative | 20 | 0 | 2(22.2%) | 13(61.9%) | 26(52%) | |
| Positive | 4(100%) | 7(77.8%) | 8(38.1%) | 24(48%) | |||
These clinical examinations are put into groups to show the number of ibexes observed with every lesion status and the percentage they represent (in brackets) before (t0) and once in captivity (t1, t2, t3, t4, t5), before (t1 and t2) and after introducing treatment (t3, t4, t5) and in relation to the CLA-ELISA results. The number of ibexes present in every handling or included in every group is shown (Ibexes).
MANOVA and specific ANOVA showing influence of Iberian ibex captivity (t0 ibexes were in the wild, t1-t5 in the enclosure), and treatment (t2 and t3, before and after treatment, respectively) on physiological parameters (i.e., haematological parameters and acute phase protein concentration) and anti- antibody presence (i.e., Optical Density (O.D.) obtained by means of ELISA) as a canonical response
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Early captivity (t0 vs t1) | 0.974 | 15.793 | 0.001 |
| Long-term captivity (t0 vs t1-t5) | 0.818 | 10.284 | 3.468e-08 |
| Treatment (t2 vs t3) | 0.735 | 1.979 | 0.141 |
| ANOVA | Mean ± SE (Min-Max) |
|
|
| Early captivity | |||
|
| 37.993 | 6.352e-06 | |
| t0 | 0.22 ± 0.02 (0.16-0.4) | ||
| t1 | 0.5 ± 0.04 (0.22-0.7) | ||
|
| 5.338 | 0.032 | |
| t0 | 11.2 ± 1.33 (5.56-21.98) | ||
| t1 | 15.16 ± 0.86 (12.11-19.95) | ||
|
| 6.652 | 0.018 | |
| t0 | 260.82 ± 52.41 (46–563) | ||
| t1 | 470.55 ± 58.3 (109–784) | ||
|
| 7.370 | 0.014 | |
| t0 | 2.16 ± 0.58 (0.6-6.2) | ||
| t1 | 0.59 ± 0.15 (0.2-2) | ||
|
| 5.085 | 0.036 | |
| t0 | 3.13 ± 0.67 (1–8.4) | ||
| t1 | 5.08 ± 0.72 (1.8-10) | ||
|
| 10.604 | 0.004 | |
| t0 | 1.76 ± 0.37 (0.6-5.2) | ||
| t1 | 0.59 ± 0.05 (0.4-1) | ||
|
| 15.952 | 0.001 | |
| t0 | 7.1 ± 0.13 (6.4-7.9) | ||
| t1 | 8.31 ± 0.27 (7–9.6) | ||
|
| |||
|
| 10.432 | 0.002 | |
| t0 | 0.23 ± 0.03 (0.17-0.4) | ||
| t1-t5 | 0.48 ± 0.03 (0.196-1.37) | ||
|
| 56.797 | 1.644e-09 | |
| t0 | 1.38 ± 0.13 (0.6-1.7) | ||
| t1-t5 | 0.61 ± 0.04 (0.2-1.2) | ||
|
| |||
|
| 4.689 | 0.041 | |
| t2 | 10.46 ± 0.46 (7.7-13.2) | ||
| t3 | 11.92 ± 0.49 (8.6-13.6) | ||
|
| 5.061 | 0.034 | |
| t2 | 33.25 ± 1.54 (24.5-42.7) | ||
| t3 | 38.33 ± 1.65 (27.4-44.8) |
ANOVA values illustrate statistically significant parameters associated with captivity and treatment effect.
Figure 2Box plot showing significant differences (p = 0.001**) between the mean optical density of the ibex CLA-ELISA processed samples at the moment of first capture in the wild (t0) and in the subsequent handlings (t1, t2, t3, t4, t5).
Figure 3Box plots showing significant differences (p < 0.05) in the mean leukocyte (WBC), monocyte, basophil, eosinophil and platelet counts, and in the serum total protein (TP) concentration of the ibexes at the moment of capture in the wild (t0) and at the first handling within the enclosure (t1).
Figure 4Box plots showing the significant differences (p < 0.05) in the mean haemoglobin concentration and in the PCV of the ibexes just before the start of treatment (t2) and one month later (t3).