| Literature DB >> 27064146 |
Masao Nishiike1, Michiyo Haoka, Takashi Doi, Tomoko Kohda, Masafumi Mukamoto.
Abstract
Analysis of the association between antibodies against bovine leukemia virus (BLV), BLV proviral load, and white blood cell (WBC) and lymphocyte counts was performed with 774 dairy cows. The average age, WBC counts and lymphoid cell counts tended to be higher in BLV antibody-positive cows than in antibody-negative cows. There was a similar trend in levels of proviral DNA. We analyzed age, WBC counts and lymphocyte counts by principal component analyses to create a distribution chart of the principle component scores. Using the chart, we categorized cows into four quadrants based on additional information, such as the presence of antibody and the levels of proviral DNA. Antibody-positive cows and cows with high BLV proviral load were found mostly in one quadrant of the chart, indicating that it is possible to predict the risk of infection without any knowledge on antibody status by using information, such as WBC counts as a biomarker. When only antibody-positive cows were included in the analysis, a characteristic distribution of different levels of proviral DNA was seen in the quadrants, suggesting that it is possible to estimate the extent of bovine leukosis infection by using this analysis. For this analysis and categorization of the cows into quadrants, we computed a mathematical formulation using discriminant analysis based on age and WBC and lymphocyte counts. This mathematical formulation for the hematological preliminary diagnosis of the disease is recommended as a screening tool to monitor bovine leukosis.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27064146 PMCID: PMC4976270 DOI: 10.1292/jvms.16-0022
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Vet Med Sci ISSN: 0916-7250 Impact factor: 1.267
Comparison of the antibody and genetic test results between different age groups and farms
| Group | Proviral load index values | No proviral DNA | Antibody positive rates | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | ||||
| Age (year) | <2 | 1% | 10% | 1% | 3% | 84% | 16% |
| 2 to 4 | 4% | 18% | 5% | 8% | 65% | 37% | |
| 4 to 6 | 9% | 21% | 8% | 15% | 47% | 58% | |
| 6 to 8 | 14% | 27% | 11% | 14% | 35% | 69% | |
| 8≤ | 8% | 21% | 9% | 10% | 53% | 54% | |
| Farms | A (90)a) | 1% | 13% | 1% | 1% | 85% | 15% |
| B (80) | 13% | 25% | 8% | 14% | 40% | 64% | |
| C (60) | 11% | 29% | 10% | 11% | 40% | 67% | |
| D (40) | 2% | 22% | 15% | 23% | 37% | 69% | |
| E (40) | 0% | 3% | 1% | 3% | 93% | 9% | |
a) The numerical value indicates breeding number of dairy cows.
The comparison of the age and the hematological-finding by the BLV antibody and BLV proviral load
| Group | Age | WBC counts (× 100) | Lymphocyte counts (× 100) | Number of dairy cows examined (heifer) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Antibody-positive group | 4.9 ± 2.2a, b) | 110.6 ± 42.1b) | 63.1 ± 36.8b) | 379 (14) | |
| Antibody-negative group | 3.8 ± 2.6 | 84.2 ± 22.3 | 39.5 ± 15.7 | 395 (66) | |
| Proviral load index values | |||||
| 3 | 5.3 ± 2.1 | 157.1 ± 35.3d) | 107.4 ± 29.4d) | 56 | |
| 2 | 4.7 ± 2.3 | 123.2 ± 40.7d) | 75.3 ± 35.0d) | 155 | |
| 1 | 5.1 ± 2.1 | 85.2 ± 22.0 | 38.4 ± 13.9 | 55 | |
| 0 | 4.8 ± 2.1 | 83.2 ± 22.7 | 36.9 ± 11.8 | 83 | |
| No proviral DNA | 3.9 ± 2.6c) | 84.0 ± 22.1 | 39.3 ± 15.6 | 425 | |
| Normal range | 78.1 ± 19.4 | 50.0 ± 25.0 | |||
a) average ± SD. b) This value indicates a statistically significant (P<0.01) difference from the value for antibody-negative group. c) This value indicates a statistically significant (P<0.01) difference from the value for proviral load index values of 0, 1, 2 and 3. d) This value indicates a statistically significant (P<0.01) difference from the value for proviral load index values of 0 and 1.
Fig. 1.Combination of principal component analysis (PCA) with anti-BLV antibody titers and BLV proviral DNA levels in each categorized quadrant.
Combination of principal component analysis (PCA) with anti-BLV antibody titers and BLV proviral DNA levels in each categorized quadrant.
| Group | Antibody positive rates | Proviral load index values | No proviral DNA | Number of dairy cows examined | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | ||||
| Quadrant 1 | 98% | 38% | 52% | 2% | 3% | 4% | 126 |
| Quadrant 2 | 39% | 4% | 25% | 4% | 5% | 62% | 181 |
| Quadrant 3 | 49% | 0% | 13% | 13% | 15% | 59% | 227 |
| Quadrant 4 | 31% | 0% | 5% | 6% | 15% | 73% | 240 |
The comparison of the age and the hematological-finding in each categorized quadrant
| Group | Age | WBC counts (× 100) | Lymphocyte counts (× 100) | Number of dairy cows examined |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quadrant 1 | 5.6 ± 1.8a, b) | 149.9 ± 36.3c) | 100.3 ± 32.8c) | 126 |
| Quadrant 2 | 1.9 ± 1.1 | 116.8 ± 22.8c) | 63.7 ± 18.0c) | 181 |
| Quadrant 3 | 6.9 ± 1.8 b) | 74.0 ± 15.6 | 31.4 ± 8.9 | 227 |
| Quadrant 4 | 3.2 ± 0.9 | 76.6 ± 13.7 | 34.4 ± 8.2 | 240 |
a) average ± SD. b) This value indicates a statistically significant (P<0.01) difference from the value for Quadrants 2 and 4. c) This value indicates a statistically significant (P<0.01) difference from the value for Quadrants 3 and 4.
Fig. 2.PCA of BLV-seropositive cows combined with BLV proviral load in each categorized quadrant.
BLV-seropositive cows combined with BLV proviral load in each categorized quadrant
| Group | Proviral load index values | Number of dairy cows examined | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | ||
| Quadrant 1 | 49% | 50% | 0% | 1% | 74 |
| Quadrant 2 | 19% | 69% | 7% | 5% | 83 |
| Quadrant 3 | 4% | 39% | 26% | 31% | 84 |
| Quadrant 4 | 1% | 26% | 25% | 48% | 108 |
The comparison of the age and the hematological-finding in each categorized quadrant of BLV-seropositive cows
| Group | Age | WBC counts (× 100) | Lymphocyte counts (× 100) | Number of dairy cows examined |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quadrant 1 | 6.4 ± 1.6a, b) | 158.6 ± 33.7c) | 108.5 ± 30.1c) | 74 |
| Quadrant 2 | 2.7 ± 1.0 | 144.1 ± 30.3c) | 89.8 ± 27.0c) | 83 |
| Quadrant 3 | 7.1 ± 1.4b) | 81.0 ± 19.7 | 38.7 ± 13.8 | 84 |
| Quadrant 4 | 3.9 ± 1.0 | 83.1 ± 15.5 | 38.1 ± 9.9 | 108 |
a) average ± SD. b) This value indicates a statistically significant (P<0.01) difference from the value for Quadrants 2 and 4. c) This value indicates a statistically significant (P<0.01) difference from the value for Quadrants 3 and 4.
Fig. 3.Quantitative classification of BLV infection status with mathematical formulation using discriminant analysis.