Literature DB >> 27717600

Opportunities and challenges when pooling milk samples using ELISA.

Kaare Græsbøll1, Lars Ole Andresen2, Tariq Halasa3, Nils Toft4.   

Abstract

Testing large quantities of samples in order to detect one or more test-positive sample(s) is expensive and time-consuming. It is possible to optimize this process by pooling samples. Two frameworks to produce different hierarchical and non-hierarchical pooling schemes were tested and compared to standard pooling. Their efficiency and the potential savings were determined as a function of prevalence and the number of pooled samples. The potential benefit of pooling samples is dependent upon the changes in the analytical sensitivity and specificity of the test used when diluting test-positive samples by pooling. To illustrate this, the sensitivity of antibody ELISA on pooled samples of bovine milk for Salmonella Dublin, Mycobacterium avium spp. paratuberculosis, and bovine virus diarrhea was tested. For these milk assays, the analytical sensitivity decreased rapidly with increasing pool sizes. The efficiency of pooling is usually only measured by the number of tests performed, yet real savings depend on all the costs involved in the pooling process. These may differ between laboratories depending on the available equipment and the salaries of the technicians, among other factors. Therefore, several cost parameters were introduced to describe the total cost and thereby calculate the total savings. In terms of overall savings, both tested schemes were potentially optimal depending on the prevalence, possible pool size, and the cost of retesting. For the pool sizes of interest in this study, the three-stage hierarchical pooling scheme was often marginally more efficient in terms of the total number of tests. However, if the price of re-pooling was high, the two-stage scheme performed better in terms of total savings. In addition, for low prevalences and the possibility of pooling a large number of samples, the two-stage non-hierarchical test may be more efficient, both in terms of number of tests and overall cost. In order to apply these results in different laboratory settings, a free Shiny WebApp was developed, to compare several pooling schemes with different cost parameters.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Group testing; Hierarchical; Pooling; Shifted transversal design

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27717600     DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2016.08.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Vet Med        ISSN: 0167-5877            Impact factor:   2.670


  6 in total

1.  Revisiting Nested Group Testing Procedures: New Results, Comparisons, and Robustness.

Authors:  Yaakov Malinovsky; Paul S Albert
Journal:  Am Stat       Date:  2018-06-04       Impact factor: 8.710

2.  The objective function controversy for group testing: Much ado about nothing?

Authors:  Brianna D Hitt; Christopher R Bilder; Joshua M Tebbs; Christopher S McMahan
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2019-08-30       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Detection of Low MAP Shedder Prevalence in Large Free-Stall Dairy Herds by Repeated Testing of Environmental Samples and Pooled Milk Samples.

Authors:  Annika Wichert; Elisa Kasbohm; Esra Einax; Axel Wehrend; Karsten Donat
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-25       Impact factor: 3.231

4.  Flock sensitivity and specificity of pooled fecal qPCR and pooled serum ELISA for screening ovine paratuberculosis.

Authors:  Yoann Mathevon; Gilles Foucras; Fabien Corbière
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-12-26       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Variation in the Performance of Different Batches of Two Mycobacterium avium Subspecies paratuberculosis Antibody ELISAs Used for Pooled Milk Samples.

Authors:  Heike Köhler; Annika Wichert; Karsten Donat
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-12       Impact factor: 2.752

6.  Tests in short supply? Try group testing.

Authors:  Christopher R Bilder; Peter C Iwen; Baha Abdalhamid; Joshua M Tebbs; Christopher S McMahan
Journal:  Signif (Oxf)       Date:  2020-05-27
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.