| Literature DB >> 30157841 |
Nickala Best1, Lucas Zanandrez2, Jacek Gwozdz3, Eckard Klien4, Nicky Buller4, Robert Suter5, Grant Rawlin3, Travis Beddoe6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ovine footrot is a highly contagious bacterial disease of sheep, costing the Australian sheep industry millions of dollars annually. Dichelobacter nodosus, the causative agent of footrot, is a gram-negative anaerobe classed into virulent and benign strains as determined by thermostability of their respective protesases. Current methods for detection of D. nodosus are difficult and time-consuming, however new molecular techniques capable of rapidly detecting and typing D. nodosus have been reported.Entities:
Keywords: Australia; Benign; Footrot; Real-time polymerase chain reaction; Sensitivity; Sheep; Specificity; Victoria; Virulent
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30157841 PMCID: PMC6114850 DOI: 10.1186/s12917-018-1575-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Vet Res ISSN: 1746-6148 Impact factor: 2.741
Descriptive characteristics of 11 Australian sheep flocks considered free of virulent footrot were sampled between June ‘15 and August ‘15 for evaluation of the specificity of an rtPCR for detection of virulent (aprV2) and benign (aprB2) protease genes of D. nodosus
| Flock ID | No. animals sampled | Sampling date | Flock origin (shire or city) | Breed | Age | Sex | Comments/Flock history |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 18 | 02.06.2015 | City of Broken Hill, NSW | Merino | Lambs | Mixed | Abbatoir line. |
| 2 | 18 | 02.06.2015 | Blayney Shire, NSW | Mixed | Mixed | Mixed | Abbatoir line. |
| 3 | 19 | 02.06.2015 | Shire ofArarat, Vic | Mixed | Rams | Male | Abbatoir line. |
| 4 | 18 | 02.06.2015 | Shire of Ararat, Vic | Merino | Mixed | Female | Abbatoir line. |
| 5 | 19 | 02.06.2015 | Shire of Ararat, Vic | Merino | Lambs | Mixed | Abbatoir line. |
| 6 | 18 | 02.06.2015 | City of Wagga Wagga, NSW | Merino | Ewes | Female | Abbatoir line. |
| 7 | 18 | 02.06.2015 | Southern Grampians Shire, Vic | Crossbreed | Ewes | Female | Abbatoir line. |
| 8 | 55 | 16.06.2015 | Yarra Ranges Shire, Vic | Coopworth crosses | Ewes | Female | Farm has had previous intermittent lameness, footrot has not been confirmed as the cause. |
| 9 | 81 | 01.07.2015 | Strathbogie Shire, Vic | Merino | Wethers | Male | Farm has no history of footrot, but lameness occasionally observed. Sheep footbathed late 2014. |
| 10 | 54 | 17.07.2015 | Wellington Shire, Vic | Merino | Wethers | Male | Well managed merino stud, no history of footrot. Wether had strayed into adjoining properties and had been cought and shorn 2 days prior to sampling. |
| 11a | 27 | 05.08.2015 | East Gippsland Shire, Vic | Merino | Ewes | Female | Virulent footrot first introduced in the 80’s, treated by footbathing. Second footrot introduced in 1995; eradicated by footbathing, antibiotic regime and culling. A closed flock currently. No footbathing for ≥ 10 years. |
a Flock 11 has been excluded from specificity and sensitivity calculations because of its history
Descriptive characteristics of 11 Australian sheep flocks considered having virulent footrot were sampled between October ‘14 and July ‘15 for evaluation of the specificity of an rtPCR for detection of virulent (aprV2) and benign (aprB2) protease genes of D. nodosus
| Flock ID | No. animals sampled | Sampling date | Flock origin (shire or city) | Breed | Age | Sex | Comments/Flock history |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12 | 26 | 27.07.2015 | Wangaratta Rural City, Vic | Dorper | Rams | Male | Farm has a history of virulent footrot. Footbathing and foot pairing done frequently. Minimal lameness and lesions currently present. Sheep reviously footbathed in May 2015. |
| 13 | 10 | 10.07.2015 | East Gippsland Shire, Vic | Merino Cross | Mixed | Mixed | Footrot introduced December 2014 by purchased rams. Owners observed lameness of about 1 in 150 animals in March/April 2015. |
| 14 | 36 | 23.06.2015 | Mitchell Shire, Vic | Merino | Rams | Male | Farm suspected of virulent footrot, samples taken on a confirmatory visit. |
| 15 | 10 | 13.10.2014 | Strathbogie Shire, Vic | Merino | NR | Female | History of footrot and lameness in flock |
| 16 | 10 | 13.10.2014 | Greater Shepparton City, Vic | Merino cross | 2.5 y | Female | A mob of South African Merino X Merino yearling ewes purchased in Nov-Dec 2013. Sheep had been on agistment. A few sheep lame when they arrived; footbathed 2–4 weeks before sampling. |
| 17 | 10 | 14.10.2014 | Shire of Newstead, Vic | Merino | Mixed | Female | Property has a footrot history - previously treated sucessfully with Footrite®. This season a recurrance of lameness, some mobs reached a 20%. |
| 18 | 9 | 20.10.2014 | Indigo Shire, Vic | Dorper | Adult | Female | Lameness in more than one foot. Lesions suggestive of benign footrot. |
| 19 | 10 | 03.11.2014 | Shire of Glenelg, Vic | NR | 3.5 years | Female | Footrot appeared in June; source not determined, appears to be clinically aggressive; high prevalence of score 4/5 (20%+). These sheep last footbathed ~ 3 weeks before sampling. |
| 20 | 10 | 04.11.2014 | Southern Grampians Shire, Vic | NR | 2 years | Female | Footrot has probably been present for a long time. Controlled by regular footbathing. Last month have had 30% of average long term rainfall for this time of the year. These sheep last footbathed ~ February 2014 |
| 21 | 10 | 17.11.2014 | Bass Coast Shire, Vic | Droper | Mixed | Mixed | Many lambs, ewes and some rams reported lame with lesions very suggestive of footrot. Treated with footbath (formalin) and antibiotics. The lesions look in a process of healing but are still obvious (inflammation limited to interdigital space). |
| 22 | 10 | 18.11.2014 | Mitchell Shire, Vic | Merino | NR | NR | Virulent footrot for several years. |
| 23 | 10 | 24.11.2014 | Southern Grampians Shire, Vic | NR | Adult | Female | Footrot appeared in June (source not determined) with high prevalence of score 4/5 (20%+). Last 3 months have had 30% of average long term rainfall for this time of the year. These sheep last footbathed ~ 3 weeks earlier. |
| 24 | 9 | 01.12.2014 | Colac Ottway Shire, Vic | Crossbred | Adult | Female | 10 of 15 seep examined had feet lesions scored ≥ 2 |
Clinical scores and results of D. nodosus culture, gelatinase test and rtPCR (aprB2/aprV2 positive, two cut offs, duplicate runs) in 318 sheep from flocks considered to be free of footrot (clinically healthy), 170 sheep from flocks considered having virulent footrot (clinically affected) and 27 sheep from a closed flock (#11) that apparently eradicated virulent footrot more than 10 years ago. Flocks were sampled from October 2014 to August 2015
| Flock ID | No. sheep tested | Results | aprB2 rtPCRd | aprV2 rtPCRd | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical Scoreb | Culturec | Gelatinase testd | |||||||||||||||||||
| Run 1 | Run 2 | Run 1 | Run 2 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Mean | Benign | Virulent | Undetermined | Cut-off | Cut-off | Cut-off | Cut-off | ||||||||
| 40 | 35 | 40 | 35 | 40 | 35 | 40 | 35 | ||||||||||||||
| Clinically healthy | 1 | 18 | 18 | – | – | – | – | – | 0 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| 2 | 18 | 18 | – | – | – | – | – | 0 | 1 | – | – | 1 | – | – | – | – | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | |
| 3 | 19 | 17 | – | 1 | – | 1 | – | 0.1 | – | – | – | – | – | – | 1 | – | – | – | – | – | |
| 4 | 18 | 11 | 1 | 6 | – | – | – | 0.6 | – | – | – | – | – | – | 4 | – | – | – | – | – | |
| 5 | 19 | 19 | – | – | – | – | – | 0 | – | – | – | – | – | – | 2 | – | – | – | – | – | |
| 6 | 18 | 11 | 3 | 1 | 1 | – | 2 | 0.8 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 5 | 4 | 6 | 4 | |
| 7 | 18 | 16 | 2 | – | – | – | – | 0.1 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| 8 | 55 | 55 | – | – | – | – | – | 0 | – | – | – | – | 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 2 | |
| 9 | 81 | 81 | – | – | – | – | – | 0 | 2 | 2 | – | – | 5 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 2 | – | 5 | – | |
| 10 | 54 | 51 | 3 | – | – | – | – | 0.1 | – | – | – | – | 8 | – | – | – | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | |
| Subtotal | 318 | 297 | 9 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 18 | 4 | # | 4 | 14 | 9 | 19 | 9 | ||
| 11a | 27 | 11 | 16 | – | – | – | – | 0.6 | – | – | – | – | 16 | 10 | 20 | 13 | – | – | – | – | |
| Clinically affected | 12 | 26 | 14 | 12 | – | – | – | – | 0.5 | 7 | – | 5 | 2 | – | – | – | – | 26 | 25 | 26 | 26 |
| 13 | 10 | 1 | 3 | – | 5 | 1 | – | 2.2 | 4 | 2 | 2 | – | 5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 6 | 9 | 6 | |
| 14 | 36 | 20 | 8 | 3 | – | – | 5 | 1.1 | 2 | – | 2 | – | 6 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 17 | 14 | 21 | 13 | |
| 15 | 10 | – | – | 1 | – | 2 | 7 | 4.5 | 2 | – | 2 | – | – | – | ND | ND | 10 | 9 | ND | ND | |
| 16 | 10 | – | – | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 5 | – | 5 | – | – | – | ND | ND | 10 | 10 | ND | ND | |
| 17 | 10 | – | – | 4 | 2 | 4 | – | 1 | 10 | 4 | 6 | – | 4 | 4 | ND | ND | 6 | 6 | ND | ND | |
| 18 | 9 | – | 9 | – | – | – | – | 4.9 | 3 | – | 3 | – | – | – | ND | ND | 9 | 9 | ND | ND | |
| 19 | 10 | – | – | – | – | 1 | 9 | 2.7 | 3 | – | 3 | – | – | – | ND | ND | 9 | 9 | ND | ND | |
| 20 | 10 | – | – | 4 | 5 | 1 | – | 1.1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | – | 10 | 10 | ND | ND | 10 | 10 | ND | ND | |
| 21 | 10 | – | 9 | 1 | – | – | – | 3.5 | – | – | – | – | 2 | 2 | ND | ND | 2 | 1 | ND | ND | |
| 22 | 10 | – | – | 1 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 3.3 | 6 | 1 | 5 | – | – | – | ND | ND | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | |
| 23 | 10 | – | – | – | – | 10 | – | 4 | – | – | – | – | – | – | ND | ND | 10 | 10 | ND | ND | |
| 24 | 9 | – | – | 5 | 2 | 2 | – | 2.6 | – | – | – | – | – | – | ND | ND | 9 | 8 | ND | ND | |
| Subtotal | 170 | 35 | 41 | 23 | 22 | 26 | 23 | 45 | 9 | 34 | 2 | 27 | 24 | 9 | 8 | 137 | 127 | 66 | 55 | ||
a Flock 11 has been excluded from specificity and sensitivity calculations because of its history
b Results expressed as a number of sheep in which the highest rated foot was in the particular score
c Results expressed as a number of sheep from which an organism morphologically consistent with D. nodosus was isolated
d Results expressed as a number of sheep that tested positive
Results of duplicate runs at cut offs Ct 40 and 35 for aprV2 and aprB2 rtPCR in 297 clinically healthy sheep and 21 sheep with foot lesions from 10 flocks considered free of footrot
| Foot lesion | Cut off 40 | Cut off 35 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run 1 + ve | Run 1 -ve | Run 2 + ve | Run 2 -ve | Run 1 + ve | Run 1 -ve | Run 2 + ve | Run 2 -ve | |
|
| ||||||||
| Positive | 0 | 21 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 21 | 0 | 21 |
| Negative | 18 | 279 | 10 | 287 | 4 | 293 | 4 | 293 |
| Specificity | 93.90% | 96.60% | 98.70% | 98.70% | ||||
| McNemars two tailed | 0.7488 | 0.1374 | 0.0014 | 0.0014 | ||||
|
| ||||||||
| Run 2 + ve | 5 | 7 | 4 | 0 | ||||
| Run 2 -ve | 13 | 293 | 0 | 314 | ||||
| Kappa | 0.302 | “fair” | 1 | “perfect” | ||||
|
| ||||||||
| Positive | 4 | 17 | 4 | 17 | 4 | 17 | 4 | 17 |
| Negative | 10 | 287 | 15 | 282 | 5 | 292 | 5 | 292 |
| Specificity | 96.60% | 94.90% | 98.30% | 98.30% | ||||
| McNemars two tailed | 0.2482 | 0.8597 | 0.019 | 0.019 | ||||
|
| ||||||||
| Run 2 + ve | 12 | 7 | 9 | 0 | ||||
| Run 2 -ve | 2 | 297 | 0 | 309 | ||||
| Kappa | 0.713 | “good” | 1 | “perfect” | ||||
Specificity is shown along with p-value for McNemar’s test for independence between lesion score and rtPCR result, and kappa statistic for agreement between rtPCR runs
Results from two cut offs of Ct 40 and 35 from the aprB2 rtPCR and aprV2 rtPCR obtained from two runs, in 72 sheep randomly sampled from 3 flocks considered having virulent footrot
| Foot lesion | Cut off 40 | Cut off 35 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Run 1 + ve | Run 1 -ve | Run 2 + ve | Run 2 -ve | Run 1 + ve | Run 1 -ve | Run 2 + ve | Run 2 -ve | |
|
| ||||||||
| Positive | 9 | 28 | 8 | 29 | 7 | 30 | 7 | 30 |
| Negative | 2 | 33 | 1 | 34 | 1 | 34 | 1 | 34 |
| Overall % positive | 15.30% | 12.50% | 11.10% | 11.10% | ||||
| McNemars two tailed | < 0.0001 | < 0.0001 | < 0.0001 | < 0.0001 | ||||
|
| ||||||||
| Run 2 + ve | 8 | 1 | 8 | 0 | ||||
| Run 2 -ve | 3 | 60 | 0 | 64 | ||||
| Kappa | 0.768 | “good” | 1 | “perfect” | ||||
|
| ||||||||
| Positive | 33 | 4 | 33 | 4 | 30 | 7 | 29 | 8 |
| Negative | 19 | 16 | 23 | 12 | 15 | 20 | 16 | 19 |
| Overall % positive | 72.20% | 77.80% | 62.50% | 62.50% | ||||
| McNemars two tailed | 0.0035 | 0.0005 | 0.1356 | 0.153 | ||||
|
| ||||||||
| Run 2 + ve | 51 | 5 | 44 | 1 | ||||
| Run 2 -ve | 1 | 15 | 1 | 26 | ||||
| Kappa | 0.779 | “good” | 0.941 | “very good” | ||||
The p-value for McNemar’s test for independence between lesion score and rtPCR result is shown along with kappa statistic for agreement between rtPCR runs
Gelatinase gel test and rtPCR results for 45 individual samples within the clinically affected data set that successfully had D. nodosus isolated, where S is thermostable (virulent) and U is thermolabile (benign)
| Flock ID | Scorea | Gelatinase gel test | rtPCR |
|---|---|---|---|
| 12 | 1 | S |
|
| 1 | S |
| |
| 0 | S |
| |
| 0 | NA |
| |
| 0 | S |
| |
| 0 | NA |
| |
| 0 | S |
| |
| 13 | 1 | U | |
| 1 | S | ||
| 3B | U |
| |
| 3C | S |
| |
| 14 | 5 | S |
|
| 1 | S | ||
| 15 | 5 | S |
|
| 5 | S |
| |
| 16 | 3 | S |
|
| 2 | S |
| |
| 2 | S |
| |
| 3 | S |
| |
| 4 | S |
| |
| 17 | 4 | S |
|
| 2 | S |
| |
| 2 | U |
| |
| 4 | U |
| |
| 4 | U |
| |
| 3 | U |
| |
| 3 | S |
| |
| 2 | S |
| |
| 4 | S |
| |
| 2 | S |
| |
| 18 | 1 | S |
|
| 1 | S |
| |
| 1 | S |
| |
| 19 | 5 | S |
|
| 5 | S |
| |
| 5 | S |
| |
| 20 | 3A | S | |
| 2 | U | ||
| 3B | S | ||
| 22 | 3A | S |
|
| 3A | U |
| |
| 4 | S |
| |
| 3A | S |
| |
| 3 | S |
| |
| 4 | S |
|
aFoot scores are according to Stewart et al., 1983 [4]. An additional file describes the foot scoring in more detail (see Additional file 1)
Comparisons of identification of D. nodosus by the aprV2 rtPCR and culture/gelatinase gel test from subsets of presence/absence or both of foot lesions from the clinically affected flocks, consisting of 135 clinically affected sheep and 35 clinically healthy sheep
| Flocks | Sheep clinical status (foot lesions) | No. sheep tested | aprV2 PCR Run/Cut-off | Culture Gelatinase Thermostable (Virulent) vs aprV2 PCR | Percentage positive results | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concordant results | Culture +ve | PCR + ve | Kappa | Culture | aprV2 PCR | ||||||
| +ve | -ve | PCR -ve | Culture -ve | ||||||||
| 12 to 24 | +ve | 135 | Run 1 / 40 | 31 | 17 | 0 | 87 | < 0.0001 | 0.082 | 23.0% | 87.4% |
| 12 to 24 | +ve | 135 | Run 1 / 35 | 31 | 20 | 0 | 84 | < 0.0001 | 0.1 | 23.0% | 85.2% |
| 12 to 14 | -ve | 35 | Run 1 / 40 | 3 | 16 | 0 | 16 | 0.0002 | 0.146 | 8.6% | 54.3% |
| 12 to 14 | -ve | 35 | Run 2 / 40 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 20 | < 0.0001 | 0.093 | 8.6% | 65.7% |
| 12 to 14 | -ve | 35 | Run 1 / 35 | 3 | 20 | 0 | 12 | 0.0015 | 0.222 | 8.6% | 42.9% |
| 12 to 14 | -ve | 35 | Run 2 / 35 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 13 | 0.0009 | 0.2 | 8.6% | 45.7% |
| 12 to 14 | -ve & + ve | 72 | Run 1 / 40 | 9 | 20 | 0 | 43 | < 0.0001 | 0.104 | 12.50% | 72.20% |
| 12 to 14 | -ve & + ve | 72 | Run 2 / 40 | 9 | 16 | 0 | 47 | < 0.0001 | 0.078 | 12.50% | 77.80% |
| 12 to 14 | -ve & + ve | 72 | Run 1 / 35 | 9 | 27 | 0 | 36 | < 0.0001 | 0.158 | 12.50% | 62.50% |
| 12 to 14 | -ve & + ve | 72 | Run 2 / 35 | 9 | 27 | 0 | 36 | < 0.0001 | 0.158 | 12.50% | 62.50% |
| 12 to 24 | -ve & + ve | 170 | Run 1 / 40 | 34 | 33 | 0 | 103 | < 0.0001 | 0.114 | 20.0% | 80.6% |
| 12 to 24 | -ve & + ve | 170 | Run 1 / 35 | 34 | 40 | 0 | 96 | < 0.0001 | 0.143 | 20.0% | 76.5% |
The p-value for McNemar’s test for independence between culture gelatinase thermostable (Virulent) and aprV2 PCR result is shown. Detection rates of both culture and rtPCR are presented as percentage positive results
Comparisons of identification of D. nodosus by the aprB2 rtPCR and culture/gelatinase gel test from subsets of presence/absence or both of foot lesions from the clinically affected flocks, consisting of 135 clinically affected sheep and 35 clinically healthy sheep
| Flocks | Sheep clinical status (foot lesions) | No. sheep tested | aprB2 PCR Run and/or Cut-off | Culture Gelatinase Thermolabile (Benign) vs aprB2 PCR | Percentage positive results | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concordant results | Culture +ve | PCR + ve | Kappa | Culture | aprB2 PCR | ||||||
| +ve | -ve | PCR -ve | Culture -ve | ||||||||
| 12 to 24 | +ve | 135 | Run 1 / 40 | 7 | 108 | 2 | 18 | 0.0008 | 0.348 | 6.7% | 18.5% |
| 12 to 24 | +ve | 135 | Run 1 / 35 | 7 | 110 | 2 | 16 | 0.0022 | 0.378 | 6.7% | 17.0% |
| 12 to 14 | -ve | 35 | Run 1 / 40 | 0 | 33 | 0 | 2 | 0.4795 | 0 | 0.0% | 5.7% |
| 12 to 14 | -ve | 35 | Run 2 / 40 | 0 | 34 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0.0% | 2.9% |
| 12 to 14 | -ve | 35 | Run 1 / 35 | 0 | 34 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0.0% | 2.9% |
| 12 to 14 | -ve | 35 | Run 2 / 35 | 0 | 34 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0.0% | 2.9% |
| 12 to 14 | -ve & + ve | 72 | Run 1 / 40 | 1 | 60 | 1 | 10 | 0.0159 | 0.112 | 2.8% | 15.3% |
| 12 to 14 | -ve & + ve | 72 | Run 2 / 40 | 1 | 62 | 1 | 8 | 0.0455 | 0.143 | 2.8% | 12.5% |
| 12 to 14 | -ve & + ve | 72 | Run 1 / 35 | 1 | 63 | 1 | 7 | 0.0771 | 0.163 | 2.8% | 11.1% |
| 12 to 14 | -ve & + ve | 72 | Run 2 / 35 | 1 | 63 | 1 | 7 | 0.0771 | 0.163 | 2.8% | 11.1% |
| 12 to 24 | -ve & + ve | 170 | Run 1 / 40 | 7 | 141 | 2 | 20 | 0.0003 | 0.336 | 5.3% | 15.9% |
| 12 to 24 | -ve & + ve | 170 | Run 1 / 35 | 7 | 141 | 2 | 17 | 0.0013 | 0.376 | 5.3% | 14.1% |
The p-value for McNemar’s test for independence between culture gelatinase thermostable (benign) and aprB2 PCR result is shown. Detection rates of both culture and rtPCR are presented as percentage positive results