| Literature DB >> 35130949 |
Martyna Puchalska1, Jan Wiśniewski2, Daniel Klich3, Elżbieta Gołąb4, Dawid Jańczak4, Justyna Sokołowska5, Kaja Urbańska5, Krzysztof Anusz2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The consumption of raw or undercooked meat, especially pork, and offal containing infective tissue cysts is suspected to be a significant route of infection with Toxoplasma gondii. Although the use of "animal-friendly pig production systems" ensuring direct contact with the natural environment offers ethical benefits, it limits the ability to ensure animal health; it may also increase the probability of infections by pathogens such as T. gondii, and thus their entry into the food chain. This study determines the seroprevalence of T. gondii in pigs from different housing systems and farms with different hygiene standards in Poland, as well as among pigs of different age groups from farms with high hygiene standards. In total 760 pig serum samples were examined for the presence of specific antibodies using the PrioCHECK® Toxoplasma Ab porcine commercial ELISA test (Prionics, Switzerland).Entities:
Keywords: ELISA; Seroprevalence; Toxoplasmosis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35130949 PMCID: PMC8822955 DOI: 10.1186/s13028-022-00623-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Vet Scand ISSN: 0044-605X Impact factor: 1.695
Data on location of farms and number of sampled animals
| Group | Voivodeship | Farm | Number of tested animals |
|---|---|---|---|
| Finishing pigs on farms with high hygiene standards | Lubelskie | 1 | 33 |
| 2 | 35 | ||
| 3 | 99 | ||
| Finishing pigs on farms with low hygiene standards | Mazowieckie | 1 | 4 |
| 2 | 1 | ||
| 3 | 17 | ||
| 4 | 3 | ||
| 5 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 2 | ||
| 7 | 9 | ||
| 8 | 6 | ||
| 9 | 6 | ||
| 10 | 8 | ||
| 11 | 21 | ||
| 12 | 10 | ||
| 13 | 23 | ||
| Finishing pigs on farm with high level of biosecurity | Wielkopolskie | 1 | 40 |
| Finishing pigs on organic farms | Kujawsko–Pomorskie | 1 | 11 |
| 2 | 20 | ||
| 3 | 5 | ||
| 4 | 8 | ||
| 5 | 13 | ||
| 6 | 29 | ||
| 7 | 11 | ||
| 8 | 8 | ||
| 9 | 11 | ||
| Pigs at < 3 months | Mazowieckie | 1 | 20 |
| Zachodniopomorskie | 2 | 20 | |
| Wielkopolskie | 3 | 23 | |
| Finishing pigs at 3–4 months | Mazowieckie | 1 | 10 |
| Wielkopolskie | 2 | 20 | |
| 3 | 30 | ||
| Finishing pigs at 5–6 months | Wielkopolskie | 1 | 10 |
| 2 | 10 | ||
| 3 | 10 | ||
| 4 | 27 | ||
| Sows at ≥ 9 months | Wielkopolskie | 1 | 20 |
| 2 | 4 | ||
| 3 | 8 | ||
| 4 | 6 | ||
| 5 | 3 | ||
| 6 | 7 | ||
| 7 | 7 | ||
| 8 | 8 | ||
| 9 | 2 | ||
| 10 | 41 | ||
| 11 | 1 | ||
| 12 | 1 | ||
| 13 | 1 | ||
| 14 | 1 | ||
| 15 | 1 | ||
| 16 | 1 | ||
| 17 | 30 |
Presence of anti-Toxoplasma gondii antibodies in analyzed porcine serum samples
| Group | Number of tested animals | Number of seropositive animals (dilution 1:50; titer < 50) | Ranges of antibody titers in seropositive animals | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50–99 | 100–199 | 200–399 | 400–799 | 800–1599 | |||
| Finishing pigs on farms with high hygiene standards | 167 | 9 (5.4%) | 8 (4.8%) | 0 (0%) | 1 (0.6%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Finishing pigs on farms with low hygiene standards | 115 | 47 (40.9%) | 17 (14.8%) | 4 (3.5%) | 1 (0.9%) | 7 (6.1%) | 5 (4.3%) |
| Finishing pigs on farm with high level of biosecurity | 40 | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Finishing pigs on organic farms | 116 | 61 (52.6%) | 4 (3.45%) | 2 (1.75%) | 10 (8.6%) | 16 (13.8%) | 13 (11.2%) |
| Subtotal: | 438 | 117 (26.7%) | 29 (6.6%) | 6 (1.4%) | 12 (2.7%) | 23 (5.3%) | 18 (4.1%) |
| Pigs at < 3 months | 63 | 7 (11.1%) | 2 (3.15%) | 2 (3.15%) | 3 (4.8%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Finishing pigs at 3–4 months | 60 | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Finishing pigs at 5–6 months | 57 | 7 (12.3%) | 5 (8.8%) | 0 (0%) | 1 (1.75%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Sows at ≥ 9 months | 142 | 62 (43.7%) | 6 (4.2%) | 3 (2.1%) | 17 (12%) | 9 (6.3%) | 0 (0%) |
| Subtotal: | 322 | 76 (23.6%) | 13 (4%) | 5 (1.6%) | 21 (6.5%) | 9 (2.8%) | 0 (0%) |
| Total: | 760 | 193 (25.4%) | 42 (5.5%) | 11 (1.4%) | 33 (4.3%) | 32 (4.2%) | 18 (2.4%) |
Fig. 1Mean frequency of antibodies to Toxoplasma gondii and pairwise comparison with Bonferroni correction (housing systems)
Fig. 2Mean frequency of antibodies to Toxoplasma gondii and pairwise comparison with Bonferroni correction (age groups)