| Literature DB >> 36230463 |
Jinchao Zhang1,2, Hejia Ma1,2, Jingkai Ai1,2, Tongsheng Qi1,2, Ming Kang1,2, Jixu Li1,2,3, Yali Sun1,2,3.
Abstract
Anaplasma genus infects the blood cells of humans and animals by biting, causing zoonotic anaplasmosis. However, limited data are available on carrier animals for Anaplasma spp. antibodies in the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau Area. Therefore, a serological indirect ELISA diagnostic method based on the major surface protein 5 (MSP5), derived from Anaplasma phagocytophilum, was developed in this study to analyze both IgG and IgM antibodies of Anaplasma spp. in a total of 3952 animals from the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, including yaks (Bos grunniens), cows (Bos taurus), cattle (Bos taurus domesticus), Tibetan sheep (Ovis aries), horses (Equus ferus caballus), pigs (Sus domesticus), chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus), donkeys (Equus asinus), stray dogs (Canis sp.), and stray cats (Felis sp.). The results showed that recombinant MSP5 protein was expressed and was successfully used to establish the indirect ELISA methods. The overall positivity for Anaplasma IgG and IgM antibodies was 14.6% (578/3952) and 7.9% (312/3952), respectively, and a total of 123 animals (3.1%) were both IgG- and IgM-positive. Moreover, the most prevalent Anaplasma IgG positivity was exhibited by donkeys (82.5%), followed by stray dogs, Tibetan sheep, pigs, chickens, horses, yaks, cows, cattle, and stray cats. The analysis for IgM antibody positivity revealed that IgM positivity was the most prevalent in the stray dogs (30.1%), followed by horses, yaks, Tibetan sheep, cows, stray cats, and cattle. Moreover, the results revealed significant differences (p < 0.05) at different altitudes in Anaplasma-specific IgG in the yaks, Tibetan sheep, and horses, and in IgM in the yaks and Tibetan sheep. In conclusion, this study is the first to demonstrate that yaks, cows, cattle, Tibetan sheep, horses, donkeys, stray dogs, stray cats, pigs, and chickens living in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau are carrier animals for Anaplasma spp. IgG or IgM antibodies. The current findings provide valuable current data on the seroepidemiology of anaplasmosis in China and for plateau areas of the world.Entities:
Keywords: Anaplasma spp.; IgG; IgM; MSP5; Qinghai–Tibetan Plateau; animals
Year: 2022 PMID: 36230463 PMCID: PMC9559258 DOI: 10.3390/ani12192723
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Animals (Basel) ISSN: 2076-2615 Impact factor: 3.231
Secondary antibodies used in this study.
| Antibodies | Catalog, Company, Country |
|---|---|
| Rabbit Anti-Bovine IgM/HRP | bs-0327R-HRP, Bioss, China |
| Rabbit Anti-Bovine IgG H&L/HRP | bs-0326R-HRP, Bioss, China |
| Goat Anti-Cow IgG H&L/HRP | ab102154, abcam, UK |
| Sheep Anti-Cow IgM H&L/HRP | ab112752, abcam, UK |
| Rabbit Anti-Sheep IgM/HRP | ab112763, abcam, UK |
| Rabbit Anti-Sheep IgG H&L/HRP | AS023, Abclonal, China |
| Goat Anti-Horse IgM H&L/HRP | ab112879, abcam, UK |
| Rabbit Anti-Horse IgG/HRP | bs-0308R-HRP, Bioss, China |
| Rabbit Anti-Pig IgG/HRP | bs-0309R-HRP, Bioss, China |
| HRP Mab Pig IgM | Primadiagnostic, China |
| Goat Anti-Chicken IgG/HRP | bs-0310G-HRP, Bioss, China |
| Rabbit Anti-Chicken IgM/HRP | bs-0314R-HRP, Bioss, China |
| Goat Anti-Donkey IgG H&L/HRP | ab6988, abcam, UK |
| Goat Anti-Dog IgG H&L/HRP | ab112852, abcam, UK |
| Goat Anti-Dog IgM H&L/HRP | ab112835, abcam, UK |
| Goat Anti-Cat IgG H&L/HRP | ab112801, abcam, UK |
| Goat Anti-Cat IgM H&L/HRP | ab112792, abcam, UK |
Figure 1The recombinant MSP5 protein of Anaplasma was expressed. SDS-PAGE analysis was performed by adding 20 μL samples diluted with the loading buffer is 2 X SDS. The results showed the rMSP5-GST in fractions 1 (Protein concentration is 2 mg/μg), 2 (Protein concentration is 1 mg/μg) and the GST in fractions 3 (Protein concentration is 2 mg/μg), 4 (Protein concentration is 1 mg/μg).
Figure 2Anaplasma spp. IgG and IgM antibodies in various animals in the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau Area were detected by the indirect ELISA methods based on MSP5 antigens in this study. The cut-off values (A) and positive animals for IgG and IgM antibodies (B) are shown. OD: Optical Density.
Seropositive rates of Anaplasma IgG and IgM antibodies in animals in the QTPA.
| Animal | No. | Total IgG-Positive | Total IgM-Positive | Both IgG and IgM-Positive (%, 95% CI) | Single-IgG-Positive (%, 95% CI) | Single-IgM-Positive (%, 95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yak | 792 | 52 (6.6, 4.8–8.3) | 51 (6.4, 4.7–8.1) | 20 (2.5, 1.4–3.6) | 32 (4.0, 2.7–5.4) | 31 (3.9, 2.6–5.3) |
| Cow | 489 | 23 (4.7, 2.8–6.6) | 13 (2.7, 1.2–4.1) | 3 (0.6, 0.1–1.3) | 20 (4.1, 2.3–5.8) | 10 (2.0, 0.8–3.3) |
| Cattle | 451 | 12 (2.7, 1.2–4.1) | 9 (2.0, 0.7–3.3) | 1 (0.2, 0.2–0.7) | 11 (2.4, 1.0–3.9) | 8 (1.8, 0.6–3.0) |
| Tibetan sheep | 794 | 205 (25.8, 22.8–28.9) | 46 (5.8, 4.2–7.4) | 14 (1.8, 0.8–2.7) | 191 (24.1, 21.1–27.0) | 32 (4.0, 2.7–5.4) |
| Horse | 389 | 27 (6.9, 4.4–9.5) | 27 (6.9, 4.4–9.5) | 8 (2.1, 0.6–3.5) | 19 (4.9, 2.7–7.0) | 19 (4.9, 2.7–7.0) |
| Pig | 424 | 101 (23.8, 19.8–27.9) | 0 | 0 | 101 (23.8, 19.8–27.9) | 0 |
| Chicken | 220 | 19 (8.6, 4.9–12.3) | 0 | 0 | 19 (8.6, 4.9–12.3) | 0 |
| Stray dog | 226 | 103 (45.6, 29.1–52.1) | 68 (30.1, 24.1–36.1) | 60 (26.5, 20.8–32.3) | 43 (19.0, 13.9–24.1) | 8 (3.5, 1.1–5.9) |
| Stray cat | 127 | 3 (2.4, 0.3–5.0) | 3 (2.4, 0.3–5.0) | 0 | 3 (2.4, 0.3–5.0) | 3 (2.4, 0.3–5.0) |
| Donkey | 40 | 33 (82.5, 70.7–94.3) | - | - | 33 (82.5, 70.7–94.3) | - |
| Total | 3952 | 578 (14.6, 13.5–15.7) | 312 (7.9, 7.1–8.7) | 123 (3.1, 2.6–3.7) | 455 (11.5, 10.5–12.5) | 189 (4.8, 4.1–5.4) |
No.: No. of animals tested in this study; %: Prevalence; 95% CI: 95% Confidence Interval.
Analysis of influence of altitude on positivity of Anaplasma IgG and IgM antibodies.
| Antibody | Animal | 2000–3000 m | 3000–4000 m | 4000–5000 m | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tested | Positive (%, 95% CI) | Tested | Positive (%, 95% CI) | Tested | Positive (%, 95% CI) | |||
| IgG | Yak | 319 | 7 (2.2, 0.6–3.8) | 257 | 37 (14.4, 10.1–18.7) | 216 | 8 (3.7, 1.2–6.2) | <0.0001 |
| Cow | 489 | 23 (4.7, 2.8–6.6) | 0 | - | 0 | - | - | |
| Cattle | 401 | 10 (2.5, 1.0–4.0) | 0 | - | 50 | 2 (4.0, 1.4–9.4) | 0.5457 | |
| Tibetan sheep | 147 | 24 (16.3, 10.4–22.3) | 647 | 181 (28.0, 24.5–31.4) | 0 | - | 0.0211 | |
| Horse | 40 | 9 (22.5, 9.6–35.4) | 289 | 18 (6.2, 3.4–9.0) | 60 | 0 | 0.0021 | |
| Pig | 424 | 101 (23.8, 19.8–27.9) | 0 | - | 0 | - | - | |
| Chicken | 220 | 19 (8.6, 4.9–12.3) | 0 | - | 0 | - | - | |
| Stray dog | 226 | 103 (45.6, 39.1–52.1) | 0 | - | 0 | - | - | |
| Stray cat | 127 | 3 (2.4, 0.3–5.0) | 0 | - | 0 | - | - | |
| Donkey | 40 | 33 (82.5, 70.7–94.3) | 0 | - | 0 | - | - | |
| IgM | Yak | 319 | 15 (4.7, 2.4–7.0) | 257 | 27 (10.5, 6.8–14.3) | 216 | 9 (4.2, 1.5–6.8) | 0.0108 |
| Cow | 489 | 13 (2.7, 1.2–4.1) | 0 | - | 0 | - | - | |
| Cattle | 401 | 8 (2.0, 0.6–3.4) | 0 | - | 50 | 1 (2.0, 1.9–5.9) | 0.9981 | |
| Tibetan sheep | 147 | 23 (15.6, 9.8–21.5) | 647 | 23 (3.6, 2.1–5.0) | 0 | - | <0.0001 | |
| Horse | 40 | 5 (12.5, 2.3–22.7) | 289 | 22 (7.6, 4.6–10.7) | 60 | 0 | 0.3390 | |
| Pig | 424 | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | - | - | |
| Chicken | 220 | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | - | - | |
| Stray dog | 226 | 68 (30.1, 24.1–36.1) | 0 | - | 0 | - | - | |
| Stray cat | 127 | 3 (2.4, 0.3–5.0) | 0 | - | 0 | - | - | |
-, no tested; %: Prevalence; 95% CI: 95% Confidence Interval.