Evaluation of different enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for the diagnosis of brucellosis due to Brucella melitensis in sheep |
| |
| Authors: | Ignacio García-Bocanegra Alberto Allepuz Julio José Pérez Anna Alba Armando Giovannini Antonio Arenas Luca Candeloro Alberto Pacios José Luís Saez Miguel Ángel González |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Departamento de Sanidad Animal, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad de Córdoba-Agrifood Excellence International Campus (ceiA3), Córdoba, Spain;2. Centre de Recerca en Sanitat Animal (CReSA), UAB-IRTA, Campus de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain;3. Departament de Sanitat i Anatomia Animals, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain;4. Laboratorio de Sanidad y Producción Animal, Consejería de Agricultura, Pesca y Medio Ambiente de la Junta de Andalucía, 41071 Sevilla, Spain;5. Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell’Abruzzo e delMolise G. Caporale, Via Campo Boario, 64100 Teramo, Italy;6. Servicio de Sanidad Animal, Consejería de Agricultura, Pesca y Medio Ambiente de la Junta de Andalucía, Spain;7. Subdirección General de Sanidad de la Producción Primaria, Dirección General de Recursos Agrícolas y Ganaderos, Ministerio de Medio Ambiente, y Medio Rural y Marino, 28071 Madrid, Spain;8. Agencia de Gestión Agraria y Pesquera de Andalucía (AGAPA), Consejería de Agricultura, Pesca y Medio Ambiente de la Junta de Andalucía, Sevilla, Spain;1. Istituto “G. Caporale”, Via Campo Boario, 64100 Teramo, Italy;2. Area Sorveglianza Epidemiologica, Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Sicilia, Via Gino Marinuzzi, 3, 90129 Palermo, Italy;3. Dipartimento Attività Sanitarie ed Osservatorio Epidemiologico, Regione Siciliana, via Vaccaro 5, 90145 Palermo, Italy;1. Department of Food Safety and Infection Biology, Norwegian School of Veterinary Science, Tromsø, Norway;2. Department of Veterinary Tropical Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Onderstepoort, South Africa;3. Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, Berlin, Germany;4. RWTH Aachen University, Department of Internal Medicine III, Aachen, Germany;5. Institute of Continuing Medical Education of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece;6. Swiss Tropical Institute, Basle, Switzerland;7. Department of Paraclinical Veterinary Studies, University of Zimbabwe, Harare, Zimbabwe;8. Department of Disease Control, University of Zambia, School of Veterinary Medicine, Lusaka, Zambia;9. Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium;10. Veterinary Epidemiology & Public Health Group, Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Royal Veterinary College, London, UK;11. Department of Food Safety and Infection Biology, Epicenter, Norwegian School of Veterinary Science, Oslo, Norway;1. Instituto Nacional de Investigação Agrária e Veterinária, I.P. (INIAV, IP), Rua General Morais Sarmento, s/n, 1500-310 Lisboa, Portugal;2. Universidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Ciências, Biosystems and Integrative Sciences Institute (BioISI), Edificio TecLabs, Campus da FCUL, Campo Grande, 1749-016 Lisboa, Portugal;1. Department of Agriculture, Food, and the Marine, Central Veterinary Research Laboratory, Backweston, Celbridge, Co. Kildare, Ireland;2. Department of Agriculture, Food, and the Marine, PO Box 149, Barrowside Business Park, Carlow, Ireland;3. School of Biological Sciences, Dublin Institute of Technology, Kevin Street, Dublin 8, Ireland;4. Department of Agriculture, Food, and the Marine, Blood Testing Laboratory, Model Farm Road, Cork, Ireland |
| |
| Abstract: | Six serological assays for the diagnosis of ovine brucellosis, due to Brucella melitensis were evaluated. Reference serum samples from sheep of known B. melitensis infection status (n = 118) were assessed using the Rose Bengal test (RBT), complement fixation test (CFT) and four commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), including two indirect ELISAs (iELISAs), one competitive ELISA (cELISA) and one blocking ELISA (bELISA).The highest differential positive rates (DPR) were obtained with the cELISA and bELISA, while the lowest DPR was estimated using iELISAs. A latent class analysis was performed to estimate the accuracy of the CFT, RBT and bELISA using 1827 sera from sheep undergoing testing as part of a surveillance and control programme. Lower sensitivity and specificity were obtained for the three serological tests when the field samples were used. A higher DPR was achieved by the CFT, compared to bELISA and RBT. The results suggest that ELISAs, and particularly the bELISA, might be suitable for inclusion in the European Union legislation on intra-community trade for diagnosing B. melitensis infection in sheep, as it has a similar test performance compared to the RBT. |
| |
| Keywords: | Sheep ELISA Rose Bengal test Complement fixation test Latent class analysis |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
