Comparison of diagnostic tests for detecting bovine brucellosis in animals vaccinated with S19 and RB51 strain vaccines
Background and Aim: The diagnosis of bovine brucellosis in animals vaccinated with strain-19 (S19) and Rose Bengal (RB)-51 strain vaccines can be misinterpreted due to false positives. This study aimed to compare diagnostic tests for detecting bovine brucellosis in animals vaccinated with S19 and RB...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Veterinary World
2023-10-01
|
| Series: | Veterinary World |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.veterinaryworld.org/Vol.16/October-2023/9.pdf |
| _version_ | 1797659951381872640 |
|---|---|
| author | Marcelo Ibarra Martin Campos Benavides Hernán Anthony Loor-Giler Andrea Chamorro Luis Nuñez |
| author_facet | Marcelo Ibarra Martin Campos Benavides Hernán Anthony Loor-Giler Andrea Chamorro Luis Nuñez |
| author_sort | Marcelo Ibarra |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background and Aim: The diagnosis of bovine brucellosis in animals vaccinated with strain-19 (S19) and Rose Bengal (RB)-51 strain vaccines can be misinterpreted due to false positives. This study aimed to compare diagnostic tests for detecting bovine brucellosis in animals vaccinated with S19 and RB51 vaccine strains.
Materials and Methods: Two groups of 12 crossbred Holstein calves between 6 and 8 months of age were used. On day 0, blood samples were collected from the animals, and the competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was used for serological diagnosis of bovine Brucellosis. All animals tested negative. After the first blood collection, the animals were subcutaneously vaccinated: one group received the S19 vaccine and the other received the RB51 vaccine. From the 3rd month after vaccination, all animals were sampled. Sampling was repeated every 2 months until the 7th month. Serological diagnosis of bovine brucellosis was performed using RB, tube serum agglutination test (SAT), SAT with 2-mercaptoethanol (SAT-2Me), and fluorescence polarization assay (FPA).
Results: Animals vaccinated with S19 showed positive results with the RB, SAT, and SAT-2Me tests in all months of post-vaccination diagnosis. In animals vaccinated with S19, FPA showed positive results at months 3 and 5 and negative results at month 7, indicating that this test discriminates vaccinated animals from infected animals 7 months after vaccination. Rose Bengal, SAT, SAT-2Me, and FPA tests showed negative results in animals vaccinated with RB51 in all months of diagnosis.
Conclusion: Animals vaccinated with S19 may test positive for brucellosis using RB, SAT, or SAT-2Me tests 7 months later. Fluorescence polarization assay is an optimal alternative for diagnosing animals in the field, thereby preventing false positives, and consequently, unnecessary confiscations of animals. Animals vaccinated with RB51 tested negative with RB, SAT, SAT-2Me, and FPA tests in all months of diagnosis, confirming that the tests are ineffective for diagnosing brucellosis caused by rough strains. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-11T18:23:41Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-02dcd9bf9bff46989f17985eabb35ed0 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 0972-8988 2231-0916 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-11T18:23:41Z |
| publishDate | 2023-10-01 |
| publisher | Veterinary World |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Veterinary World |
| spelling | doaj.art-02dcd9bf9bff46989f17985eabb35ed02023-10-14T12:11:01ZengVeterinary WorldVeterinary World0972-89882231-09162023-10-0116102080808510.14202/vetworld.2023.2080-2085Comparison of diagnostic tests for detecting bovine brucellosis in animals vaccinated with S19 and RB51 strain vaccinesMarcelo Ibarra0https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8255-3703Martin Campos1https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3309-2074Benavides Hernán2https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9236-3076Anthony Loor-Giler3https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5306-0240Andrea Chamorro4https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5166-3977Luis Nuñez5https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4421-5321Facultad de Industrias Agropecuarias y Ciencias Ambientales, Carrera Agropecuaria, Universidad Politécnica Estatal del Carchi, Antisana S/N y Av Universitaria, Tulcán Ecuador 040102; Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, Universidad Nacional de Rosario, Boulevard Ovidio Lagos y Ruta 33 Casilda-Santa Fe-Argentina.Facultad de Industrias Agropecuarias y Ciencias Ambientales, Carrera Agropecuaria, Universidad Politécnica Estatal del Carchi, Antisana S/N y Av Universitaria, Tulcán Ecuador 040102; Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, Universidad Nacional de Rosario, Boulevard Ovidio Lagos y Ruta 33 Casilda-Santa Fe-Argentina.Facultad de Industrias Agropecuarias y Ciencias Ambientales, Carrera Agropecuaria, Universidad Politécnica Estatal del Carchi, Antisana S/N y Av Universitaria, Tulcán Ecuador 040102.Facultad de Ingeniería y Ciencias Aplicadas, Carrera de Ingeniería en Biotecnología, Universidad de Las Américas, Antigua Vía a Nayón S/N, Quito EC 170124 Ecuador.Facultad de Industrias Agropecuarias y Ciencias Ambientales, Carrera de Enfermeria, Universidad Politécnica Estatal del Carchi, Antisana S/N y Av Universitaria, Tulcán Ecuador 040102.Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Carrera de Medicina Veterinaria, Universidad de Las Américas, Antigua Vía a Nayón S/N, Quito EC 170124 Ecuador; One Health Research Group, Universidad de Las Américas, Quito, Ecuador.Background and Aim: The diagnosis of bovine brucellosis in animals vaccinated with strain-19 (S19) and Rose Bengal (RB)-51 strain vaccines can be misinterpreted due to false positives. This study aimed to compare diagnostic tests for detecting bovine brucellosis in animals vaccinated with S19 and RB51 vaccine strains. Materials and Methods: Two groups of 12 crossbred Holstein calves between 6 and 8 months of age were used. On day 0, blood samples were collected from the animals, and the competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was used for serological diagnosis of bovine Brucellosis. All animals tested negative. After the first blood collection, the animals were subcutaneously vaccinated: one group received the S19 vaccine and the other received the RB51 vaccine. From the 3rd month after vaccination, all animals were sampled. Sampling was repeated every 2 months until the 7th month. Serological diagnosis of bovine brucellosis was performed using RB, tube serum agglutination test (SAT), SAT with 2-mercaptoethanol (SAT-2Me), and fluorescence polarization assay (FPA). Results: Animals vaccinated with S19 showed positive results with the RB, SAT, and SAT-2Me tests in all months of post-vaccination diagnosis. In animals vaccinated with S19, FPA showed positive results at months 3 and 5 and negative results at month 7, indicating that this test discriminates vaccinated animals from infected animals 7 months after vaccination. Rose Bengal, SAT, SAT-2Me, and FPA tests showed negative results in animals vaccinated with RB51 in all months of diagnosis. Conclusion: Animals vaccinated with S19 may test positive for brucellosis using RB, SAT, or SAT-2Me tests 7 months later. Fluorescence polarization assay is an optimal alternative for diagnosing animals in the field, thereby preventing false positives, and consequently, unnecessary confiscations of animals. Animals vaccinated with RB51 tested negative with RB, SAT, SAT-2Me, and FPA tests in all months of diagnosis, confirming that the tests are ineffective for diagnosing brucellosis caused by rough strains.https://www.veterinaryworld.org/Vol.16/October-2023/9.pdfagglutinationbovinebrucellosisvaccination |
| spellingShingle | Marcelo Ibarra Martin Campos Benavides Hernán Anthony Loor-Giler Andrea Chamorro Luis Nuñez Comparison of diagnostic tests for detecting bovine brucellosis in animals vaccinated with S19 and RB51 strain vaccines Veterinary World agglutination bovine brucellosis vaccination |
| title | Comparison of diagnostic tests for detecting bovine brucellosis in animals vaccinated with S19 and RB51 strain vaccines |
| title_full | Comparison of diagnostic tests for detecting bovine brucellosis in animals vaccinated with S19 and RB51 strain vaccines |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of diagnostic tests for detecting bovine brucellosis in animals vaccinated with S19 and RB51 strain vaccines |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of diagnostic tests for detecting bovine brucellosis in animals vaccinated with S19 and RB51 strain vaccines |
| title_short | Comparison of diagnostic tests for detecting bovine brucellosis in animals vaccinated with S19 and RB51 strain vaccines |
| title_sort | comparison of diagnostic tests for detecting bovine brucellosis in animals vaccinated with s19 and rb51 strain vaccines |
| topic | agglutination bovine brucellosis vaccination |
| url | https://www.veterinaryworld.org/Vol.16/October-2023/9.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT marceloibarra comparisonofdiagnostictestsfordetectingbovinebrucellosisinanimalsvaccinatedwiths19andrb51strainvaccines AT martincampos comparisonofdiagnostictestsfordetectingbovinebrucellosisinanimalsvaccinatedwiths19andrb51strainvaccines AT benavideshernan comparisonofdiagnostictestsfordetectingbovinebrucellosisinanimalsvaccinatedwiths19andrb51strainvaccines AT anthonyloorgiler comparisonofdiagnostictestsfordetectingbovinebrucellosisinanimalsvaccinatedwiths19andrb51strainvaccines AT andreachamorro comparisonofdiagnostictestsfordetectingbovinebrucellosisinanimalsvaccinatedwiths19andrb51strainvaccines AT luisnunez comparisonofdiagnostictestsfordetectingbovinebrucellosisinanimalsvaccinatedwiths19andrb51strainvaccines |