Author:
Elsayed Mohamed Sabry Abd Elraheam,Salah Ahmed,Elbadee Ahmed Abd,Roshdy Tamer
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Mycobacterium bovis notoriously causes detrimental infections in bovines and humans. In this study, 1500 buffaloes and 2200 cattle were tested by single intradermal comparative cervical tuberculin test and compared with the detection rates of M. bovis isolation, real-time and simplex PCR, and flow Cytometry.
Results
The tuberculin test is the reference test in Egypt, the positive rate was 54/3700 (1.5%) composed of 18/1500 (1.2%) buffaloes and 36/2200 (1.6%) cattle which were mandatorily slaughtered under the Egyptian legislation, after postmortem examination the non-visible-lesion proportion was 39/54 (72.2%) which surpassed the visible-lesion rate 15/54 (27.8%) with (p < 0.0001). The samples from each case were pooled into one sample representing the case, and the isolation rate of M. bovis was 25/54 (46.3%). Real-time PCR using atpE was positive for mycobacteria on the genus level in 18/18 (100%) and 5/5 (100%) of tissue samples and isolates, respectively; simplex PCR detected M. bovis in 44/54 (81.5%) and 25/25 (100%) of tissue samples and isolates, respectively. Flow Cytometry evaluation of the CD4+, CD8+, WC1+δγ, and CD2+ cell phenotypes showed increased counts in the tuberculin-positive cases compared with negative cases (p < 0.0001), and these phenotypes in the tuberculin-positive cases increased after antigen stimulation than in the negative cases (p < 0.0001). Detection rates of PCR techniques and flow Cytometry exceeded that of bacterial isolation (p < 0.0001) and exhibited a strong correlation.
Conclusions
The skin test suffers from interference from non-tuberculous mycobacteria able to cause false-positive reactions in cattle and other species. Real-time PCR using atpE, conventional PCR targeting RDs, and flow Cytometry are rapid and accurate methods that correlate with the isolation and can be promising for detection and confirmation of infected live and slaughtered cases.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Microbiology (medical),Microbiology
Reference63 articles.
1. Riojas MA, McGough KJ, Rider-Riojas CJ, Rastogi N, Hazbon MH. Phylogenomic analysis of the species of the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex demonstrates that Mycobacterium africanum, Mycobacterium bovis, Mycobacterium caprae, Mycobacterium microti and Mycobacterium pinnipedii are later heterotypic synonyms of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2018;68(1):324–32. https://doi.org/10.1099/ijsem.0.002507.
2. Sichewo PR, Michel AL, Musoke J, Etter EMC. Risk factors for zoonotic tuberculosis at the wildlife–livestock–human interface in South Africa. Pathogens. 2019;8(3):101. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens8030101.Delta.
3. Cosivi O, Grange JM, Daborn CJ, Raviglione MC, Fujikura T, Cousins D, et al. Zoonotic tuberculosis due to Mycobacterium bovis in developing countries. Emerg Infect Dis. 1998;4(1):59–70. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid0401.980108.
4. El-Olemy GM, El-Bassiouni AA, Negm S. Tuberculosis in Toukh-Tanbisha, Menufia, Egypt. In: Proceeding of the 4th international symposium on veterinary epidemiology and economics; 1985. www.sciquest.org.nz/elibrary/download/61287/Tuberculosis+in+Toukh.
5. WHO. Zoonotic tuberculosis (Mycobacterium bovis): memorandum from a WHO meeting (with the participation of FAO). Bull World Health Organ. 1994;72:851–7.
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献