4.3 Article

Evaluation of serological diagnostic tests for bovine brucellosis in dairy cattle herds in an endemic area: a multicenter study

Journal

TROPICAL ANIMAL HEALTH AND PRODUCTION
Volume 55, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11250-023-03519-1

Keywords

Brucellosis; Rose bengal plate test; Standard agglutination test; I-ELISA

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to identify and compare the seroprevalence of brucellosis among dairy cattle farms using different serological tests. Results showed that I-ELISA had higher specificity and sensitivity compared to RBPT and SAT, and could significantly decrease non-specific reaction, making it a more accurate diagnostic tool for brucellosis in endemic areas.
Brucellosis is known as one of the most common zoonotic diseases worldwide affecting both livestock and humans. It causes abortions, reduces milk production, and infertility in infected animals. The disease is routinely diagnosed through three serological techniques, such as rose bengal plate test (RBPT), standard agglutination test (SAT), and indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (I-ELISA). The aim of this study was to identify and compare the brucellosis seroprevalence among dairy cattle farms through these different serological tests. From 2112 sampled dairy cattle in different parts of Iran, RBPT, SAT, and I-ELISA led to 296 (14.02%), 215 (10.18%), and 297 (14.06%) positive results, respectively. Brucella abortus biovar 3 (62 cases) was identified as the most common cause of brucellosis in tested animals. Our results showed that the specificity and sensitivity of I-ELISA were higher than those obtained by RBPT and SAT. In this study, the overall agreement of RBPT and SAT with I-ELISA reached 95.21% and 94.12% in dairy cattle farms, respectively. Furthermore, Cohen's kappa statistical analysis revealed that the best degree of agreement was seen between RBPT and I-ELISA (0.80), followed by RBPT and SAT (0.78) and finally SAT and I-ELISA (0.72), thereby indicating a strong agreement between RBPT and I-ELISA methods and good agreement between SAT and I-ELISA methods. The McNemar analysis also showed that a significant difference exists between positive and negative results determined by SAT and I-ELISA methods (p < 0.0001). However, the positive and negative results determined by I-ELISA and RBPT did not show a significant difference (p = 0.9207). Therefore, I-ELISA was a more specific and sensitive serological test when compared to RBPT and SAT and could remarkably decrease non-specific reaction by improving the serological screening specificity for an accurate brucellosis diagnosis in endemic areas.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available