4.7 Article

Novel insights into transmission routes of Mycobacterium avium in pigs and possible implications for human health

期刊

VETERINARY RESEARCH
卷 45, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/1297-9716-45-46

关键词

-

资金

  1. Research Council of Norway
  2. Norwegian Veterinary Institute (NVI)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mycobacterium avium infection is a severe condition in humans, whereas pigs are often subclinically infected. Pig carcasses represent a possible source of human infection. Faecal excretion of M. avium was recently demonstrated in experimentally infected pigs, along with detection of M. avium in apparently normal lymph nodes. The present study investigates faecal excretion in naturally infected herds and the presence of live mycobacteria in lymph nodes. Two pig herds (A and B), with a history of sporadically suspected M. avium infection were sampled. Herd B used peat, as opposed to Herd A. Samples from peat, sawdust, drinking water, faeces and lymph nodes were collected. Identification of mycobacteria was performed by 16S rDNA sequencing and PCR. Mycobacterium avium isolates were analysed by Multi-Locus Variable Number of Tandem repeat Analysis (MLVA). Mycobacterium avium subsp. hominissuis was detected in samples of faeces, peat and lymph nodes from Herd B, often with identical MLVA profiles. Additionally, other non-tuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) were found in the same material. The absence of macroscopic lymph node lesions in the presence of M. avium subsp. hominissuis was frequently demonstrated. In Herd A, only one NTM isolate, which proved not to be M. avium, was found. Faeces might facilitate transmission of M. avium subsp. hominissuis between pigs and maintain the infection pressure in herds. The low incidence of macroscopic lesions together with the massive presence of M. avium subsp. hominissuis in lymph nodes from pigs kept on peat raises questions related to animal husbandry, food safety and human health.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据