No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundBrucellosis in livestock causes enormous losses for economies of developing countries and poses a severe health risk to consumers of dairy products. Little information is known especially on camel brucellosis and its impact on human health. For surveillance and control of the disease, sensitive and reliable detection methods are needed. Although serological tests are the mainstay of diagnosis in camel brucellosis, these tests have been directly transposed from cattle without adequate validation. To date, little information on application of real-time PCR for detection of Brucella in camel serum is available. Therefore, this study was performed to compare the diagnostic efficiency of different serological tests and real-time PCR in order to identify the most sensitive, rapid and simple combination of tests for detecting Brucella infection in camels.FindingsA total of 895 serum samples collected from apparently healthy Sudanese camels was investigated. Sudan is a well documented endemic region for brucellosis with cases in humans, ruminants, and camels. Rose Bengal Test (RBT), Complement Fixation Test (CFT), Slow Agglutination Test (SAT), Competitive Enzyme Linked Immunosorbant Assay (cELISA) and Fluorescence Polarization Assay (FPA) as well as real-time PCR were used. Our findings revealed that bcsp31 kDa real-time PCR detected Brucella DNA in 84.8% (759/895) of the examined samples, of which 15.5% (118/759) were serologically negative. Our results show no relevant difference in sensitivity between the different serological tests. FPA detected the highest number of positive cases (79.3%) followed by CFT (71.4%), RBT (70.7%), SAT (70.6%) and cELISA (68.8%). A combination of real-time PCR with one of the used serological tests identified brucellosis in more than 99% of the infected animals. 59.7% of the examined samples were positive in all serological tests and real-time PCR. A subpopulation of 6.8% of animals was positive in all serological tests but negative in real-time PCR assays. The high percentage of positive cases in this study does not necessarily reflect the seroprevalence of the disease in the country but might be caused by the fact that the camels were imported from brucellosis infected herds of Sudan, accidentally. Seroprevalence of brucellosis in camels should be examined in confirmatory studies to evaluate the importance of brucellosis in this animal species.ConclusionWe suggest combining bcsp31 real-time PCR with either FPA, CFT, RBT or SAT to screen camels for brucellosis.

The present study was performed to assess the presence of Enterobacteriaceae in raw meat and handlers in Egypt using cultivation and matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS). A total of 100 raw meat samples (chicken and beef meat, 50 each) were randomly purchased from butchers and local meat retailers located at Mansoura city, Egypt. Fifty human samples were collected from meat handlers (hand swabs and stool specimens, 25 each). 228 bacterial isolates were recovered from these samples. Unidentified isolates were characterized by partial 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Escherichia coli isolates were further typed using a DNA microarray system. Proteus spp. (60.0%) were found to be the most abundant followed by Escherichia coli (38.7%), Klebsiella spp. (17.3%), and Citrobacter spp. (13.3%). The presence of different Enterobacteriaceae in locally produced retail raw meat demonstrates the risk of infection of people through consumption of raw or undercooked meat and the risk for cross-contamination of other food products. Harmonized and concerted actions from veterinary and public health authorities are needed to reduce the risk of infection.

In this preliminary study, a novel DNA microarray system was tested for the diagnosis of bovine piroplasmosis and anaplasmosis in comparison with microscopy and PCR assay results. In the Dakahlia Governorate, Egypt, 164 cattle were investigated for the presence of piroplasms and Anaplasma species. All investigated cattle were clinically examined. Blood samples were screened for the presence of blood parasites using microscopy and PCR assays. Seventy-one animals were acutely ill, whereas 93 were apparently healthy. In acutely ill cattle, Babesia/Theileria species (n=11) and Anaplasma marginale (n=10) were detected. Mixed infections with Babesia/Theileria spp. and A. marginale were present in two further cases. A. marginale infections were also detected in apparently healthy subjects (n=23). The results of PCR assays were confirmed by DNA sequencing. All samples that were positive by PCR for Babesia/Theileria spp. gave also positive results in the microarray analysis. The microarray chips identified Babesia bovis (n=12) and Babesia bigemina (n=2). Cattle with babesiosis were likely to have hemoglobinuria and nervous signs when compared to those with anaplasmosis that frequently had bloody feces. We conclude that clinical examination in combination with microscopy are still very useful in diagnosing acute cases of babesiosis and anaplasmosis, but a combination of molecular biological diagnostic assays will detect even asymptomatic carriers. In perspective, parallel detection of Babesia/Theileria spp. and A. marginale infections using a single microarray system will be a valuable improvement.

The aim of this study was to provide the first detailed insight into the population structure of Staphylococcus aureus in one modern dairy farm (Gamasa) and several household cows and buffaloes in Dakahlia Governorate, Egypt. Eight hundred seventy-two quarter milk samples of 218 dairy cattle and buffaloes with clinical and subclinical mastitis were investigated. Bacteria were identified using matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry, and staphylococci were further characterized by DNA sequencing of 16S rRNA genes and microarray analysis. Staphylococcus aureus was present in 5.6% of all collected samples, whereas methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) represented 24.5% of all identified S. aureus (12/49). Six clonal complexes (CC) of S. aureus were detected. Staphylococcus aureus CC398 (ST291/813)-MSSA (methicillin-susceptible S. aureus) was identified frequently in the Gamasa farm in addition to a few CC5-MRSA-V isolates. However, a small number of different isolates of S. aureus were found in household cattle and buffaloes harboring different CC. The presence of these genotypes of S. aureus in milk might indicate a public health hazard, because all of these CC have previously been isolated from human patients. Thus, a recommendation was given to the owner of the dairy farm to review the hygiene regimen on the farm. In perspective, further investigation regarding S. aureus screening of all lactating cows and personnel on the farm is warranted.

The sensitivity and specificity of three commercially available complement fixation test (CFT) antigens from c.c.pro (c.c.pro), Central Veterinary Institute of Wageningen UR (CIDC) and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) were comparatively evaluated by testing 410 sera collected from glanders-endemic and non-endemic areas (200 true-negative randomly collected sera and 210 sera collected from experimentally immunised animals (12 rabbits, 19 horses), clinically positive (135) and culture-positive (44) horses, donkeys and mules). Immunoblotting (IB) was used as the gold standard test. Highest sensitivity was shown for the CIDC antigen (100 per cent) followed by the c.c.pro antigen (99.39 per cent). However, the USDA antigen showed substantially less (p<0.05) sensitivity (62.19 per cent). Highest specificity was found for the USDA antigen (100 per cent) followed by the CIDC (97.5 per cent) and c.c.pro antigen (96.5 per cent). Positive and negative predictive values (assumed glanders prevalence of <0.1 per cent) for each antigen were calculated to be 95.88 and 99.48 (c.c.pro), 97.04 and 100 (CIDC), 100 and 76.33 per cent (USDA), respectively. Almost perfect agreement (0.96) was found between CFT using either c.c.pro or CIDC and IB.

BackgroundBovine brucellosis remains one of the most prevalent zoonotic infections affecting dairy cattle in developing countries where the applied control programs often fail. We analyzed the epidemiologic pattern of bovine brucellosis in a dairy cattle herd that showed several cases of abortions after regular vaccination with RB51 (B. abortus vaccine). In 2013 thirty dairy cows, from a Holstein-Friesian dairy herd with a population of 600 cattle, aborted five months post vaccination by a regular RB51 vaccine. Blood samples were drawn from milking cows and growing heifers, as well as heifers and cows pregnant up to 6 months. These samples were collected in June 2013 (n = 257) and May 2014 (n = 263) and were tested by real time (rt)-PCR as well as serological tests, in particular Rose Bengal Test (RBT), Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assays (ELISA) and Fluorescence Polarization Assay. Tissue specimens were also collected from an aborted fetus and cultured. Isolates were subjected to bacteriological typing tests at the genus and species levels.ResultsFive months post vaccination with RB51 vaccine, Brucella (B.) DNA was detected in blood samples of cows by rt-PCR. The serological tests also revealed the spread of Brucella field strains within the herd in 2013. Four Brucella isolates were recovered from specimens collected from the aborted fetus. These isolates were typed as follows: one B. abortus RB51 vaccine strain and three isolates of B. abortus field strain. The seropositive cows with positive rt-PCR might indicate an infection by the Brucella field strain; while the positive rt-PCR results from seronegative animals may either be due to circulating RB51 vaccine DNA in vaccinated animals or to circulating field strain in infected animals before seroconversion.ConclusionThe results herein suggest that PCR can be a good supplementary tool in an outbreak situation, if an assay is available that can differentiate vaccine and field strains with a high analytical sensitivity. We recommend using RBT and ELISA in parallel in outbreak situations, to identify as many infected animals as possible during the initial screenings. This test procedure should be repeated for at least three successive negative tests, with one month interval.