2001
DOI: 10.1016/s0378-1135(01)00313-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Monitoring of transmission of Salmonella enterica serovars in pigs using bacteriological and serological detection methods

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

7
53
1
1

Year Published

2005
2005
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 71 publications
(63 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
7
53
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…According to our results, Salmonella was isolated from the inoculated pigs in both trials early on the first day post-infection (Tables 1 and 2) which is in agreement with previous reports about rapid Salmonella shedding after experimental inoculation [7,26,27].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…According to our results, Salmonella was isolated from the inoculated pigs in both trials early on the first day post-infection (Tables 1 and 2) which is in agreement with previous reports about rapid Salmonella shedding after experimental inoculation [7,26,27].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…In the only available report about airborne transmission of S. Typhimurium in swine, no bacteria were isolated from sentinel animals exposed to airflow from a room with infected pigs and only seroconversion was observed [8]. Despite the large variation of time and frequency of Salmonella shedding that is seen in exposed pigs [26,27], S. Typhimurium can be rapidly isolated from faeces soon after they are commingled with animals shedding this pathogen [26], or when they are placed in a contaminated environment [16]. However, when infected and sentinel pigs had only nose-tonose contact, the majority of the exposed pigs shed S. Typhimurium after 5 weeks [8].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The probability of serologically detecting S. Typhimurium or S. Derby, was higher than for S. Goldcoast, S. Panama or S. Livingstone. Similar results were obtained in the study by Van Winsen et al [33] who concluded that some serovars may not be detected at all or may be detected to a lesser extent in different mix-ELISA currently used. Moreover, according to Nielsen et al [18], not all pigs do seroconvert.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…being present in the intestines or the associated lymph nodes that is important with regards to contamination of the carcasses [5]. In many studies, the association between serological and bacteriological results as measured in faecal samples has been calculated at the herd level [9,11,16,25,28,33] and at the individual level 1 [10,28]. The authors agree that the serological test is suitable for screening on a herd basis in control programmes aiming to reduce Salmonella prevalence in pork.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Four mutually exclusive health states, measurable with available detection methods (bacteriology and serology [8,11]), are identified in the literature [22,33,34] and retained in this model ( Fig. 1): susceptible animals free of Salmonella (S), shedding animals (I − ), seropositive shedding animals (I + ), and seropositive carrying animals (C + ).…”
Section: Salmonella Infection States and Dynamicsmentioning
confidence: 99%