Prevalence of Brucella antibodies in horses (Equus Caballus) in Jalingo, Taraba State, Nigeria

Abstract

A study was conducted to determine the prevalence of Brucella antibodies in Jalingo using the Rose Bengal plate test (RBPT) and the serum agglutination test (SAT). A total of 90 adult horses that were on zero grazing management system were sampled. The sampling sites were selected based on the availability of horses. The objectives of the study were to determine the prevalence of Brucella antibodies in horses as well as the distribution of the infection according to sex. There was no association of horses seen with other animals. The samples collected comprised of 88 males and 02 female horses from four locations in Jalingo: Barade, Sarkin dawaki, Sintali and Turaki. All the sera samples were subjected to initial screening by RBPT and positive cases were then analyzed with SAT. The overall prevalence of Brucella antibodies was 07 (07.8%) with all positive cases recorded from male horses for RBPT, while none was positive for SAT among the male and female horses. There was no significant difference in the prevalence of horse Brucella antibodies between male and female (P>0.05). Horses in Jalingo are in the four wards identified and were all sampled. Turaki ward recorded the highest prevalence of 13.3%, while Barade Ward had the lowest prevalence with 00.0%. However, there is no significant difference in the prevalence between the male and female (P>0.05). Further studies need to be conducted to determine the involvement of other species and humans.

Seroprevalence and risk factors of brucellosis in Arabian horses

“…Therefore, despite differences in timing, environment and host determinants, diagnostic tests, sampling size and study designs, the prevalence of brucellosis in the Iranian horses is almost the same, and the seroprevalence of brucellosis is expected to be less than 10% across Iran. In the studies conducted in other countries, the seroprevalence of brucellosis were reported to be 0—100% in Nigeria (Ardo & Abubakar, 2016; Ardo et al., 2016; Bertu et al., 2014; Ehizibolo et al., 2011; Sadiq et al., 2013), 8.3% in Mongolia (Zolzaya et al., 2014), 0.26–6.5% in Brazil (Antunes et al., 2013; Santos et al., 2016), 3.6‐ ‐67.9% in Pakistan (Gul et al., 2013; Hussain et al., 2020; Safirullah et al., 2014), 0.25–60.6% in Turkey (Göz et al., 2007; Solmaz et al., 2004; Tel et al., 2011), 0.24% in Mexico (Acosta‐Gonzalez et al., 2006), 3.6–4.9% in Sudan (Musa, 2004), 1–8.5% in Jordan (Abo‐Shehada et al., 2009) and 0% in Eritrea (Omer et al., 2000). This significant difference in the prevalence of brucellosis in different countries, and even between different regions in a country can be due to differences in management such as husbandry, contact rate with domestic and wild animals and population density, location, climate, sample size, diagnostic method and hosting characteristics (Acosta‐Gonzalez et al.…”