Seroprevalence of Neospora caninum in Goats in Niğde Province

Abstract

ÖzetBu çalışma, Şubat 2010 -Mayıs 2010 tarihleri arasında Niğde ilinde bulunan keçilerde Neospora caninum'un seroprevalansının araştırılması amacı ile yapılmıştır. Çalışmanın materyali olarak Niğde ilinde 8 farklı çalışma merkezine ait (Bahçeli, Merkez-Tepeköy, Bor, Çamardı Celaller Köyü, Kızılca, Çukurkuyu, Ulukışla, ve Çamardı Merkez) 1 yaş ve üzeri toplam 181 dişi keçi belirlenmiş ve bu keçilerin serumlarında N. caninum antikorları ELISA testi ile araştırılmıştır. Niğde yöresinde ELISA testi ile incelenen toplam 181 keçinin 47 (%25.9)'sinin N. caninum antikorları yönünden seropozitif olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Serolojik incelemede, en fazla seropozitiflik %42.3 oranı ile 5 yaşındaki keçilerde tespit edilirken en az seropozitiflik oranı ise %13.8 ile 3 yaşındaki keçilerde belirlenmiştir. Abort yapan 16 keçinin 6 (%37.5)'sı, abort yapmayan 165 keçinin 41 (%24.8)'i seropozitif olarak tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca çalışma merkezleri arasında en yüksek seropozitiflik %54.5 oranı ile Çamardı'da belirlenmiş, buna karşılık Bahçeli ve Kızılca'da ise muayene edilen keçilerde seropozitiflik saptanmamıştır. Elde edilen seropozitiflik oranlarında; keçilerin yaş grupları ve çalışma merkezlerinin istatistiksel olarak önemli (sırası ile P<0.05, P<0.01) olduğu, abort yapan ve yapmayan keçiler arasında ise önemsiz olduğu saptanmıştır (P>0.05). Sonuç olarak, Niğde yöresinde keçilerde N. caninum'un varlığı ilk kez bu çalışma ile ortaya konulmuş ve abort olaylarında neosporosisin de dikkate alınması gerektiği kanısına varılmıştır. Anahtar sözcükler: Neospora caninum, Keçi, Niğde, Seroprevalans Seroprevalence of Neospora caninum in Goats in Niğde Province SummaryThis study was performed to investigate seroprevalence of Neospora caninum in goats in Niğde province between February 2010-May 2010. A total of 181 goats which were one year old or more than one year old, were selected from eight different study sites (Bahçeli, Centrum-Tepeköy, Bor, Çamardı Celaller Village, Kızılca, Çukurkuyu, Ulukışla, ve Central Çamardı) as the study sample and N. caninum antibodies were tested in these goats serum using ELISA. The 47 out of 181 sera (25.9%) were found to be seropositive for N. caninum. In the serologic examinations, the seropositivity rate was highest in 5 years old (42.3%) while it was lowest in 3 years old (13.8%) in goats. The 6 (37.5%) out of 16 aborted goats and 41 (24.8%) out of 165 non-aborted were detected as seropositive. The highest seropositivity rate of study sites was determined in Çamardı as 54.5% in addition to this, none of examined goats in Bahçeli and Kızılca detected seropositivity. The difference between the seropositivity rates to N .caninum among age groups and study sites was statistically significant (P<0.05, P<0.01, respectively) while the difference to N. caninum among aborted and non-aborted goats was statistically insignificant (P>0.05). As a result, this is the first serologic survey for N. caninum performed on goats in Niğde province and neosporosis should be taken into consideration in abortion cases.

Oxidant/Antioxidant Status and Certain Trace Elements Relationship in Hair Goats Naturally Infected by Neospora caninum

“…While no statistically significant difference was determined between the female hair goats from different locations as part of the present study, a significant difference between the age groups was determined, similar to the studies of others previously mentioned (Figliuolo et al, 2004;Al-Majali et al, 2008;Cayvaz and Karatepe, 2011;Iovu et al, 2012;Díaz et al, 2016;Gharekhani et al, 2016), which was particularly true for the older animals. The reason for this age discrepancy might be the longer exposure of older animals to the contaminated forage areas, increasing the likelihood they would consume sporulated oocytes and horizontal contamination risk.…”

“…The seroprevalence determined in the present study is higher compared to the findings of the studies performed in Adana (Utuk and Eski, 2019), Konya, Karaman (Zhou et al, 2016), Kırşehir (Utuk et al, 2011) and Şanlıurfa (Sevgili et al, 2003), while it is similar to the findings of study performed in Elâzığ (Utuk et al, 2011), and lower than the findings of the studies performed in Erzurum (Utuk et al, 2011), Niğde (Cayvaz and Karatepe, 2011) and Kilis (Utuk and Eski, 2017).…”

“…Neosporosis is considered a significant problem in particular for cattle breeding (Utuk and Eski, 2017), but it also causes abortions and infected births in sheep and goats, resulting in severe economic losses (Cayvaz and Karatepe, 2011). Since clinical findings alone are not enough in the diagnosis of the disease (Cayvaz and Karatepe, 2011;Gharekhani et al, 2016). Amongst these, ELI-SA is reportedly more sensitive and specific (Dubey, 2003;Gharekhani et al, 2016).…”

First Report of Seroprevalence and Risk Factors ofNeospora caninumInfection in Tibetan Sheep in China

“…The N. caninum prevalence in Tibetan sheep varied between regions, ranging from 4.4% in Luqu (8/182, 95% CI 1.4-7.4) to 9.4% in Tianzhu (90/962, 95% CI 7.5-11.2) ( Table 1 ), but the difference was not statistically significant ( P > 0.05). Caprine infection of N. caninum has been reported worldwide, for example, the lower prevalence of 5.6% in Iraq [ 14 ], 6.1% in Costa Rica [ 15 ], 6% in the Czech Republic [ 16 ], 6.6% in Argentina, and 6.4% in Brazil [ 17 ], the higher prevalence of 25.9% in Turkey [ 18 ] and 23.6% in Thailand [ 19 ]. Due to the different investigation sites, different detection methods, sheep breeds, and various sample capacities, it is difficult to compare N. caninum prevalence between these studies, but these studies all confirmed that caprines are truly easy to be infected by N. caninum .…”

Seroprevalence of Neospora caninum in Goats in Gevas District of Van

“…For the Black Sea Region, an infection rate of 8.69% was reported only in the study conducted in Ordu province. It was detected at a rate of 8.45% in the South East Anatolian region (Kilis and Sanliurfa) (Sevgili et al 2003;Cayvaz and Karatepe 2011;Utuk et al 2011;Okur 2015;Zhou et al 2016;Utuk and Eski 2017;Utuk and Eski 2019;Eski 2020;Özdamar et al 2021;Çubukçu and Gökpınar 2021;Gökpınar 2022).…”