Cargando…

Evaluation of different diagnostic methods for the detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in boot swabs and liquid manure samples

BACKGROUND: Environmental sampling based on boot swabs and/or liquid manure samples is an upcoming strategy for the identification of paratuberculosis (paraTB) positive herds, but only limited data are available regarding the diagnostic performance of molecular detection methods (qPCR) versus faecal...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hahn, Nathalie, Failing, Klaus, Eisenberg, Tobias, Schlez, Karen, Zschöck, Peter-Michael, Donat, Karsten, Einax, Esra, Köhler, Heike
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5563032/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28821251
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-017-1173-6
_version_ 1783258060762906624
author Hahn, Nathalie
Failing, Klaus
Eisenberg, Tobias
Schlez, Karen
Zschöck, Peter-Michael
Donat, Karsten
Einax, Esra
Köhler, Heike
author_facet Hahn, Nathalie
Failing, Klaus
Eisenberg, Tobias
Schlez, Karen
Zschöck, Peter-Michael
Donat, Karsten
Einax, Esra
Köhler, Heike
author_sort Hahn, Nathalie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Environmental sampling based on boot swabs and/or liquid manure samples is an upcoming strategy for the identification of paratuberculosis (paraTB) positive herds, but only limited data are available regarding the diagnostic performance of molecular detection methods (qPCR) versus faecal culture (FC) for this purpose. In the present study, the test characteristics of two different qPCR protocols (A and B) and a standardized FC protocol, for the detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in boot swabs and liquid manure samples were evaluated. RESULTS: In 19 paraTB unsuspicious and 58 paraTB positive herds boot swabs and liquid manure were sampled simultaneously and analyzed in three different diagnostic laboratories. Using boot swabs and liquid manure, a substantial to excellent accordance was found between both qPCRs, for boot swabs also with culture, while for liquid manure the detection rate of culture was decreased after prolonged storage at −20 °C. The quantitative results of both qPCR methods correlated well for the same sample and also for boot swabs and liquid manure from the same herd. When cut-off threshold cycle (C(T)-)-values were applied as recommended by the manufacturers, herd level specificity (Sp) of qPCR B was below 100% for boot swabs and for both qPCRs for liquid manure. A decreased herd level sensitivity was encountered after adjustment of Sp to 100% and re-calculation of the cut-off C(T)-values. CONCLUSIONS: qPCR is equally suitable as bacterial culture for the detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in boot swabs and liquid manure samples. Both matrices represent easily accessible composite environmental samples which can be tested with reliable results. The data encourage qPCR testing of composite environmental samples for paraTB herd diagnosis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5563032
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55630322017-08-21 Evaluation of different diagnostic methods for the detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in boot swabs and liquid manure samples Hahn, Nathalie Failing, Klaus Eisenberg, Tobias Schlez, Karen Zschöck, Peter-Michael Donat, Karsten Einax, Esra Köhler, Heike BMC Vet Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Environmental sampling based on boot swabs and/or liquid manure samples is an upcoming strategy for the identification of paratuberculosis (paraTB) positive herds, but only limited data are available regarding the diagnostic performance of molecular detection methods (qPCR) versus faecal culture (FC) for this purpose. In the present study, the test characteristics of two different qPCR protocols (A and B) and a standardized FC protocol, for the detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in boot swabs and liquid manure samples were evaluated. RESULTS: In 19 paraTB unsuspicious and 58 paraTB positive herds boot swabs and liquid manure were sampled simultaneously and analyzed in three different diagnostic laboratories. Using boot swabs and liquid manure, a substantial to excellent accordance was found between both qPCRs, for boot swabs also with culture, while for liquid manure the detection rate of culture was decreased after prolonged storage at −20 °C. The quantitative results of both qPCR methods correlated well for the same sample and also for boot swabs and liquid manure from the same herd. When cut-off threshold cycle (C(T)-)-values were applied as recommended by the manufacturers, herd level specificity (Sp) of qPCR B was below 100% for boot swabs and for both qPCRs for liquid manure. A decreased herd level sensitivity was encountered after adjustment of Sp to 100% and re-calculation of the cut-off C(T)-values. CONCLUSIONS: qPCR is equally suitable as bacterial culture for the detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in boot swabs and liquid manure samples. Both matrices represent easily accessible composite environmental samples which can be tested with reliable results. The data encourage qPCR testing of composite environmental samples for paraTB herd diagnosis. BioMed Central 2017-08-18 /pmc/articles/PMC5563032/ /pubmed/28821251 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-017-1173-6 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Hahn, Nathalie
Failing, Klaus
Eisenberg, Tobias
Schlez, Karen
Zschöck, Peter-Michael
Donat, Karsten
Einax, Esra
Köhler, Heike
Evaluation of different diagnostic methods for the detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in boot swabs and liquid manure samples
title Evaluation of different diagnostic methods for the detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in boot swabs and liquid manure samples
title_full Evaluation of different diagnostic methods for the detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in boot swabs and liquid manure samples
title_fullStr Evaluation of different diagnostic methods for the detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in boot swabs and liquid manure samples
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of different diagnostic methods for the detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in boot swabs and liquid manure samples
title_short Evaluation of different diagnostic methods for the detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in boot swabs and liquid manure samples
title_sort evaluation of different diagnostic methods for the detection of mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in boot swabs and liquid manure samples
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5563032/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28821251
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-017-1173-6
work_keys_str_mv AT hahnnathalie evaluationofdifferentdiagnosticmethodsforthedetectionofmycobacteriumaviumsubspparatuberculosisinbootswabsandliquidmanuresamples
AT failingklaus evaluationofdifferentdiagnosticmethodsforthedetectionofmycobacteriumaviumsubspparatuberculosisinbootswabsandliquidmanuresamples
AT eisenbergtobias evaluationofdifferentdiagnosticmethodsforthedetectionofmycobacteriumaviumsubspparatuberculosisinbootswabsandliquidmanuresamples
AT schlezkaren evaluationofdifferentdiagnosticmethodsforthedetectionofmycobacteriumaviumsubspparatuberculosisinbootswabsandliquidmanuresamples
AT zschockpetermichael evaluationofdifferentdiagnosticmethodsforthedetectionofmycobacteriumaviumsubspparatuberculosisinbootswabsandliquidmanuresamples
AT donatkarsten evaluationofdifferentdiagnosticmethodsforthedetectionofmycobacteriumaviumsubspparatuberculosisinbootswabsandliquidmanuresamples
AT einaxesra evaluationofdifferentdiagnosticmethodsforthedetectionofmycobacteriumaviumsubspparatuberculosisinbootswabsandliquidmanuresamples
AT kohlerheike evaluationofdifferentdiagnosticmethodsforthedetectionofmycobacteriumaviumsubspparatuberculosisinbootswabsandliquidmanuresamples