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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |