Indian Journal of Animal Research

  • Chief EditorK.M.L. Pathak

  • Print ISSN 0367-6722

  • Online ISSN 0976-0555

  • NAAS Rating 6.50

  • SJR 0.263

  • Impact Factor 0.4 (2024)

Frequency :
Monthly (January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November and December)
Indexing Services :
Science Citation Index Expanded, BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Scopus, AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Research Article

Indian Journal of Animal Research, volume 53 issue 5 (may 2019) : 661-666

Serum based polymerase chain reaction and enzyme linked immunosorbent assays for diagnosis of bovine brucellosis
 

V. Naveen Kumar, M. Vijaya Bharathi, G. Selvaraju, K. Porteen, K. Vijayarani
1Madras Veterinary College, Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Chennai-600 007, Tamil Nadu, India.
Cite article:- Kumar Naveen V., Bharathi Vijaya M., Selvaraju G., Porteen K., Vijayarani K. (2018). Serum based polymerase chain reaction and enzyme linked immunosorbent assays for diagnosis of bovine brucellosis. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 53(5): 661-666. doi: 10.18805/ijar.B-3542.

ABSTRACT

Brucellosis is one of the economically important diseases in India and diagnosis of brucellosis using single test is cumbersome due to variation in sensitivity and specificity among the different test. The present study was aimed to assess the suitability of serum as clinical specimen in molecular diagnosis and evaluate the serology and molecular assays as in diagnosis of bovine brucellosis. A total of 821 bovine sera samples were subjected to indirect Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay (i-ELISA) and serum based Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) assay. On serology 6.70 per cent positivity of brucellosis were reported and on PCR assay, 47 and 29 sera samples were positive for bcsp 31 genus specific and IS711 species specific PCR assay respectively with per cent positivity of 5.72 and 3.53. In comparison between serology and molecular test, 44 samples were positive for both assays and 11 and 3 samples were positive for serology and molecular assays individually. This study suggests that serum sample can be utilised as the choice of clinical specimen for both PCR assay and i-ELISA will be a future choice for the diagnosis of bovine brucellosis.  

REFERENCES

  1. Aparicio DE (2013). Epidemiology of brucellosis in domestic animals caused by Brucella melitensis, Brucella suis and Brucella abortus. Rev. Sci. Tech., 32(1): 53-60.
  2. Agarwal R, Kumar M and Singh JL (2007). Seroprevalence of brucellosis in Uttranchal. Indian Vet. J., 84: 204-205.
  3. Al-Majali AM, Talafha AQ and Ababneh MM (2009). Seroprevalence and risk factors for bovine brucellosis in Jordan. J. Vet. Sci., 10(1): 61-65.
  4. Baily GC, Kraahn JB, Drasar BS and Stokeer NG (1992). Detection of Brucella melitensis and Brucella abortus by DNA amplification. J. Trop. Med. Hyg., 95: 271-275.
  5. Bhattacharya DK, Ahmed K and Rahman H (2005). Studies on seroprevalence of bovine brucellosis by different tests. J. Vet. Pub. Heal., 3: 131-133.
  6. Chand P and Sharma AK (2004). Situation of brucellsis in bovines at organized cattle farms belonging to three different states. J. Immunol. Immunopathol., 6: 11-15.
  7. Elfaki MG, Uz-Zaman T, Al-Hokail AA and Nakeeb SM (2005). Detection of Brucella DNA in sera from patients with brucellosis by polymerase chain reaction. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis., 53: 1–7.
  8. Gupta VK, Nayakwadi S, Kumar A, Gururaj K, Kumar A and Pawaiya RS (2014). Markers for the molecular diagnosis of brucellosis in animals. Adv. Anim. Vet. Sci., 2(3): 31-39. 
  9. Mahmood R, Ali T, Waheed U, Asif M and Khan QM (2016). Application of serum based PCR and Fluorescence Polarization Assay for diagnosis of brucellosis among people occupationally at risk to disease. Int. J. Agric. Biol., 18: 377-384.
  10. Morata P, Queipo-Ortuno MI and Colmenero JD (1998) Strategy for optimizing DNA amplification in a peripheral blood PCR assay used for diagnosis of human brucellosis. J. Clin. Microbiol., 6:2443-2446.
  11. Navarro E, Segura JC, Castano MJ and Solera J (2006). Use of real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction to monitor the evolution of Brucella melitensis DNA load during therapy and post-therapy follow-up in patients with brucellosis. Clin. Infect. Dis., 42(9): 1266 – 1273.
  12. Nielsen K (1995). A brief review of diagnosis of bovine brucellosis by detection of antibody. Arch. Med. Vet., 28: 9-17.
  13. Nielsen K (2002). Diagnosis of brucellosis by serology. Vet. Microbiol., 90: 447-459.
  14. National Institute of Veterinary Epidemiology and Disease Informatics (NIVEDI) (2014), Annual report, 2013-14, Hebaal, Bangalore, pp. 42.
  15. Office Internationale des Epizooties OIE (2009). Manual of Standards for Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines, 6th ed. France, OIE Press, pp. 389-428.
  16. Patel TJ (2007). Serological, cultural and molecular detection of Brucella infection in bovines including quantification in milk by real-    time PCR. M.V.Sc., Dissertation submitted to the Anand Agricultural University, Gujarath, India.
  17. Rahman S, Sarker AS, Rahman AKMA, Sarker RR, Melzer F, Sprague LD and Neubauer H (2014). The Prevalence of Brucella abortus DNA in seropositive bovine sera in Bangladesh. Afric. J. Microbiol. Res., 8(48): 3856 – 3860.
  18. Rani K, Manjula A, Singh R and Kumar P (2014). Immunological and molecular detection of Brucella abortus in Buffaloes (bubalus bubalis). Buffalo Bulletin, 33(1): 25 – 31. 
  19. Saini S, Gupta VK, Gururaj K, Singh DD, Pawaiya RVS, Gangwar NK, Mishra AK, Dwivedi D, Andani D, Kumar A and Goswami TK (2017). Comparative diagnostic evaluation of OMP31 gene based TaqMan® real-time PCR assay with visual LAMP assay and indirect ELISA for caprine brucellosis. Trop. Anim. Health. Prod., 49:1253–1264
  20. Shome R, Padmashree BS, Krithiga N, Triveni K, Sahay S, Shome BR, Singh P and Rahman H (2014). Bovine Brucellosis in organized farms of India - An assessment of diagnostic assays and risk factors. Adv. Anim. Vet. Sci., 2(10): 557-564.
  21. Smith R (1994). Veterinary Clinical Epidemiology, CRC Press, The Library of Congress.
  22. Snedecor GM and Cochran WG (1994). Statistical Methods. Oxford and IBH Publishing house, Kolkata.
  23. Takele BY, Khairani-Bejo S, Bahaman AR and Omar AR (2009). Comparison of PCR assay with serum and whole blood samples of experimental trials for detection and differentiation of Brucella melitensis. J. Anim. Vet. Adv., 8(8):1637-1640.
  24. Thrusfield M (1995). Veterinary Epidemiology, 2nd ed. CRC. Department of Veterinary Clinical Studies Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies University of Edinburg.
  25. Zamanian M, Hashemi Tabar GR, Rad M and Haghparast A (2015). Evaluation of different primers for detection of Brucella in human and animal serum samples by using PCR method. Arch. Iran. Med., 18(1): 44 – 50.
  26. Zerva L, Bourantas K, Mitka S, Kansouzidou A and Legakis NJ (2001). Serum is the preferred clinical specimen for diagnosis of human brucellosis by PCR. J. Clin. Microbiol., 39: 1661–1664. 
Reviewed By

Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)