首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Viruses >(Non-)Sense of Milk Testing in Small Ruminant Lentivirus Control Programs in Goats. Comparative Analysis of Antibody Detection and Molecular Diagnosis in Blood and Milk
【2h】

(Non-)Sense of Milk Testing in Small Ruminant Lentivirus Control Programs in Goats. Comparative Analysis of Antibody Detection and Molecular Diagnosis in Blood and Milk

机译:山羊小反刍动物慢病毒控制程序中牛奶测试的(非)感觉。血液和牛奶中抗体检测和分子诊断的比较分析

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Small ruminant lentivirus (SRLV) control programs are mainly based on diagnostic tests performed on blood samples collected from sheep and goats. Since blood sampling is costly and stressful for the animals, we evaluated whether milk could be used as an inexpensive and easily collectable matrix for SRLV detection. We therefore compared SRLV detection via two commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) in blood and corresponding milk samples from 321 goats originating from eight different SRLV-infected farms in Flanders (Belgium). The IDscreen ELISA had a better relative sensitivity (97% vs 93%) and specificity (100% and 97%) than the Elitest ELISA for SRLV-specific antibody detection in milk compared to serum. The higher sensitivity correlates with a 10-fold higher analytical sensitivity of the IDscreen test. In contrast to the overall good ELISA results, qPCR on milk cell pellets lacked sensitivity (81%) and specificity (88%), compared to molecular detection in blood leucocyte pellets. Our results show that serology is more suitable than qPCR for SRLV diagnosis, and that milk may represent an interesting matrix for a preliminary evaluation of a herd’s infection status. Serum remains however the sample of choice for control programs where it is important to identify positive animals with the highest sensitivity.
机译:小反刍动物慢病毒(SRLV)控制程序主要基于对从绵羊和山羊采集的血液样本进行的诊断测试。由于对动物进行血液采样既昂贵又压力大,因此我们评估了牛奶是否可以用作廉价且易于收集的SRLV检测基质。因此,我们比较了通过两种商业酶联免疫吸附测定(ELISA)和定量聚合酶链反应(qPCR)在来自法兰德斯(比利时)八个不同SRLV感染农场的321只山羊的血液和相应牛奶样品中的SRLV检测。与牛奶中的SRLV特异性抗体检测相比,IDscreen ELISA具有比Elitest ELISA更好的相对灵敏度(97%比93%)和特异性(100%和97%)。更高的灵敏度将IDscreen测试的分析灵敏度提高了10倍。与总体良好的ELISA结果相反,与血液白细胞沉淀中的分子检测相比,乳细胞沉淀上的qPCR缺乏灵敏度(81%)和特异性(88%)。我们的结果表明,血清学比qPCR更适合于SRLV诊断,而且牛奶可能代表了一个有趣的矩阵,可用于初步评估牛群的感染状况。但是,血清仍然是控制程序的首选样本,在该程序中,识别具有最高敏感性的阳性动物很重要。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号