Comparative study for the detection of antibodies to Neospora caninum in milk and sera in dairy cattle in southern Romania
- 89 Downloads
The study aimed to assess the within-herd Neospora caninum exposure in dairy cattle in southern Romania, based on the detection of specific antibodies in milk and serum. A total of 104 paired samples of milk and serum were collected from four dairy farms. Individual samples were analyzed for N. caninum antibodies by ELISA: IDEXX Neospora Ab (Idx) (three farms: A, B, C; n = 60) and ID-VET Lab (Idv) (farm D; n = 44). Additionally, four pooled milk samples, one per each farm (A, B, C) and a composed one (A+B+C), were analyzed with Idx ELISA. Optimized cut-off values for milk samples were determined by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, with serum results considered as true status. The agreement was expressed by K values. The overall seroprevalence of N. caninum infection was 45% in the farms tested by Idx ELISA and 56.8% in the farm tested by Idv ELISA. A good agreement between serum and milk was obtained for both ELISA kits (K = 0.72 and 0.77, respectively). The specificity and sensitivity at optimized cut-off of S/P>0.704 for Idx and S/P%>7.966% for Idv were 100% and 70.37% for Idx and 89.47% and 88% for Idv. Testing pooled milk samples, there were identified as N. caninum positive the dairy farms with a 15% or higher within-herd seroprevalence at the cut-off value of S/P>0.51. This is the first study in Romania in which milk samples were tested to determine the N. caninum infection status in dairy farms, providing a base for further researches.
KeywordsCattle Neospora caninum IgG antibodies serum milk Romania
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Altman D.G. 1991. Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman and Hall, London.Google Scholar
- Conraths J., Gottstein B. 2007. Neosporosis: General considerations. In: (Eds. L.M. Ortega-Mora, B. Gottstein, F.J. Conraths and D. Buxton) Protozoal abortion in farm ruminants. CAB International, Wallingford, 42–46.Google Scholar
- Gavrea R.R., Cozma V. 2010. Seroprevalence of Neospora caninum in cows with reproductive failure in Center and Northwest of Romania. Sciencia Parasitologica, 11, 67–70.Google Scholar
- Moore D.P., Pérez A., Agliano S., Brace M., Cantón G., Cano D., Leunda M.R., Odeón A.C., Odriozola E., Campero C.M. 2009. Risk factors associated with Neospora caninum infections in cattle in Argentina. Veterinary Parasitology, 161, 122–125. DOI: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2009.01.003.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wapenaar W., Barkema H.W., O’Handley R.M., Bartels C.J. 2007. Use of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in bulk milk to estimate the prevalence of Neospora caninum on dairy farms in Prince Edward Island, Canada. Canadian Veterinary Journal, 48, 493–499.Google Scholar
- Wu J.T.Y., Dreger S., Chow E.Y.W., Bowlby E.E. 2002. Validation of 2 commercial Neospora caninum enzyme linked immunosorbent assays. Canadian Journal for Veterinary Research, 66, 264–271.Google Scholar