Evaluation of different diagnostic methods for diagnosis of Lumpy skin disease in cows

Abstract

Viral isolation, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), dot blot hybridization (DBH), and indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (iELISA) were used for the diagnosis of lumpy skin disease in clinically infected, fevered, and apparently normal dairy cows. Lumpy skin disease virus (LSDV) was isolated from skin biopsies and blood samples collected from clinically infected cows in percentages of 72% and 20%, respectively. The virus recovered from blood samples collected from fevered cows in percentage of 33.3%. Both PCR and DBH detected viral DNA in 100% of skin biopsies collected from clinically infected cows whereas the detection rates in blood samples collected from clinically infected animals were 100% and 84% using PCR and DBH, respectively. Viral DNA was detected in blood samples collected from fevered cows using PCR and DBH in percentages of 77.8% and 66.6%, respectively. Only 19.1% of blood samples collected from in-contact cows was positive for both of PCR and DBH. Detection rates of antibodies against LSDV using iELISA in serum samples collected from clinically infected and fevered cows were 56% and 11.1%, respectively, whereas all in-contact cows had no antibodies against the virus.

Investigation on the incidence of adverse reactions, viraemia and haematological changes following field immunization of cattle using a live attenuated vaccine against lumpy skin disease

“…This could also indicate either that the attenuated vaccine strain does not enter blood circulation as efficiently as WT LSDV, or a more rapid elimination of the vaccine virus by the host's immune mechanisms. Low LSDV viraemia titres are generally referred in experimental studies with WT strains, where monitoring was performed either by virus isolation in cell cultures (Tuppurainen, ; Irons, Tuppurainen, & Venter, ; Awad, Ibrahim, Mahran, Fararh, & Abdel Moniem, ), or via real‐time PCR (Tuppurainen et al., ). The fact that the vaccine virus was detected in the bloodstream of over half of the sampled animals (17 of 27) indicates a potential for spreading via insect bites; however, the possibility for this event is probably limited, due to the low concentration of the virus.…”

Lumpy Skin Disease: Global and Turkish Perspectives

“…However, laboratory analyses are necessary for definitive diagnosis. Electron microscopy, virus isolation, serological and molecular tests have been used for the laboratory analyses of LSDV [10]. The main problem for LSD diagnosis is the differentiating infected from vaccinated animals as well as to detect subclinical animals.…”

“…Antibodies to LSDV can be detected by VN test after 21 days of infection [9]. Antibodies to LSDV were detected by ELISA in 56% and 11.1% of the clinically infected and fevered cows, respectively [10]. The disadvantageous of serological tests is that vaccinated animals cannot be differentiated from infected animals as well as other poxviruses [9][10][11].…”

“…PCR and real time PCR have been used for molecular detection of LSDV in samples taken from skin lesions, blood, saliva, milk and semen [10,11,[14][15][16][17][18]. Viral DNA can be detected in the skin lesions by PCR for 42 days [9] and 92 days [14] after experimental infection.…”

“…After 1956, LSDV spread more or less to Africa continent as well as Madagascar and remained in Africa until 1986 [23]. It was then spread to Egypt in 1989 and nearly whole country had LSD cases and 1499 deaths were reported [3,10,23] (Figure 3). LSD outbreaks in Turkey started in august 2013 [5], in Kahramanmaras after the outbreaks seen in Lebanon, Jordan and Israel in 2012 [1][2][3].…”