Non-specific seroreactions against<i>Brucella abortus</i>in ruminants in New Zealand and the presence of<i>Yersinia enterocolitica</i>0:9

Hilbink, F.; Sg, Fenwick; Ej, Thompson; Kittelberger, Reinhold; Penrose, M.; Gp, Ross

doi:10.1080/00480169.1995.35884

Cited by 21 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is worthy to note that it is only since the early nineteen-nineties that YO9 has been regularly isolated in cattle in Europe [42], but also in other parts of the world including New Zealand [44]. Although YO9 infections do not seem to be associated with clinical signs in cattle, they induce what has been called "False Positive Serological Reactions" (FPSR) in brucellosis tests.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

From the discovery of the Malta fever?s agent to the discovery of a marine mammal reservoir, brucellosis has continuously been a re-emerging zoonosis

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Brucellosis is not a sustainable disease in humans. The source of human infection always resides in domestic or wild animal reservoirs. The routes of infection are multiple: foodborne, occupational or recreational, linked to travel and even to bioterrorism. New Brucella strains or species may emerge and existing Brucella species adapt to changing social, cultural, travel and agricultural environment. Brucella melitensis is the most important zoonotic agent, followed by Brucella abortus and Brucella suis. This correlates with the fact that worldwide, the control of bovine brucellosis (due to B. abortus) has been achieved to a greater extent than the control of sheep and goat brucellosis (due to B. melitensis), these latter species being the most important domestic animals in many developing countries. The long duration and high cost of treatment of human brucellosis reduces the efficacy of the therapy. There is no human vaccine for brucellosis and the occurrence of brucellosis is directly linked to the status of animal brucellosis in a region. In this context, the Word Health Organization has defined the development of a human vaccine, besides the implementation of control and eradication programs in animals, as a high priority. The pathogenicity for humans of B. suis biovars 1, 3 and 4 is well established, whereas B. suis biovar 2 seems to be less pathogenic. Indeed, although hunters and pig farmers have repeatably experienced infectious contact with B. suis biovar 2 (found in wild boar and outdoor-rearing pigs in Europe), isolation of B. suis biovar 2 from human samples have only been seldom reported. Marine mammal brucellosis, due to two new proposed Brucella species i.e. B. cetaceae and B. pinnipediae, represents a new zoonotic threat but the pathogenicity for humans of the different Brucella species found in cetaceans and pinnipeds still has to be clearly established.Brucella / animal and human brucellosis / zoonoses / domestic and wildlife reservoir

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

From the discovery of the Malta fever?s agent to the discovery of a marine mammal reservoir, brucellosis has continuously been a re-emerging zoonosis

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(n = 2,544) using the buffered acidified plate antigen (BAPA) test and reagents from USDA National Veterinary Services Laboratory, Ames, IA according to USDA Uniform Methods and Requirements [57]. As with the other diagnostic tests, the BAPA has not been validated in deer, and false positive results due to cross-reactivity with other pathogens, such as Yersinia enterocolitica O:9 have been observed [58], [59].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Serosurveillance for Livestock Pathogens in Free-Ranging Mule Deer (Odocoileus hemionus)

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Routine disease surveillance has been conducted for decades in mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) in California for pathogens shared between wildlife and domestic ruminants that may have implications for the animal production industry and wildlife health. Deer sampled from 1990 to 2007 (n = 2,619) were tested for exposure to six pathogens: bluetongue virus (BTV), epizootic hemorrhagic disease virus (EHDV), bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV), Leptospira spp., Anaplasma spp. and Brucella spp. We evaluated the relationship between exposure to these pathogens and demographic risk factors to identify broad patterns in seroprevalence across a large temporal and spatial scale. The overall seroprevalence for the entire study period was 13.4% for BTV, 16.8% for EHDV, 17.1% for BVDV, 6.5% for Leptospira spp., 0.2% for Brucella spp., and 17% for Anaplasma spp. Antibodies against BTV and EHDV were most prevalent in the deer populations of southern California. Antibodies against Leptospira spp. and Anaplasma spp. were most prevalent in coastal and central northern California whereas antibodies against BVDV were most prevalent in central-eastern and northeastern California. The overall seroprevalence for Anaplasma spp. was slightly lower than detected in previous studies. North and central eastern California contains large tracts of federal land grazed by livestock; therefore, possible contact between deer and livestock could explain the high BVDV seroprevalence found in these areas. Findings from this study will help to establish baseline values for future comparisons of pathogen exposure in deer, inform on long-term trends in deer population health and provide relevant information on the distribution of diseases that are shared between wildlife and livestock.

show abstract

“…One of the most important problems which should be always taken into account is the possibility of cross reactions between Brucella sp. and Y. enterocolitica O:9, which are difficult to distinguish from specific anti-Brucella reactions (6,9,14,16,20,23). The study of Szulowski et al (19) presents that each year, in Poland, a very limited number of cattle is classified as positive for brucellosis and slaughtered, but Brucella sp.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genotypic virulence markers of Yersinia enterocolitica O:9 isolated from pigs and wild boars serologically positive and negative for brucellosis

Weiner

Kubajka

Szulowski

et al. 2014

Bulletin of the Veterinary Institute in Pulawy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper concerns molecular study on pathogenicity markers of fourteen Y. enterocolitica O:9 isolated from pigs in which initially positive serological reactions for brucellosis were observed (n = 41), healthy pigs, which were brucellosis-negative (n = 258), and wild boars serologically negative for brucellosis (n = 209). PCR identification proved that all isolates were ail, ystA-and myfA-positive. The plasmid encoding yadA marker was detected in nine isolates that originated from pigs serologically positive or negative for brucellosis, and from one isolate of wild boar origin. Furthermore, none of the examined isolates was ystB-positive. Results of the investigations indicate that the Y. enterocolitica O:9 isolates from pigs or wild boars, regardless of whether they were serologically positive or negative for brucellosis, may also be potentially pathogenic for humans, due to the presence of chromosomal and plasmid encoded molecular markers.

show abstract

Non-specific seroreactions againstBrucella abortusin ruminants in New Zealand and the presence ofYersinia enterocolitica0:9

Cited by 21 publications

References 6 publications

From the discovery of the Malta fever?s agent to the discovery of a marine mammal reservoir, brucellosis has continuously been a re-emerging zoonosis

From the discovery of the Malta fever?s agent to the discovery of a marine mammal reservoir, brucellosis has continuously been a re-emerging zoonosis

Serosurveillance for Livestock Pathogens in Free-Ranging Mule Deer (Odocoileus hemionus)

Genotypic virulence markers of Yersinia enterocolitica O:9 isolated from pigs and wild boars serologically positive and negative for brucellosis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About