Pathomorphological findings of Mortellaro disease in dairy cattle

Abstract

Mortellaro disease is an infection caused by mostly spirochete bacteria in dairy cows, sheep, and goats. The aim of the present study was to define to Mortellaro disease pathomorphologically and immunohistochemically and investigate whether cell-cell adhesion connections are lost in cell proliferation. Tissue samples were collected from underfoots of Holstein (n: 6) and Swiss Brown (n: 15) dairy cattle. The sections were stained with hematoxylin-eosin (H&E) and Warthin-Starry (WS) for isolation of spirochetes histopathologically and with β-catenin and PCNA primary antibodies immunohistochemically. Histopathologically, number of the cells in the stratum spinosum layer increased excessively, and it gave finger-like extensions to the dermis. Black stained spirochetes were detected among enlarged keratinocytes and inflammatory cells in WS staining. β-catenin was strongly positive in the cell membranes of epithelial cells in all slides. PCNA also gave positive reaction moderately (n: 18) and strongly (n: 3) in nuclei of epithelial cells. It was observed that β-catenin cell-cell adhesion connections did not impair in the disease, so this is thought to positively affect the prognosis of the disease. The high expression of PCNA showed that the mitotic activity was high and explained the formation of wart-like. As a result, while the disease does not have a poor prognosis, the disease has a negative economic impact, and the economical results of this disease might be much greater than the treatment costs. It is still seen in our country and causes in loss of yield for the economy of country.

Keywords

• dairy cattle
• digital dermatitis
• immunohistochemistry
• Mortellaro disease
• pathomorphology

References

1. Ahmad B, Asif M, Ali A, et al (2020): Expression of Ki-67 and Βeta-Catenin in pseudoepitheliomatous hyperplasia and squamous cell carcinoma in oral mucosal biopsies: an immunohistochemical study. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 21, 157-161.
2. Akin I, Akin T (2018): Economic impact of digital dermatitis treatment on a dairy farm: an application of the break-even analysis. Cienc Rural, 48, 1-8.
3. Akköse M, İzci C (2017): Koyun ve keçilerde digital dermatitis. Atatürk Üniversitesi Vet Bil Derg, 12, 99-110.
4. Angel JW, Crosby-Durrani HE, Duncan JS, et al (2015): Histopathological characterization of the lesions of contagious ovine digital dermatitis and immunolabelling of Treponema-like organisms. J Comp Pathol, 153, 212-226.
5. Blowey RW, Sharp MW (1988): Digital dermatitis in dairy cattle. Vet Rec, 122, 505-508.
6. Bruijnis MRN, Hogeveen H, Stassen EN (2010): Assessing economic consequences of foot disorders in dairy cattle using a dynamic stochastic simulation model. J Dairy Sci, 93, 2419-2432.
7. Bui T, Schade B, Cardiff RD, et al (2017): β-Catenin haploinsufficiency promotes mammary tumorigenesis in an ErbB2-positive basal breast cancer model. PNAS, 114, E707-E716.
8. Clegg SR, Sullivan LE, Bell J, et al (2014): The expanding host range of digital dermatitis treponemes. 55-56. In: Proceedings of the Cattle Lameness Conference, Sixways, Worcester, UK.

9. Cruz CE, Pescador CA, Nakajima Y, et al (2005): Immunopathological investigations on bovine digital epidermitis. Vet Rec, 157, 834-840.
10. Davies IH, Naylor RD, Martin PK (1999): Severe ovine foot disease. Vet Rec, 145, 646.
11. De Montpréville VT, Lacroix L, Rouleau E, et al (2020): Non-small cell lung carcinomas with CTNNB1 (beta-catenin) mutations: A clinicopathological study of 26 cases. Ann Diagn Pathol, 46, 151522.
12. Demirkan İ (1997): Mortellaro hastalığı (digital dermatitis): genel perspektif. Kafkas Univ Vet Fak Derg, 3, 123-125.
13. Demirkan I, Erdoğan M, Çevik Demirkan A, et al (2018): Isolation and identification of Treponema pedis and Treponema phagedenis-like organisms from bovine digital dermatitis lesions found in dairy cattle in Turkey. J Dairy Sci, 101, 10317-10326.
14. Dopfer D, Koopmans A, Meijer FA, et al (1997): Histological and bacteriological evaluation of digital dermatitis in cattle, with special reference to spirochaetes and Campylobacter faecalis. Vet Rec, 140, 620-623.
15. Durgun T, İstek Ö (2004): Digital dermatitis in the cows. Fırat Üniversitesi Doğu Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2, 35-38.
16. Evans NJ, Murray RD, Carter SD (2016): Bovine digital dermatitis: current concepts from laboratory to farm. Vet J, 211, 3-13.
17. Fu X, Zhu X, Qin F, et al (2018): Linc00210 drives Wnt/β-catenin signaling activation and liver tumor progression through CTNNBIP1-dependent manner. Mol Cancer, 17, 73.
18. Gao C, Wang Y, Broaddus R, et al (2018): Exon 3 mutations of CTNNB1 drive tumorigenesis: a review. Oncotarget, 9, 5492-5508.
19. Görgül OS, Kahraman MM, Çeçen G, et al (2002): Sığırlarda digital ve interdigital dermatitis’lerde klinik tanı, sağaltım ve histopatolojik bulgular. J Res Vet Med, 21, 115-124.
20. Hoffman A (2012): Footbaths for the treatment or control of hairy heel warts (digital dermatitis) in dairy herds: summary of seven studies. Washington State University Veterinary Medicine Extension: Washington State University.
21. Luna GL (1968): Manual of Histologic Staining Methods of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology. McGraw Hill Book Co, New York.
22. Middelveen MJ, Burugu D, Poruri A, et al (2013): Association of spirochetal infection with Morgellons disease. F1000Research, 2, 25.
23. Naryzhny SN (2008): Proliferating cell nuclear antigen: a proteomics view. Cell Mol Life Sci, 65, 3789-3808.
24. Nowrouzian I (1994): Risk factors in the development of digital dermatitis in dairies in Tehran, Iran. Proc Int Symp Dis Ruminant Digit, 8, 155.
25. Palmer MA, O’Connell NE (2015): Digital dermatitis in dairy cows: a review of risk factors and potential sources of between-animal variation in susceptibility. Animals, 5, 512-535.
26. Pignatti E, Sining L, Yuchi Y, et al (2020): Beta-Catenin causes adrenal hyperplasia by blocking zonal transdifferentiation. Cell Rep, 31, 107524.
27. Read DH, Walker RL (1998): Papillomatous digital dermatitis (footwarts) in california dairy cattle: clinical and gross pathologic findings. J Vet Diagn Invest, 10, 67-76.
28. Refaai W, Ducatelle R, Geldhof P, et al (2013): Digital dermatitis in cattle is associated with an excessive innate immune response triggered by the keratinocytes. BMC Vet Res, 9, 193.
29. Shearer JK, Amstel S van (2000): Lameness in Dairy Cattle. 1-12. In: Proceedings from 2000 Kentucky Dairy Conference, USA.
30. Shiizaki K, Kido K, Mizuta Y (2019): Insight into the relationship between arylhydrocarbon receptor and β-catenin in human colon cancer cells. PLoS ONE, 1, 1-21.
31. Strzalka W, Ziemienowicz A (2011): Proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA): a key factor in DNA replication and cell cycle regulation. Ann Bot, 107, 1127-1140.
32. Sullivan LE, Evans NJ, Clegg SR, et al (2014): Digital dermatitis treponemes associated with a severe foot disease in dairy goats. Vet Rec, 176, 283.
33. Terzioğlu G, Keskin AÜ, Yanıkkaya Demirel G (2013): Hücre proliferasyonu ölçüm yöntemleri ve çeşitli ticari proliferasyon kitlerinin karşılaştırılması. Turk J Immunol, 1, 74-89.
34. Wilson-Welder JH, Alt DP, Nally JE (2015): Digital dermatitis in cattle: current bacterial and immunological findings. Animals, 5, 1114-1135.