Differentiation of Bovine Tuberculosis and Paratuberculosis Infections with Antemortem Diagnostic Methods

Öz

In this study, based on the results of tuberculin skin tests (Bovine and Avian PPD) used in the antemortem diagnosis and differentiation of Bovine Tuberculosis, the animals in the farms with suspected Tuberculosis were serologically examined to diagnose Paratuberculosis infection and fecal bacterioscopy was performed. In addition, it was aimed to obtain data that will contribute to the eradication studies of Bovine Tuberculosis disease by comparing the antemortem diagnostic methods of Bovine Tuberculosis disease, which is endemic in Türkiye and by determining the sensitivity and specificity values of the interferon gamma (IFN-γ) test. In this context, intradermal tuberculin test was applied to 423 cattle with suspected Tuberculosis in a total of 5 dairy cattle farms, one each from Çankırı, Çorum, Ankara, Eskişehir and Konya regions, and this test was determined as the gold standard method and the sensitivity and specificity of the IFN-γ test were determined as 86% and 97%, respectively. For the diagnosis of Paratuberculosis infection, antibody ELISA, fecal bacterioscopy and IFN-γ ELISA were performed on these animals and the prevalence of these tests were 10.4%, 5.44% and 4.96% respectively and 4 (0.95%) of the cattle were positive for each of the diagnostic methods for Map infection. As a result, it was concluded that IFN-γ test, which gives similar results to intradermal tuberculin test results, can also be used in the antemortem diagnosis of Bovine Tuberculosis. Also, in the comparative intradermal tuberculin test for the diagnosis of Tuberculosis infection, avian PPD positive animals were found to play a decisive role in the detection of nonspecific reactions or Paratuberculosis infected animals, supported by other tests used for the diagnosis of Paratuberculosis.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Cattle
• ELISA
• IFN-γ test
• Mycobacterium bovis
• Paratuberculosis

Sığır Tüberküloz ve Paratüberküloz Enfeksiyonlarının Antemortem Tanı Yöntemleriyle Ayrımı

Öz

Bu araştırmada, Tüberküloz şüpheli işletmelerde bulunan hayvanlara, Sığır Tüberkülozunun antemortem tanı ve ayrımında kullanılan tüberkülin deri testleri (PPD bovine ve avian) sonuçlarından yola çıkılarak, Paratüberküloz enfeksiyonu teşhisi koymak için serolojik olarak incelendi ve fekal bakteriyoskopi yapıldı. Ayrıca Türkiye’de endemik olarak görülen Sığır Tüberküloz hastalığının antemortem tanı yöntemleri karşılaştırılıp, interferon gama (IFN-γ) testinin sensitivite ve spesifite değerleri belirlenerek Sığır Tüberküloz hastalığının eradikasyon çalışmalarına katkı sağlayacak verilerin elde edilmesi amaçlandı. Bu kapsamda Çankırı, Çorum, Ankara, Eskişehir ve Konya bölgelerinden birer adet olmak üzere toplam 5 süt sığırcılığı işletmesinde Tüberküloz şüphesi olan 423 sığıra intradermal tüberkülin testi uygulandı ve bu test altın standart metot olarak belirlenerek, IFN-γ testinin sensitivitesi % 86, spesifitesi % 97 olarak belirlendi. Paratüberküloz enfeksiyonunun tanısı için bu hayvanlara antikor ELISA , fekal bakteriyoskopi ve IFN-γ ELISA yapıldı ve bu testlerin prevalansları sırasıyla % 10,4, % 5,44 ve % 4,96 bulundu ve sığırlardan 4 (%0,95)’ü Map enfeksiyonu tanı yöntemlerinin her birine pozitif sonuç verdi. Sonuç olarak, intradermal tüberkülin testi sonuçlarına benzer sonuçlar veren IFN-γ testinin Sığır Tüberkülozu'nun antemortem tanısında kullanılabileceği sonucuna varıldı. Ayrıca Tüberküloz enfeksiyonunun tanısı için yapılan karşılaştırmalı intradermal tüberkülin testinde PPD aviana pozitif reaksiyon veren hayvanların Paratüberküloz tanısı için kullanılan diğer testlerle desteklenerek nonspesifik reaksiyonların ortaya çıkarılmasında ya da PTB enfekte hayvanların tespit edilmesinde belirleyici rol oynadığı görüldü.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• ELISA
• IFN-γ test
• Mycobacterium bovis
• Paratüberküloz
• Sığır

Kaynakça

1. Ahir P, Filia G, Mahajan V, Leishangthem G , Rai ST, Singh A, (2016). Diagnosis of Bovine Tuberculosis in Lactating Cattle and Buffaloes by Comparative Intradermal Tuberculin Test and Bovine Gamma-Interferon Immunoassay. J Anim Res. 6,1069. doi: 10.5958/227 7 -940X.2016.00157.1.
2. Al Anbagi NA, Salman SS, (2022). Prevalence of paratuberculosis determined by serum interferon, interleukin ELISA and feces in buffalo (Iraq). Prevalence. 26(1), 79-85.
3. Alvarez J, De Juan L, Bezos J, Romero B, Saez JL, Marques S, Dominguez C, Mınguez O, Fernandez-Mardomıngo B, Mateos A, Dominguez L, Aranaz A, (2009). Effect of paratuberculosis on the diagnosis of bovine tuberculosis in a cattle herd with a mixed infection using interferon-gamma detection assay. Vet Microbiol. 135(3-4), 389-393. doi: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2008.09.060.
4. Barratt AS, Arnoult MH, Ahmadi BV, Rich KM, Gunn GJ, Stott AW, (2018). A framework for estimating society’s economic welfare following the introduction of an animal disease: the case of Johne’s disease, PLoS One. 13(6):Article ID e0198436. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202253.
5. Borum AE, Çatık S, Mecitoğlu Z, Demir G, Ülgen M, Şentürk S, (2014). ELISA ve fekal bakteriyoskopi ile sığırlarda Paratuberküloz prevalansının belirlenmesi. Etlik Vet Mikrobiyol Derg. 25(1), 1-5.
6. Camanes G, Joly A, Fourichon C, Ben Romdhane R, Ezanno P, (2018). Control measures to prevent the increase of paratuberculosis prevalence in dairy cattle herds: an individual-based modelling approach, Vet Res. 49(1), 60. doi: 10.1186/s13567-018-0557-3.
7. Corneli S, Di Paolo A, Vitale N, Torricellı M, Petrucci L, Sebastiani C, Ciullo M, Curcio L, Biagetti M, Papa P, Costarelli S, Cagiola M, Dondo A, Mazzone P, (2021). Early Detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis Infected Cattle: Use of Experimental Johnins and Innovative Interferon-Gamma Test Interpretative Criteria. Front Vet Sci. 8:638890. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2021.638890.
8. Cruz-Estupıinan SE, Lancheros Buitrago DJ, Bulla-Castaneda DM, Garcia Corredor DJ, Pulido-Medellın MO, (2022). Serological diagnosis and risk factors associated with bovine paratuberculosis in the municipality of Tuta, Colombia. Iran J Vet Sci Technol. 14(2), 38-46. doı:10.22067/ijvst.2022.74879.1114.

9. Çakır Ş, (2021). Sığır Tüberkülozunun Enfeksiyon Dinamiklerine Dayalı Epidemiyolojik Model Geliştirme. Doktota Tezi. Kırıkkale Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Kırıkkale.
10. De Lacerda Roberto JP, Limeira CH, Da Costa Barnabe NN, Soares RR, Silva MLCR, De Barros Gomes AA, Dos SantoS Higino SS, DE Azevedo SS, Alves CJ, (2021). Antibody detection and molecular analysis for Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis (MAP) in goat milk: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Res Vet Sci. 135, 72-77. doi: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2021.01.004
11. Dieguez FJ, Gonzalez AM, Menendez S, Vilara MJ, Sanjuana ML, Yus E, Arnai I, (2009). Evaluation of four commercial serum ELISAs for detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis infection in dairy cows. Vet J. 180(2), 2231-235. doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2007.11.004.
12. Eamens G, Marsh I, Plain K, Whittington R, (2015). Australian and New Zealand standard diagnostic test protocols. Paratuberculosis (Johne's disease) Subcommittee on Animal Health Laboratory Standards. Access link: [http://www.agriculture. gov.au/ SiteCollectionDocuments/ animal/ ahl / anzsdpjohnes-disease july-2015. pdf.]. Accessed: 3/10/2022.
13. Elmagzoub WA, Adam NM, Idris SM, Mukhtar ME, AB Delaziz SA, Okuni JB, Ojok L, ABD El Wahed A, Eltayeb E, Gameel AA, Eltom KH, (2020). Seroprevalence of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in Dairy Cattle in Khartoum State, Sudan. Vet Sci. 7(4), 209. doi: 10.3390/vetsci7040209.
14. Eisenberg T, Nesseler A, Sauerwald C, Kling U, Ribe K, Kaim U, Althoff G, Fiege N, Schlez K, Hamann HP, Fawzy A, Moser I, Ribe R, Kraft G, Zschöck M, Menge C, (2016). Mycobacterium tuberculosis exposure of livestock in a German dairy farm: implications for intra vitam diagnosis of bovine tuberculosis in an officially tuberculosis-free country. Epidemiol Infect. 144, 724-731. doi:10.1017/S0950268815001995.
15. Erganiş O, (1993). Veteriner Epidemiyoloji. Ed.: Erganiş O. Sensitivite ve Spesifite Arasındaki İlişki. 1. Baskı. Mimoza Yayıncılık, Konya. S.:57-59.
16. Fujiki A, (2001). TB Bacteriology Examination to Stop TB. In: Fujiki A. (Ed), Direct smear examination. The Research Institute of Tuberculosis, Japan International Cooperation Agency JINNOU Co.7.
17. Garcia AB, Shalloo L, (2015). Invited review: The economic impactand control of paratuberculosis in cattle. Int J Dairy Sci. 98(8), 5019-5039. doi: 10.3168/jds.2014-9241
18. Garvey M, (2018). Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis: a possible causative agent in human morbidity and risk to public health safety, Open Vet J. 8(2), 172-181. doi: 10.4314/ovj.v8i2.10.
19. Gilardoni LR, Paolicchi FA, Mundo SL, (2012). Bovine paratuberculosis: a review of the advantages and disadvantages of different diagnostic tests. Rev Argent Microbiol. 44, 201-215. PMID: 23102470.
20. Gormley E, Doyle MB, Fitzsimons T, McgilL K, Collins JD, (2006). Diagnosis of Mycobacterium bovis infection in cattle by use of the gamma-interferon (Bovigam) assay. Vet Microbiol. 112, 171-179. doi: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2005.11.029
21. Hashem Z, Soliman R, Abd El Aziz M, Badr Y, Aboul-Ella H, (2022). Development of a monoclonal antibodies-based interferon-gamma enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for rapid and accurate diagnosis of bovine tuberculosis. https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-1918522/v1.(Accessed:12/01/2023). doi: 10. 21203/rs.3.rs-1918522/v1.
22. Karatay M, Akyüz E, Gökce G, (2020). Seroprevalence of paratuberculosis in cattle in ardahan region. Kocatepe Vet J. 13(4), 327-331. doi: 10.30607/kvj.741292.
23. Lahuerta-Marin A, Gallagher M, Mcbride S, Skuce R, Menzies F, Mcnair J, Mcdowell SWJ, Byrne AW, (2015). Should they stay, or should they go? Relative future risk of bovine tuberculosis for interferon-gamma test-positive cattle left on farms. Vet Res. 46, 90. doi: 10.1186/s13567-015-0242-8.
24. Lievaart-Peterson K, Luttikholt S, Gonggrijp M, Ruuls R, Ravesloot L, Koets AP, (2019). Mycobacterium avium Subspecies paratuberculosis DNA and Antibodies in Dairy Goat Colostrum and Milk. Vet Sci. 6(4), 96. doi: 10.3390/vetsci6040096.
25. Makav M, Gökçe E, (2013). Kars yöresi sığırlarında subklinik paratuberkülozun seroprevalansı. Kafkas univ Vet Fak Derg. 19(5), 913-916. doi:10.9775/kvfd.2013.8529.
26. Menzies FD, Neill SD, (2000). Cattle-to-cattle transmission of bovine tuberculosis. Vet J. 160, 92-106. doi: 10.1053/tvjl.2000.0482.
27. Mohamed A, (2020). Bovine tuberculosis at the human–livestock–wildlife interface and its control through one health approach in the Ethiopian Somali Pastoralists: A review, One Health, 9:100113. doi: 10.1016/j.onehlt.2019.100113.
28. Mortier RA, Barkema HW, De Buck J, (2015). Susceptibility to and diagnosis of Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis infection in dairy calves: a review. Prev Vet Med. 121(3-4), 189-198. doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2015.08.011.
29. Moyano RD, Romero MA, Colombatti Olivieri MA, Alvarado Pinedo MF, Traveria GE, Romano MI, Alonso MN, (2021). Development and Validation of a Novel ELISA for the Specific Detection of Antibodies against Mycobacterium avium Subspecies paratuberculosis Based on a Chimeric Polyprotein. Vet Med Int. 2021:7336848. doi: 10.1155/2021/7336848.
30. Nielsen SS, (2010). Immune-based diagnosis of paratuberculosis. In: Behr MA, Collins DM. (Eds), Paratuberculosis: organism, disease, control. Oxfordshire Wallingford, UK: CAB International, p: 284-293.
31. Nielsen SS, Toft N, (2008). Ante mortem diagnosis of paratuberculosis: A review of accuracies of ELISA, interferon-γ assay and faecal culture techniques. Vet Microbiol. 129(3-4), 217-235. doi: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2007.12.011.
32. O’hagan MJH, Matthews DI, Laird C, Mcdowell SWJ, (2016). Farmers’ beliefs about bovine tuberculosis control in Northern Ireland. Vet J. 212, 22-26. doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2015. 10.038.
33. OIE, (2022). Mammalian tuberculosis. Terrestrial Manuel. Chapter 3.1.13.
34. OIE, (2021). Paratuberculosis (Johne’s disease). Terrestrial Manuel. Chapter 3.1.16.
35. Ozsvari L, Lang Z, Monostori A, Kostoulas P, Fodor I, (2020). Bayesian estimation of the true prevalence of paratuberculosis in Hungarian dairy cattle herds. Prev Vet Med. 183:105124. doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2020.105124.
36. Öztürk D, Pehlivanoglu F, Tok AA, Gunlu S, Guldali Y, Turutoglu H, (2010a). Sero prevalence of paratuberculosis in the Burdur province (Turkey), in dairy cattle using the enzyme linked immuno sorbent assay (ELISA). Israel J Vet Med. 65, 53-57.
37. Öztürk D, Pehlivanoğlu F, Kale M, Tok AA, Guldali Y, Turutoglu H, (2010b). In Vitro Diagnosis of Bovine Tuberculosis by γ-Interferon Assay. Kafkas Univ Vet Fak Derg. 16(5), 875-878. doi:10.9775/kvfd.2009.1473.
38. Paolicchi A, Zumarraga MJ, Gioffre A, Zamorano P, Morsella C, Verna A, Cataldı A, Alito A, Romano M, (2003). Application of Different Methods for the Diagnosis of Paratuberculosis in a Dairy Cattle Herd in Argentina. J Vet Med B. 50, 20-26. doi: 10.1046/j.1439-0450.2003.00606.x.
39. Praud A, Boschiroli ML, Meyer L, Garin-Bastuji B, Dufour B, (2015). Assessment of the sensitivity of the gamma interferon test and the single intradermal comparative cervical test for the diagnosis of bovine tuberculosis under field conditions. Epidemiol Infect. 143(1), 157-166. doi: 10.1017/S0950268814000338.
40. Radostits O, Gay C, Hinchcli K, Constable P, (2007). Veterinary Medicine, 10th ed.; Saunders: Philadelphia, PA, USA.
41. Resmi Gazete, (2009). Sığır Bovine Tüberkülozu Yönetmeliği. 02 Nisan 2009. Sayı: 27188 Acces link:[https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/200904/20090402 -2.htm].Accessed: 4/6/2022.
42. Resmi Gazete, (1978). Sığır Tüberkülozu Yönetmeliği. 09 Kasım 1978. Sayı: 16458.Acsess link: [https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/arsiv/16458.pdf]. Accessed: 10/09/2022.
43. Sayın Z, (2010). Sığır Tüberkülozunun Farklı Metotlar ile Karşılaştırmalı Teşhisi. Doktora Tezi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Konya.
44. Smith K, Kleynhans L, Warren RM, Goosen WJ, Miller MA, (2021). Cell-mediated immunological biomarkers and their diagnostic application in livestock and wildlife infected with Mycobacterium bovis. Front Immunol. 12:483. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2021. 639605.
45. Stabel JR, Kimura K, Robbe-Austerman S, (2007). Augmentation of secreted and intracellular gamma interferon following Johnin purified protein derivative sensitization of cows naturally infected with Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis. J Vet Diagn Invest. 19:43-51. doi: 10.1177/104063870701900107.
46. Şababoğlu E, (2019). Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis Enfeksiyonu Teşhis Edilen Koyunların Gama-interferon, İnterlöykin-10 ve Neopterin Düzeyleri. Doktora Tezi. Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Burdur.
47. Thomas J, Balseiro A, Gortazar C, Risalde MA, (2021). Diagnosis of tuberculosis in wildlife: a systematic review. Vet Res. 52, 1-23. doi: 10.1186/s13567-020-00881-y.
48. Tütüncü M, Kılıçoğlu Y, Güzel M, Pekmezci D, Gülhan T, (2018). Seropositivity of Mycobacterium paratuberculosis in cattle with chronic diarrhea in the middle black sea region. Atatürk Üniversitesi Vet Bil Derg. 13(1), 1-5. doi: 10.17094/ataunivbd.297128.
49. Vazquez P, Garrido JM, Juste RA, (2013). Specific Antibody and Interferon-Gamma Responses Associated with Immunopathological Forms of Bovine Paratuberculosis in Slaughtered Friesian Cattle. PLoS ONE. 8(5):e64568. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0064568.
50. Vural B, Atala N, Çelebi M, (1995). Sığırlarda Paratüberkülozun Serolojik, Allerjik ve Bakteriyolojik Muayene Yöntemleri ile Mukayeseli Olarak Araştırılması. Etlik Vet Mikrobiyol Derg. 8(1), 19-44.
51. Weber MF, Verhoeff J, Van Schaik G, Van Maanen C, (2009). Evaluation of Ziehl–Neelsen stained faecal smear and ELISA as tools for surveillance of clinical paratuberculosis in cattle in the Netherlands. Prev Vet Med. 92(3), 256-266. doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed. 2009.08.017.
52. Whittington RJ, Begg DJ, De Silva K, Purdie AC, Dhand NK, Plain KM, (2017). Case definition terminology for paratuberculosis (Johne’s disease). BMC Vet Res. 13:328. doi: 10.1186/s12917-017-1254-6.
53. Yıldırım D, Civelek T, (2013). Prevalence of subclinical paratuberculosis in dairy cattle in Uşak Region. Kafkas Univ Vet Fak Derg. 19(1), 121-126. doi: 10.9775/kvfd.2013.7306.