两种虎红平板凝集试验检测羊布鲁氏菌病效果比较
作者:
作者单位:

作者简介:

通讯作者:

基金项目:

国家自然科学基金项目(31602055)


Comparative Analysis on Two Kinds of RBPT Methods for Sheep Brucellosis
Author:
Affiliation:

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
    摘要:

    为比较常规和改良虎红平板凝集试验(RBPT)的羊布鲁氏菌病检测效果,对239份免疫、非免疫场绵羊和阴性绵羊血清进行检测,并通过竞争ELISA试验(cELISA)和试管凝集试验(SAT)进行确诊。结果显示:常规RBPT检测非免疫血清的敏感性为68.85%,特异性为93.55%,与cELISA的符合率为77.17%;检测免疫羊血清的敏感性为75.81%,特异性为73.33%,与cELISA的符合率为75.00%。改良RBPT检测非免疫羊血清的敏感性为91.80%,特异性为70.97%,与cELISA的符合率为84.78%;检测免疫羊血清的敏感性为98.39%,特异性为10%,与cELISA的符合率为69.57%。两种RBPT和cELISA的阴性血清检测结果全部为阴性,符合率为100%。结果表明:改良RBPT法的敏感性要高于常规RBPT法,可以在阳性羊群中筛选到更多抗体效价较低的早期感染动物。但其特异性有一定程度的降低,必须结合SAT、cELISA等特异性高的方法进行确诊。本研究为羊布鲁氏菌病检测方法的选择提供了参考。

    Abstract:

    In order to compare the effect of two kinds of rose bengal plate agglutination test(RBPT)methods for sheep brucellosis,239 serum samples collected from immunized and non-immunized farm and negative sheep were tested and subsequently confirmed by cELISA and serum agglutination test(SAT). The results showed that,for the conventional RBPT,the sensitivity and specificity for non-immunized serum samples were 68.85% and 93.55%,respectively,and the coincidence rate with cELISA was 77.17%;the sensitivity and specificity for immunized serum samples were 75.81% and 73.33%,respectively,and the coincidence rate with cELISA was 75.00%. For the modified RBPT,the sensitivity and specificity for non-immunized serum samples were 91.80% and 70.97%,respectively,and the coincidence rate with cELISA was 84.78%;the sensitivity and specificity for immunized serum samples were 98.39% and 10%,respectively,and the coincidence rate with cELISA was 69.57%. All test results of the above methods for negative serum were negative,with the coincidence rate of 100%. In conclusion,the modified RBPT was more sensitive than the conventional one,and could detect more infected animals at early stage with lower antibody titer from positive sheep population. But its specificity was reduced to a certain extent,so it should be used to confirm a case in combination with SAT,cELISA and other methods with high specificity. Some references were provided for choosing a detection method for sheep brucellosis.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文

董浩,彭小薇,冯宇,原霖,毕一鸣,赵柏林,穆佳毅,左海莉,邹晓娟,王传彬.两种虎红平板凝集试验检测羊布鲁氏菌病效果比较[J].《中国动物检疫》编辑部,2020,37(11):87-90.

复制
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:
  • 最后修改日期:
  • 录用日期:
  • 在线发布日期: 2020-11-02
您是第位访问者
《中国动物检疫》编辑部 ® 2020 版权所有
地址:山东省青岛市南京路369号《中国动物检疫》编辑部 邮编:266032
电话:0532-85623545 0532-85622559 0532-85642906 传真:0532-85621826 鲁ICP备08016398号-3
技术支持:北京勤云科技发展有限公司