Comparison of Three Decontamination Methods for Mycobacterium Bovis Isolation

Overview

Journal Braz J Microbiol

Specialty Microbiology

Date 2013 Sep 14

PMID 24031209

Citations 13

Authors

Simone Rodrigues Ambrosio

Eugenia Marcia de Deus Oliveira

Cesar Alejandro Rosales Rodriguez

Jose Soares Ferreira Neto

Marcos Amaku

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

SIXTY SAMPLES OF TISSUE FRAGMENTS WITH LESIONS SUGGESTIVE OF TUBERCULOSIS FROM BOVINE ABATTOIRS, KEPT IN SATURATED SOLUTION OF SODIUM BORATE, WERE SUBJECTED TO FOUR TREATMENTS: 4% NaOH (Petroff Method), 12 % H2SO4 and 1.5% HPC (1-Hexadecylpyridinium Chloride) decontamination, and physiological saline solution (control). The HPC method showed the lowest contamination rate (3%) when compared to control (88%, p<0.001), NaOH (33%, p<0.001) and H2SO4 (21.7%, p<0.002). Regarding the isolation success, the HPC method was better (40%) than the control (3%, p<0.001), NaOH (13%, p=0.001) and H2SO4 (1.7%, p<0.001) methods. These results indicate that HPC is an alternative to the Petroff method.

Citing Articles

Bovine brucellosis and tuberculosis at a livestock-wildlife interface in Zimbabwe: A nexus for amplification of a zoonosis or a myth?.

Matope G, Gadaga M, Bhebhe B, Tshabalala P, Makaya P Vet Med Sci. 2023; 9(3):1327-1337.

PMID: 36723830 PMC: 10188082. DOI: 10.1002/vms3.1084.

Genomic analysis of variant strains isolated from bovine in the state of Mato Grosso, Brazil.

Dos Anjos T, Castro V, Machado Filho E, Suffys P, Magdinier Gomes H, Duarte R Front Vet Sci. 2022; 9:1006090.

PMID: 36467663 PMC: 9709292. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2022.1006090.

Genotypic Characterization of Isolates From Dairy Cattle Diagnosed With Clinical Tuberculosis.

de Melo E, Magdinier Gomes H, Suffys P, Lopes M, Teixeira R, Dos Santos I Front Vet Sci. 2021; 8:747226.

PMID: 34708105 PMC: 8542897. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2021.747226.

Isolation of Mycobacterium avium and other nontuberculous mycobacteria in chickens and captive birds in peninsular Malaysia.

Sattar A, Zakaria Z, Abu J, Aziz S, Rojas-Ponce G BMC Vet Res. 2021; 17(1):13.

PMID: 33413380 PMC: 7791791. DOI: 10.1186/s12917-020-02695-8.

Genetic evaluation of Mycobacteriumbovis isolates with MIRU-VNTR and spoligotyping.

Tuzcu N, Koksal F Turk J Med Sci. 2020; 50(8):2017-2023.

PMID: 32599971 PMC: 7775703. DOI: 10.3906/sag-1910-138.

References

Ellsworth S, Kirkbride C, Johnson D . Excretion of Mycobacaterium avium from lesions in the intestine and tonsils of infected swine. Am J Vet Res. 1980; 41(9):1526-30. View

Jorgensen J . An improved medium for culture of Mycobacterium paratuberculosis from bovine faeces. Acta Vet Scand. 1982; 23(3):325-35. PMC: 8295813. View

Claxton P, Eamens G, Mylrea P . Laboratory diagnosis of bovine tuberculosis. Aust Vet J. 1979; 55(11):514-20. DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-0813.1979.tb07013.x. View

Corner L . Post mortem diagnosis of Mycobacterium bovis infection in cattle. Vet Microbiol. 1994; 40(1-2):53-63. DOI: 10.1016/0378-1135(94)90046-9. View

Brown W, Hernandez De Anda J . Tuberculosis in adult beef cattle of Mexican origin shipped direct-to-slaughter into Texas. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1998; 212(4):557-9. View