» Articles » PMID: 35681807

Detection of Low MAP Shedder Prevalence in Large Free-Stall Dairy Herds by Repeated Testing of Environmental Samples and Pooled Milk Samples

Overview
Journal Animals (Basel)
Date 2022 Jun 10
PMID 35681807
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

An easy-to-use and affordable surveillance system is crucial for paratuberculosis control. The use of environmental samples and milk pools has been proven to be effective for the detection of subsp. (MAP)-infected herds, but not for monitoring dairy herds certified as MAP non-suspect. We aimed to evaluate methods for the repeated testing of large dairy herds with a very low prevalence of MAP shedders, using different sets of environmental samples or pooled milk samples, collected monthly over a period of one year in 36 herds with known MAP shedder prevalence. Environmental samples were analyzed by bacterial culture and fecal PCR, and pools of 25 and 50 individual milk samples were analyzed by ELISA for MAP-specific antibodies. We estimated the cumulative sensitivity and specificity for up to twelve sampling events by adapting a Bayesian latent class model and taking into account the between- and within-test correlation. Our study revealed that at least seven repeated samplings of feces from the barn environment are necessary to achieve a sensitivity of 95% in herds with a within-herd shedder prevalence of at least 2%. The detection of herds with a prevalence of less than 2% is more challenging and, in addition to numerous repetitions, requires a combination of different samples.

Citing Articles

Enhancing Inner Area Revaluation Through Optional Control Programmes for Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis and Ruminant Paratuberculosis Potentially Linked to Crohn's Disease in Humans.

Mazzeo A, Rossi N, Di Chiro V, Maiuro L, Rosati S, Giorgione S Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2025; 21(12.

PMID: 39767436 PMC: 11675313. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph21121595.


Progress in Paratuberculosis Control Programmes for Dairy Herds.

Weber M, Kelton D, Eisenberg S, Donat K Animals (Basel). 2024; 14(7).

PMID: 38612366 PMC: 11010894. DOI: 10.3390/ani14071127.


subsp. in Different Environmental Samples from a Dairy Goat Barn-Implications for Sampling Strategies for Paratuberculosis Diagnostic and Prevention.

Pickrodt C, Donat K, Moog U, Kohler H Animals (Basel). 2023; 13(10).

PMID: 37238116 PMC: 10215105. DOI: 10.3390/ani13101688.

References
1.
Tavornpanich S, Munoz-Zanzi C, Wells S, Raizman E, Carpenter T, Johnson W . Simulation model for evaluation of testing strategies for detection of paratuberculosis in midwestern US dairy herds. Prev Vet Med. 2007; 83(1):65-82. DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2007.06.010. View

2.
Lavers C, McKenna S, Dohoo I, Barkema H, Keefe G . Evaluation of environmental fecal culture for Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis detection in dairy herds and association with apparent within-herd prevalence. Can Vet J. 2013; 54(11):1053-60. PMC: 3801281. View

3.
Collins M, Wells S, Petrini K, Collins J, Schultz R, Whitlock R . Evaluation of five antibody detection tests for diagnosis of bovine paratuberculosis. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol. 2005; 12(6):685-92. PMC: 1151972. DOI: 10.1128/CDLI.12.6.685-692.2005. View

4.
Whitlock R, Buergelt C . Preclinical and clinical manifestations of paratuberculosis (including pathology). Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 1996; 12(2):345-56. DOI: 10.1016/s0749-0720(15)30410-2. View

5.
Kudahl A, Nielsen S . Effect of paratuberculosis on slaughter weight and slaughter value of dairy cows. J Dairy Sci. 2009; 92(9):4340-6. DOI: 10.3168/jds.2009-2039. View