Development and field evaluation of an ELISA to differentiate Anaplasma marginale–infected from A. centrale–vaccinated cattle

1Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Immunization of calves with Anaplasma centrale is used to prevent acute anaplasmosis caused by A. marginale. Natural and vaccine-acquired immunity is detected through serologic tests based primarily on A. marginale recombinant major surface protein 5 (MSP5m) because it has 91% identity with MSP5 from A. centrale (MSP5c). We developed a displacement, double-antigen, sandwich ELISA (ddasELISA) to detect antibodies against A. marginale or A. centrale. For ddasELISA validation, we analyzed serum samples positive for antibodies against Anaplasma spp. from cattle naturally infected with A. marginale (n = 300) or vaccinated with A. centrale (n = 255). Species-specific nested PCR (nPCR) assays were used to confirm infection. The optical density (OD) values obtained from antibodies directed at unique epitopes of A. marginale (ODAm) or A. centrale (ODAc) were used in the formula ODAm/ODAc. If the derived ratio was > 0.38, the serum sample was considered positive for antibodies against A. marginale, with 98.9% sensitivity and 98.0% specificity. In a field evaluation, we analyzed 702 Anaplasma spp. antibody–positive serum samples from 34 herds by ddasELISA and nPCR; 571 were classified by ddasELISA as A. marginale–infected or A. centrale–vaccinated, with 84% agreement (κ = 0.70) between ddasELISA and nPCR. Our results indicate that ddasELISA could be used as a cost-effective alternative to molecular techniques to confirm infection with A. marginale in countries in which prevention is based on vaccination with A. centrale.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bellezze, J., Thompson, C. S., Bosio, A. S., Torioni, S. M., & Primo, M. E. (2023). Development and field evaluation of an ELISA to differentiate Anaplasma marginale–infected from A. centrale–vaccinated cattle. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation, 35(2), 204–208. https://doi.org/10.1177/10406387231152472

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free