Studies on calf diarrhoea in mozambique: Prevalence of bacterial pathogens

48Citations
Citations of this article
59Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The prevalence of diarrhoea in calves was investigated in 8 dairy farms in Mozambique at 4 occasions during 2 consecutive years. A total of 1241 calves up to 6 months of age were reared in the farms, and 63 (5%) of them had signs of diarrhoea. Two farms had an overall higher prevalence (13% and 21%) of diarrhoea. Faecal samples were collected from all diarrhoeal calves (n=63) and from 330 healthy calves and analysed for Salmonella species, Campylobacter jejuni and enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC). Salmonella spp. was isolated in only 2% of all calves. Campylobacter was isolated in 11% of all calves, irrespective of health condition, and was more frequent (25%) in one of the 2 diarrhoeal farms (p=0.001). 80% of the isolates were identified as C. jejuni. No ETEC strains were detected among the 55 tested strains from diarrhoeal calves, but 22/55 (40%) strains from diarrhoeal calves and 14/88 (16%) strains from healthy calves carried the K99 adhesin (p=0.001). 6,757 E. coli isolates were typed with a biochemical fingerprinting method (the PhenePlate™) giving the same E. coli diversity in healthy and diarrhoeal calves. Thus it was concluded: i) the overall prevalence of diarrhoea was low, but 2 farms had a higher prevalence that could be due to an outbreak situation, ii) Salmonella did not seem to be associated with diarrhoea, iii) Campylobacter jejuni was common at one of the 2 diarrhoeal farms and iv) ETEC strains were not found, but K99 antigen was more prevalent in E. coli strains from diarrhoeal calves than from healthy, as well as more prevalent in one diarrhoeal farm.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Achá, S. J., Kühn, I., Jonsson, P., Mbazima, G., Katouli, M., & Möllby, R. (2004). Studies on calf diarrhoea in mozambique: Prevalence of bacterial pathogens. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, 45(1–2), 27–36. https://doi.org/10.1186/1751-0147-45-27

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