Journals / Etlik Veteriner Mikrobiyoloji Dergisi / 1984 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 6-7

Studies on aglutination and agar- gel diffusion test for the detection of antibodies against Brucella ovis in rams.

Koçlarda Aglutinasyon ve Agar- Jel Diffuzyon Yöntemiyle Brucella Ovis Antikorlarının Saptanması Üzerinde Araştırmalar

Pages
41–62
Publication Date
1984-12-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

By agar gel diffusion test, 50 serum gave positive reactions and 155 ıwere negatives from 5 serums of suspicion and from 3 negatives reactions by agglutination tests were positives by agar gel diffussion tests on the otherland one serum sample showed negative reactions by agar gel diffuion test ıwas positive by agglutination test 42 (84) of the pasitives serums ıwere corresponded by both tıwo tests used. it seemed to be a.gar gel diffusion tests more sensitive simplier and economic, a.nd more valid than aglutinin tests for Bruceila ovis.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study ıwas carried out using 205 blood serum of ram collected mainly from Konya, Ankara and Adana proices of the country.
📊
Key Findings & Data:All serums ware examined both by serum aglutination and agar-gel diffusion tests comparisonly Br. ovis By serum aglutination tests 166 serums showed 1/10-1/640 agglutinin titres among them 43 serum !were positives, 156 negatif and 6 suspicion reactions were obtained.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:By agar gel diffusion test, 50 serum gave positive reactions and 155 ıwere negatives from 5 serums of suspicion and from 3 negatives reactions by agglutination tests were positives by agar gel diffussion tests on the otherland one serum sample showed negative reactions by agar gel diffuion test ıwas positive by agglutination test 42 (84) of the pasitives serums ıwere corresponded by both tıwo tests used. it seemed to be a.gar gel diffusion tests more sensitive simplier and economic, a.nd more valid than aglutinin tests for Bruceila ovis.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Koç · Brucella Ovis · Brucella Ovis Antikor Saptanması

Abstract

This study ıwas carried out using 205 blood serum of ram collected mainly from Konya, Ankara and Adana proices of the country. All serums ware examined both by serum aglutination and agar-gel diffusion tests comparisonly Br. ovis By serum aglutination tests 166 serums showed 1/10-1/640 agglutinin titres among them 43 serum !were positives, 156 negatif and 6 suspicion reactions were obtained. By agar gel diffusion test, 50 serum gave positive reactions and 155 ıwere negatives from 5 serums of suspicion and from 3 negatives reactions by agglutination tests were positives by agar gel diffussion tests on the otherland one serum sample showed negative reactions by agar gel diffuion test ıwas positive by agglutination test 42 (84) of the pasitives serums ıwere corresponded by both tıwo tests used. it seemed to be a.gar gel diffusion tests more sensitive simplier and economic, a.nd more valid than aglutinin tests for Bruceila ovis.

Özet

Bu araştırma.da kullanılan 205 koç serumundan 185'i Et ve Balık Kurumu'na, Konya Cihanbeyli kazasından kesime gelen hayvanlardan, 15'i Enstitümüzde deneme hayvanı olarak kullanılan koçlardan ve 5'i de Adana Mercimek Harasından Lôboratuvarımıza muayene için gelen koç serumlarından sağlanmıştır. Bu serumlar aynı zamanda serum aglutinasyon ve agar jel diffuzyon test yöntemiyle Bruceila ovis'e karşı yoklanmış olup serum aglutinasyon testinde 166 serum 1/10-1/640 ara.sında değişen aglutinin titreleri göstermiştir. Bu testte 43 serum pozitif, 6 şüpheli ve 156 serum negatif reaksiyon verirken, Agar jel diffuzyon testinde 50 serum pozitif, 155 serum da negatif sonuç vermiştir. Aglutinasyon testinde şüpheli 5 serum negatif, 3 serum agar jel diffuzyon testinde pozitif reaksiyon vermiştir. Yine agar jel'de negatif olan bir serum aglutinasyonla pozitif sonuç vermiştir. 42 serum iki testte de parelel çalışmış olup uyum yüzde % 84 dür. Buna. göre agar jel diffuzyon testinin daha kesin sonuç vermesi, bu testin duyarlı, basit ve ekonomik oluşuyla serolajik kanıda önemli bir yeri olduğu kanısına varılmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

YUMUŞAK, M. (1984). Studies on aglutination and agar- gel diffusion test for the detection of antibodies against Brucella ovis in rams.. Etlik Veteriner Mikrobiyoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 6-7, 41–62. https://ajindex.com/articles/141169

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Altan, G.G. Jones L.M.• Pietz, D.E. (1975): Lôboratory Tecmigues in Brucellosis. WHO Monograph Series. Second Edition, Geneva
  2. B!berstein, E.L. and Mc Gowan, B. (1958): Epididmitis ·in rams studies ve Lôboratory diagnosis. Cornell. Vet., 48: 31
  3. Biberstein, E.L. Mc Gowan, B., Robinson, E.A. and Harold. D.R. (1962) Epididymitis in rams. Studies on immunity. Cornell. Vet., 52: 214
  4. Buchanan, R.E., Gibbans, N.E. (1975): Bergeys Manuel of Determinative Bacteriology, Eighhh ed!dion. The Willams, Wilkins Company/ Baltimore
  5. Buddle, M.B. and Boyes B.W. (1953): A bruceila mutant oausing genital disease of sheep in Newzealand. Aust. Vet. J.• 29-145
  6. Clapp, K.H., Symons, E.A. and Doolette, J.B. (1955): The application of a complement-Fixastion Test to. The Diagnosis of ovine Bruceilasis Aust. Vet. J., 31: 29
  7. Corbel, M.J., Gill, K.P.W. and Redwood, D.W. (1979): Diagnostic procdure for non-Smooth Bruceila strains. Research sertion Disase of breeding department Central Veterinary Laboratory. New Haw 'Weybridge Surrey
  8. Cox, C., J., Gorried, C.J.R., Naırn, R.C. and Word, H.A. (1977): A Conparasıon of methods for the serological diagnosis of Bruceila ovis infection. Br. Vet J., 133: 442
  9. Doğuer, M. (1961 l: Türkiye'de izole edilen Bruceila suşlarının idantifikasyonlarını. Etlik Vet. Bakt. Enst. Derg. 1: (3): 155
  10. Hall, W.T.K. (1955) Epid!dymitis of rams. Studies 10 skin sensitivity and pathology, Aust. Vet. J. 31: 7
  11. Hughes, K.L. and, Cloxton, P.D (1968): Bruceila ovis infection. An evaluation of microbiological, serological An Clinical methods of diagnosis in the ranı. Aust. Vet. J., 54: 41
  12. Kenedy, P.C., Frazıer, L.M. and Mc Gowan, B. (1956): Epididynıitis in roms: Patohology and Bacteriology, Cornell. Vet., 46: 303
  13. Keogh, J,, Doolette, J.B. and Clapp. K.H. (1958): The ep i dinıiology of ovinel Bruceilasis in soufh, Austiralia. Aust. Vet. J., 34: 412 14· - Lawrence, W.E. (1961): ov!ne. Brucellosis. A rewiew of the disease in sheep nıanifested by ep i jidynıitis and abortion. Brit. Vet. J., 117: 435
  14. Lows, L., Sinınıons, G.C., and Ludford, G.G. (1972 ): Experimental Bruceila ovis infeelian in Ranıs, Aust. Vet. J., 48: 313
  15. Maslarski, N. (1973): Antibodies in the senıinal plasnıa or roms infected with Bruceila ovis. Veterinama Shirka. 70: 13. (Vet. Bull. 3850 abstraktan alınmıştır.
  16. Matthews, T.R. and Trueblood, M.S. (1966 Detection of precipitins against Bru