SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences / 2013 / Cilt: 43 - Sayı: 4

PCR detection of Brucella abortus in cow milk samples collected from Erzurum, Turkey

Tülin ARASOĞLU
Medine GÜLLÜCE
Hakan ÖZKAN
Ahmet ADIGÜZEL
Fikrettin ŞAHİN
Pages
501–508
Publication Date
2013-04-01
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)

Results: The results showed that 273 (81.7%) and 317 (94.9%) out of 334 milk samples were positive for brucellosis, as detected by either both or one of the primer sets used in the present study, respectively.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, we designed and used 2 different type-specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods for the detection of Brucella abortus.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and methods: There were 2 different primer sets (B4/B5 and AF/AR) selected and used for the amplification of 2 different genes that are present in all biovars of Brucella species, including bcsp31, encoding 31-kDa immunogenic cell surface proteins, and omp25, which is known to be one of the virulence factors encoding outer membrane proteins of 26–23 kDa.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results: The results showed that 273 (81.7%) and 317 (94.9%) out of 334 milk samples were positive for brucellosis, as detected by either both or one of the primer sets used in the present study, respectively.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Turk J Med Sci 2013 · 43(4): 501-508. Full text: pdf Other articles published in the same issue: Turk J Med Sci · vol.43

Abstract

In this study, we designed and used 2 different type-specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods for the detection of Brucella abortus. Materials and methods: There were 2 different primer sets (B4/B5 and AF/AR) selected and used for the amplification of 2 different genes that are present in all biovars of Brucella species, including bcsp31, encoding 31-kDa immunogenic cell surface proteins, and omp25, which is known to be one of the virulence factors encoding outer membrane proteins of 26–23 kDa. Results: The results showed that 273 (81.7%) and 317 (94.9%) out of 334 milk samples were positive for brucellosis, as detected by either both or one of the primer sets used in the present study, respectively. The detection limit of PCR assays for Brucella in milk samples was determined as 5 pg DNA for both of the primer sets. Conclusion: These results suggest that the use of the specific PCR assay with the primer sets used in the study is a rapid, reliable, and accurate technique in comparison to traditional and conventional methods for the detection and diagnosis of Brucella spp. in milk samples. Kew words: Brucella abortus, bovine milk, bcsp31-PCR, omp25-PCR

Özet

In this study, we designed and used 2 different type-specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods for the detection of Brucella abortus. Materials and methods: There were 2 different primer sets (B4/B5 and AF/AR) selected and used for the amplification of 2 different genes that are present in all biovars of Brucella species, including bcsp31, encoding 31-kDa immunogenic cell surface proteins, and omp25, which is known to be one of the virulence factors encoding outer membrane proteins of 26–23 kDa. Results: The results showed that 273 (81.7%) and 317 (94.9%) out of 334 milk samples were positive for brucellosis, as detected by either both or one of the primer sets used in the present study, respectively. The detection limit of PCR assays for Brucella in milk samples was determined as 5 pg DNA for both of the primer sets. Conclusion: These results suggest that the use of the specific PCR assay with the primer sets used in the study is a rapid, reliable, and accurate technique in comparison to traditional and conventional methods for the detection and diagnosis of Brucella spp. in milk samples. Kew words: Brucella abortus, bovine milk, bcsp31-PCR, omp25-PCR

🔖

Cite This Article

ARASOĞLU, T., GÜLLÜCE, M., ÖZKAN, H., ADIGÜZEL, A., ŞAHİN, F. (2013). PCR detection of Brucella abortus in cow milk samples collected from Erzurum, Turkey. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, Cilt: 43 - Sayı: 4, 501–508. https://ajindex.com/articles/400891

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Ertek M, Yazgı H, Özkurt Z, Ayyıldız A, Parlak M. Comparison of the diagnostic value of the standard tube agglutination test and the ELISA IgG and IgM in patients with brucellosis. Turk J Med Sci 2006; 363: 159–63.
  2. Motaharinia Y, Rezaee MA, Hazhir MS, Zandi F, Shapouri R, Hakhamaneshi MS et al. Evaluation of the antibacterial activity of Zataria multiflora Boiss., Rhus coriaria L. (sumac), Mentha piperita L., and Ocimum basilicum L. extracts on Brucella strains isolated from brucellosis patients. Turk J Med Sci 2012; 425: 816–22.
  3. Bounaadja L, Albert D, Chenais B, Henault S, Zygmunt MS, Poliak S et al. Real-time PCR for identification of Brucella spp.: a comparative study of IS711, bcsp31 and per target genes. Vet Microbiol 2009; 137: 156–64. Güllüce M. Kars ve çevresinde, sığırlarda, B. abortus’a karşı oluşan antikorların ELİSA ve diğer serolojik yöntemlerle (RBPT, SAT, MRT) saptanması ve sonuçlarının karşılaştırılması. PhD, Kafkas University Veterinary Faculty, Kars, Turkey; 1993 (in Turkish). Munir R, Farooq U, Fatima Z, Afzal M, Anwar Z, Jahangir M. Sero-prevalence of brucellosis in bovines at farms under different management conditions. Brit J Dairy Sci 2011; 2: 35– Baddour MM, Alkhalifa DH. Evaluation of 3 PCR techniques for detection of Brucella DNA in peripheral human blood. Egyptian J Med Microbiol 2007; 16: 201–9.
  4. Kurtaran B, Candevir, İnal AS, Kömür S, Akyıldız Ö, Saltoğlu N et al. Clinical appearance of brucellosis in adults: fourteen years of experience. Turk J Med Sci 2012; 42: 497–505.
  5. Keid LB, Soares RM, Vasconcellos SA, Salgado VR, Megid J, Richtzenhain LJ. Comparison of a PCR assay in whole blood and serum specimens for canine brucellosis diagnosis. Vet Rec 2010; 167: 96–9.
  6. Salehi M, Pishva E, Salehi R, Rahmani M. Isolation of Brucella abortus using PCR-RFLP analysis. Iranian J Publ Health 2006; 35: 22–7.
  7. Çalık Ş, Gökengin AD. Human brucellosis in Turkey: a review of the literature between 1990 and 2009. Turk J Med Sci 2011; 41: 549–5. Cutler SJ. Brucellosis, the most common bacterial zoonosis? Biomed Sci 2006; 63: 336–41.
  8. Abdoel TH, Smits HL. Rapid latex agglutination test for the serodiagnosis of human brucellosis. Diagn Micr Infec Dis 2007; 57: 123 –8. Mukherjee F, Jain J, Patel V, Nair M. Multiple genus-specific markers in PCR assays improve the specificity and sensitivity of diagnosis of brucellosis in field animals. J Med Microbiol 2007; 56: 1309–16.
  9. Leal-Klevezas DS, Martínez-Vázquez IO, García-Cantş J, López-Merino A, Martínez-Sori