SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ankara Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi / 2010 / Cilt: 57 - Sayı: 1

The comparison of agglutination, hemagglutination inhibition and indirect hemagglutination tests in the serological diagnosis ofinfectious coryza in chickens

Tavuklarda infeksiyöz koriza'nın serolojik teşhisinde aqlutinasyon, hemaglutinasyon inhibisyon ve indirekt hemaglutinasyon testlerinin karşılaştırılması

Arzu FINDIK
Hakan YARDIMCI
Pages
69–72
Publication Date
2022-10-12
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)

Plate agglutination test performed with serotype spesific antigens were found to be useful to determine chickens infected with these serotype strains.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study was carried out to investigate the feasibility of agglutination, hemagglutination inhibition (HI) and indirect hemagglutination (IHA) tests in the diagnosis of Infectious Coryza in chickens and to compare these tests.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The agglutination tests were performed by using both serotype specific plate agglutination test antigens (serotype A, B and C specific) and the whole cell plate agglutination test antigen that prepared from serotype C (Modesto) strain. 510 sera were tested in this study. 42.75% of the field sera were found positive and 57.25% were found negative in plate agglutination tests performed with whole cell antigen.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Plate agglutination test performed with serotype spesific antigens were found to be useful to determine chickens infected with these serotype strains.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study was carried out to investigate the feasibility of agglutination, hemagglutination inhibition (HI) and indirect hemagglutination (IHA) tests in the diagnosis of Infectious Coryza in chickens and to compare these tests. The agglutination tests were performed by using both serotype specific plate agglutination test antigens (serotype A, B and C specific) and the whole cell plate agglutination test antigen that prepared from serotype C (Modesto) strain. 510 sera were tested in this study. 42.75% of the field sera were found positive and 57.25% were found negative in plate agglutination tests performed with whole cell antigen. The test sera of 31.37% were found positive in regards to have serotype A antibodies and 15.1% of them were found positive in regards to have serotype C antibodies and remaining 53.53% were found to be negative in plate agglutination test performed with serotype spesific plate agglutination antigens. Hemagglutination did not occur in hemagglutination test performed with fresh chicken erythrocytes. Whereas in hemagglutination test which was performed with glutaraldehyde-fixed chicken erythrocytes, 1/64 HA titer was determined. Consequently, while the agglutination tests performed with whole cell antigen was found to be sensitive, HI and IHA were inefficient in the detection of seropositive chickens. Plate agglutination test performed with serotype spesific antigens were found to be useful to determine chickens infected with these serotype strains.

Özet

Bu çalışma, tavuklarda İnfeksiyöz Koriza’nın serolojik teşhisinde aglutinasyon, hemaglutinasyon inhibisyon (HI) ve indirekt hemaglutinasyon (IHA) testlerinin kullanılabilirliğini araştırmak ve bu testler arasında bir karşılaştırma yapmak amacıyla yapıldı. Aglutinasyon testi hem serotip spesifik lam aglutinasyon antijenleri (serotip A, B ve C spesifik) hem de serotip C (Modesto) suşundan hazırlanan tüm hücre lam aglutinasyon antijeni kullanılarak yapıldı. Çalışma kapsamında 510 serum incelendi. Tüm hücre antijeni ile yapılan lam aglutinasyon testinde saha serumlarının %42.75’i pozitif, %57.25’i ise negatif sonuç verdi. Serotip spesifik lam aglutinasyon antijenleri ile yapılan testte, serumların %31.37’si serotip A, %15.1’i serotip C antikorları yönünden pozitif bulundu. Serumların %53.53’ü ise sero-negatif bulundu. Taze tavuk eritrositleri ile yapılan hemaglutinasyon testinde aglutinasyon görülmezken; gluteraldehit ile fikse edilmiş tavuk eritrositlerinin kullanıldığı hemaglutinasyon testinde 1/64 titre belirlendi. Sonuç olarak, seropozitif tavukların saptanmasında tüm hücre antijeni ile yapılan aglütinasyon testinin duyarlı olduğu belirlenirken, HI ve IHA testlerinin yetersiz kaldığı saptandı. Serotip spesifik antijenlerle yapılan lam aglutinasyon testinin de infekte hayvanları belirlemede yararlı olduğu görüldü.

🔖

Cite This Article

FINDIK, A., YARDIMCI, H. (2022). The comparison of agglutination, hemagglutination inhibition and indirect hemagglutination tests in the serological diagnosis ofinfectious coryza in chickens. Ankara Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 57 - Sayı: 1, 69–72. https://ajindex.com/articles/445025

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Blackall PJ (1989): The avian haemophili. Clin Microbiol Rev, 2, 276-277
  2. Eaves LE, Rogers DG, Blackall PJ (1989): Comparison of hemagglutinin and agglutinin schemes for the serological classification of H. paragallinarum and proposal of a new hemagglutinin serovar. J Clin Microbiol, 27, 1510-1513
  3. Hinz KH (1976): Differentiation of Haemophilus strains isolated from chickens. IV. studies on the dissociation of Haemophilus paragallinarum. Avian Pathol, 5, 51-56
  4. Iritani Y, Iwaki S, Yamaguchi T (1981): Determination of types 1 and 2 hemagglutinins in serotypes of H. paragallinarum. Avian Dis, 25, 479-483
  5. Iritani Y, Sugimori G, Katagiri K (1977): Serologic response to Haemophilus gallinarum in artificially infected and vaccinated chickens. Avian Dis, 21, 1-8
  6. Jordan FTW (1994): Haemophilus paragallinarum (Infectious Coryza, Fowl Coryza). 49-50. In: FTW Jordan (Ed), Poultry Diseases. Bailliere Tindall, England
  7. Kato K, Tsubahara H, Okuma S (1965): Infectious coryza of chickens. VI. Hemagglutinating properties of H. gallinarum. Jpn J Vet Sci, 27(Suppl), 457
  8. Kume K, Sawata A, Nakase Y (1980): Relationship between protective activity and antigen structure of H.paragallinarum serotypes 1 and 2. Am J Vet Res, 41, 97-100
  9. Ok Ü, Ateş M (1997): Enfeksiyöz koriza şüpheli tavuklardan H. paragallinarum’un izolasyonu, serotiplendirilmesi ve seroepizootiyolojisi. Veterinarium, 8, 27-34
  10. Page LA (1962): Haemophilus infections in chickens. I. characteristics of 12 Haemophilus isolates recovered from diseased chickens. Am J Vet Res, 23, 85-95
  11. Sawata A, Kume K, Nakase Y (1979): Antigenic structure and relationship between serotypes 1 and 2 H. paragallinarum. Am J Vet Sci, 40, 1450-1453
  12. Sawata A, Kume K, Nakase Y (1982): Hemagglutinin of Haemophilus paragallinarum serotype 2 organisms: Occurence and immunologic properties of hemagglutinin. Am J Vet Res, 43, 1311-1314
  13. Thornton AM, Blackall PJ (1984): Serological classification of Australian isolates of Haemophilus paragallinarum. Aust Vet J, 61, 251-253
  14. Yamaguchi T, Iritani Y, Hayashi Y (1988): Serological response of chickens either vaccinated or artificially infected with Haemophilus paragallinarum. Avian Dis, 32, 308-312
  15. Yamaguchi T, Iritani Y, Hayashi Y (1989): Hemagglutinating activity and immunological properties of Haemophilus paragallinarum field isolates in Japan. Avian Dis, 33, 511-515
  16. Yamaguchi T, Iwaki S, Iritani Y (1981): Latex agglutination test for mea