These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Reliability of an ELISA test for diagnosing oestrosis in Iberian ibex.
    Author: Arias MS, Moreno V, Sarasa M, Paz-Silva A, Sánchez-Andrade R, Morrondo P, Díez-Baños P, Granados JE, Sánchez A, Pérez JM.
    Journal: J Parasitol; 2014 Apr; 100(2):235-8. PubMed ID: 24299554.
    Abstract:
    Oestrosis is one of the most prevalent parasitosis affecting the Iberian ibex, Capra pyrenaica . To date, both the diagnosis of oestrosis and the determination of the intensity of parasitism require the use of invasive methods (necropsy), which necessarily limit research possibilities. We analyzed the immune humoral response (IgM and IgG) against Oestrus ovis L. excretory/secretory larval antigens in 32 sera taken from Iberian ibex from the Sierra Nevada Natural Space (southern Spain). Three antigens were collected: L1OES (from L1 larvae), L2OES (L2), and L3OES (L3). Necropsy was considered as the gold standard. The percentage of ibexes harboring Oestrus spp. larvae was 88%, the mean intensity of parasitism being 16.96 ± 14.96 larvae per parasitized host (range: 2-52). In our sample, first-instar larvae (L1) were found in 9% of ibexes, while 69% of hosts carried L2 larvae and 88% L3 larvae. Positive correlations between L1 and L2 numbers, and between L2 and L3 numbers were detected. The best results with the immunoenzymatic assay were obtained using IgG antibodies against the L1OES antigens (specificity = 89%; sensitivity = 100%; positive predictive value = 100%; negative predictive value = 57%). The IgG seroprevalence against L1OES was 78%. Thus, the analysis of IgG antibodies against antigens collected from L1 O. ovis larvae would seem to be a noninvasive method for reliably diagnosing oestrosis in naturally infested Iberian ibex. Nevertheless, additional immunological and methodological advances are still required because false positive and false negative results still represent a non-negligible part of the results of the ELISA tests.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]