title: Comparative evaluation of microagglutination test and serum agglutination test as supplementary diagnostic methods for brucellosis.
abstract: The diagnosis of brucellosis in cattle and small ruminants requires the use of more than one serological test. The complement fixation test (CFT), the rose bengal test (RBT), and the serum agglutination test (SAT) are among the most useful tests for routine diagnosis. The microagglutination test (MAT) was developed as a simpler and more efficient test than the SAT. The relative efficacy of this test compared with that of the SAT was evaluated by using brucella-free sheep and goats prior to and after vaccination treatment. The specificities of the MAT and the SAT were 100%. Of the ewes and goats with a vaccination history, one ewe, expectedly a negative responder, had reactions in the MAT, the complement fixation test, and the rose bengal test but not in the SAT, suggesting a lower sensitivity of the SAT in this case. The calculated sensitivities of the MAT and the SAT were 93.9%. The agreement between MAT and SAT results from nonresponders was examined by using sera from unvaccinated lambs and kids (95.2% agreement), unvaccinated ewes and goats (84.4%), and ewes and goats with a vaccination history (43.9%). For the latter group higher levels of agglutination units were observed by the MAT than by the SAT in 51.5% of the samples. In testing sera from positive reactors after vaccination neither method was superior (MAT values were greater than SAT values for 23.5% of the samples, and MAT values were less than SAT values for 21.9% of the samples). Comparison of the methods on the individual sample level revealed a significant correlation between the MAT and the SAT (r = 0.96 +/- 0.005; P < 0.001). Since the MAT is simpler to perform than the SAT and can potentially be automated, the inclusion of the MAT as a supplementary test in brucellosis control programs is recommended.
authors.affiliation: Department of Bacteriology, Kimron Veterinary Institute, Beit Dagar, Israel.
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Baum
authors.forename: O
authors.initials: O
authors.lastname: Zamir
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Bergman-Rios
authors.forename: E
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Katz
authors.forename: Z
authors.initials: Z
authors.lastname: Beider
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Cohen
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Banai
mesh_terms: D000372:Agglutination Tests / Q000379:methods* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D000818:Animals; D000907:Antibodies, Bacterial / Q000097:blood; D001428:Bacterial Vaccines / Q000494:pharmacology; D017347:Brucella melitensis / Q000276:immunology; D002006:Brucellosis / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000517:prevention & control / Q000662:veterinary*; D002417:Cattle; D002418:Cattle Diseases / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000276:immunology / Q000517:prevention & control; D003168:Complement Fixation Tests; D005069:Evaluation Studies as Topic; D005260:Female; D015511:Goat Diseases / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000276:immunology / Q000517:prevention & control; D006041:Goats; D012395:Rose Bengal; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D012756:Sheep; D012757:Sheep Diseases / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000276:immunology / Q000517:prevention & control
chemical_list: D000907:Antibodies, Bacterial; D001428:Bacterial Vaccines; D012395:Rose Bengal