Comparative evaluation of Serum Plate Agglutination Test (SPAT) and Rose Bengal Plate Test (RBPT) for diagnosis of Brucella abortus in sera of cattle and human

Paper Details

Research Paper 01/05/2017
Views (898)
current_issue_feature_image
publication_file

Comparative evaluation of Serum Plate Agglutination Test (SPAT) and Rose Bengal Plate Test (RBPT) for diagnosis of Brucella abortus in sera of cattle and human

Fida Muhammad Khan, Muhammad Subhan Qureshi, Shah Nawaz, Muhammad Aftab, Umar Sadique, Ziaul Islam, Zia Ur Rahman Khalil
Int. J. Biosci. 10(5), 367-371, May 2017.
Copyright Statement: Copyright 2017; The Author(s).
License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Abstract

To diagnose bovine brucellosis, various conventional and advance molecular techniques are in practice. No single serological test is appropriate in all epidemiological circumstances; each of them has a number of restrictions predominantly for screening individual animals and human. The performance characteristics of Serum Plate Agglutination Test (SPAT) and Rose Bengal Plate Test (RBPT) for diagnosis of Brucella abortus were evaluated by using Indirect Enzyme Linked Immunosorbant Assay (i-ELISA) as a Gold Standard. A total of 410 human and 202 cattle blood sera were screened. In human sera, RBPT detected 75 positive samples, while SPAT detected 78 positive samples. In cattle sera, RBPT detected 29 positive samples, while SPAT detected 32 positive samples. In cattle sera, RBPT showed high sensitivity 82.60%, specificity 94.72%, positive predictive value 76% and negative predictive value 96.41% as compared to SPAT which showed 81.15% sensitivity, 93.54% specificity, 71.79% positive predictive value and 96.08% negative predictive value. Similarly, in human sera RBPT showed high sensitivity 76%, specificity 94.35%, positive predictive value 65.51% and negative predictive value 96.53%, while SPAT showed 72% sensitivity, 92.09% specificity, 56.25% positive predictive value and 95.88%negative predictive. In the present study, although RBPT showed comparatively better result than SPAT but still its sensitivity and specificity is low, so it can be used as a screening test but cannot be used as a confirmatory test.

Agasthya AS, Isloor S, Prabhudas K. 2007. Brucellosis in high risk group individuals. Indian Journal of Medical Microbiology 25, 28- 31.

Chachra D, Hari SM, Gurpreet K, Mudit C. 2009. Comparative efficacy of Rose Bengal plate test, standard tube agglutination test and Dot ELISA in immunological detection of antibodies to Brucella abortus in sera. Journal of Bacteriology Research 1, 030-033.

Elsheikh HM, Hassan SO, Mohammad-Ahmad SA, Khojali MI. 2012. Investigations on seroprevalence of bovine brucellosis in Northeastern, Sudan. Veterinary Research 5, 13-15.

Glynn MK, Lynn TV. 2008. Zoonosis update. American Veterinary Medical Association 233, 900- 908.

Hussain I, Muhammad AI, Muhammad MS, Masood AA. 2008. Seroprevalence of brucellois in human, cattle, and buffalo Populations in Pakistan. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Science 3, 315-318.

Nielsen K. 2002. Diagnosis of brucellosis by serology. Veterinary Microbiology 90,447- 459.

OIE terrestrial manual. 2009. Version adopted by the World Assembly of Delegates of the OIE.

Smith RD. 1995. Veterinary clinical epidemiology: A problem-oriented approach 2nd edition.

Stemshorn BW, Forbes LB, Eaglesome MD, Nielsen KH, Robertson FJ, Samagh BS. 1985. A comparison of standard serological test for the diagnosis of bovine brucellosis in Canada. Canadian Journal of Comparative Medicine 49, 391-394.

Weidmann H. 1991. Survey of means now available for combating brucellosis in cattle in tropics. Institute for Scientific Cooperation, Tubmgen, Georg Hauser, Metzingen, Germany 33, 98-111.

Wright P, Nielsen K, Kelly W. 1990. Primary binding techniques for the serodiagnosis of bovine brucellosis: enzyme immunoassay. In: Adams, LG, editor. Advances in brucellosis research. College Station: Texas A&M University Press. 305–320.

Related Articles

Effects of crop succession on bird communities in an urban wetland in Korhogo (Côte d’Ivoire)

Konan Ekoun Michaël*, Niamien Coffi Jean Magloire, Guétondé Valérie Florence, Yéo N’gan-Nan, Yaokokoré-Béibro Kouassi Hilaire, Int. J. Biosci. 29(3), 94-107, September 2026.

Assessment of physicochemical parameters and bacteriological quality of pond water of Sylhet agricultural university, Sylhet

Parsha Shanzana*, Muktarul Jannat Rafa, Rubayet Jahan Nuha, Int. J. Biosci. 29(3), 87-93, September 2026.

Anther development and microsporogenesis in Swietenia macrophylla King. (Meliaceae): A histological study

Mahantesh Shitaram Chavhan, Shekappa Ningappa Agadi*, Int. J. Biosci. 29(3), 71-86, September 2026.

Intra-population genetic diversity modeling of date palm (Phoenix dactylifera L.) population in Niger

Adamou Ibrahim Maman Laouali*, Zango Oumarou, Alio Moussa Abdourazak, Rafiou Abdoulaye, Idi Saidou Sani, Idi Garba Nana Mariama, Bakasso Yacoubou, Int. J. Biosci. 29(3), 62-70, September 2026.

Biocontrol potential of indigenous Trichoderma isolates against Fusarium wilt of cotton in Tanzania: In vitro screening and screen-house validation

Fauzia Khalid Mpiganzila*, Alfonce Leonard, Lidia Munuo, Ernest Mbega, Agatha Aloyce, Int. J. Biosci. 29(3), 44-61, September 2026.

In vitro study of antioxidant, anti-inflammatory and antihyperglycemic activity of medicinal plants

T. K. Nishath*, P. Mathavi, V. Ambikapathy, P. Prakash, A. Panneerselvam, Int. J. Biosci. 29(3), 32-43, September 2026.

Association between the IL13 rs1800925 (-1112C/T) polymorphism and Schistosoma mansoni infection intensity in a population from western Côte d’Ivoire

Bernardin Ahouty Ahouty*, Abla Edwige Sokouri, Georges Bohoussou Kassi, Innocent Allépo Abé, Martial Kassi N’djetchi, Yaya Ouangbo Ouattara, Ornella Karmelle Lydia Dago, Mathurin Yao Koffi, Thomas Konan Konan, Mathurin N’Goran Koffi, Int. J. Biosci. 29(3), 20-31, September 2026.