The Veterinary record · 2020
Surveying bovine digital dermatitis and non-healing bovine foot lesions for the presence of Fusobacterium necrophorum, Porphyromonas endodontalis and Treponema pallidum.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Staton Gareth James, Sullivan Leigh Emma, Blowey Roger W, Carter Stuart D, Evans Nicholas James
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Non-healing bovine foot lesions, including non-healing white line disease, non-healing sole ulcer and toe necrosis, are an increasingly important cause of chronic lameness that are poorly responsive to treatment. Recent studies have demonstrated a high-level association between these non-healing lesions and the Treponema phylogroups implicated in bovine digital dermatitis (BDD). However, a polymicrobial aetiology involving other gram-stain-negative anaerobes is suspected.
METHODS: A PCR-based bacteriological survey of uncomplicated BDD lesions (n=10) and non-healing bovine foot lesions (n=10) targeting Fusobacterium necrophorum, Porphyromonas endodontalis, Dichelobacter nodosus and Treponema pallidum/T. paraluiscuniculi was performed.
RESULTS: P. endodontalis DNA was detected in 80.0% of the non-healing lesion biopsies (p=<0.001) but was entirely absent from uncomplicated BDD lesion biopsies. When compared to the BDD lesions, F. necrophorum was detected at a higher frequency in the non-healing lesions (33.3% vs 70.0%, respectively), whereas D. nodosus was detected at a lower frequency (55.5% vs 20.0%, respectively). Conversely, T. pallidum/T. paraluiscuniculi DNA was not detected in either lesion type.
CONCLUSION: The data from this pilot study suggest that P. endodontalis and F. necrophorum should be further investigated as potential aetiological agents of non-healing bovine foot lesions. A failure to detect syphilis treponemes in either lesion type is reassuring given the potential public health implications such an infection would present.
METHODS: A PCR-based bacteriological survey of uncomplicated BDD lesions (n=10) and non-healing bovine foot lesions (n=10) targeting Fusobacterium necrophorum, Porphyromonas endodontalis, Dichelobacter nodosus and Treponema pallidum/T. paraluiscuniculi was performed.
RESULTS: P. endodontalis DNA was detected in 80.0% of the non-healing lesion biopsies (p=<0.001) but was entirely absent from uncomplicated BDD lesion biopsies. When compared to the BDD lesions, F. necrophorum was detected at a higher frequency in the non-healing lesions (33.3% vs 70.0%, respectively), whereas D. nodosus was detected at a lower frequency (55.5% vs 20.0%, respectively). Conversely, T. pallidum/T. paraluiscuniculi DNA was not detected in either lesion type.
CONCLUSION: The data from this pilot study suggest that P. endodontalis and F. necrophorum should be further investigated as potential aetiological agents of non-healing bovine foot lesions. A failure to detect syphilis treponemes in either lesion type is reassuring given the potential public health implications such an infection would present.