Feberwee A, Mekkes D R, de Wit J J, Hartman E G, Pijpers A
Animal Health Service, P.O. Box 9, 7400 AA Deventer, The Netherlands.
Avian Dis. 2005 Jun;49(2):260-8. doi: 10.1637/7274-090804R.
In this study, the technical performance of culture, two commercially available polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests, rapid plate agglutination (RPA) test, hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test, and eight commercially available enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) were compared for the detection of avian mycoplasma infections from 3 days postinfection (d.p.i.) through 35 d.p.i. The tests were carried out on samples from specified pathogen-free layers that were infected at 66 wk of age with recent Mycoplasma synoviae (MS) and Mycoplasma gallisepticum (MG) field strains, MS and MG ATCC strains, and Mycoplasma imitans (MIM), respectively. Results showed a high percentage of positive samples in the homologous infected groups and a high percentage of negative samples (100%) in the uninfected and heterologous infected groups during 35 d.p.i. of both culture and PCR tests. For the group infected with the MG 15302 ATCC strain, serology was more sensitive than bacteriology. All MG and MS tests, with the exception of MG ELISA kit D showed a lower percentage of positive samples during 35 d.p.i. for the detection of the MG and MS ATCC strain infection compared with that of the field strains. Also, the number of cross-reactions (false positives) in the serologic tests was lower after infection with an ATCC strain than after an infection with the MG or MS field strain. Contradictory to other studies, the ELISAs and the RPA test using undiluted serum showed a relatively high number of false-positive results. The MG ELISAs (except ELISA kit D) showed more false-positive results (up to 37%) in the MIM-infected group than in the MS-infected groups. This was not unexpected, as MIM and MG have a close antigenic relationship. The results of the serologic tests in this study showed that a certain level of false-positive results can be expected in about any serologic test. Although the level of false-positive results varied between several serologic tests, this study showed that it is not advisable to rely completely on one test (system) only.
在本研究中，比较了培养法、两种市售聚合酶链反应（PCR）检测、快速平板凝集（RPA）试验、血凝抑制（HI）试验以及八种市售酶联免疫吸附测定（ELISA）在感染后3天（d.p.i.）至35 d.p.i.期间检测禽支原体感染的技术性能。这些试验针对来自特定病原体清除鸡群的样本进行，这些鸡群在66周龄时分别感染了近期的滑液支原体（MS）和鸡毒支原体（MG）田间菌株、MS和MG ATCC菌株以及模仿支原体（MIM）。结果显示，在培养和PCR试验的35 d.p.i.期间，同源感染组的阳性样本百分比很高，未感染组和异源感染组的阴性样本百分比很高（100%）。对于感染MG 15302 ATCC菌株的组，血清学比细菌学更敏感。除MG ELISA试剂盒D外，所有MG和MS检测在35 d.p.i.期间检测MG和MS ATCC菌株感染时的阳性样本百分比均低于检测田间菌株时。此外，与感染MG或MS田间菌株后相比，感染ATCC菌株后血清学检测中的交叉反应（假阳性）数量更少。与其他研究相反，使用未稀释血清的ELISA和RPA试验显示出相对较高数量的假阳性结果。MG ELISA（ELISA试剂盒D除外）在MIM感染组中显示出比MS感染组更多的假阳性结果（高达37%）。这并不意外，因为MIM和MG具有密切的抗原关系。本研究中的血清学检测结果表明，在几乎任何血清学检测中都可能出现一定程度的假阳性结果。尽管几种血清学检测之间假阳性结果的水平有所不同，但本研究表明，仅完全依赖一种检测（系统）是不可取的。
