Winter John M, Stacy Nicole I, Adamovicz Laura A, Allender Matthew C
Wildlife Epidemiology Laboratory, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, United States.
Department of Diagnostic, Comparative, and Population Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States.
Front Vet Sci. 2019 Nov 12;6:398. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2019.00398. eCollection 2019.
Leukogram evaluation provides valuable information about inflammation, infection, and stress in free-living and zoo-maintained wildlife. While multiple protocols for quantifying leukocytes are available in reptiles, agreement between methods is infrequently described and analytical variability (including repeatability and reproducibility) has not been critically evaluated. This study addresses these knowledge gaps for two hematological methods in eastern box turtles (): Avian Leukopet (LO) and total white blood cell (WBC) estimates from blood films (EST). The objectives of this study were (1) to evaluate agreement in total WBC and individual leukocyte counts between the LO and EST methods, (2) to document repeatability (intra-assay variability) and reproducibility (inter-assay variability) for the LO method, and (3) to investigate whether biological drivers of WBC counts differ between quantification methods. Box turtles ( = 120) were sampled from five study sites in Illinois during the 2018 active season. The LO method produced significantly higher WBC counts than the EST method, and constant and proportional error was variable for each leukocyte type. The LO method demonstrated an intra-assay variability of 8.2% and an inter-assay variability of 12%, independent of biological variation. WBC counts were significantly affected by age class using both LO and EST methods, but WBC differences between locations and sexes were only observed using the LO method. These findings emphasize the importance of considering leukocyte determination method when analyzing reptilian hematology results. The inherent variability in currently available methods creates uncertainty in resulting data and highlights the need of a gold standard for reptilian WBC quantification.
白细胞计数评估可为自由生活及动物园饲养的野生动物的炎症、感染和应激状况提供有价值的信息。虽然有多种用于量化爬行动物白细胞的方案,但很少有关于不同方法之间一致性的描述,且分析变异性(包括重复性和再现性)尚未得到严格评估。本研究针对东部箱龟的两种血液学方法填补了这些知识空白:禽白细胞分类计数法(LO)和血涂片白细胞总数(WBC)估计法(EST)。本研究的目的是:(1)评估LO法和EST法在白细胞总数和单个白细胞计数方面的一致性;(2)记录LO法的重复性(批内变异性)和再现性(批间变异性);(3)研究白细胞计数的生物学驱动因素在不同量化方法之间是否存在差异。在2018年活动季节,从伊利诺伊州的五个研究地点采集了120只箱龟样本。LO法得出的白细胞计数显著高于EST法,且每种白细胞类型的恒定误差和比例误差各不相同。LO法的批内变异性为8.2%,批间变异性为12%,与生物学变异无关。使用LO法和EST法时,白细胞计数均受年龄组的显著影响,但仅在使用LO法时观察到不同地点和性别的白细胞差异。这些发现强调了在分析爬行动物血液学结果时考虑白细胞测定方法的重要性。现有方法中固有的变异性导致所得数据存在不确定性,并凸显了建立爬行动物白细胞量化金标准的必要性。