Du Plessis J L, Bezuidenhout J D, Brett M S, Camus E, Jongejan F, Mahan S M, Martinez D
Onderstepoort Veterinary Institute, Afrique du Sud.
Rev Elev Med Vet Pays Trop. 1993;46(1-2):123-9.
Five serological tests, the indirect and competitive ELISA, the indirect fluorescent antibody (IFA) test with 2 different antigens and the Western blot technique were compared and applied to sera that were known to be either negative or positive against Cowdria ruminantium or that were collected from animals in heartwater-free regions. No false positive reactions were recorded with any of the tests against the known negative sera. Except for minor variations in the sensitivity of the 5 tests, there was good correlation between them. Their specificity, however, remains in dispute since in all 5 tests extensive cross-reactions were recorded with antibodies in response to an as yet unidentified agent, probably Ehrlichia.
对五种血清学检测方法进行了比较,包括间接和竞争酶联免疫吸附测定(ELISA)、使用两种不同抗原的间接荧光抗体(IFA)检测以及蛋白质印迹技术,并将其应用于已知对反刍兽埃立克体呈阴性或阳性的血清,或从无牛心水病地区的动物采集的血清。针对已知阴性血清,所有检测均未记录到假阳性反应。除了这五种检测方法在敏感性上存在微小差异外,它们之间具有良好的相关性。然而,它们的特异性仍存在争议,因为在所有五种检测中,均记录到针对一种尚未明确的病原体(可能是埃立克体)产生抗体时出现广泛的交叉反应。