Show simple item record

resumen

Abstract
Eurytrematosis is a disease caused by flukes of the genus Eurytrema. These parasites infect the pancreatic ducts of a wide variety of species, including cattle, sheep and humans. Diagnosing eurytrematosis through the analysis of faecal samples can be difficult because most of the available techniques are considered of low sensitivity. In this context, a modification of the Dennis, Stone and Swanson technique (Belem Sedimentation Technique, BST) was [ver mas...]
dc.contributor.authorOlmos, Leandro Hipolito
dc.contributor.authorPantiu, Andrea Julia
dc.contributor.authorAvellaneda Cáceres, Agustín
dc.contributor.authorValencia, P.N.
dc.contributor.authorCayo, P.N.
dc.contributor.authorSignorini Porchiett, Marcelo Lisandro
dc.contributor.authorMicheloud, Juan Francisco
dc.date.accessioned2022-07-29T10:38:39Z
dc.date.available2022-07-29T10:38:39Z
dc.date.issued2022-07-27
dc.identifier.issn0022-149X
dc.identifier.issn1475-2697 (online)
dc.identifier.otherhttps://doi.org/10.1017/S0022149X22000414
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/12436
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-helminthology/article/abs/comparison-of-two-coprological-methods-for-the-diagnosis-of-eurytrema-ssp-in-cattle-and-sheep/F240BADD6A4FC46156DFA71B9ADACBBC
dc.description.abstractEurytrematosis is a disease caused by flukes of the genus Eurytrema. These parasites infect the pancreatic ducts of a wide variety of species, including cattle, sheep and humans. Diagnosing eurytrematosis through the analysis of faecal samples can be difficult because most of the available techniques are considered of low sensitivity. In this context, a modification of the Dennis, Stone and Swanson technique (Belem Sedimentation Technique, BST) was previously developed to increase the probability of detecting infected animals; nevertheless, the values of eggs per gram obtained using the modified technique are generally low. We proposed a modification of the this technique (MBST), to increase the sensitivity and detection rate of infected animals. The objective of this work was to describe MBST and compare it with BST. Faecal samples of 212 clinically healthy animals (174 from cattle and 38 from sheep) from 20 farms were taken by the intra-rectal route and stored at 4°C. The samples were processed using BST and MBST. Positive samples amounted to 55 (25.9%) using BST and 121 (57.1%) using MBST. In the simples from cattle, 52 (29.8%) and 107 (61.4%) were positive in BST and MBST, respectively. In sheep, three (7.8%) and 14 (36.8%) positive samples were obtained in BST and MBST, respectively.The results obtained using the two methods were significantly different, indicating a lack of agreement between their findings. The results suggest that MBST is a more sensitive method to detect Eurytrema spp. eggs in faeces than BST.eng
dc.formatapplication/pdfes_AR
dc.language.isoenges_AR
dc.publisherCambridge University Presses_AR
dc.relationinfo:eu-repograntAgreement/INTA/2019-PEM-E5-I702-001/2019-PEM-E5-I702-001/AR./Caracterización de la euritremosis en rumiantes en Misiones – Aportes para su controles_AR
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccesses_AR
dc.sourceJournal of Helminthology 96 : e53 (2022)es_AR
dc.subjectEurytremaes_AR
dc.subjectDiagnosiseng
dc.subjectSedimentationeng
dc.subjectCattleeng
dc.subjectSheepeng
dc.subjectDiagnósticoes_AR
dc.subjectSedimentaciónes_AR
dc.subjectGanado Bovino
dc.subjectOvinos
dc.subject.otherCoprologyeng
dc.titleComparison of two coprological methods for the diagnosis of Eurytrema ssp. in cattle and sheepes_AR
dc.typeinfo:ar-repo/semantics/artículoes_AR
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees_AR
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiones_AR
dc.description.origenInstituto de Investigación Animal del Chaco Semiáridoes_AR
dc.description.filFil: Olmos, Leandro Hipólito. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Investigación Animal del Chaco Semiárido. Área de Investigación en Salud Animal; Argentinaes_AR
dc.description.filFil: Olmos, Leandro Hipolito. Universidad Católica de Salta. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias y Veterinarias; Argentinaes_AR
dc.description.filFil: Pantiu, Andrea Julia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Montecarlo; Argentinaes_AR
dc.description.filFil: Avellaneda Cáceres, Agustín. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentinaes_AR
dc.description.filFil: Avellaneda Cáceres, Agustín. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Investigación Animal del Chaco Semiárido. Área de Investigación en Salud Animal; Argentinaes_AR
dc.description.filFil: Avellaneda Cáceres, Agustín. Universidad Católica de Salta. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias y Veterinarias; Argentinaes_AR
dc.description.filFil: Valencia, P.N. Instituto San Cayetano N° 8092. Tecnicatura Superior en Laboratorio; Argentinaes_AR
dc.description.filFil: Cayo, P.N. Instituto San Cayetano N° 8092. Tecnicatura Superior en Laboratorio; Argentinaes_AR
dc.description.filFil: Signorini Porchiett, Marcelo Lisandro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentinaes_AR
dc.description.filFil: Signorini Porchiett, Marcelo Lisandro. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA).Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Rafaela; Argentinaes_AR
dc.description.filFil: Micheloud, Juan Francisco. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Investigación Animal del Chaco Semiárido. Área de Investigación en Salud Animal; Argentinaes_AR
dc.description.filFil: Micheloud, Juan Francisco. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentinaes_AR
dc.description.filFil: Micheloud, Juan Francisco. Universidad Católica de Salta. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias y Veterinarias; Argentinaes_AR
dc.subtypecientifico


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

common

Show simple item record