1887

Journal of Medical Microbiology logo

Volume 71, Issue 12

Evaluation of three proteins involved in the adhesion process as antigens for the detection of bovine intramammary infections No Access

Abstract

. Fast and accurate diagnosis is one of the key strategies in the successful control of intramammary infections caused by . Immunoassays are one of the diagnostic tools that have been proposed for the detection of infection because they offer an advantage in terms of cost and are fast and easy to use compared to other diagnostic tests.

. The main challenge of the immunoassays is to identify antigens or serological markers that allow accurate discrimination between infected and uninfected cows with , since this bacterium can naturally colonize different areas of the animal body.

. To evaluate three proteins (IsdA, ClfA, SdrD) involved in the adhesion process as antigens to detect indicator antibodies of bovine intramammary infections.

. Ninety-six cows in lactation and not vaccinated against were included. Forty-eight of these cows were infected with , while the rest (=48 cows) were uninfected. Blood and milk samples were collected from each animal to recover serum and whey. IgG titres against the three proteins individually and combined (Mix) were measured in each sample using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) test.

. Significant differences in the IgG response against the proteins evaluated were observed, highlighting the antigenic potential of IsdA and demonstrating that some antigens can detect specific antibodies of infection better than others. According to receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, the combined proteins showed the most remarkable capacity (sensitivity of 79 % and specificity of 77 %) to differentiate between infected and uninfected cows when blood samples were used. In addition, the combined proteins also showed the highest specificity (94 %) when using milk samples.

. Our findings provide information on the usefulness of three adhesion-associated proteins in detecting serological markers of intramammary infections in bovines.

  • Received:
  • Accepted:
  • Published Online:
Keyword(s): ELISA , IgG , immunoassay , mastitis , proteins and Staphylococcus aureus
Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • Universidad de Antioquia (Award ES84180138)
    • Principle Award Recipient: MarthaOlivera-Angel
  • Universidad de Antioquia (Award 2017-15551)
    • Principle Award Recipient: GiovannyTorres
  • Departamento Administrativo de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (COLCIENCIAS) (Award 727-2015)
    • Principle Award Recipient: GiovannyTorres
© 2022 The Authors
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001613
2022-12-14
2024-04-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Keefe G. Update on control of Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus agalactiae for management of mastitis. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract 2012; 28:203–216 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Li T, Lu H, Wang X, Gao Q, Dai Y et al. Molecular characteristics of Staphylococcus aureus causing Bovine mastitis between 2014 and 2015. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2017; 7:127 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Nemeghaire S, Argudín MA, Haesebrouck F, Butaye P. Epidemiology and molecular characterization of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus nasal carriage isolates from bovines. BMC Vet Res 2014; 10:153 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Halasa T, Huijps K, Østerås O, Hogeveen H. Economic effects of bovine mastitis and mastitis management: a review. Vet Q 2007; 29:18–31 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Hernández-Castellano L, Wall SK, Stephan R, Corti S, Bruckmaier R. Milk somatic cell count, lactate dehydrogenase activity, and immunoglobulin G concentration associated with mastitis caused by different pathogens: a field study. Schweiz Arch Tierheilkd 2017; 159:283–290 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  6. McCarthy H, Rudkin JK, Black NS, Gallagher L, O’Neill E et al. Methicillin resistance and the biofilm phenotype in Staphylococcus aureus. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2015; 5:1 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Zapotoczna M, O’Neill E, O’Gara JP. Untangling the diverse and redundant mechanisms of Staphylococcus aureus biofilm formation. PLoS Pathog 2016; 12:e1005671 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Gomes F, Saavedra MJ, Henriques M. Bovine mastitis disease/pathogenicity: evidence of the potential role of microbial biofilms. Pathog Dis 2016; 74:ftw006 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Bennett MR, Bombardi RG, Kose N, Parrish EH, Nagel MB et al. Human mAbs to Staphylococcus aureus IsdA provide protection through both heme-blocking and Fc-mediated mechanisms. J Infect Dis 2019; 219:1264–1273 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Stranger-Jones YK, Bae T, Schneewind O. Vaccine assembly from surface proteins of Staphylococcus aureus. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2006; 103:16942–16947 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Moormeier DE, Bayles KW. Staphylococcus aureus biofilm: a complex developmental organism. Mol Microbiol 2017; 104:365–376 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Rainard P, Foucras G, Fitzgerald JR, Watts JL, Koop G et al. Knowledge gaps and research priorities in Staphylococcus aureus mastitis control. Transbound Emerg Dis 2018; 65 Suppl 1:149–165 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Petzer IM, Karzis J, Donkin EF, Webb EC, Etter EMC. Validity of somatic cell count as indicator of pathogen-specific intramammary infections. J S Afr Vet Assoc 2017; 88:e1–e10 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  14. den Reijer PM, Sandker M, Snijders SV, Tavakol M, Hendrickx APA et al. Combining in vitro protein detection and in vivo antibody detection identifies potential vaccine targets against Staphylococcus aureus during osteomyelitis. Med Microbiol Immunol 2017; 206:11–22 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Joost I, Jacob S, Utermöhlen O, Schubert U, Patti JM et al. Antibody response to the extracellular adherence protein (Eap) of Staphylococcus aureus in healthy and infected individuals. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol 2011; 62:23–31 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  16. National Mastitis Council Interpreting bacteriological culture results to diagnose bovine intramammary infections; 20122
  17. Council NM. Microbiological Procedures for the Diagnosis of Bovine Udder Infection and Determination of Milk Quality, Fourth edition. USA; 2004
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Fournier C, Kuhnert P, Frey J, Miserez R, Kirchhofer M et al. Bovine Staphylococcus aureus: association of virulence genes, genotypes and clinical outcome. Res Vet Sci 2008; 85:439–448 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Cucarella C, Tormo MA, Ubeda C, Trotonda MP, Monzón M et al. Role of biofilm-associated protein bap in the pathogenesis of bovine Staphylococcus aureus. Infect Immun 2004; 72:2177–2185 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Torres G, Vargas K, Sánchez-Jiménez M, Reyes-Velez J, Olivera-Angel M. Genotypic and phenotypic characterization of biofilm production by Staphylococcus aureus strains isolated from bovine intramammary infections in Colombian dairy farms. Heliyon 2019; 5:e02535 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Fabres-Klein MH, Aguilar AP, Silva MP, Silva DM, Ribon AOB. Moving towards the immunodiagnosis of Staphylococcal intramammary infections. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2014; 33:2095–2104 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Clarke SR, Wiltshire MD, Foster SJ. IsdA of Staphylococcus aureus is a broad spectrum, iron-regulated adhesin. Mol Microbiol 2004; 51:1509–1519 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Hammer ND, Skaar EP. Molecular mechanisms of Staphylococcus aureus iron acquisition. Annu Rev Microbiol 2011; 65:129–147 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Ashraf S, Cheng J, Zhao X. Clumping factor A of Staphylococcus aureus interacts with AnnexinA2 on mammary epithelial cells. Sci Rep 2017; 7:40608 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Zapotoczna M, McCarthy H, Rudkin JK, O’Gara JP, O’Neill E. An essential role for coagulase in Staphylococcus aureus biofilm development reveals new therapeutic possibilities for device-related infections. J Infect Dis 2015; 212:1883–1893 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Ma Y, Xu Y, Yestrepsky BD, Sorenson RJ, Chen M et al. Novel inhibitors of Staphylococcus aureus virulence gene expression and biofilm formation. PLoS One 2012; 7:e47255 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Vaishampayan A, de Jong A, Wight DJ, Kok J, Grohmann E. A novel antimicrobial coating represses biofilm and virulence-related genes in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Front Microbiol 2018; 9:221 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Nishitani K, Beck CA, Rosenberg AF, Kates SL, Schwarz EM et al. A diagnostic serum antibody test for patients with Staphylococcus aureus Osteomyelitis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473:2735–2749 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Schukken YH, Günther J, Fitzpatrick J, Fontaine MC, Goetze L et al. Host-response patterns of intramammary infections in dairy cows. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 2011; 144:270–289 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Boerhout EM, Koets AP, Vernooij JCM, Mols-Vorstermans TGT, Nuijten PJM et al. Reisolation of Staphylococcus aureus from bovine milk following experimental inoculation is influenced by fat percentage and specific immunoglobulin G1 titer in milk. J Dairy Sci 2016; 99:4259–4269 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Pastoret P. Handbook Invertebrate Immunology USA: Academic Press; 1998
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Renna MS, Silvestrini P, Beccaria C, Velázquez NS, Baravalle C et al. Effects of chronic Staphylococcus aureus infection on immunological parameters and functionality of macrophages isolated from bovine mammary secretions. Microb Pathog 2019; 137:103743 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Doymaz MZ, Sordillo LM, Oliver SP, Guidry AJ. Effects of Staphylococcus aureus mastitis on bovine mammary gland plasma cell populations and immunoglobin concentrations in milk. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 1988; 20:87–93 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Fox LK, Adams DS. The ability of the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay to detect antibody against Staphylococcus aureus in milk following experimental intramammary infection. J Vet Med B Infect Dis Vet Public Health 2000; 47:517–526 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Maxim LD, Niebo R, Utell MJ. Screening tests: a review with examples. Inhal Toxicol 2014; 26:811–828 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Murphy MP, Niedziela DA, Leonard FC, Keane OM. The in vitro host cell immune response to bovine-adapted Staphylococcus aureus varies according to bacterial lineage. Sci Rep 2019; 9:6134 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Spoor LE, McAdam PR, Weinert LA, Rambaut A, Hasman H et al. Livestock origin for a human pandemic clone of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. mBio 2013; 4:e00356-13 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001613
Loading
Evaluation of three Staphylococcus aureus proteins involved in the adhesion process as antigens for the detection of bovine intramammary infections
J. Med. Microbiol. 71, 001613 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.001613
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001613
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001613
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error