A post-mortem study of bovine fasciolosis in the Mitidja (north center of Algeria): prevalence, risk factors, and comparison of diagnostic methods
The present study was conducted to determine the prevalence of fasciolosis and investigate the associated risk factors (sex, age, and season) in slaughtered cattle of the Mitidja area. This survey also aimed to compare three diagnostic methods: liver inspection, microscopic bile examination, and ELI...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Tropical animal health and production 2019-11, Vol.51 (8), p.2315-2321 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 2321 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 8 |
| container_start_page | 2315 |
| container_title | Tropical animal health and production |
| container_volume | 51 |
| creator | Chaouadi, Mylissa Harhoura, Khaled Aissi, Miriem Zait, Houria Zenia, Safia Tazerouti, Fadila |
| description | The present study was conducted to determine the prevalence of fasciolosis and investigate the associated risk factors (sex, age, and season) in slaughtered cattle of the Mitidja area. This survey also aimed to compare three diagnostic methods: liver inspection, microscopic bile examination, and ELISA test. Liver and bile of 1400 cattle were examined for the presence of adult and eggs of
Fasciola hepatica
, respectively. Based on the results obtained by liver and bile examination, a subset of 206 cattle from the 1400 was selected for antibodies detection using the ELISA test. Liver inspection and microscopic bile examination showed prevalences of 2.86% and 5.50%, respectively
.
The difference between the two methods was highly significant (
p
|
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11250-019-01951-w |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2312557324</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2234821241</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-a012527ddfcc12f18d6bed0d132b2491efd5afad629c5b886c778876034f0873</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1u1DAUhS0EokPhBVggS2yK1ID_Enu6G1X8Sa3YdG859k3HQ2IH22nV1-CJ62EKSF10cWXp-nzH1_cg9JaSj5QQ-SlTylrSELreV0ub22doRVvJGym4eo5WhIh1I6SQR-hVzjtCKqa6l-iIU9q1gosV-r3Bc8ylmWIqMOFcFneH44D7eOMD4MFk6-MYs8_YB1y2gC998W5n8EmoyBZbCAXSHtmM15C8-XCG5wQ3ZoRg4RQnn39WG1tiyqfYBIdtnGZT2zHsKefNdagTeIsnKNvo8mv0YjBjhjcP5zG6-vL56vxbc_Hj6_fzzUVjuWxLY0j9PZPODdZSNlDluh4ccZSznok1hcG1ZjCuY2vb9kp1VkqlZEe4GIiS_BidHGznFH8tkIuefLYwjiZAXLJmvPrXZTJRpe8fSXdxSaEOpxnjQjHKBK0qdlDZFHNOMOg5-cmkO02J3gemD4HpGpb-E5i-rdC7B-uln8D9Q_4mVAX8IMj1KtQN_3_7Cdt7qbWicw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2234821241</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A post-mortem study of bovine fasciolosis in the Mitidja (north center of Algeria): prevalence, risk factors, and comparison of diagnostic methods</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><creator>Chaouadi, Mylissa ; Harhoura, Khaled ; Aissi, Miriem ; Zait, Houria ; Zenia, Safia ; Tazerouti, Fadila</creator><creatorcontrib>Chaouadi, Mylissa ; Harhoura, Khaled ; Aissi, Miriem ; Zait, Houria ; Zenia, Safia ; Tazerouti, Fadila</creatorcontrib><description>The present study was conducted to determine the prevalence of fasciolosis and investigate the associated risk factors (sex, age, and season) in slaughtered cattle of the Mitidja area. This survey also aimed to compare three diagnostic methods: liver inspection, microscopic bile examination, and ELISA test. Liver and bile of 1400 cattle were examined for the presence of adult and eggs of
Fasciola hepatica
, respectively. Based on the results obtained by liver and bile examination, a subset of 206 cattle from the 1400 was selected for antibodies detection using the ELISA test. Liver inspection and microscopic bile examination showed prevalences of 2.86% and 5.50%, respectively
.
The difference between the two methods was highly significant (
p
< 0.001). The overall prevalence of bovine fasciolosis found by both methods was 6.07%. The disease was more prevalent in females (11.96%) than in males (2.43%), and in older cattle (12.30%) than in younger ones (2.36%). The ELISA test showed some conflicting results: 23.61% of cattle previously diagnosed positive with liver inspection and bile examination were found seronegative, and 3.73% of cattle previously diagnosed negative were found to be seropositive. The sensitivity and specificity of microscopic bile examination were respectively 80% (CI 65.2–89.5%) and 96.7% (CI 95.6–97.5%) as compared with the liver inspection. Likewise, this same method has a sensitivity of 81.36% (CI 69.6–89.3%) and a specificity of 88.97% (CI 82.8–93.1%) as compared with the ELISA test. Our results show that microscopic bile examination is able to detect more infected cattle than liver inspection. In addition to being simple, fast, inexpensive, sensitive, and specific, it is an effective method for the diagnosis of fasciolosis.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0049-4747</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-7438</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11250-019-01951-w</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31165434</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Algeria - epidemiology ; Animals ; Antibodies ; Bile ; Bile - parasitology ; Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Cattle ; Cattle Diseases - diagnosis ; Cattle Diseases - epidemiology ; Diagnostic systems ; Eggs ; Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay ; Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay - veterinary ; Fasciola hepatica - isolation & purification ; Fascioliasis - diagnosis ; Fascioliasis - epidemiology ; Fascioliasis - veterinary ; Female ; Inspection ; Life Sciences ; Liver ; Liver - parasitology ; Male ; Ovum ; Prevalence ; Regular Articles ; Risk analysis ; Risk Factors ; Sensitivity ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Veterinary Medicine/Veterinary Science ; Zoology</subject><ispartof>Tropical animal health and production, 2019-11, Vol.51 (8), p.2315-2321</ispartof><rights>Springer Nature B.V. 2019</rights><rights>Tropical Animal Health and Production is a copyright of Springer, (2019). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-a012527ddfcc12f18d6bed0d132b2491efd5afad629c5b886c778876034f0873</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-a012527ddfcc12f18d6bed0d132b2491efd5afad629c5b886c778876034f0873</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-8012-1632</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11250-019-01951-w$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11250-019-01951-w$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31165434$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chaouadi, Mylissa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harhoura, Khaled</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aissi, Miriem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zait, Houria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zenia, Safia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tazerouti, Fadila</creatorcontrib><title>A post-mortem study of bovine fasciolosis in the Mitidja (north center of Algeria): prevalence, risk factors, and comparison of diagnostic methods</title><title>Tropical animal health and production</title><addtitle>Trop Anim Health Prod</addtitle><addtitle>Trop Anim Health Prod</addtitle><description>The present study was conducted to determine the prevalence of fasciolosis and investigate the associated risk factors (sex, age, and season) in slaughtered cattle of the Mitidja area. This survey also aimed to compare three diagnostic methods: liver inspection, microscopic bile examination, and ELISA test. Liver and bile of 1400 cattle were examined for the presence of adult and eggs of
Fasciola hepatica
, respectively. Based on the results obtained by liver and bile examination, a subset of 206 cattle from the 1400 was selected for antibodies detection using the ELISA test. Liver inspection and microscopic bile examination showed prevalences of 2.86% and 5.50%, respectively
.
The difference between the two methods was highly significant (
p
< 0.001). The overall prevalence of bovine fasciolosis found by both methods was 6.07%. The disease was more prevalent in females (11.96%) than in males (2.43%), and in older cattle (12.30%) than in younger ones (2.36%). The ELISA test showed some conflicting results: 23.61% of cattle previously diagnosed positive with liver inspection and bile examination were found seronegative, and 3.73% of cattle previously diagnosed negative were found to be seropositive. The sensitivity and specificity of microscopic bile examination were respectively 80% (CI 65.2–89.5%) and 96.7% (CI 95.6–97.5%) as compared with the liver inspection. Likewise, this same method has a sensitivity of 81.36% (CI 69.6–89.3%) and a specificity of 88.97% (CI 82.8–93.1%) as compared with the ELISA test. Our results show that microscopic bile examination is able to detect more infected cattle than liver inspection. In addition to being simple, fast, inexpensive, sensitive, and specific, it is an effective method for the diagnosis of fasciolosis.</description><subject>Algeria - epidemiology</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Antibodies</subject><subject>Bile</subject><subject>Bile - parasitology</subject><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Cattle</subject><subject>Cattle Diseases - diagnosis</subject><subject>Cattle Diseases - epidemiology</subject><subject>Diagnostic systems</subject><subject>Eggs</subject><subject>Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay</subject><subject>Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay - veterinary</subject><subject>Fasciola hepatica - isolation & purification</subject><subject>Fascioliasis - diagnosis</subject><subject>Fascioliasis - epidemiology</subject><subject>Fascioliasis - veterinary</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Inspection</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Liver</subject><subject>Liver - parasitology</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Ovum</subject><subject>Prevalence</subject><subject>Regular Articles</subject><subject>Risk analysis</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>Sensitivity</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Veterinary Medicine/Veterinary Science</subject><subject>Zoology</subject><issn>0049-4747</issn><issn>1573-7438</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc1u1DAUhS0EokPhBVggS2yK1ID_Enu6G1X8Sa3YdG859k3HQ2IH22nV1-CJ62EKSF10cWXp-nzH1_cg9JaSj5QQ-SlTylrSELreV0ub22doRVvJGym4eo5WhIh1I6SQR-hVzjtCKqa6l-iIU9q1gosV-r3Bc8ylmWIqMOFcFneH44D7eOMD4MFk6-MYs8_YB1y2gC998W5n8EmoyBZbCAXSHtmM15C8-XCG5wQ3ZoRg4RQnn39WG1tiyqfYBIdtnGZT2zHsKefNdagTeIsnKNvo8mv0YjBjhjcP5zG6-vL56vxbc_Hj6_fzzUVjuWxLY0j9PZPODdZSNlDluh4ccZSznok1hcG1ZjCuY2vb9kp1VkqlZEe4GIiS_BidHGznFH8tkIuefLYwjiZAXLJmvPrXZTJRpe8fSXdxSaEOpxnjQjHKBK0qdlDZFHNOMOg5-cmkO02J3gemD4HpGpb-E5i-rdC7B-uln8D9Q_4mVAX8IMj1KtQN_3_7Cdt7qbWicw</recordid><startdate>20191101</startdate><enddate>20191101</enddate><creator>Chaouadi, Mylissa</creator><creator>Harhoura, Khaled</creator><creator>Aissi, Miriem</creator><creator>Zait, Houria</creator><creator>Zenia, Safia</creator><creator>Tazerouti, Fadila</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8012-1632</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20191101</creationdate><title>A post-mortem study of bovine fasciolosis in the Mitidja (north center of Algeria): prevalence, risk factors, and comparison of diagnostic methods</title><author>Chaouadi, Mylissa ; Harhoura, Khaled ; Aissi, Miriem ; Zait, Houria ; Zenia, Safia ; Tazerouti, Fadila</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-a012527ddfcc12f18d6bed0d132b2491efd5afad629c5b886c778876034f0873</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Algeria - epidemiology</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Antibodies</topic><topic>Bile</topic><topic>Bile - parasitology</topic><topic>Biomedical and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Cattle</topic><topic>Cattle Diseases - diagnosis</topic><topic>Cattle Diseases - epidemiology</topic><topic>Diagnostic systems</topic><topic>Eggs</topic><topic>Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay</topic><topic>Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay - veterinary</topic><topic>Fasciola hepatica - isolation & purification</topic><topic>Fascioliasis - diagnosis</topic><topic>Fascioliasis - epidemiology</topic><topic>Fascioliasis - veterinary</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Inspection</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Liver</topic><topic>Liver - parasitology</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Ovum</topic><topic>Prevalence</topic><topic>Regular Articles</topic><topic>Risk analysis</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>Sensitivity</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Veterinary Medicine/Veterinary Science</topic><topic>Zoology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chaouadi, Mylissa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harhoura, Khaled</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aissi, Miriem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zait, Houria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zenia, Safia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tazerouti, Fadila</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agriculture Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Tropical animal health and production</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chaouadi, Mylissa</au><au>Harhoura, Khaled</au><au>Aissi, Miriem</au><au>Zait, Houria</au><au>Zenia, Safia</au><au>Tazerouti, Fadila</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A post-mortem study of bovine fasciolosis in the Mitidja (north center of Algeria): prevalence, risk factors, and comparison of diagnostic methods</atitle><jtitle>Tropical animal health and production</jtitle><stitle>Trop Anim Health Prod</stitle><addtitle>Trop Anim Health Prod</addtitle><date>2019-11-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>51</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>2315</spage><epage>2321</epage><pages>2315-2321</pages><issn>0049-4747</issn><eissn>1573-7438</eissn><abstract>The present study was conducted to determine the prevalence of fasciolosis and investigate the associated risk factors (sex, age, and season) in slaughtered cattle of the Mitidja area. This survey also aimed to compare three diagnostic methods: liver inspection, microscopic bile examination, and ELISA test. Liver and bile of 1400 cattle were examined for the presence of adult and eggs of
Fasciola hepatica
, respectively. Based on the results obtained by liver and bile examination, a subset of 206 cattle from the 1400 was selected for antibodies detection using the ELISA test. Liver inspection and microscopic bile examination showed prevalences of 2.86% and 5.50%, respectively
.
The difference between the two methods was highly significant (
p
< 0.001). The overall prevalence of bovine fasciolosis found by both methods was 6.07%. The disease was more prevalent in females (11.96%) than in males (2.43%), and in older cattle (12.30%) than in younger ones (2.36%). The ELISA test showed some conflicting results: 23.61% of cattle previously diagnosed positive with liver inspection and bile examination were found seronegative, and 3.73% of cattle previously diagnosed negative were found to be seropositive. The sensitivity and specificity of microscopic bile examination were respectively 80% (CI 65.2–89.5%) and 96.7% (CI 95.6–97.5%) as compared with the liver inspection. Likewise, this same method has a sensitivity of 81.36% (CI 69.6–89.3%) and a specificity of 88.97% (CI 82.8–93.1%) as compared with the ELISA test. Our results show that microscopic bile examination is able to detect more infected cattle than liver inspection. In addition to being simple, fast, inexpensive, sensitive, and specific, it is an effective method for the diagnosis of fasciolosis.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><pmid>31165434</pmid><doi>10.1007/s11250-019-01951-w</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8012-1632</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0049-4747 |
| ispartof | Tropical animal health and production, 2019-11, Vol.51 (8), p.2315-2321 |
| issn | 0049-4747 1573-7438 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2312557324 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerNature Journals |
| subjects | Algeria - epidemiology Animals Antibodies Bile Bile - parasitology Biomedical and Life Sciences Cattle Cattle Diseases - diagnosis Cattle Diseases - epidemiology Diagnostic systems Eggs Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay - veterinary Fasciola hepatica - isolation & purification Fascioliasis - diagnosis Fascioliasis - epidemiology Fascioliasis - veterinary Female Inspection Life Sciences Liver Liver - parasitology Male Ovum Prevalence Regular Articles Risk analysis Risk Factors Sensitivity Sensitivity and Specificity Veterinary Medicine/Veterinary Science Zoology |
| title | A post-mortem study of bovine fasciolosis in the Mitidja (north center of Algeria): prevalence, risk factors, and comparison of diagnostic methods |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-03T19%3A31%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20post-mortem%20study%20of%20bovine%20fasciolosis%20in%20the%20Mitidja%20(north%20center%20of%20Algeria):%20prevalence,%20risk%20factors,%20and%20comparison%20of%20diagnostic%20methods&rft.jtitle=Tropical%20animal%20health%20and%20production&rft.au=Chaouadi,%20Mylissa&rft.date=2019-11-01&rft.volume=51&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=2315&rft.epage=2321&rft.pages=2315-2321&rft.issn=0049-4747&rft.eissn=1573-7438&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11250-019-01951-w&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2234821241%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2234821241&rft_id=info:pmid/31165434&rfr_iscdi=true |