JVDI Advertisement
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dargatz, D.
Right arrow Articles by Tewari, D
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Dargatz, D.
Right arrow Articles by Tewari, D
Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation, Vol 16, Issue 6, 509-514
Copyright © 2004 by American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians


Articles

A multilaboratory evaluation of a commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay test for the detection of antibodies against Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in cattle

DA Dargatz, BA Byrum, MT Collins, SM Goyal, SK Hietala, RH Jacobson, CA Kopral, BM Martin, BJ McCluskey, and D Tewari

USDA, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Veterinary Services, Centers for Epidemiology and Animal Health, Fort Collins, CO 80526, USA.

Five laboratories participated in a study to evaluate sources of variation in results from an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for antibodies against Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis. Each laboratory repeatedly tested duplicates of a negative, positive (P), and high-positive (HP) serum sample, which were supplied by the United States Department of Agriculture: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service: Veterinary Services, National Veterinary Services Laboratories, Ames, IA, on all 96-well microtiter plates when routinely testing other samples for M. avium subsp. paratuberculosis antibodies. These 3 sera were aliquoted and sent to the 5 participating laboratories. This study focused on variation in test results because of assay reagents and laboratory techniques and did not account for biologic variability associated with the time course of infection in cattle. Overall, results from 868 microtiter plates were used in the study. For each sample a sample-to-positive (S/P) ratio was calculated according to the manufacturer's directions. The S/ P ratio for the P sample ranged from 0.06 to 1.039 (mean = 0.466 and 0.484 for wells 1 and 2, respectively) and those for the HP sample ranged from 2.446 to 8.727 (mean = 4.027 and 3.980 for wells 1 and 2, respectively). The majority of the variation in S/P ratio for the P sample was attributed to kit lot (37.5%), followed by random (unexplained) error (27.0%), laboratory (18.3%), and kit lot by laboratory (11.9%). By eliminating plates in which the separation between negative and positive control ODs was less than 0.4, the proportion of variation attributed to laboratory was reduced markedly. These results confirm that there is variability in M. avium subsp. paratuberculosis ELISA results and that several sources contribute to the observed variability. The study gives a relative estimate of the contribution of various sources to the overall variability observed in the M. avium subsp. paratuberculosis ELISA results with kit lot being a primary contributor. Similar data for other ELISA tests for antibodies to M. avium subsp. paratuberculosis or other antigens also should be developed.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
jvdiHome page
S. Rajeev, W. Shulaw, R. Berghaus, Y. Zhang, and B. Byrum
A testing scheme for the detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. Paratuberculosis in bovine feces utilizing the ESP Para-JEM liquid culture system
J Vet Diagn Invest, November 1, 2006; 18(6): 529 - 535.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2004 by the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc.