Reference:
Blyumenkrants D.A..
Differential diagnostic signs of anaplasmosis in animals
// Agriculture. – 2018. – ¹ 2.
– P. 9-15.
DOI: 10.7256/2453-8809.2018.2.28043.
DOI: 10.7256/2453-8809.2018.2.28043
Read the article
Abstract: The article studies differential diagnostic signs of anaplasmosis in animals. Currently, in the context of ensuring the stabilization of livestock farming, an important task is to reduce mortality and maintain the high level of animal reproduction. One of the factors causing loss of highly productive farm animals and reducing their reproductive ability is anaplasmosis. Favourable weather and climate conditions and breach or nonobservance of instructions requesting to carry out scheduled veterinary activities lead to wide distribution of the disease which damages the economic industry. Identification of anaplasm on the early stages of the disease is often difficult due to the peculiar form of the pathogen, necessitating the conduct of the most sensitive serological diagnostic methods. The decrease of economic and breeding value leads to compulsory slaughter and culling thus increasing the general economic losses of farms caused by anaplasmosis.The article presents the data about the distribution and differential diagnostic characters of anaplasmosis in animals, based on the analytical review of scientific sources and literature. The author establishes the widespread infestation of farm animals with Anaplasma agents. Chronicity and parasitosis are referred to as the main features of the course of the disease. The prevalence varies from 1.54% to 46.9% regardless of the habitat and the conditions of animal management which indicates the permanent presence of Anaplasma in tongue worms determining the high rates of circulation of the disease agents in farms. The decisive factor in anaplasmosis diagnosis is the positive result of microscopic examination of Romanovsky-Giemsa stained blood smears. Serological methods are essential for Anaplasma species identification. At the same time, one of the most significant tests is the immunofluorescence test.
Keywords: Serological methods, differentiation, revealing, diagnostics, Spread, focality, epizootology, pathogen, carrier, anaplasmosis
References:
Jifei Y. Molecular detection and characterization of Anaplasma spp. in sheep and cattle from Xinjiang, northwest China / Y Jifei, L Youquan, L Zhijie, L Junlong, N Qingli, R Qiaoyun, C Ze, G Guiquan, L Jianxun, Y Hong // Parasit Vectors. – 2015. – Vol. 8(108) – P. 3–6. Published online. doi: 10.1186/s13071-015-0727-3
Renneker S. Can Anaplasma ovis in small ruminants be neglected any longer? / S Renneker, J Abdo, D.E.A Salih, T Karagenç, H Bilgiç, A Torina, A.G Oliva, J Campos, B Kullmann, J. Ahmed, U Seitzer // Transbound Emerg Dis. – 2013. – Vol. 60. – P .105-112
Kocan K. M., de la Fuente J., Blouin E. F. et al. The natural history of Anaplasma marginale // Vet. Parasitol. – 2010. – Vol. 167. – P. 95–107.
D'yakonov, L.P. K epizootologii anaplazmoza ovets // Parazitologicheskie problemamy respublik Zakavkaz'ya i Severnogo Kavkaza. – M., Makhachkala, 1961. – S. 22-24
Sidorchuk, A. A. Anaplazmoz krupnogo rogatogo skota i ovets / A. A. Sidorchuk, A. A. Glushkov // Veterinariya s.-kh. zhivotnykh: nauch.