| |
Brief communications
|
Peer reviewed
|
The temporal relationship
of fecal shedding of Lawsonia intracellularis and seroconversion in
field cases
James Mark Hammer,
DVM
Pharmacia Animal
Health, Kalamazoo, Michigan; Dr J. M. Hammer, 12494 Sunset Terrace, Clive,
IA 50325; E-mail: jamesmarkhammer@aol.com
Cite as: Hammer
JM..
The temporal relationship
of fecal shedding of Lawsonia intracellularis and seroconversion in
field cases. J Swine Health
Prod 2004;12(1):29-33.
Also
available as a PDF.
Summary
In a cross-sectional study in nine herds, the interval between earliest detection
of Lawsonia intracellularis by fecal polymerase chain reaction (at 6
to 23 weeks of age) and seroconversion (immunoperoxidase monolayer assay at
12 to 27 weeks of age)
ranged from 2 to 8 weeks (mode, 2 weeks).
Keywords: swine, proliferative
enteropathy,Lawsonia intracellularis, polymerase chain reaction, immunoperoxidase
monolayer assay
Search the AASV web site
for pages with similar keywords.
Received: February
5, 2003
Accepted: August
11, 2003
Proliferative enteropathy, or ileitis, is a troubling
disease for producers and veterinarians to control in the field. The causative
agent is
Lawsonia intracellularis (LI), an obligate
intracellular bacterium.1-3 Because the bacterium
cannot be cultivated using conventional methods, antemortem diagnosis and herd
dynamics of LI exposure must be made on the basis
of serological tests or assays for fecal shedding.
Studies using various serological techniques or polymerase chain reaction
(PCR) to determine the incidence and prevalence of LI infection have been
reported.4-8 When the indirect immunofluorescence
antibody test (IFAT) was used, 316 to
73.3%7 of herds tested positive. Just et
al9 reported seroprevalence ranging from 0 to 54%
by farm site in pigs < 25 weeks of age. In this serial serological study,
seroconversion occurred at 12 weeks of age, with no
animals testing positive beyond 17 weeks of
age.9 These studies investigated the
prevalence of LI by various methodologies, but fell short of determining when
LI
was being shed within a herd.
The use of the immunoperoxidase monolayer assay (IPMA) has been limited
to challenge model investigations10-11 and
a few field studies. Guedes et al12
reported 100% specificity and 89% sensitivity at
a serum dilution of 1:30 for the IPMA serological test. Guedes et
al13 also determined that there was 98.6% agreement
between the IFAT and the IPMA tests in experimentally infected pigs, concluding
that both serological tests provide similar results .These studies show that
the
IPMA is a good herd level test to identify exposure to LI, but the period of
fecal shedding has not been related to the time of
seroconversion in field studies. To improve
control strategies, practitioners must be able to
use serological tests to estimate when LI is being shed in a herd, which requires
an understanding of the interval between fecal shedding and seroconversion under
field conditions.
Serology may be useful to swine veterinarians to elucidate the course of LI
infection in a herd, but the temporal relationship
of fecal shedding of LI to seroconversion needs to be understood to improve
timing of control therapies, including antibiotic placement and vaccination. The
objective of this study was to determine the
temporal relationship of detection of fecal
shedding of LI, determined by fecal polymerase chain reaction (fPCR), and
IPMA seroconversion within the study herds. The impact of nursery and finishing pig flow
on LI shedding and seroconversion is also examined.
Materials and Methods
Selection of study herds
Herds were enrolled on the basis of three criteria. First, each herd had a
history of ileitis, diagnosed by necropsy findings with laboratory confirmation
by
histopathology, immunohistochemistry, or a previous
positive PCR on fecal samples or tissue scrapings. Second, in each selected
herd, clinical signs of ileitis had been present, including either porcine intestinal
adenomatosis (PIA) or porcine hemorrhagic enteropathy (PHE). The clinical
signs
for PIA were defined as nonhemorrhagic diarrhea (soft or watery stools) occurring
between6 and 20 weeks of age and gaunt pigs with poor performance, as
indicated by dramatic weight variation between
pigs in the finishing barns. The clinical signs of PHE were defined as hemorrhagic
diarrhea, pale pigs with dark brown to bloody stool, and sudden death occurring
between 4 to 12 months of age.14 Finally,
herd managers in enrolled herds were willing to allow sample collection and share
medication histories and performance records. All reported medication programs
included,
at some phase of production, an in-feed antimicrobial shown to have efficacy
against LI. Because of the varied in-feed medication programs used in the study
herds,
an analysis was not possible.
All herds were in multi-site farms with the breeding herd separated from the
growing herd. Pig flow management, which varied by herd, is described in Table 1.
Nurseries housed piglets from approximately 4.5 kg to approximately 25 kg (3 to 10 weeks
of age). Finishers housed pigs from approximately 25 kg to market weight.
Nurseries and finishers were categorized by the
number of sow sources entering the nursery farm(s), all in-all out practices, and
the number of sites housing pigs. Pig flow was continuous in single site facilities and
noncontinuous in multiple site facilities.
Sampling and testing procedures
A cross-sectional sampling technique was used, designed to detect a 10%
infection rate at a 95% confidence interval.
Thirty pigs were selected for sampling from a barn or age group (cohort). The number of
pens in a barn or housing a cohort was divided by 30 to determine the number of
pigs sampled per pen. If more than 30 pens housed a single cohort, every other pen
or every third pen was sampled as required.
Pigs were restrained for venipuncture and digital collection of feces. Pig flows
were sampled at 2-week intervals from 6 weeks of age through market age. Blood and
fecal samples were refrigerated and shipped to the University of Minnesota for testing
as described elsewhere.15-17
To determine the youngest age of seroconversion, all sera were tested by IPMA
for LI. An age group was considered to be seropositive(ie, seroconverted)
if
any serum sample in the cohort was positive by the IPMA at the standard 1:30
serum
dilution.
Fecal samples from all cohorts in a pig flow were not tested by fPCR. When
the IPMA was positive in a cohort of pigs, all fecal samples from this cohort
and the
two younger cohorts were tested. A cohort was determined to be shedding LI if
one sample was fPCR-positive. Fecal PCR testing continued in younger cohorts
until no samples in a cohort were fPCR-positive. The youngest fPCR-positive cohort
(ie, age at initial detection of fecal shedding of LI) was defined as the
first
fPCR-positive cohort in a pig flow preceded by an
fPCR-negative cohort.
Herd comparison procedures
The herds were divided into two categories based on the rate of IPMA
seroconversion. Seroconversion rate for a herd was
classified as high if > 20% of the pigs in one
or more cohorts were seropositive; seroconversion rate was classified as low
to moderate if <= 20% of the pigs in all seropositive cohorts were seropositive.
Herds with high and low-to-moderate seroconversion rates were compared on
the basis of veterinary classification and pig flow management from the sow
farm through the nursery and finishing barns. The veterinary
classification of the herd was derived from the herd veterinarian's
clinical diagnosis, which was based on the cited definitions of clinical ileitis, and
conversations with the herd veterinarian.
Results
Nine herds were included in the study. Age of the youngest cohort at
seroconversion, age of the youngest fPCR-positive
cohort, age at earliest fecal shedding of LI
detected, and interval between earliest fPCR detection and seroconversion are
summarized for each herd in Table 2. First evidence
of seroconversion varied among herds. In herds that seroconverted to LI, age
at seroconversion ranged from 12 weeks to 27 weeks.
In five of the eight herds in which seroconversion was detected, one
serum sample was positive in the group designated as youngest cohort at
seroconversion. In one herd, seroconversion was not
detected.
Fecal shedding of LI was detected by fPCR in all herds. The age of the youngest
fPCR-positive cohort ranged from 6 weeks to 23 weeks. In the herd in which
seroconversion was not detected, fPCR testing was
performed on the basis of the herd veterinarian's
clinical observation and the fact that pooled
fecal samples had been previously positive by fPCR in the early nursery. In this
herd, fecal shedding occurred in cohorts 6 and 8 weeks of age. In two herds, age at
earliest detection of fecal shedding was not
identified because the youngest pigs sampled (6 weeks of age) were fPCR-positive.
Excluding these two herds, the initial detection
of positive fPCRs occurred in cohorts ranging in age from 9 to 23 weeks.
The interval between earliest detection of positive fPCRs and IPMA
seroconversion in each herd was the difference between
the ages of the youngest cohort at seroconversion and the youngest cohort that
became fPCR-positive. In one herd, this interval could not be determined because
pigs
from different weeks of production were housed in the same barn and sampled as
one cohort. The sampling of two cohorts as one in this herd confounds the
determination of the interval between earliest detection
of positive fPCRs and seroconversion, because the youngest cohort at seroconversion
and the youngest fPCR-positive cohort were both identified in the mixed group.
Excluding this herd and the herd in which seroconversion was not detected, the
interval between earliest detection of positive fPCRs and seroconversion ranged
from
2 to 8 weeks, with a mode of 2 weeks.
Table 3 presents the serological categories, the herd veterinarian's classification
of disease caused by LI (ie, PIA, PHE, or both), and pig flow in the nursery
and
finisher for each herd. Three herds (Herds 3, 7, and 8) were included in the
high seroconversion category. The remaining six herds were in the low-to-moderate
seroconversion category. The serological response tended to be low when pigs
were segregated by site in the nursery or finisher.
Herds with more age groups on a site tended to have a high serological response,
even though the pigs were segregated by building or room.
Discussion
These results must be interpreted carefully because of the cross-sectional
collection of the samples. Even though the same animals were not collected
at different ages,
the characteristics of fecal shedding and seroconversion may help practitioners
understand the temporal relationship between fecal shedding of LI and
seroconversion. Just et al9 theorized that a
cross-sectional serological study would be the best
method for determining exposure to LI in a
production system. The results of the study in these nine herds may be used to
draw some conclusions about the usefulness of IPMA serological testing and fPCR
in
determining the herd dynamics of LI infection.
The youngest cohort at seroconversion varied among herds from 12 weeks to
27 weeks of age, suggesting that exposure occurs in the late nursery period
through finishing and that exposure builds until
the dose of LI becomes high enough to induce seroconversion. This conclusion
is supported by the fPCR results, ie, cohorts in various herds were fPCR-positive
between 6 and 23 weeks of age. It has been
reported that fPCR detects 103 or more LI
organisms per gram of feces;15,18 therefore,
not all infected pigs shed enough LI organisms in their feces to be detectable
by
fPCR.19
Confounding the serological results and the fPCR results are the in-feed
antimicrobial programs. Use of in-feed
antimicrobials may have affected the duration of the
fecal shedding of LI and the age of
seroconversion. In-feed antimicrobials may prevent or
delay infection with LI,20 potentially
delaying seroconversion. Other reports have speculated that fecal shedding, as
determined
by fPCR, is reduced with antimicrobial
treatment.5,8 In this study, in-feed
antimicrobial programs might have reduced the degree and the extent of LI
shedding, potentially delaying seroconversion.
In herds where earliest shedding of LI was detected, the interval between
earliest detection of positive fPCRs and IPMA seroconversion in each herd
ranged from
2 to 8 weeks, with a mode of 2 weeks. On the basis of the results from the
small sample of herds in this study, variation in the interval between earliest
detection of shedding and seroconversion may make it difficult, using serology
alone, to
predict the age at which fecal shedding occurs in
a herd.
The low seroconversion rate detected in some herds in this study also limits the
use of serology alone in predicting the age at which fecal shedding of LI is likely to
occur. Sampling intensity and the characteristics of the IPMA may contribute to the
low seroconversion rate detected. The sampling intensity used to detect earliest age
at seroconversion was designed to detect a 10% infection rate at a 95%
confidence interval.21 In 62.5% of herds in
which seroconversion was detected, one serum sample was positive in the group
designated as youngest cohort at seroconversion.
The sensitivity of the IPMA (89%)13 might
be a factor in the low seroconversion rate in this study because of the possibility of
false negatives. Nonetheless, when the first pigs in a herd seroconvert, it is likely, on
the basis of these results, that fecal shedding of
LI began 2 to 8 weeks previously, and timing of antibiotic treatment or vaccination
for LI in the herd should be based on this estimate.
Knittel et al,22 using a pure
culture challenge model and the IFAT, reported seroconversion at 14 days post
challenge and PCR-positive fecal samples at 7 days post challenge. In this
cross-sectional
study, there was a longer shedding-to-seroconversion interval that varied
from herd to herd. This variability may be related to pathogen load,
antimicrobials used, testing accuracy, pig flow, or
other risk factors.
In herds housing multiple cohorts of pigs, the shedding-to-seroconversion
interval was less variable and the seroconversion rate was higher than in
herds housing
fewer cohorts of pigs. This suggests a longer but less intense exposure to LI
at a younger age in herds with low-to-moderate seroconversion rates compared
to herds categorized
as having a high seroconversion rate.
If the temporal relationship of fecal shedding (detected by PCR) and seroconversion
(detected using the IPMA) is known, practitioners can better understand and
control LI transmission within a farm. With some limitations, serological testing provides
an estimate of the age when LI is being shed and causing widespread exposure in a
herd. Use of this knowledge to more accurately schedule antimicrobial placement and
vaccination in a herd will improve control of LI.
Implications
- Under field conditions, serological testing for LI on a large scale
is necessary to detect seroconversion in the youngest cohort of growing pigs.
- Results of serological testing may be used to estimate the age at which
fecal shedding of LI occurs in growing pigs, but the estimate must be
interpreted cautiously.
- In this cross-sectional study in nine herds, the interval between
the youngest age at detection of fecal shedding of LI by PCR and
seroconversion (IPMA) ranged from 2 to 8 weeks.
- Although fPCR provides a better estimate of the age at which LI
is being shed in a herd, compared to serological testing, concurrent use
of the IPMA and fPCR provides the best evidence of fecal shedding
and exposure to LI within a herd.
Acknowledgements
I wish to thank the Pharmacia Animal Health (PAH) swine business unit
management team for funding the project. Special thanks to Drs Connie Gebhart
and Roberto Guedes for protocol development, laboratory services, and general
encouragement during the project. A final thank
you to the PAH swine technical service team of Drs James Bradford, Roberta
Alvarez, Michael Senn, and Shelley Stanford for assistance throughout the project.
References
1. Jones GF, Ward GE, Murtaugh MP, Rose R, Gebhart CJ. Relationship between Ileal
symbiont intracellularis and porcine proliferative
enteritis. Infect Immun. 1993;61:5237-5244.
2. McOrist S, Gebhart C, Boid R, Barns S.
Characteristics of Lawsonia intracellularis gen. Nov.,
sp. Nov., the obligate intracellular bacterium of
porcine proliferative enteropathy. Int J Syst
Bacteriol. 1995;45:820-825.
3. McOrist S, Jasni S, Mackie RA, MacIntyre N, Neef N, Lawson GH. Reproduction of
porcine proliferative enteropathy with pure cultures of
ileal symbiont intracellularis. Infect
Immun. 1993;61:4286-4292.
4. Just SD, Thoen CO, Thompson
JU, Thacker BJ, Marstellar TA. Monitoring of
Lawsonia intracellularis by indirect serum immunofluorescence assay in
a commercial swine production system. J Swine Health
Prod. 2001;9:57-61.
*5. Pozo J, Collins AM, Rubio P, Love RJ.
Maternal immunity in Lawsonia infection.
Proc Int Pig Vet Soc. Melbourne, Australia. 2000;108.
*6. Hurtado ME, Maestro R, Rolo M, Palencia L, Sandoval J. Seroepidemiological evaluation
of Lawsonia in swine farms in Venezuela.
Proc Int Pig Vet Soc. Melbourne, Australia. 2000;28.
*7. Wendt M, Bontiz A, McOrist S. Prevalence of
Lawsonia infection in German breeding herds.
Proc Int Pig Vet Soc. Melbourne, Australia. 2000;27.
*8. Ohlinger VF, Pesch S, Knittel, J. Prevalence
of Lawsonia intracellularis in diagnostic samples
from Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium. Proc
Int Pig Vet Soc. Melbourne, Australia. 2000;70.
*9. Just SD, Thoen CO, Thompson JU, Thacker BJ, Marstellar TA. Monitoring of
Lawsonia on a commercial swine farm. Proc
AASP. Des Moines, Iowa. 1999;27.
*10. Guedes RMC, Gebhart CJ, Winkelman NL, Mackie-Nuss RA, Marsteller TA. Comparison
of different methods for diagnosis of porcine
proliferative enteropathy. Proc Allen D. Leman Swine
Conf. St Paul, Minnesota. 2000;70-72.
*11. Guedes RMC, Gebhart CJ, Winkelman NL, Mackie-Nuss RA. Comparative study of an
indirect immunofluorescent test and the
immunoperoxidase monolayer assay for diagnosing porcine
proliferative enteropathy. Proc Int Pig Vet
Soc. Melbourne, Australia. 2000; 61.
12. Guedes RMC, Gebhart CJ, Winkelman NL, Mackie-Nuss RA. Comparative study of an
indirect immunofluorescent test and the
immunoperoxidase monolayer assay for diagnosing porcine
proliferative enteropathy. J Vet Diagn
Invest. 2002;14:420-423.
13. Guedes RMC, Gebhart CJ, Deen J, Winkelman NL. Validation of an immunoperoxidase
monolayer assay as a serological test for porcine
proliferative enteropathy. J Vet Diagn
Invest. 2002;14:528-530.
14. McOrist S, Gebhart CJ. Porcine
proliferative enteropathies. In Straw
BE, D'Allaire S, Mengeling
WL, Taylor DJ, eds. Diseases of
Swine. 8th ed. 1999;524-525.
15. Jones GF, Ward GE, Gebhart CJ, Murtaugh MP, Collins JE. Use of a DNA probe to detect
the intracellular organism of proliferative enteritis
in swine feces. Am J Vet Res. 1993;54:1585-1590.
16. McOrist S, Gebhart CJ, Lawson GH. Polymerase chain reaction for diagnosis of porcine
proliferative enteropathy. Vet Microbiol.
1994;41:205-212.
17. Guedes RM, Gebhart CJ, Winkelman NL, Mackie-Nuss RA, Marsteller TA, Deen J.
Comparison of different methods for diagnosis of
porcine proliferative enteropathy. Can J Vet
Res. 2002;66:99-107.
18. Jones GF, Ward GE, Murtaugh MP, Lin G, Gebhart CJ. Enhanced detection of
intracellular organism of swine proliferative enteritis, ileal
symbiont intracellularis, in feces by polymerase
chain reaction. J Clin Microbiol. 1993;31:2611-2615.
19. McOrist S, Boid R, Lawson GHK, McConnell I. Monoclonal antibodies to
intracellular Campylobacter-like organisms of the porcine
proliferative enteropathies. Vet Rec. 1987;121:421-422.
*20. Collins AM, Van Dijk M, McOrist S, Love
RJ. Strategic medication and development of
immunity to Lawsonia. Proc Int Pig Vet
Soc. Melbourne, Australia. 2000;30.
21. Cannon RM, Roe RT. Livestock Disease
Surveys: A Field Manual for Veterinarians. Canberra,
Australia: Australian Government Publishing
Service. 1982;16.
22. Knittel JP, Jordan DM, Schwartz KJ, Janke
BH, Roof MB, McOrist S, Harris DL. Evaluation of antemortem polymerase chain reaction and
serologic methods for detection of Lawsonia
intracellularis-exposed pigs. Am J Vet
Res. 1998;59:722-726.
* Non-refereed references.
|
|