| |
Response to Critical review of "Profiling Mycoplasma
hyopneumoniae in farms using serology and a nested PCR technique.
There are three comments I would like to add to the critical
review:
- Nested-PCR is a highly sensitive technique, and care must
be taken to avoid false positive results due to contamination
during sample processing and PCR preparation. The reviewer mentions
Stark's et al. work, where the authors have detected Mycoplasma
hyopneumoniae from air samples. In that trial, the authors
obtained positive results not from swabs exposed to air, but
from filters obtained from a vacuum pressure pump. Using a vacuum
pump the authors were able to detect the microorganisms in rooms
where the pigs coughed intensely. I would think that it is less
likely to obtain a positive result by exposing a swab to the
environment. However, it has to be tested.
- The reviewer mentions the lack of correlation between PCR
and serology as a shortcoming. We did not expect to see such
correlation, since both tests measure different things: PCR detects
the antigen, and serology seroconversion. Although seroconversion
is expected after antigen exposure, the timing is different.
Seroconversion occurs after 4-8 weeks after exposure. We did
observe seroconversion in all farms, and in all cases antigen
detection preceeded seroconversion.
- I agree with the comment that the presence of the microorganism
in nasal swabs and clinical pneumonia should be studied. It would
also be interesting to determine for how long after infection
the microorganims remains in the nasal cavity, and if nasal colonization
is constant during that period of time.
|
|