Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This observational analysis finds a seroprevalence of brucellosis in dairy herds, implying significant disease burden.
Brucellosis is an economically important zoonotic disease of dairy industry. This study was designed to assess individual animal and herd level seroprevalence of bovine brucellosis in dairy herds located in Southwestern Punjab, India. A total of 898 bovine cattle (n 623); buffaloes (n 275) serum samples from six districts Bathinda (n 769), Barnala (n 100), Muktsar (n 22), Mansa (n 03), Faridkot (n 03) and Moga (n 01) of Southwestern Punjab were received for diagnosis of brucellosis. The samples were belonging to 260 dairy herds and animals were suffering from reproductive disorders such as abortion, infertility, repeat breeding, hygroma etc. Initially, the Rose Bengal plate agglutination test (RBPT) was performed to screen serum samples for qualitative detection of anti-Brucella antibodies. In RBPT, 31.18 per cent (280898) of serum samples were positive for brucellosis. Among the 260 herds, 98 (37.69) herds were positive for the disease. The RBPT-positive samples were further processed for quantitative detection of antibody titre using standard plate agglutination test (STAT). In STAT, 72.50 per cent (203280) of RBPT-positive samples were positive. The highest prevalence was reported in Mansa (66.67), followed by Bathinda (32.89), Barnala (23), and Muktsar (9.1). None of the samples from Faridkot and Moga districts tested positive. Three host factors, viz, species, sex, and age, were included in the analysis of disease status. There was no statistical variation in the disease prevalence among cattle and buffaloes, and males and females. However, the prevalence was higher among animals aged more than one year (30.21-34.24) than those aged less than one year (22.22). Further studies need to be conducted with large sample size to determine the true burden of disease in Punjab, especially in the Southwestern region.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yadav et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: