EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
53,869,633
Abstracts:
29,686,251
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Cultural detection of Mycobacterium paratuberculosis in bovine faeces. Comparison of two procedures for decontamination and culture



Cultural detection of Mycobacterium paratuberculosis in bovine faeces. Comparison of two procedures for decontamination and culture



Zum kulturellen Nachweis von Mycobacterium paratuberculosis in Rinderkotproben Vergleich zweier Dekontaminierungs und Kulturverfahren: 117



Removal of contaminating bacteria from bovine faeces by using the hexadecylpyridium chloride method described by R. S. Merkal (1984) gave better results than treatment with NaOH and oxalic acid when applied to 687 samples from cattle in 19 herds infected with paratuberculosis. Residual contamination by saprophytic bacteria was reduced by adding chloramphenicol to culture medium at 30 mg/l.

(PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90)

Accession: 001790218

Download citation: RISBibTeXText



Related references

Detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in faeces using different procedures of pre-treatment for real-time PCR in comparison to culture. Veterinary Journal 199(1): 138-142, 2015

Comparison of polymerase chain reaction tests and faecal culture for detecting Mycobacterium paratuberculosis in bovine faeces. Veterinary Microbiology 36(3-4): 289-299, 1993

Evaluation of a rapid and inexpensive liquid culture system for the detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in bovine faeces. Journal of Microbiological Methods 84(3): 413-417, 2011

Comparison of immunomagnetic bead separation-polymerase chain reaction and faecal culture for the detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp paratuberculosis in sheep faeces. Australian Veterinary Journal 79(7): 497-500, 2001

An improved medium for culture of Mycobacterium paratuberculosis from bovine faeces. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 23(3): 325-335, 1982

Comparison of a commercial DNA probe test and three cultivation procedures for detection of Mycobacterium paratuberculosis in bovine feces. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation 4(1): 23-27, 1992

The detection of Mycobacterium paratuberculosis in bovine faeces by isolation and the comparison of isolation with the examination of stained smears by light microscopy. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 36(3): 112-114, 1988

Detection of bovine paratuberculosis by culture of pooled faeces. Revue de Medecine Veterinaire 144(6): 527-533, 1993

Comparison of two DNA extractions and nested PCR, real-time PCR, a new commercial PCR assay, and bacterial culture for detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in bovine feces. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation 15(2): 87-93, 2003

Evaluation of radiometric faecal culture and direct PCR on pooled faeces for detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in cattle. Veterinary Microbiology 125(1-2): 22-35, 2007

Comparison of real-time, quantitative PCR with molecular beacons to nested PCR and culture methods for detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in bovine fecal samples. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 40(1): 287-291, 2002

Comparison of faecal culture and IS900 PCR assay for the detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in bovine faecal samples. Veterinary Research Communications 33(7): 781-791, 2010

Mycobacterium porcinum strains isolated from bovine bulk milk: implications for Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis detection by PCR and culture. Veterinary Microbiology 130(3-4): 338-347, 2008

Detection of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in bovine fecal samples: comparison of three polymerase chain reaction-based diagnostic tests with a conventional culture method. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation 16(6): 503-508, 2004