Screening for Coxiella burnetii in dairy cattle herds in Poland

Number of tested animals	Number of positive animals (%)	CI (95%) Clopper Pearson	% True positive animals (CI 95%)	Number of tested herds	Number of positive herds (%)	CI (95%) Clopper Pearson	% True positive herds (CI 95%)
Greater Poland	173	11 (6.36)	3.2–11.1%	5.6 (0.7–11.7)	26	3 (11.54)	2.45–30.15%	12.9 (2.1–32.8)
Kuyavia-Pomerania	243	23 (9.47)	6.1–13.9%	8.9 (2.2–15.4)	65	13 (20.0)	11.1–31.77%	20.9 (9.8–36.4)^c)
Lesser Poland	50	1 (2.0)	0.1–10.6%	2.8 (0.1–11.3)	4	1 (25.0)	0.63–80.59%	33.3 (4.1–80.7)
Lower Silesia	200	6 (3.0)	1.1–6.4%	2.4 (0.2–6.5) ^a)	33	3 (9.09)	1.92–24.33%	9.8 (1.3–25.3)
Lublin	103	5 (4.85)	1.6–11.0%	4.5 (0.4–11.4)	35	4 (11.43)	3.2–26.74%	12.3 (2.2–29.4)
Lubusz	106	4 (3.77)	1.0–9.4%	3.5 (0.3–10.0)	42	4 (9.52)	2.66–22.62%	10.0 (1.6–23.9)
Łódź	206	18 (8.74)	5.3–13.5%	8.1 (1.8–14.7)	169	15 (8.88)	5.05–14.22%	8.2 (1.9–15.4)
Mazovia	131	9 (6.87)	3.2–12.6%	6.3 (1.0–13.2)	21	6 (28.57)	11.28–52.18%	31.2 (12.1–57.8)^d)
Opole	150	8 (5.30)	2.3–10.2%	4.7 (0.5–10.7)	51	5 (9.8)	3.26–21.41%	10.1 (1.8–22.5)
Podlaskie	116	11 (9.48)	4.8–16.3%	9.1 (2.1–17.6)	41	6 (14.63)	5.57–29.17%	15.4 (4.1–32.1)
Pomerania	87	6 (6.9)	2.6–14.4%	6.6 (0.8–15.4)	51	5 (9.8)	3.26–21.41%	10.0 (1.7–23.0)
Silesia	160	17 (10.63)	6.3–16.5%	10.1 (2.8–18.2)	30	5 (16.67)	5.64–34.72%	18.1 (5.0–37.8)^e)
Subcarpathia	136	1 (0.7)	0.1–4.0%	1.0 (0.0–4.2) ^b)	134	1 (0.75)	0.02–4.09%	1.0 (0.0–4.3)^{c),d),e),f),g)}
Świętokrzyskie	20	2 (10.0)	1.2–31.7%	12.1 (1.4–34.2)	5	2 (40.0)	5.27–85.34%	45.2 (10.9–87.3)^f)
Warmia-Masuria	153	24 (15.69)	10.3–22.4%	15.7 (6.7–25.6) ^a),b)	69	13 (18.84)	10.43–30.06%	19.6 (8.8–33.8)^g)
West Pomerania	146	8 (5.48)	2.4–10.5%	4.8 (0.5–10.8)	25	3 (12.0)	2.55–31.22%	13.5 (2.1–33.7)
Total	2,180	154 (7.06)	6.0–8.2%	6.0 (1.1–9.4)	801	89 (11.11)	9.02–13.49%	10.5 (3.2–15.8)

[i] CI (95%) – 95% confidence interval; ^{a), b), c), d), e), f), g)} – statistically significant differences (P≥0.05)

True seroprevalence of *C. burnetii* at animal and herd level in cattle herds in the voivodeships of Poland based on sera analyses by ELISA. TPH – true positive herds; TPA – true positive animals; voivodeships: GP – Greater Poland, KP – Kuyavia-Pomerania, LP – Lesser Poland, LS – Lower Silesia, LB – Lublin, LU – Lubusz, LDZ – Łódź, MAS – Mazovia, OPO – Opole, PDL – Podlaskie, POM – Pomerania, SL – Silesia, PKR – Subcarpathia, SW – Świętokrzyskie, WM – Warmia-Masuria, WP – West Pomerania

Table 2

Results of real-time PCR and ELISA for milk samples at herd level in each voivodeship

Voivodeship	Sample category**	Number of tested herds	Number of positive herds in real-time PCR*	Number of positive herds in ELISA*	Real-time PCR		ELISA
Percentage of positive herds	CI (95%)	Percentage of positive herds	CI (95%)
	IMS	1	1	1
Greater Poland	BTM	1	0	1
	BTM + IMS	1	1	1
	Total	3	2	3	66.67%	9.43–99.16%	100%	29.24–100.00%
	IMS	27	4	18
Kuyavia-	BTM	1	0	0
Pomerania	BTM + IMS	0	0	0
	Total	28	4	18	14.29%	4.03–32.67%	64.29%	44.07–81.36%
	IMS	3	0	0
	BTM	1	0	0
Lesser Poland	BTM + IMS	0	0	0
	Total	4	0	0	0.00%	0.00–60.24%	0.00%	0.00–60.24%
	IMS	4	1	3
Lower Silesia	BTM BTM + IMS	1 0	0 0	1 0
	Total	5	1	4	20%	0.51–71.64%	80.00%	28.36–99.49%
	IMS	4	1	3
	BTM	1	0	1
Lublin	BTM + IMS	0	0	0
	Total	5	1	4	20%	0.51–71.64%	80.00%	28.36–99.49%
	IMS	3	0	1
Lubusz	BTM	0	0	0
	BTM + IMS	0	0	0
	Total	3	0	1	0%	0.00-70.76%	33.33%	0.84-90.57%
	IMS	6	1	3
	BTM	1	1	1
Łódź	BTM + IMS	1	1	1
	Total	8	3	5	37.5%	8.52–75.51%	62.50%	24.49–91.48%
	IMS	15	3	7
	BTM	3	1	1
Mazovia	BTM + IMS	1	0	1
	Total	19	4	9	21.05%	6.05–45.57%	47.37%	24.45–71.14%
	IMS	8	1	5
Opole	BTM BTM + IMS	1 0	1 0	1 0
	Total	9	2	6	22.22%	2.81–60.01%	66.67%	29.93–92.51%
	IMS	16	6	13

Podlaskie	BTM BTM + IMS	3 0	0 0	1 0
	Total	19	6	14	31.58%	12.58–56.55%	73.68%	48.8–90.85%
	IMS	7	3	5
Pomerania	BTM	1	1	1
	BTM + IMS	0	0	0
	Total	8	4	6	50%	15.70–84.3%	75.00%	34.91–96.81%
	IMS	3	0	1
	BTM	2	1	1
Silesia	BTM + IMS	0	0	0
	Total	5	1	2	20%	0.51–71.64%	40.00%	5.27–85.34%
	IMS	4	1	2
	BTM	0	0	0
Subcarpathia	BTM + IMS	0	0	0
	Total	4	1	2	25%	0.63–80.59%	50.00%	6.76–93.24%
	IMS	2	1	2
Świętokrzyskie	BTM	2	2	2
	BTM + IMS	0	0	0
	Total	4	3	4	75%	19.41–99.37%	100.00%	39.67–100%
	IMS	3	0	1

Warmi-Masurian	BTM BTM + IMS	1 1	1 0	1 1
	Total	5	1	3	20%	0.51–71.64%	60.00%	14.66–94.73%
	IMS	3	0	3
West Pomerania	BTM	0	0	0
	BTM + IMS	1	0	1
	Total	4	0	4	0%	0.00–60.24%	100%	39.76–100%
	IMS	109	23	68	21.1%	13.87–29.96%	62.39%	52.6–71.48%
	BTM	19	8	12	42.11%	20.25–66.5%	63.16%	38.36–83.71%
Total	BTM + IMS	5	2	5	40%	5.27–85.34%	100%	47.82–100%
	Total	133	33	85	24.81%	17.74–33.04%	63.91%	55.13–72.05%

[i] * – herd was classified as positive if at least one sample was positive in ELISA/real-time PCR test

** – sample category: IMS – individual milk samples, BTM – bulk tank milk, BTM + IMS – bulk tank milk and individual milk

Multivariate analysis of the presence of antibodies against *C. burnetii* in individual milk samples and bulk tank milk, geographical location of farms, positive and negative conformity rates between results from ELISA test and results from real-time PCR. Blue points represent each category of analysed variables. Blue points with similar profiles (low value of distances indicating a strong association between variables) are marked by the red rectangle without corners. Blue points located in the green rectangle in the graph’s centre showed the points with similar profiles but representing eigenvalues indicating the lack of any association. Voivodeships: GP – Greater Poland, KP – Kuyavia-Pomerania, LP – Lesser Poland, LS – Lower Silesia, LB – Lublin, LB – Lubusz, LDZ – Łódź, MAS – Mazovia, OPO – Opole, PDL – Podlaskie, POM – Pomerania, SL – Silesia, PKR – Subcarpathia, SW – Świętokrzyskie, WM – Warmia-Masuria, WP – West Pomerania; BTM – bulk tank milk; IMS – individual milk sample; CON – conforming results between ELISA and real-time PCR; NCON – non-conforming results between ELISA and real-time PCR; CON Pos – positive conforming results in ELISA and real-time PCR tests; CON Neg – negative conforming results in ELISA and real-time PCR; ELISA Neg – negative ELISA results; ELISA Pos – positive ELISA results; real-time PCR Neg – negative real-time PCR results; real-time PCR Pos – positive real-time PCR results

References

Authors

Metrics

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jvetres-2022-0070 | Journal eISSN: 2450-8608 (formerly 2300-3235)

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English

Page range: 549 - 557

Submitted on: Oct 19, 2022

Accepted on: Dec 6, 2022

Published on: Dec 18, 2022

Published by: National Veterinary Research Institute in Pulawy

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Keywords:

Coxiella burnetii,

Q fever,

cattle,

Related subjects:

Microbiology and virology,

Life sciences, other,

Medicine,

Veterinary medicine

© 2022 Monika Szymańska-Czerwińska, Agnieszka Jodełko, Zbigniew Osiński, Krzysztof Niemczuk, published by National Veterinary Research Institute in Pulawy
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Volume 66 (2022): Issue 4 (December 2022)

Screening for Coxiella burnetii in dairy cattle herds in Poland

Figures & Tables

Table 1

Fig. 1

Table 2

Fig. 2

Paradigm

My account