الفهرس 
Review of literatureOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 139 |  |  |
| | | from | 139 | | |
Abstract
Accurate diagnosis of brucellosis in any species is generally fairly straightforward but may be very difficult in some cases. The only finite diagnosis, the ‘gold standard’, is the recovery of the causative agent from the host. Because of inherent problems with the isolation of Brucella sp. inefficiency, cost, danger, and other factors, most laboratories prefer to use other, more cost-effective methods. Molecular biology as a diagnostic tool is advancing and will soon be at the point of replacing actual bacterial isolation. It is rapid, safe, and cost-effective, the only real problems being some uncertainties regarding specificity.
The total number of examined samples is 72 which are all positive in both RBT and cELISA while LF, MAT, iELISA and CFT showed 39 (54%), 41 (57%), 36 (50%) and 61 (85%) positive samples respectively.
The results of rose Bengal test for diagnosis of bovine brucellosis in a qualitative comparison with the other serological test (MAT, iELISA, cELISA, CFT and LF). sixty samples were +ve in RBT and CFT together. All samples were +ve in cELISA together with RBT, while 41 samples were +ve in MAT and RBT. Thirty nine and thirty four samples were positive for LF and iELISA together with RBT respectively. on the other hand there is no samples were –ve in both CELISA, CFT, MAT and LF together with RBT While only one samples was negative in both RBT and iELISA. there is no samples showed –ve results with positive in RBT also 11, 31, 35 and 33 were positive for RBT but negative for CFT, MAT, iELISA and LF test respectively. Finally, neither samples were negative for RBT nor positive for cELISA, MAT and LF test, while there are one sample negative for RBT but positive for CFT. Thirty five samples were positive for iELISA and negative for RBT.
Results of CFT as a qualitative gold standard for diagnosis of bovine brucellosis with the other serological tests (RBT, LF test, MAT, iELISA and cELISA). It is clear that 11 undiluted sera were –ve in CFT together with LF and IELISA while these samples were +ve in both RBT and C ELISA . Ten of these samples were –ve and one was positive in MAT. Twenty one sera samples diluted 1/2 showed all suspicious results in CFT . There were no suspicious reactions in the other serological tests. Further dilution of the sera samples 1/8 , 1/16 . 1/32 1/128 , 1/256 showed +ve results in CFT as 6,2,7,7 ,11 and 7 respectively which all agree with the results of RBT
The correlation between the quantitative results of CFT and MAT is measured as 0.62 which is very strong correlation. This correlation means that when CFT gave positive at low dilution (1/4) MAT gives negative results and as the animal gave positive at higher dilution in CFT the MAT starts to read positive. This shows the importance of CFT as very effective test other than MAT in early diagnosis of infection.
The correlation between the quantitative results of CFT and iELISA is measured as 0.75 which is very strong correlation. This correlation means that when CFT gave positive at low dilution (1/4) iELISA gives negative results and as the animal gave positive at higher dilution of CFT the iELISA starts to read positive . This shows the importance of CFT as very effective test other than iELISA in early diagnosis of infection.
The correlation between the quantitative results of CFT and LIF is measured as 0.75 which is very strong correlation. This correlation means that when CFT gave positive at low dilution (1/4) LIF gives negative results and as the animal gave positive at higher dilution of CFT the LIF starts to read positive . This shows the importance of CFT as very effective test other than LIF in early diagnosis of infection.