• 1.

    Sainz Á, Roura X, Miró G, et al. Guideline for veterinary practitioners on canine ehrlichiosis and anaplasmosis in Europe. Parasit Vectors 2015;8:75.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Dumler JS, Barbet AF, Bekker CP, et al. Reorganization of genera in the families Rickettsiaceae and Anaplasmataceae in the order Rickettsiales: unification of some species of Ehrlichia with Anaplasma, Cowdria with Ehrlichia and Ehrlichia with Neorickettsia, descriptions of six new species combinations and designation of Ehrlichia equi and ‘HGE agent’ as subjective synonyms of Ehrlichia phagocytophila. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2001;51:2145 2165.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Beall MJ, Chandrashekar R, Eberts MD, et al. Serological and molecular prevalence of Borrelia burgdorferi, Anaplasma phagocytophilum, and Ehrlichia species in dogs from Minnesota. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis 2008;8:455 464.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Fukui Y, Inokuma H. Subclinical infections of Anaplasma phagocytophilum and Anaplasma bovis in dogs from Ibaraki, Japan. Jpn J Infect Dis 2019;72:168 172.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Hornok S, Horváth G, Takács N, et al. Molecular evidence of a badger-associated Ehrlichia sp., a Candidatus Neoehrlichia lotoris-like genotype and Anaplasma marginale in dogs. Ticks Tick Borne Dis 2018;9:1302 1309.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Chien NTH, Nguyen TL, Bui KL, et al. Anaplasma marginale and A. platys characterized from dairy and indigenous cattle and dogs in northern Vietnam. Korean J Parasitol 2019;57:43 47.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Lanza-Perea M, Zieger U, Qurollo BA, et al. Intraoperative bleeding in dogs from Grenada seroreactive to Anaplasma platys and Ehrlichia canis. J Vet Intern Med 2014;28:1702 1707.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Sakamoto L, Ichikawa Y, Sakata Y, et al. Detection of Anaplasma bovis DNA in the peripheral blood of domestic dogs in Japan. Jpn J Infect Dis 2010;63:349 352.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Kim H-Y, Mott J, Zhi N, et al. Cytokine gene expression by peripheral blood leukocytes in horses experimentally infected with Anaplasma phagocytophila. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 2002;9:1079 1084.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Scorpio DG, Dumler JS, Barat NC, et al. Comparative strain analysis of Anaplasma phagocytophilum infection and clinical outcomes in a canine model of granulocytic anaplasmosis. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis 2011;11:223 229.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Lappin MR, Breitschwerdt EB, Jensen WA, et al. Molecular and serologic evidence of Anaplasma phagocytophilum infection in cats in North America. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2004;225:893 896.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Qurollo BA, Balakrishnan N, Cannon CZ, et al. Co-infection with Anaplasma platys, Bartonella henselae, Bartonella koehlerae and ‘Candidatus Mycoplasma haemominutum‘ in a cat diagnosed with splenic plasmacytosis and multiple myeloma. J Feline Med Surg 2014;16:713 720.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Arraga-Alvarado CM, Qurollo BA, Parra OC, et al. Case report: molecular evidence of Anaplasma platys infection in two women from Venezuela. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2014;91:1161 1165.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Dahmani M, Davoust B, Benterki MS, et al. Development of a new PCR-based assay to detect Anaplasmataceae and the first report of Anaplasma phagocytophilum and Anaplasma platys in cattle from Algeria. Comp Immunol Microbiol Infect Dis 2015;39:39 45.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Breitschwerdt EB, Hegarty BC, Hancock SI. Sequential evaluation of dogs naturally infected with Ehrlichia canis, Ehrlichia chaffeensis, Ehrlichia equi, Ehrlichia ewingii, or Bartonella vinsonii. J Clin Microbiol 1998;36:2645 2651.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Hegarty BC, Maggi RG, Koskinen P, et al. Ehrlichia muris infection in a dog from Minnesota. J Vet Intern Med 2012;26:1217 1220.

  • 17.

    Qurollo BA, Davenport AC, Sherbert BM, et al. Infection with Panola Mountain Ehrlichia sp. in a dog with atypical lymphocytes and clonal T-cell expansion. J Vet Intern Med 2013;27:1251 1255.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Qurollo BA, Chandrashekar R, Hegarty BC, et al. A serological survey of tick-borne pathogens in dogs in North America and the Caribbean as assessed by Anaplasma phagocytophilum, A. platys, Ehrlichia canis, E. chaffeensis, E. ewingii, and Borrelia burgdorferi species-specific peptides. Infect Ecol Epidemiol 2014;4:24699.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Beall MJ, Alleman AR, Breitschwerdt EB, et al. Seroprevalence of Ehrlichia canis, Ehrlichia chaffeensis and Ehrlichia ewingii in dogs in North America. Parasit Vectors 2012;5:29.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Harrus S, Waner T. Diagnosis of canine monocytotropic ehrlichiosis (Ehrlichia canis): an overview. Vet J 2011;187:292 296.

  • 21.

    Mylonakis ME, Harrus S, Breitschwerdt EB. An update on the treatment of canine monocytic ehrlichiosis (Ehrlichia canis). Vet J 2019;246:45 53.

  • 22.

    Starkey LA, Barrett AW, Beall MJ, et al. Persistent Ehrlichia ewingii infection in dogs after natural tick infestation. J Vet Intern Med 2015;29:552 555.

  • 23.

    Qurollo BA, Buch J, Chandrashekar R, et al. Clinicopathological findings in 41 dogs (2008–2018) naturally infected with Ehrlichia ewingii. J Vet Intern Med 2019;33:618 629.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Kidd L. Optimal vector-borne disease screening in dogs using both serology-based and polymerase chain reaction–based diagnostic panels. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2019;49:703 718.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25.

    Woody BJ, Hoskins JD. Ehrlichial diseases of dogs. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1991;21:75 98.

  • 26.

    Waner T, Harrus S, Jongejan F, et al. Significance of serological testing for ehrlichial diseases in dogs with special emphasis on the diagnosis of canine monocytic ehrlichiosis caused by Ehrlichia canis. Vet Parasitol 2001;95:1 15.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27.

    O'Connor TP, Hanscom JL, Hegarty BC, et al. Comparison of an indirect immunofluorescence assay, western blot analysis, and a commercially available ELISA for detection of Ehrlichia canis antibodies in canine sera. Am J Vet Res 2006;67:206 210.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28.

    Chandrashekar R, Mainville CA, Beall MJ, et al. Performance of a commercially available in-clinic ELISA for the detection of antibodies against Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Ehrlichia canis, and Borrelia burgdorferi and Dirofilaria immitis antigen in dogs. Am J Vet Res 2010;71:1443 1450.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29.

    Solano-Gallego L, Llull J, Osso M, et al. A serological study of exposure to arthropod-borne pathogens in dogs from northeastern Spain. Vet Res 2006;37:231 244.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30.

    Rikihisa Y, Ewing SA, Fox JC, et al. Analyses of Ehrlichia canis and a canine granulocytic Ehrlichia infection. J Clin Microbiol 1992;30:143 148.

  • 31.

    Gaunt S, Beall M, Stillman B, et al. Experimental infection and co-infection of dogs with Anaplasma platys and Ehrlichia canis: hematologic, serologic and molecular findings. Parasit Vectors 2010;3:33.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 32.

    O'Connor TP, Saucier JM, Daniluk D, et al. Evaluation of peptide- and recombinant protein–based assays for detection of anti–Ehrlichia ewingii antibodies in experimentally and naturally infected dogs (Erratum published in Am J Vet Res 2010;71:1383). Am J Vet Res 2010;71:1195 1200.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 33.

    Huang H, Lin M, Wang X, et al. Proteomic analysis of and immune responses to Ehrlichia chaffeensis lipoproteins. Infect Immun 2008;76:3405 3414.

  • 34.

    O'Connor TP Jr, Chandrashekar R, inventors; Idexx Laboratories, assignee. Peptides for detection to Anaplasma phagocytophilum. US patent 6,964,855. Nov 15, 2005.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 35.

    Kordick SK, Breitschwerdt EB, Hegarty BC, et al. Coinfection with multiple tick-borne pathogens in a Walker Hound kennel in North Carolina. J Clin Microbiol 1999;37:2631 2638.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 36.

    Stillman BA, Monn M, Liu J, et al. Performance of a commercially available in-clinic ELISA for detection of antibodies against Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Anaplasma platys, Borrelia burgdorferi, Ehrlichia canis, and Ehrlichia ewingii and Dirofilaria immitis antigen in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2014;245:80 86.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 37.

    McBride JW, Corstvet RE, Gaunt SD, et al. Kinetics of antibody response to Ehrlichia canis immunoreactive proteins. Infect Immun 2003;71:2516 2524.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 38.

    Moutailler S, Moro CV, Vaumourin E, et al. Co-infection of ticks: the rule rather than the exception. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2016;10:e0004539.

  • 39.

    Starkey LA, Barrett AW, Chandrashekar R, et al. Development of antibodies to and PCR detection of Ehrlichia spp. in dogs following natural tick exposure. Vet Microbiol 2014;173:379 384.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 40.

    Nair AD, Cheng C, Ganta CK, et al. Comparative experimental infection study in dogs with Ehrlichia canis, E. chaffeensis, Anaplasma platys and A. phagocytophilum. PLoS One 2016;11:e0148239.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 41.

    Lashnits E, Neupane P, Maggi RG, et al. Detection of Bartonella spp. in dogs after infection with Rickettsia rickettsii. J Vet Intern Med 2020;34:145 159.

Advertisement

Comparison of Anaplasma and Ehrlichia species–specific peptide ELISAs with whole organism–based immunofluorescent assays for serologic diagnosis of anaplasmosis and ehrlichiosis in dogs

View More View Less
  • 1 Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27606.
  • | 2 Idexx Laboratories Inc, Westbrook, ME 04092.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the performance of 5 synthetic peptide–based ELISAs with that of 3 commercially available immunofluorescent assays (IFAs) for serologic diagnosis of anaplasmosis and ehrlichiosis in dogs.

SAMPLE

A convenience set of 109 serum samples obtained before and at various times after inoculation for 23 dogs that were experimentally infected with Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Anaplasma platys, Ehrlichia canis, Ehrlichia chaffeensis, or Ehrlichia ewingii and 1 uninfected control dog in previous studies.

PROCEDURES

All serum samples were assessed with 5 synthetic peptide–based ELISAs designed to detect antibodies against A phagocytophilum, A platys, E canis, E chaffeensis, and E ewingii and 3 whole organism–based IFAs designed to detect antibodies against A phagocytophilum, E canis, and E chaffeensis. The species-specific seroreactivity, cross-reactivity with the other tick-borne pathogens (TBPs), and diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were calculated for each assay and compared among assays.

RESULTS

All serum samples obtained from dogs experimentally infected with a TBP yielded positive results on a serologic assay specific for that pathogen. In general, sensitivity was comparable between ELISAs and IFAs and tended to increase with duration after inoculation. Compared with the IFAs, the corresponding ELISAs were highly specific and rarely cross-reacted with antibodies against other TBPs.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Results suggested that peptide-based ELISAs had enhanced specificity relative to whole organism–based IFAs for detection of antibodies against Anaplasma and Ehrlichia spp, which should facilitate accurate diagnosis and may help detect dogs coinfected with multiple TBPs.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the performance of 5 synthetic peptide–based ELISAs with that of 3 commercially available immunofluorescent assays (IFAs) for serologic diagnosis of anaplasmosis and ehrlichiosis in dogs.

SAMPLE

A convenience set of 109 serum samples obtained before and at various times after inoculation for 23 dogs that were experimentally infected with Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Anaplasma platys, Ehrlichia canis, Ehrlichia chaffeensis, or Ehrlichia ewingii and 1 uninfected control dog in previous studies.

PROCEDURES

All serum samples were assessed with 5 synthetic peptide–based ELISAs designed to detect antibodies against A phagocytophilum, A platys, E canis, E chaffeensis, and E ewingii and 3 whole organism–based IFAs designed to detect antibodies against A phagocytophilum, E canis, and E chaffeensis. The species-specific seroreactivity, cross-reactivity with the other tick-borne pathogens (TBPs), and diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were calculated for each assay and compared among assays.

RESULTS

All serum samples obtained from dogs experimentally infected with a TBP yielded positive results on a serologic assay specific for that pathogen. In general, sensitivity was comparable between ELISAs and IFAs and tended to increase with duration after inoculation. Compared with the IFAs, the corresponding ELISAs were highly specific and rarely cross-reacted with antibodies against other TBPs.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Results suggested that peptide-based ELISAs had enhanced specificity relative to whole organism–based IFAs for detection of antibodies against Anaplasma and Ehrlichia spp, which should facilitate accurate diagnosis and may help detect dogs coinfected with multiple TBPs.

Supplementary Materials

    • Supplementary Table S1 (PDF 190 kb)

Contributor Notes

Address correspondence to Dr. Qurollo (Barbara_Qurollo@ncsu.edu).