You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for
- Author or Editor: Catherine A. Alinovi x
- Refine by Access: Content accessible to me x
Objective—To analyze and compare contents of the preocular tear films of llamas and cattle.
Animals—40 llamas and 35 cattle.
Procedure—Tear pH was determined by use of a pH meter. Total protein concentration was determined by use of 2 microtiter methods. Tear proteins were separated by use of electrophoresis and molecular weights of bands were calculated. Western blot immunoassay was used to detect IgA, lactoferrin, transferrin, ceruloplasmin, α1-antitrypsin, α1-amylase, and α2-macroglobulin. Enzyme electrophoresis was used to detect proteases.
Results—The pH of llama and cattle tears were 8.05 ± 0.01 and 8.10 ± 0.01, respectively. For results of both methods, total protein concentration of llama tears was significantly greater than that of cattle tears. Molecular weights of tear protein bands were similar within and between the 2 species, although llama tears had a distinct 13.6-kd band that was not detected in cattle. Lactoferrin, IgA, transferrin, ceruloplasmin, α1-antitrypsin, α1-amylase, α2–macroglobulin, and proteases were detected in both species.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Llama tears have significantly greater total protein concentration than cattle tears, whereas pH is similar between species. Because little variation was detected within species for the number and molecular weight of protein bands, pooling of tears for analysis is justified. Results suggest that lactoferrin, ceruloplasmin, transferrin, α1-antitrypsin, α2-macroglobulin, α1-amylase, and IgA are present in the tears of llamas and cattle. (Am J Vet Res 2000;61:1289–1293)
Objectives—To assess methods of detecting environmental contamination with Salmonella organisms and evaluate a cleaning and disinfection protocol for horse stalls in a veterinary teaching hospital.
Sample Population—37 horses with diarrhea likely to be caused by Salmonella infection and their stall environments.
Procedures—Fecal samples were collected from horses daily during hospitalization; samples were obtained from stall sites after cleaning and application of disinfectants. Fecal and environmental samples were cultured for Salmonella spp and tested via polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay to detect Salmonella DNA.
Results—1 horse died and 2 were discharged prior to sample collection. Fecal samples from 9 of 34 horses yielded growth of Salmonella organisms on bacteriologic culture, and 23 yielded positive results via PCR assay on ≥ 1 occasion. Among environmental samples from 21 stalls, salmonellae were detected at ≥ 1 stall site on 6 of 78 occasions, and ≥ 1 stall site yielded positive results via PCR assay on 69 of 77 occasions. Salmonella DNA was detected more frequently in samples of stall drains, cracks, and corners. Salmonella spp were cultured from samples of 3 stalls after both initial and second cleaning and disinfection cycles, but no organisms were detected in samples obtained after use of a peroxygen disinfectant.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggest that stalls in which horses with salmonellosis were housed should only be used to accommodate newly hospitalized horses after samples (collected after 2 cycles of cleaning and disinfection) from drains, cracks, and corners yield negative results on bacteriologic culture. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2003;223:1640–1644)