Comparative analysis of two microbiological tests in the detection of oxytetracycline residue in chicken using ELISA as gold standard

E. Ezenduka, O. J. Okorie-Kanu, J. A. Nwanta
{"title":"Comparative analysis of two microbiological tests in the detection of oxytetracycline residue in chicken using ELISA as gold standard","authors":"E. Ezenduka, O. J. Okorie-Kanu, J. A. Nwanta","doi":"10.1080/15321819.2019.1669639","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The validity of two microbiological methods: Tube (Premi® Test) and Plate (Three Plate Test) Test for the detection of oxytetracycline (OTC) in poultry was done using Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) immunoassay as gold standard. OTC was administered to two groups of birds: intramuscular drug administration (group A) and oral drug administration (group B). Liver and muscle tissue samples from birds in both groups were tested for the presence of OTCwith the Four Plate Test (FPT), Premi® Test and ELISA. For muscle tissues, FPT had a sensitivity of 71.4% and 60%, while Premi® Test had a sensitivity of 57% and 20% for intramuscular and orally treated birds, respectively. For the liver tissues, FPT had 87.5% and 83.5% while Premi® Test had 37.5% and 16.6% sensitivity for intramuscular and orally treated birds, respectively. The two tests had 100% specificity for OTC in tissues of birds from both treatment groups. There is a strong correlation (r = 0.93) between the inhibition zones of FPT and ELISA concentrations in OTC detection. FPT, therefore, has a higher sensitivity for OTC than Premi® Test.","PeriodicalId":15987,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Immunoassay and Immunochemistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Immunoassay and Immunochemistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15321819.2019.1669639","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

ABSTRACT The validity of two microbiological methods: Tube (Premi® Test) and Plate (Three Plate Test) Test for the detection of oxytetracycline (OTC) in poultry was done using Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) immunoassay as gold standard. OTC was administered to two groups of birds: intramuscular drug administration (group A) and oral drug administration (group B). Liver and muscle tissue samples from birds in both groups were tested for the presence of OTCwith the Four Plate Test (FPT), Premi® Test and ELISA. For muscle tissues, FPT had a sensitivity of 71.4% and 60%, while Premi® Test had a sensitivity of 57% and 20% for intramuscular and orally treated birds, respectively. For the liver tissues, FPT had 87.5% and 83.5% while Premi® Test had 37.5% and 16.6% sensitivity for intramuscular and orally treated birds, respectively. The two tests had 100% specificity for OTC in tissues of birds from both treatment groups. There is a strong correlation (r = 0.93) between the inhibition zones of FPT and ELISA concentrations in OTC detection. FPT, therefore, has a higher sensitivity for OTC than Premi® Test.
以ELISA为金标准的两种微生物学方法检测鸡肉中土霉素残留的比较分析
以酶联免疫吸附法(ELISA)为金标准,研究了两种微生物检测方法(管法(Premi®法)和板法(三板法)在家禽中土霉素(OTC)检测中的有效性。采用肌肉给药(A组)和口服给药(B组)两组禽鸟进行OTC治疗。采用四板试验(FPT)、Premi®试验和ELISA检测两组禽鸟肝脏和肌肉组织中OTC的存在。对于肌肉组织,FPT的敏感性为71.4%和60%,而Premi®Test对肌肉注射和口服治疗的敏感性分别为57%和20%。对于肝脏组织,FPT的敏感性为87.5%和83.5%,而Premi®Test对肌肉注射和口服治疗的敏感性分别为37.5%和16.6%。这两种检测方法对两个治疗组的鸟类组织中OTC的特异性均为100%。FPT的抑制区与ELISA浓度对OTC的检测有很强的相关性(r = 0.93)。因此,FPT对OTC的敏感性高于Premi®Test。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信