Brucella Species and Brucella melitensis

A special issue of Pathogens (ISSN 2076-0817). This special issue belongs to the section "Bacterial Pathogens".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 August 2022) | Viewed by 27570

Special Issue Editors


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
1. Research Unit in Hygiene, Statistics and Public Health, Campus Bio-Medico University, Rome, Italy
2. Chief Medical Officer, MG Vannini Hospital-Saint Camillus Daughters' Institute, 00177 Roma, Italy
Interests: Brucella species; Brucella melitensis

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Director, Research Unit in Hygiene, Statistics and Public Health – Campus Bio-Medico University, Rome, Italy
Interests: Brucella

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues, 

Brucellosis is recognized as one of the most prevalent bacterial zoonoses worldwide, caused by infection with Gram-negative bacteria of the genus Brucella. A wide range of domestic and wild animals can be identified as primary hosts, with humans as secondary. Brucella species are small, Gram-negative and coccobacilli bacteria. Twelve species have been described and six are known to be pathogenic for both animals and humans. 

In that context, human exposure occurs through contaminated food products (meat and raw, unpasteurized milk), direct contact with infected animals, or inhalation of contagious aerosols. Humans are accidental hosts, but brucellosis continues to be a major public health and zoonotic concern. 

A significant proportion of cases still continue to be unreported or unspecified. However, brucellosis can affect all age and sex groups, and its control in humans largely depends on limiting the infection in animals through surveillance and care programs, as well as through animal vaccination; efficient strategies for prevention among exposed professionals can help, too. 

For this Special Issue of Pathogens, we invite you to submit research articles, review articles, short notes, as well as communications related to Brucella species molecular and epidemiological aspects, surveillance measures, food safety process control, and professional exposure evaluation. We look forward to your relevant contribution.

Prof. Dr. Andrea Ianni
Prof. Dr. Tommasangelo Petitti
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Pathogens is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2700 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • Brucella species
  • surveillance 
  • safety and quality 
  • control system 
  • brucellosis 
  • evidence 
  • exposed professional categories 
  • exposure prevention

Published Papers (8 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review, Other

11 pages, 1388 KiB  
Article
Modelling Human Brucellosis Based on Infection Rate and Vaccination Coverage of Sheep and Goats
by Georgios Dougas, Aristomenis Katsiolis, Maria Linou, Polychronis Kostoulas and Charalambos Billinis
Pathogens 2022, 11(2), 167; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/pathogens11020167 - 27 Jan 2022
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 2262
Abstract
In this study, the vaccination coverage, serological sampling and infection rate of sheep and goats were evaluated as predictors for the modeling of human brucellosis in Greece. The human brucellosis disease frequency per local regional unit (RU) varied significantly (RR90) among consecutive years. [...] Read more.
In this study, the vaccination coverage, serological sampling and infection rate of sheep and goats were evaluated as predictors for the modeling of human brucellosis in Greece. The human brucellosis disease frequency per local regional unit (RU) varied significantly (RR90) among consecutive years. The notification rate was higher (p < 0.001) in the RUs with implementation of vaccination in sheep and goats (vaccination zone—VZ) with a median of 1.4 (IQR 0.0–3.1) compared with the RUs of the eradication zone (EZ) with a median of 0.0 (IQR 0.0–0.0). In VZ, the increased frequency of human cases was associated with delayed vaccine administration (estimate: 0.14 (0.04; 0.29), p = 0.03) and higher vaccination coverage of the animals (estimate: −0.349 (−0.72; −0.07), p < 0.01). However, the flock sampling rate was highly heterogenous among RUs (IQR 10.56–52.93), and inconsistent within RUs throughout the period of the study 2013–2017 (p = 0.001), limiting the reliable estimation of the infection rate in livestock and the design of an integrated One Health model for human disease. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Brucella Species and Brucella melitensis)
Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 1012 KiB  
Article
Progressive Area Elimination of Bovine Brucellosis, 2013–2018, in Gauteng Province, South Africa: Evaluation Using Laboratory Test Reports
by Krpasha Govindasamy, Eric M. C. Etter, Peter Geertsma and Peter N. Thompson
Pathogens 2021, 10(12), 1595; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/pathogens10121595 - 09 Dec 2021
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2531
Abstract
Bovine brucellosis is a zoonotic disease of global public health and economic importance. South Africa has had a national bovine brucellosis eradication scheme since 1979; however, no published report on elimination progress from any province exists. We analysed laboratory test results of all [...] Read more.
Bovine brucellosis is a zoonotic disease of global public health and economic importance. South Africa has had a national bovine brucellosis eradication scheme since 1979; however, no published report on elimination progress from any province exists. We analysed laboratory test results of all cattle herds participating in the Gauteng Provincial Veterinary Services’ eradication scheme between 2013 and 2018. Herd reactor status and within-herd seroprevalence, modelled using mixed-effects logistic and negative binomial regression models, respectively, showed no significant change over the period. However, provincial State Vet Areas, Randfontein (OR = 1.6; 95% CI: 1.2–2.1; p < 0.001) and Germiston (OR = 1.9; 95% CI: 1.5–2.5, p = 0.008) had higher odds of reactor herds than the Pretoria Area and within-herd prevalence count ratios for these areas were 1.5-fold greater than the Pretoria State Vet Area (p < 0.001). Reactor herds were associated with increased herd size (p < 0.001) and larger herd sizes were associated with lower within-herd prevalence (p < 0.001). Despite no evidence of significant progress toward bovine brucellosis elimination in Gauteng province, variability in bovine brucellosis prevalence between State Vet Areas exists. A public health and farmer-supported strategy of ongoing district-based surveillance and cattle vaccination targeting small- to medium-sized herds combined with compulsory test and slaughter of reactors in larger herds is recommended for the province. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Brucella Species and Brucella melitensis)
Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 1123 KiB  
Article
Bovine Brucellosis in Gauteng, South Africa: Seroprevalence amongst Cattle Handlers and Variables Associated with Seropositive Cattle Herds, 2014–2016
by Krpasha Govindasamy, Peter N. Thompson, Bernice N. Harris, Jennifer Rossouw, Darrell A. Abernethy and Eric M. C. Etter
Pathogens 2021, 10(12), 1547; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/pathogens10121547 - 26 Nov 2021
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 2301
Abstract
In South Africa, the prevalence of cattle handler exposure to Brucella on cattle farms is unknown and risk factors and cattle symptoms associated with infected cattle herds are unavailable. To address this gap, a case-control study of cattle herds was conducted in Gauteng [...] Read more.
In South Africa, the prevalence of cattle handler exposure to Brucella on cattle farms is unknown and risk factors and cattle symptoms associated with infected cattle herds are unavailable. To address this gap, a case-control study of cattle herds was conducted in Gauteng province and farm workers and veterinary officials were tested for exposure to Brucella. Seroprevalence amongst farm workers exposed to case herds ranged from 4.0% (BrucellaCapt®) to 16.7% (IgG ELISA®), compared to those exposed to control herds, where seroprevalence ranged from 1.9% (BrucellaCapt®) to 5.7% (IgG ELISA®). Seroprevalence amongst veterinary officials was significantly greater compared to farm workers exposed to case herds for the outcome RBT+ IgM- IgG+ (OR = 11.1, 95% CI: 2.5–49.9, p = 0.002) and RBT- IgM- IgG+ (OR = 6.3, 95% CI: 2.3–17.3, p < 0.001). Risk factors associated with being an infected herd were: being a government-sponsored farm vs. private farm (OR 4.0; 95% CI: 1.4–11.3; p = 0.009), beef vs. dairy herd (OR 7.9; 95% CI: 1.4–44.9; p = 0.020), open vs. closed herd (OR 3.3; 95% CI: 1.1–10.4; p = 0.038) and the presence of antelope on the farm (OR 29.4; 95% CI: 4.0–218.2; p = 0.001). Abortions (OR = 5.1; 95% CI: 2.0–13.3; p < 0.001), weak calves in the herd (OR = 8.0; 95% CI: 2.6–24.4; p < 0.001), reduction in number of calves born (OR = 9.0; 95% CI: 2.1–43.6; p < 0.001), reduction in conception rate (OR = 3.9; 95% CI: 0.8–18.3; p = 0.046), hygromas in cattle (p = 0.011) and farmers reporting brucellosis-like symptoms in their farm workers or in him/herself (OR = 3.4; 95% CI: 1.3–8.7; p = 0.006) were more likely to be associated with Brucella infected herds than control herds. This evidence can be used in strategic planning to protect both human and herd health. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Brucella Species and Brucella melitensis)
Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 526 KiB  
Article
Knowledge of Brucellosis, Health-Seeking Behaviour, and Risk Factors for Brucella Infection amongst Workers on Cattle Farms in Gauteng, South Africa
by Krpasha Govindasamy, Eric M. C. Etter, Bernice N. Harris, Jennifer Rossouw, Darrell A. Abernethy and Peter N. Thompson
Pathogens 2021, 10(11), 1484; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/pathogens10111484 - 14 Nov 2021
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 3412
Abstract
Brucellosis in humans is under-detected and underreported in sub-Saharan Africa. Risk factors associated with Brucella infection and health seeking behaviour in response to brucellosis-like symptoms, amongst cattle farm workers and veterinary officials in South Africa, are unknown. Farm workers and veterinary officials ( [...] Read more.
Brucellosis in humans is under-detected and underreported in sub-Saharan Africa. Risk factors associated with Brucella infection and health seeking behaviour in response to brucellosis-like symptoms, amongst cattle farm workers and veterinary officials in South Africa, are unknown. Farm workers and veterinary officials (N = 230) were screened for brucellosis using commercial Rose Bengal Test (RBT®), IgM Enzyme-linked Immunoassay (ELISA)®, IgG ELISA® and the BrucellaCapt® test. Knowledge of brucellosis and risk factors for exposure to Brucella were also investigated. Seroprevalence varied according to test used: 10.1% (RBT®), 20.9% (IgG ELISA®) and 6.5% (BrucellaCapt®). Only 22.2% (6/27) of veterinary officials opt to visit a clinic, doctor, or hospital in response to self-experienced brucellosis-like symptoms, compared to 74.9% (152/203) of farm workers (p < 0.001). Of the BrucellaCapt® seropositive participants, 53% (7/15) did not visit a clinic in response to brucellosis-like symptoms. Weak evidence of an association between the handling of afterbirth or placenta and infection of a short evolution (RBT®, IgM ELISA® and IgG ELISA® seropositive) was found (OR = 8.9, 95% CI: 1.0–81.1, p = 0.052), and strong evidence of an association between this outcome and the slaughter of cattle (OR = 5.3, 95% CI: 1.4–19.6, p = 0.013). There was strong evidence of a positive association between inactive/resolved infection and veterinary officials vs. farm workers exposed to seropositive herds (OR = 7.0, 95% CI: 2.4–20.2, p < 0.001), with a simultaneous negative association with the handling of afterbirth or placenta (OR = 3.9, 95% CI: 1.3–11.3, p = 0.012). Findings suggest a proportion of undetected clinical cases of brucellosis amongst workers on cattle farms in Gauteng. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Brucella Species and Brucella melitensis)
Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 1785 KiB  
Article
Serosurvey and Risk Factors Associated with Brucella Infection in High Risk Occupations from District Lahore and Kasur of Punjab, Pakistan
by Shahzad Ali, Usama Saeed, Muhammad Rizwan, Laiba Hassan, Muhammad Ali Syed, Falk Melzer, Hosny El-Adawy and Heinrich Neubauer
Pathogens 2021, 10(5), 620; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/pathogens10050620 - 18 May 2021
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 2686
Abstract
Brucellosis is a neglected zoonotic disease, and occupations with a high risk of infection exist. Limited information is available on brucellosis for these employees at high risk in Pakistan. A total of 459 persons with high-risk occupations, i.e., 211 abattoir workers, 63 milkers, [...] Read more.
Brucellosis is a neglected zoonotic disease, and occupations with a high risk of infection exist. Limited information is available on brucellosis for these employees at high risk in Pakistan. A total of 459 persons with high-risk occupations, i.e., 211 abattoir workers, 63 milkers, 52 dung cake makers, 44 veterinarians, 44 shepherds, and 45 veterinary students of the districts Kasur and Lahore, Pakistan, were tested in this study. Blood samples and information on place of residence, gender, age, urbanicity, type of occupation, socioeconomic status, contact with animals, consumption of raw milk, contact to women who had a miscarriage, contact to aborted animal fetus or abortion material, pregnancy, miscarriage history, or intrauterine fetal death were collected. Serum samples were examined using Rose Bengal tests for anti-Brucella antibodies and seropositive samples were subjected to genus-specific qPCR for the detection of DNA. Data were analyzed using chi-squared and binary regression. Twenty (4.35%) persons were seropositive for anti-Brucella antibodies. Out of these, 18 (90%) were tested positive by Brucella genus-specific qPCR. Positive sera were more often found in Lahore district (8.3%) than in Kasur district (3.1%). Persons older than 36 years were more often seropositive. Persons involved in the handing of milk and in contact with animals were more often seropositive. Contact with women who had had a miscarriage was also a significant factor for seropositivity for brucellosis. Place of residence, gender, age, urbanicity, and contact with animals were identified as potential risk factors in the present study. The present study confirmed that brucellosis is an occupation hazard for abattoir workers, milkers, dung cake makers, and veterinarians in the districts of Lahore and Kasur of Punjab, Pakistan. The study shows the need for strategies for safety at work to minimize the risk of infection. Raising awareness for the prevention and use of proper personal protection equipment during the slaughtering and treatment of animal is highly needed. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Brucella Species and Brucella melitensis)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research, Other

18 pages, 700 KiB  
Review
Pathogenicity and Its Implications in Taxonomy: The Brucella and Ochrobactrum Case
by Edgardo Moreno, José María Blasco, Jean Jacques Letesson, Jean Pierre Gorvel and Ignacio Moriyón
Pathogens 2022, 11(3), 377; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/pathogens11030377 - 21 Mar 2022
Cited by 20 | Viewed by 4014
Abstract
The intracellular pathogens of the genus Brucella are phylogenetically close to Ochrobactrum, a diverse group of free-living bacteria with a few species occasionally infecting medically compromised patients. A group of taxonomists recently included all Ochrobactrum organisms in the genus Brucella based on [...] Read more.
The intracellular pathogens of the genus Brucella are phylogenetically close to Ochrobactrum, a diverse group of free-living bacteria with a few species occasionally infecting medically compromised patients. A group of taxonomists recently included all Ochrobactrum organisms in the genus Brucella based on global genome analyses and alleged equivalences with genera such as Mycobacterium. Here, we demonstrate that such equivalencies are incorrect because they overlook the complexities of pathogenicity. By summarizing Brucella and Ochrobactrum divergences in lifestyle, structure, physiology, population, closed versus open pangenomes, genomic traits, and pathogenicity, we show that when they are adequately understood, they are highly relevant in taxonomy and not unidimensional quantitative characters. Thus, the Ochrobactrum and Brucella differences are not limited to their assignments to different “risk-groups”, a biologically (and hence, taxonomically) oversimplified description that, moreover, does not support ignoring the nomen periculosum rule, as proposed. Since the epidemiology, prophylaxis, diagnosis, and treatment are thoroughly unrelated, merging free-living Ochrobactrum organisms with highly pathogenic Brucella organisms brings evident risks for veterinarians, medical doctors, and public health authorities who confront brucellosis, a significant zoonosis worldwide. Therefore, from taxonomical and practical standpoints, the Brucella and Ochrobactrum genera must be maintained apart. Consequently, we urge researchers, culture collections, and databases to keep their canonical nomenclature. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Brucella Species and Brucella melitensis)
Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 1351 KiB  
Review
Microbiological Laboratory Diagnosis of Human Brucellosis: An Overview
by Giovanni Di Bonaventura, Silvia Angeletti, Andrea Ianni, Tommasangelo Petitti and Giovanni Gherardi
Pathogens 2021, 10(12), 1623; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/pathogens10121623 - 14 Dec 2021
Cited by 35 | Viewed by 7810
Abstract
Brucella spp. are Gram-negative, non-motile, non-spore-forming, slow-growing, facultative intracellular bacteria causing brucellosis. Brucellosis is an endemic of specific geographic areas and, although underreported, represents the most common zoonotic infection, with an annual global incidence of 500,000 cases among humans. Humans represent an occasional [...] Read more.
Brucella spp. are Gram-negative, non-motile, non-spore-forming, slow-growing, facultative intracellular bacteria causing brucellosis. Brucellosis is an endemic of specific geographic areas and, although underreported, represents the most common zoonotic infection, with an annual global incidence of 500,000 cases among humans. Humans represent an occasional host where the infection is mainly caused by B. melitensis, which is the most virulent; B. abortus; B. suis; and B. canis. A microbiological analysis is crucial to identifying human cases because clinical symptoms of human brucellosis are variable and aspecific. The laboratory diagnosis is based on three different microbiological approaches: (i) direct diagnosis by culture, (ii) indirect diagnosis by serological tests, and (iii) direct rapid diagnosis by molecular PCR-based methods. Despite the established experience with serological tests and highly sensitive nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs), a culture is still considered the “gold standard” in the laboratory diagnosis of brucellosis due to its clinical and epidemiological relevance. Moreover, the automated BC systems now available have increased the sensitivity of BCs and shortened the time to detection of Brucella species. The main limitations of serological tests are the lack of common interpretative criteria, the suboptimal specificity due to interspecies cross-reactivity, and the low sensitivity during the early stage of disease. Despite that, serological tests remain the main diagnostic tool, especially in endemic areas because they are inexpensive, user friendly, and have high negative predictive value. Promising serological tests based on new synthetic antigens have been recently developed together with novel point-of-care tests without the need for dedicated equipment and expertise. NAATs are rapid tests that can help diagnose brucellosis in a few hours with high sensitivity and specificity. Nevertheless, the interpretation of NAAT-positive results requires attention because it may not necessarily indicate an active infection but rather a low bacterial inoculum, DNA from dead bacteria, or a patient that has recovered. Refined NAATs should be developed, and their performances should be compared with those of commercial and home-made molecular tests before being commercialized for the diagnosis of brucellosis. Here, we review and report the most common and updated microbiological diagnostic methods currently available for the laboratory diagnosis of brucellosis. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Brucella Species and Brucella melitensis)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Other

Jump to: Research, Review

4 pages, 220 KiB  
Brief Report
Detection of Brucella abortus Vaccine Strain RB51 in Water Buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) Milk
by Daniela Averaimo, Fabrizio De Massis, Giovanni Savini, Giuliano Garofolo, Flavio Sacchini, Anna Abass, Manuela Tittarelli, Giacomo Migliorati and Antonio Petrini
Pathogens 2022, 11(7), 748; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/pathogens11070748 - 30 Jun 2022
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 1280
Abstract
The isolation of B. abortus RB51 vaccine strain from a milk sample in a water buffalo farm in southern Italy emphasizes the risk to public health of consuming contaminated milk or milk products following illegal vaccination. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Brucella Species and Brucella melitensis)
Back to TopTop