↓ Skip to main content

A comprehensive evaluation of an ELISA for the diagnosis of the two most common ascarids in chickens using plasma or egg yolks

Overview of attention for article published in Parasites & Vectors, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A comprehensive evaluation of an ELISA for the diagnosis of the two most common ascarids in chickens using plasma or egg yolks
Published in
Parasites & Vectors, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13071-017-2121-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gürbüz Daş, Mark Hennies, Birgit Sohnrey, Shayan Rahimian, Kalyakorn Wongrak, Manuel Stehr, Matthias Gauly

Abstract

Classical faecal egg counts (FEC) provide less reliable diagnostic information for nematode infections in chickens. We developed an ELISA based on Ascaridia galli antigens and tested two hypotheses, as follows: (i) IgY antibodies developed against A. galli will also be useful to identify Heterakis gallinarum infections, and (ii) circulating antibodies stored in egg yolks are as good as plasma samples, so a non-invasive diagnosis is possible. The aim of this study, therefore, was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the ELISA system with FEC, using both plasma and egg yolks from experimentally infected hens. In addition, naturally infected animals were evaluated to validate the assay. The assay quantified large differences (P < 0.001) in plasma or in egg-yolk IgY concentrations between infected and uninfected animals in two experiments, each performed with either of the nematode species. The assay performed with high accuracy as quantified with the area under the ROC curve (AUC) values of > 0.90 for both nematodes using either plasma or egg yolks. Sensitivity of the assay was 94 and 93% with plasma and egg yolk samples, respectively, whereas FEC yielded in a sensitivity of 84% in A. galli experiment. Total test accuracy of the assay with plasma samples (AUC = 0.99) tended to be higher (P = 0.0630) than FEC (AUC = 0.92) for A. galli, while the assay with either sample matrix performed similar to FEC (AUC ≥ 0.91) for H. gallinarum. Among the three tests, the FECs correlated better with A. galli burden than the ELISA. Although 90% of naturally infected hens were correctly identified by the ELISA, 45% of the infected hens tested negative with FEC, indicating the validity of the higher test accuracy of the ELISA. Antigens of A. galli can be used successfully to identify H. gallinarum-infected animals, indicating that chickens develop cross-reactive antibodies against the two closely related species. Egg yolks are as informative as plasma samples, so that animal welfare-friendly sampling is possible. Although the assay with plasma samples reveals qualitative information of higher quality than FECs on the infection status of naturally infected birds, the latter is still a better tool to assess the intensity of A. galli but not of H. gallinarum infections.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 18%
Other 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Researcher 3 7%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 15 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 27%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 8 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 14 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 January 2018.
All research outputs
#13,547,128
of 22,965,074 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#2,473
of 5,485 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,603
of 310,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#83
of 164 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,965,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,485 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,294 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 164 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.