Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/31753
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorShifaw, Anwaren
dc.contributor.authorFeyera, Tekaen
dc.contributor.authorElliott, Timothyen
dc.contributor.authorSharpe, Brendanen
dc.contributor.authorWalkden-Brown, Stephen Wen
dc.contributor.authorRuhnke, Isabelleen
dc.date.accessioned2021-10-25T00:01:41Z-
dc.date.available2021-10-25T00:01:41Z-
dc.date.issued2021-11-
dc.identifier.citationVeterinary Parasitology, v.299, p. 1-9en
dc.identifier.issn1873-2550en
dc.identifier.issn0304-4017en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/31753-
dc.description.abstractExcreta egg counting techniques are used for indirectly estimating the magnitude of gastrointestinal nematode infection in live animals. The aim of this study was to optimise laboratory and field sampling methods for routine monitoring of nematode infections in chickens by evaluating the sensitivity, accuracy, and precision of the Modified McMaster (MM) and Mini-FLOTAC (MF) methods using laying chicken excreta samples spiked with estimated true numbers of eggs (Experiment 1 = 5-1500 EPG (eggs/g); Experiment 2 = 5-500 EPG) without and with operator effects, respectively or using individual fresh excreta (n = 230) and fresh floor excreta (n = 42) from naturally infected free-range layer farms. The Coefficient of Variation (CV) was assessed within and between operators and the time spent on sample preparation and counting was also evaluated. MF was more sensitive than MM at ≤ 50 EPG level but not above this while MM had a significantly higher egg recovery rate than MF for ≥ 50 EPG levels (MM = 89.7 %, MF = 68.2 %; P < 0.0001). Operator factors did not have a significant effect (P = 0.358-0.998) on egg counts across methods and EPG levels. The CV between replicates of the MM and MF methods for ≥ 50 EPG was 43.4 and 36.5 %, respectively. The inter-observer CV of the MM and MF methods for ≥ 50 EPG levels was 63.8 and 44.3 % respectively. When the naturally infected free-range layers which were individual caged for excreta sampling, the proportion of samples positive for MM and MF were 91.7 and 96.5 %, respectively (P = 0.023). MM resulted in significantly (P = 0.029) higher excreta egg counts (604) than MF (460) with the difference between methods greatest at higher EPG levels. Fresh floor excreta (pooled or individual) and individual caged chicken excreta did not have significant effect on egg counts (P = 0.274). The total time taken for sample preparation and egg counting was significantly lower using the MM method (4.3-5.7 min) than the MF method (16.9-23.8 min) (P < 0.0001). In conclusion, MM was more accurate than MF, particularly at higher EPG levels, but slightly less precise and sensitive, particularly at low EPG levels, while taking less than 25 % of the laboratory time per sample. Our observations indicate that the MM method is more appropriate for rapid diagnosis of chicken nematodes in the field. Pooled fresh floor excreta samples would be sufficient to indicate infection level in free range farms.en
dc.languageenen
dc.publisherElsevier BVen
dc.relation.ispartofVeterinary Parasitologyen
dc.titleComparison of the Modified McMaster and Mini-FLOTAC methods for the enumeration of nematode eggs in egg spiked and naturally infected chicken excretaen
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.vetpar.2021.109582en
local.contributor.firstnameAnwaren
local.contributor.firstnameTekaen
local.contributor.firstnameTimothyen
local.contributor.firstnameBrendanen
local.contributor.firstnameStephen Wen
local.contributor.firstnameIsabelleen
local.profile.schoolAnimal Science, School of Environmental and Rural Scienceen
local.profile.schoolSchool of Environmental and Rural Scienceen
local.profile.schoolAnimal Science, School of Environmental and Rural Scienceen
local.profile.schoolSchool of Environmental and Rural Scienceen
local.profile.schoolSchool of Environmental and Rural Scienceen
local.profile.schoolSchool of Environmental and Rural Scienceen
local.profile.emailayesuf@myune.edu.auen
local.profile.emailtdewo@myune.edu.auen
local.profile.emailtellio22@une.edu.auen
local.profile.emailbsharpe3@une.edu.auen
local.profile.emailswalkden@une.edu.auen
local.profile.emailiruhnke@une.edu.auen
local.output.categoryC1en
local.record.placeauen
local.record.institutionUniversity of New Englanden
local.publisher.placeNetherlandsen
local.identifier.runningnumber109582en
local.format.startpage1en
local.format.endpage9en
local.identifier.scopusid85116521828en
local.peerreviewedYesen
local.identifier.volume299en
local.contributor.lastnameShifawen
local.contributor.lastnameFeyeraen
local.contributor.lastnameElliotten
local.contributor.lastnameSharpeen
local.contributor.lastnameWalkden-Brownen
local.contributor.lastnameRuhnkeen
dc.identifier.staffune-id:ayesufen
dc.identifier.staffune-id:tdewoen
dc.identifier.staffune-id:tellio22en
dc.identifier.staffune-id:bsharpe3en
dc.identifier.staffune-id:swalkdenen
dc.identifier.staffune-id:iruhnkeen
local.profile.orcid0000-0002-0638-5533en
local.profile.orcid0000-0001-5423-9306en
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.identifier.unepublicationidune:1959.11/31753en
local.date.onlineversion2021-10-05-
dc.identifier.academiclevelStudenten
dc.identifier.academiclevelStudenten
dc.identifier.academiclevelAcademicen
dc.identifier.academiclevelAcademicen
dc.identifier.academiclevelAcademicen
dc.identifier.academiclevelAcademicen
local.title.maintitleComparison of the Modified McMaster and Mini-FLOTAC methods for the enumeration of nematode eggs in egg spiked and naturally infected chicken excretaen
local.relation.fundingsourcenoteAustralian Eggs Limited (Project 1BS003) and Anwar Shifaw was supported by a University of New England postgraduate scholarship.en
local.output.categorydescriptionC1 Refereed Article in a Scholarly Journalen
local.search.authorShifaw, Anwaren
local.search.authorFeyera, Tekaen
local.search.authorElliott, Timothyen
local.search.authorSharpe, Brendanen
local.search.authorWalkden-Brown, Stephen Wen
local.search.authorRuhnke, Isabelleen
local.uneassociationYesen
local.atsiresearchNoen
local.sensitive.culturalNoen
local.identifier.wosid000709551400002en
local.year.available2021en
local.year.published2021en
local.fileurl.closedpublishedhttps://rune.une.edu.au/web/retrieve/18d8f62e-ca6f-445f-99a6-e69faa2b7affen
local.subject.for2020300909 Veterinary parasitologyen
local.subject.seo2020100411 Poultryen
Appears in Collections:Journal Article
School of Environmental and Rural Science
Files in This Item:
1 files
File SizeFormat 
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

7
checked on Jul 27, 2024

Page view(s)

1,182
checked on Mar 8, 2023

Download(s)

4
checked on Mar 8, 2023
Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in Research UNE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.