JCM Figure table search 04
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bélanger, M.
Right arrow Articles by Alleman, A. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bélanger, M.
Right arrow Articles by Alleman, A. R.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, September 2002, p. 3506-3508, Vol. 40, No. 9
0095-1137/02/$04.00+0     DOI: 10.1128/JCM.40.9.3506-3508.2002
Copyright © 2002, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Comparison of Serological Detection Methods for Diagnosis of Ehrlichia canis Infections in Dogs{dagger}

Myriam Bélanger,1 Heather L. Sorenson,2 Michelle K. France,2 Michael V. Bowie,1 Anthony F. Barbet,1 Edward B. Breitschwerdt,3 and A. Rick Alleman2*

Departments of Pathobiology,1 Physiological Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32610,2 Department of Companion Animal and Special Species Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 276063

Received 10 December 2001/ Returned for modification 21 April 2002/ Accepted 18 June 2002

We determined the value of four serological assays for the diagnosis of canine monocytic ehrlichiosis by comparing them to the indirect fluorescent-antibody assay "gold standard." The specificity of Dip-S-Ticks was significantly lower than that of all of the other tests evaluated. The sensitivity of Dip-S-Ticks was significantly higher than that of Snap3Dx or the Snap Canine Combo. The sensitivity of the rMAP2 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was significantly higher than that of the Snap Canine Combo. The accuracy levels of the rMAP2 ELISA, Snap3Dx, Dip-S-Ticks, and Snap Canine Combo were 97.0, 89.8, 85.1, and 82.9%, respectively.

* Corresponding author. Mailing address: College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Florida, P.O. Box 100103, Gainesville, FL 32610. Phone: (352) 392-4700. Fax: (352) 392-2938. E-mail: AllemanR{at}mail.vetmed.ufl.edu.

{dagger} College of Veterinary Medicine Journal Series publication 610.

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, September 2002, p. 3506-3508, Vol. 40, No. 9
0095-1137/02/$04.00+0     DOI: 10.1128/JCM.40.9.3506-3508.2002
Copyright © 2002, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.



This article has been cited by other articles:



Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
Clin. Vaccine Immunol. ALL ASM JOURNALS

Copyright © 2002 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.