Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Archive
  • About the Journal
    • About CVI
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • FAQ
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Archive
  • About the Journal
    • About CVI
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • FAQ
NOTE

Performance of Competitive and Indirect Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assays, Gel Immunoprecipitation with Native Hapten Polysaccharide, and Standard Serological Tests in Diagnosis of Sheep Brucellosis

C. M. Marín, E. Moreno, I. Moriyón, R. Díaz, J. M. Blasco
C. M. Marín
Unidad de Sanidad Animal, Servicio de Investigación Agraria, Diputación General de Aragón, Zaragoza, 1 and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
E. Moreno
Programa de Investigación en Enfermedades Tropicales, Escuela de Medicina Veterinaria, Universidad Nacional, Heredia, Costa Rica 2
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
I. Moriyón
Departamento de Microbiologı́a, Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, 3 Spain, and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
R. Díaz
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J. M. Blasco
Unidad de Sanidad Animal, Servicio de Investigación Agraria, Diputación General de Aragón, Zaragoza, 1 and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Competitive and standard enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), rose bengal (RB), complement fixation, and agar gel immunoprecipitation with native hapten (AGID-NH) were compared by using sera from Brucella-free, Brucella melitensis-infected, and B. melitensisRev1-vaccinated sheep. The most sensitive tests were indirect ELISA and RB, and the most specific tests were AGID-NH and competitive ELISA. We show that RB followed by AGID-NH is a simple and effective system for diagnosing sheep brucellosis.

Sheep brucellosis is a zoonotic disease that causes human suffering and great economic losses. When implemented, the control of this disease is usually based on vaccination, serological testing, and culling. Until now, the best vaccine available has been the smooth (S) Brucella melitensis Rev1 strain. Although this strain is useful, it does not afford 100% protection, and it induces a strong antibody response to the S lipopolysaccharide (S-LPS), particularly when used in adult sheep. Since S-LPS is the most relevant antigen in conventional serological tests such as the rose bengal (RB) and the complement fixation (CF) assays (3), it is not surprising that Rev1 vaccination interferes with serological diagnosis. Vaccination of young sheep (rather than adult sheep) by the conjunctival route (rather than subcutaneously) reduces the antibody response without significantly affecting the protection levels; even so, conventional serological diagnosis requires the use of screening and confirmatory tests such as RB and CF, respectively. However, the use of these two tests does not result in 100% sensitivity and specificity (6, 7, 17).

To reduce these restrictions in the use of the vaccine and to facilitate serological diagnosis, alternative assays have been investigated, including tests that detect antibodies to proteins (8, 9, 16, 18, 25) and to the S-LPS-related native hapten (NH) polysaccharide (5, 12, 13, 17). Moreover, indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (iELISAs) with S-LPS have been investigated, but when adjusted to optimal sensitivity, they lack specificity for sera from vaccinated sheep (7, 17). Similar problems are encountered in the diagnosis of cattle brucellosis when vaccination with Brucella abortus 19 is implemented, so to improve the specificity of the iELISAs under these conditions, a competitive ELISA (cELISA) was developed (14, 15, 21, 22). This cELISA is based on the displacement of serum antibodies by a fixed concentration of a mouse monoclonal antibody (MAb) against the common (C/Y) epitope, which is the dominant epitope in the O polysaccharides of both B. abortus and B. melitensis and is the most relevant in serological diagnosis. Since the cELISA does not involve the use of a specific conjugate anti-animal species immunoglobulin, this assay can be easily adapted to detectBrucella infections in different animal species. The aim of our work was to compare this cELISA, the iELISA, an immunoprecipitation assay with NH, and the standard tests.

Blood sera were obtained from sheep naturally infected with B. melitensis (29 with biotype 1 and 26 with biotype 3, as demonstrated by bacteriological cultures of necropsy samples [7, 19]) and from 60 sheep belonging toBrucella-free flocks. Sera were tested by the cELISA system supplied by the Joint FAO/IAEA Division of the International Atomic Energy Agency (Vienna, Austria), which was shipped as a kit with the necessary protocols and computation analysis procedures. The kit contained 96-well polystyrene plates, standardized B. abortus biotype 1 S-LPS phenol-water extract (24), mouse MAb M84 of C/Y specificity, horseradish peroxidase-conjugated goat anti-mouse immunoglobulin G (heavy plus light chain specificity), 2,2′-azinobis(3-ethylbenzthiazolinesulfonic acid) (ABTS) diammonium salt substrate, buffer substances, and negative and positive (strongly, intermediately, and weakly) bovine sera as controls (15). To adapt the cELISA for testing sheep sera, these controls were replaced by pools of sera from Brucella-free or B. melitensis-infected sheep (see above), and the dilutions of the positive pools were adjusted to yield optical densities equivalent to the strongly, intermediately, and weakly positive bovine controls. The assay was carried out as described in previous works (14, 15,22), and the results were expressed as the percent inhibition of binding of MAb M84 {[(1 − mean absorbance value of the duplicate test sample)/mean absorbance value of triplicate test with the MAb alone] × 100}. The iELISA was performed with a crudeB. melitensis S-LPS preparation (1, 4, 11, 17) and peroxidase-conjugated protein G, and the results were expressed as the percentage of the optical density with respect to a strongly positive control serum (1, 13, 17). The agar gel immunodiffusion test for detecting NH-precipitating antibodies (AGID-NH) was performed with 1% Noble agar (Difco Laboratories, Detroit, Mich.) gels in 10% NaCl–0.1 M NaOH-H3BO4 (pH 8.3) with 20 μl of serum and the antigen wells set 3 mm apart. The antigen was an NH-rich B. melitensis 16M hot-water extract in which the NH precipitation band is characteristic (4, 10, 11, 20). The CF (3) and RB tests were also used, the latter with a 3:1 proportion of serum to antigen for optimal sensitivity (6).

Receiver-operating characteristic analyses (SAS statistical package version 6 [SAS Institute Inc.]) of the results obtained by the iELISAs and cELISAs of the sera from the B. melitensis-infected and Brucella-free sheep showed that both assays yielded optimal sensitivity and specificity with the 1:50 serum dilution. Moreover, the results of each type of ELISA show that the distributions of the sera from sheep infected with B. melitensis biotype 1 and biotype 3 were similar (not shown), thus confirming that the S-LPS ELISAs for animal brucellosis perform similarly regardless of the antigen source (i.e., B. abortusor B. melitensis) and regardless of the infectingBrucella species or biotype (1). For the 1:50 serum dilution, the distribution of the absorbance values of the cELISAs (Fig. 1A) showed that binding of MAb M84 was less than 20% inhibited by the 60 sera fromBrucella-free sheep and that all but 2 sera from B. melitensis-infected sheep inhibited MAb M84 binding by more than 20%. Thus, with the 20% cutoff, the sensitivity (percentage of truly infected animals identified as positive) and specificity (percentage of truly uninfected animals identified as negative) of the cELISA were 96 and 100%, respectively. With these sera, the iELISA (Fig. 1B) completely discriminated the sera from the Brucella-free andB. melitensis-infected populations (100% sensitivity and specificity), even though the difference in sensitivity from cELISA was not statistically significant (P = 0.15, two-tailed Student’s t test). As demonstrated for the iELISA, the RB test showed 100% sensitivity, and both tests were more sensitive (P < 0.05) than the CF (92%) and AGID-NH (90%) tests. The sensitivities of the CF and AGID-NH tests were similar to each other (P = 0.73) and were not significantly different from that of the cELISA (P = 0.40 and P = 0.24, respectively). The AGID-NH, RB, and CF tests showed 100% specificities for sera from Brucella-free animals.

Fig. 1.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

Distribution of the sera of B. melitensis-infected (black bars) and Brucella-free (open bars) sheep according to the results of the cELISA (A) and the iELISA (B).

The specificities of these tests in the context of a vaccination program were studied by using sera of two groups of lambs plus two groups of adult sheep (all from Brucella-free flocks) that had been vaccinated either subcutaneously or conjunctivally with 109 CFU of B. melitensis Rev1 and maintained in a Brucella-free environment. For the purpose of this study, the animals were bled at different time intervals (Table1), although only the last bleedings represented a situation similar to that found in ordinary eradication programs. The specificities of the tests (i.e., the percentage of vaccinated animals that tested negative and, therefore, would not be misdiagnosed as infected) varied depending upon the age of the animal and the route of vaccination (Table 1). As expected (17), the specificities of all tests were generally higher when the sera of conjunctivally vaccinated sheep and the sera of lambs were tested. The results also showed that the specificity of the cELISA was constantly higher than that of the iELISA, with very marked differences in the group of subcutaneously vaccinated lambs and, no matter which route of vaccination, in the vaccinated adult sheep. The specificity values in this last group were independent from the vaccination route. The cELISA and AGID-NH test were more specific. Although the differences were not statistically significant, the AGID-NH test seemed to perform better than cELISA only when the sera of adult sheep bled 5 months after subcutaneous vaccination were tested. The tests had similar specificities. The CF test, which is the standard confirmatory test (3, 6), showed higher specificity than the cELISA in only two of the bleedings of the conjunctivally vaccinated lambs.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Specificities of serological tests for brucellosis for sera from B. melitensisRev1-vaccinated sheepa

It is noteworthy that a relatively simple test such as the AGID-NH test was as specific as the sophisticated cELISA. As demonstrated by the contrasting results of iELISA and cELISA, the diagnostic specificity of the latter is due to the elimination of low-affinity antibodies (dominant in the sera of vaccinated animals) by the competing anti-C/Y MAb. Antibody affinity, rather than epitopic differences between S-LPS and NH, is also likely to account in part for the performance of the AGID-NH test (2).

Immunochemical studies have shown that the NH and the O polysaccharide of the S-LPS (which is the serologically relevant section of S-LPS) have similar structures and epitopic densities (4, 12). In fact, antibodies to the NH can be absorbed with S-LPS (2). However, precipitation tests with S-LPS do not show the sensitivity and specificity of similar tests performed with NH (10, 11, 20), although NH and S-LPS yield similar results in both iELISA (1, 2,13) and passive hemagglutination (2). To explain these apparently contradictory observations, we have proposed (2) that the higher specificities of the precipitation tests with NH result from two sets of factors. First, the dispersed state of the low-molecular-weight NH (4) in solution, as opposed to the highly aggregated S-LPSs, may be relevant in explaining their different behavior in precipitation tests. Second, if low-affinity antibodies are predominant after vaccination, the higher threshold affinity of precipitation tests compared to that of iELISAs (23) may explain why NH fails to react with sera from vaccinated animals in the former but not in the latter assay. Obviously, the comparison of the results of the i and cELISAs demonstrates that the sera of vaccinated sheep contain more antibodies of lower affinity than do sera from infected sheep, and this is consistent with the proposed hypothesis.

The results of this work have practical implications concerning the use of the tests evaluated. In the absence of vaccination, the iELISA and the much less sophisticated RB test (standardized and performed as described in reference 6) should be the tests of choice because of their very high sensitivities. When vaccination was implemented, no single test simultaneously afforded 100% sensitivity and specificity. Although the cELISA greatly improves the specificity of the iELISA, the data suggest that it is less sensitive. Therefore, the study of larger numbers of sera from bacteriologically positive animals is necessary before the use of the cELISA can be recommended as a single diagnostic test for B. melitensis sheep brucellosis. However, screening with either the iELISA or the RB assay followed by confirmation by means of either the cELISA or the AGID-NH test would afford the best combination of sensitivity and specificity. Both ELISAs are technically more demanding, and since they do not outperform the unsophisticated RB and AGID-NH tests, the latter seem to be the simplest choice for the diagnosis of sheep brucellosis when Rev1 vaccination is implemented.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We are grateful to Daphnne Garita and Cristian Sánchez for expert assistance in the serological assays and to Santiago Lázaro for excellent care of animals.

This research was supported by the Dirección General de Investigación Cientı́fica y Tecnológica (grant AGF95-1013-CO) and by the Joint FAO/IAEA Division of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 6 July 1998.
    • Returned for modification 9 October 1998.
    • Accepted 23 November 1998.
  • Copyright © 1999 American Society for Microbiology

REFERENCES

  1. ↵
    1. Alonso-Urmeneta B.,
    2. Marı́n C.,
    3. Aragón V.,
    4. Blasco J. M.,
    5. Dı́az R.,
    6. Moriyón I.
    (1998) Evaluation of lipopolysaccharides and polysaccharides of different epitopic structures in the indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for diagnosis of brucellosis in small ruminants and cattle. Clin. Diagn. Lab. Immunol. 5:749–754.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Alonso-Urmeneta B.,
    2. Moriyón I.,
    3. Dı́az R.,
    4. Blasco J. M.
    (1988) Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay with Brucella native hapten polysaccharide and smooth lipopolysaccharide. J. Clin. Microbiol. 26:2642–2646.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. Alton G. G.,
    2. Jones L. M.,
    3. Angus R. D.,
    4. Verger J. M.
    (1988) Techniques for the brucellosis laboratory. (Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Paris, France).
  4. ↵
    1. Aragón V.,
    2. Dı́az R.,
    3. Moreno E.,
    4. Moriyón I.
    (1996) Characterization of Brucella abortus and Brucella melitensis native haptens as outer membrane O-type polysaccharides independent from the smooth lipopolysaccharide. J. Bacteriol. 178:1070–1079.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. Blasco J. M.,
    2. Dı́az R.,
    3. Moriyón I.,
    4. Salvo M. D.
    (1984) Evaluation of a radial immunodiffusion test for diagnosing brucellosis in sheep and its possible value for differentiating infected from Brucella melitensis REV 1 vaccinated sheep. Dev. Biol. Stand. 56:507–511.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Blasco J. M.,
    2. Garin-Bastuji B.,
    3. Marı́n C. M.,
    4. Gerbier G.,
    5. Fanlo J.,
    6. Jiménez de Bagüés M. P.,
    7. Cau C.
    (1994) Efficacy of different Rose Bengal and complement fixation antigens for the diagnosis of Brucella melitensis infection in sheep and goats. Vet. Rec. 134:415–420.
    OpenUrlAbstract
  7. ↵
    1. Blasco J. M.,
    2. Marı́n C.,
    3. Jiménez de Bagués M.,
    4. Barberán M.,
    5. Hernández A.,
    6. Molina L.,
    7. Velasco J.,
    8. Dı́az R.,
    9. Moriyón I.
    (1994) Evaluation of allergic and serological tests for diagnosing Brucella melitensis infection in sheep. J. Clin. Microbiol. 32:1835–1840.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. Debbarh H. S.,
    2. Cloeckaert A.,
    3. Zygmunt M. S.,
    4. Dubray G.
    (1995) Identification of seroreactive Brucella melitensis cytosoluble proteins which discriminate between antibodies elicited by infection and Rev.1 vaccination in sheep. Vet. Microbiol. 44:37–48.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Debbarh H. S.-A.,
    2. Cloeckaert A.,
    3. Bézard G.,
    4. Dubray G.,
    5. Zygmunt M. S.
    (1996) Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay with partially purified cytosoluble 28-kilodalton protein for serological differentiation between Brucella melitensis-infected and B. melitensis Rev.1-vaccinated sheep. Clin. Diagn. Lab. Immunol. 3:305–308.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    1. Dı́az R.,
    2. Toyos J.,
    3. Salvo M. D.,
    4. Fernández L. L.,
    5. Alonso-Urmementa B.,
    6. Moriyón I.,
    7. Dorronsoro I.
    (1984) Studies on the polysaccharide B and native hapten of Brucella and Yersinia enterocolitica serotype 9. Dev. Biol. Stand. 56:213–220.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  11. ↵
    1. Dı́az R.,
    2. Toyos J.,
    3. Salvo M. D.,
    4. Pardo M. L.
    (1981) A simple method for the extraction of polysaccharide B from Brucella cells for use in the radial immunodiffusion test diagnosis of bovine brucellosis. Ann. Rech. Vet. 12:35–39.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Dı́az-Aparicio E.,
    2. Aragón V.,
    3. Marı́n C.,
    4. Alonso B.,
    5. Font M.,
    6. Moreno E.,
    7. Pérez-Ortiz S.,
    8. Blasco J. M.,
    9. Dı́az R.,
    10. Moriyón I.
    (1993) Comparative analysis of Brucella serotype A and M and Yersinia enterocolitica O:9 polysaccharides for serological diagnosis of brucellosis in cattle, sheep, and goats. J. Clin. Microbiol. 31:3136–3141.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. ↵
    1. Dı́az-Aparicio E.,
    2. Marı́n C.,
    3. Alonso-Urmeneta B.,
    4. Aragón V.,
    5. Pérez-Ortiz S.,
    6. Pardo M.,
    7. Blasco J. M.,
    8. Dı́az R.,
    9. Moriyón I.
    (1994) Evaluation of serological tests for diagnosis of Brucella melitensis infection of goats. J. Clin. Microbiol. 32:1159–1165.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. ↵
    1. Gall D.,
    2. Nielsen K.
    (1994) Improvements to the competitive ELISA for detection of antibodies to Brucella abortus in cattle sera. J. Immunoass. 15:277–291.
  15. ↵
    1. Gall D.,
    2. Colling A.,
    3. Marino O.,
    4. Moreno E.,
    5. Nielsen K.,
    6. Perez B.,
    7. Samartino L.
    (1998) Enzyme immunoassays for serological diagnosis of bovine brucellosis: a trial in Latin America. Clin. Diagn. Lab. Immunol. 5:654–661.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. ↵
    1. Hemmen F.,
    2. Weynants V.,
    3. Scarcez T.,
    4. Letesson J.-J.,
    5. Saman E.
    (1995) Cloning and sequence analysis of a newly identified Brucella abortus gene and serological evaluation of the 17-kilodalton antigen that it encodes. Clin. Diagn. Lab. Immunol. 2:263–267.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    1. Jiménez de Bagüés M. P.,
    2. Marı́n C. M.,
    3. Blasco J. M.,
    4. Moriyón I.,
    5. Gamazo C.
    (1992) An ELISA with Brucella lipopolysaccharide antigen for the diagnosis of B. melitensis infection in sheep and for the evaluation of serological responses following subcutaneous or conjunctival B. melitensis strain Rev 1 vaccination. Vet. Microbiol. 30:233–241.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  18. ↵
    1. Letesson J. J.,
    2. Tibor A.,
    3. van Eynde G.,
    4. Wansard V.,
    5. Weynants V.,
    6. Denoel P.,
    7. Saman E.
    (1997) Humoral immune responses of Brucella-infected cattle, sheep, and goats to eight purified recombinant Brucella proteins in an indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Clin. Diagn. Lab. Immunol. 4:556–564.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. ↵
    1. Marı́n C. M.,
    2. Jiménez de Bagüés M. P.,
    3. Barberán M.,
    4. Blasco J. M.
    (1996) Comparison of two selective media for the isolation of Brucella melitensis from naturally infected sheep and goats. Vet. Rec. 138:409–411.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. ↵
    1. Moreno E.,
    2. Speth S. L.,
    3. Jones L. M.,
    4. Berman D. T.
    (1981) Immunochemical characterization of Brucella lipopolysaccharides and polysaccharides. Infect. Immun. 31:214–222.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. ↵
    1. Nielsen K. H.,
    2. Kelly L.,
    3. Gall D.,
    4. Balsevicius S.,
    5. Bosse J.,
    6. Nicoletti P.,
    7. Kelly W.
    (1996) Comparison of enzyme immunoassays for the diagnosis of bovine brucellosis. Prev. Vet. Med. 26:7–32.
  22. ↵
    1. Nielsen K. H.,
    2. Kelly L.,
    3. Gall D.,
    4. Nicoletti P.,
    5. Kelly W.
    (1995) Improved competitive enzyme immunoassay for the diagnosis of bovine brucellosis. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 46:285–291.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    1. Peterfy F.,
    2. Kuusela P.,
    3. Makelä O.
    (1998) Affinity requirements for antibody assays mapped by monoclonal antibodies. J. Immunol. 130:1809–1813.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  24. ↵
    1. Rojas N.,
    2. Freer E.,
    3. Weintraub A.,
    4. Ramirez M.,
    5. Lind S.,
    6. Moreno E.
    (1994) Immunochemical identification of Brucella abortus lipopolysaccharide epitopes. Clin. Diagn. Lab. Immunol. 1:206–213.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. ↵
    1. Zygmunt M. S.,
    2. Debbarh H. S.,
    3. Cloeckaert A.,
    4. Dubray G.
    (1994) Antibody response to Brucella melitensis outer membrane antigens in naturally infected and Rev1 vaccinated sheep. Vet. Microbiol. 39:33–46.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Performance of Competitive and Indirect Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assays, Gel Immunoprecipitation with Native Hapten Polysaccharide, and Standard Serological Tests in Diagnosis of Sheep Brucellosis
C. M. Marín, E. Moreno, I. Moriyón, R. Díaz, J. M. Blasco
Clinical and Diagnostic Laboratory Immunology Mar 1999, 6 (2) 269-272; DOI:

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Email

Thank you for sharing this Clinical and Vaccine Immunology article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Performance of Competitive and Indirect Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assays, Gel Immunoprecipitation with Native Hapten Polysaccharide, and Standard Serological Tests in Diagnosis of Sheep Brucellosis
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Clinical and Vaccine Immunology.
Share
Performance of Competitive and Indirect Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assays, Gel Immunoprecipitation with Native Hapten Polysaccharide, and Standard Serological Tests in Diagnosis of Sheep Brucellosis
C. M. Marín, E. Moreno, I. Moriyón, R. Díaz, J. M. Blasco
Clinical and Diagnostic Laboratory Immunology Mar 1999, 6 (2) 269-272; DOI:
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About CVI
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • Submit a Manuscript to mSphere

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

Copyright © 2019 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 1556-6811; Online ISSN: 1556-679X