Detection of specific Treponema species and Dichelobacter nodosus from digital dermatitis (Mortellaro's disease) lesions in Swiss cattle.

INTRODUCTION The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of the three Treponema species as well as D. nodosus in Digital dermatitis (DD) and slurry of Swiss cattle using PCR. A total of 86 specimens from 24 farms were enrolled in the study. Slurry samples from 21 DD-affected and one unaffected farm were collected to assess the potential of environmental transmission. Nested and real-time PCR were performed from the specimens to detect Treponema species and D. nodosus, respectively. The DD-stages were positive for at least one or more of the DD-associated Treponema species in 50 of 61 cases (82.0%) and in 9 of 25 cases (36.0%) in unaffected animals. Infected animals with small focal active lesions showed a significantly lower prevalence (14.8%) compared to the other DD stages (67.2%; P=0.011). Most prevalent was T. phagedenis (65.1%). D. nodosus was detected in 51.8% of clinical DD lesions and 24.1% in unaffected cases, but its presence was not significantly associated with the various DD-stages. All samples positive for D. nodosus contained the acid protease gene aprB2 but were negative for aprV2, the latter associated with virulence in sheep foot rot. Control farms were negative for all DD-associated Treponema species while positive for aprB2 and negative for aprV2. The presence of aprB2 suggests it is ubiquitous in the animal environment. With respect to the slurry samples, three out of 21 specimens (14.3%) were positive for one or more of the DD-associated Treponema species and eleven out of 21 specimens (52.4%) were positive for aprB2 and negative for aprV2 of D. nodosus. In conclusion, an association was found between the presence of clinical DD and specific Treponema species, while for D. nodosus no such link with DD lesions could be observed.

[1]  D. Döpfer,et al.  Development of real-time PCR and loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assays for the differential detection of digital dermatitis associated treponemes , 2017, PloS one.

[2]  R. Blowey,et al.  Detection and Isolation of Digital Dermatitis Treponemes from Bovine Pressure Sores. , 2016, Journal of comparative pathology.

[3]  M. W. Nielsen,et al.  Potential bacterial core species associated with digital dermatitis in cattle herds identified by molecular profiling of interdigital skin samples. , 2016, Veterinary microbiology.

[4]  L. E. Sullivan,et al.  A molecular epidemiology of treponemes in beef cattle digital dermatitis lesions and comparative analyses with sheep contagious ovine digital dermatitis and dairy cattle digital dermatitis lesions. , 2015, Veterinary microbiology.

[5]  D. Döpfer,et al.  Altered Microbiomes in Bovine Digital Dermatitis Lesions, and the Gut as a Pathogen Reservoir , 2015, PloS one.

[6]  L. E. Sullivan,et al.  High-Level Association of Bovine Digital Dermatitis Treponema spp. with Contagious Ovine Digital Dermatitis Lesions and Presence of Fusobacterium necrophorum and Dichelobacter nodosus , 2015, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[7]  M. W. Nielsen,et al.  Discovery of bovine digital dermatitis-associated Treponema spp. in the dairy herd environment by a targeted deep-sequencing approach. , 2014, Applied and environmental microbiology.

[8]  G. Phillips,et al.  Deep Sequencing Analysis Reveals Temporal Microbiota Changes Associated with Development of Bovine Digital Dermatitis , 2014, Infection and Immunity.

[9]  A. Steiner,et al.  Lameness and foot lesions in Swiss dairy cows: I. Prevalence. , 2014, Schweizer Archiv fur Tierheilkunde.

[10]  A. Steiner,et al.  Simultaneous Detection and Discrimination of Virulent and Benign Dichelobacter nodosus in Sheep of Flocks Affected by Foot Rot and in Clinically Healthy Flocks by Competitive Real-Time PCR , 2014, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[11]  L. E. Sullivan,et al.  Digital dermatitis in beef cattle , 2013, Veterinary Record.

[12]  M. Palmer,et al.  The effect of slurry on skin permeability to methylene blue dye in dairy cows with and without a history of digital dermatitis. , 2013, Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience.

[13]  N. Capion,et al.  Bovine digital dermatitis: possible pathogenic consortium consisting of Dichelobacter nodosus and multiple Treponema species. , 2012, Veterinary microbiology.

[14]  C. Ekstrøm,et al.  Infection dynamics of digital dermatitis in first-lactation Holstein cows in an infected herd. , 2012, Journal of dairy science.

[15]  D. Döpfer,et al.  Growth curves and morphology of three Treponema subtypes isolated from digital dermatitis in cattle. , 2012, Veterinary journal.

[16]  D. Döpfer,et al.  Long-term observations on the dynamics of bovine digital dermatitis lesions on a California dairy after topical treatment with lincomycin HCl. , 2012, Veterinary journal.

[17]  N. Bareille,et al.  A simple method to score digital dermatitis in dairy cows in the milking parlor. , 2011, Journal of dairy science.

[18]  D. Logue.  Understanding bovine digital dermatitis , 2011, Veterinary Record.

[19]  C. Hart,et al.  Characterization of Novel Bovine Gastrointestinal Tract Treponema Isolates and Comparison with Bovine Digital Dermatitis Treponemes , 2010, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[20]  Y T Gröhn,et al.  The cost of different types of lameness in dairy cows calculated by dynamic programming. , 2010, Preventive veterinary medicine.

[21]  Tetsuya Hayashi,et al.  Identification of candidate pathogens of papillomatous digital dermatitis in dairy cattle from quantitative 16S rRNA clonal analysis. , 2010, Veterinary microbiology.

[22]  H Hogeveen,et al.  Assessing economic consequences of foot disorders in dairy cattle using a dynamic stochastic simulation model. , 2010, Journal of dairy science.

[23]  C. Hart,et al.  Association of Unique, Isolated Treponemes with Bovine Digital Dermatitis Lesions , 2009, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[24]  C. Hart,et al.  Three unique groups of spirochetes isolated from digital dermatitis lesions in UK cattle. , 2008, Veterinary microbiology.

[25]  S. Thamsborg,et al.  Prevalence of foot lesions in Danish Holstein cows , 2008, Veterinary Record.

[26]  Tim K. Jensen,et al.  Evidence of Multiple Treponema Phylotypes Involved in Bovine Digital Dermatitis as Shown by 16S rRNA Gene Analysis and Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization , 2008, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[27]  U. Göbel,et al.  Involvement of Guggenheimella bovis in digital dermatitis lesions of dairy cows. , 2008, Veterinary microbiology.

[28]  Y. Nakajima,et al.  Immunopathological investigations on bovine digital epidermitis , 2005, Veterinary Record.

[29]  M. Woodward,et al.  The occurrence of treponemes in contagious ovine digital dermatitis and the characterisation of associated Dichelobacter nodosus. , 2005, Veterinary microbiology.

[30]  L. Garber,et al.  Papillomatous digital dermatitis and associated risk factors in US dairy herds. , 1999, Preventive veterinary medicine.

[31]  M. Wagner,et al.  Fluorescence in situ hybridization shows spatial distribution of as yet uncultured treponemes in biopsies from digital dermatitis lesions. , 1998, Microbiology.

[32]  D. Read,et al.  Papillomatous Digital Dermatitis (Footwarts) in California Dairy Cattle: Clinical and Gross Pathologic Findings , 1998, Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc.

[33]  W. Klee,et al.  Histological and bacteriological evaluation of digital dermatitis in cattle, with special reference to spirochaetes and Campylobacter faecalis , 1997, Veterinary Record.

[34]  P. Kuhnert,et al.  Phylogenetic Positions of Clostn'dium chauvoei and Clostridium septicurn Based on 16s rRNA Gene Sequences , 1996 .