Printer Friendly

Isolation of Mycobacterium bovis & M. tuberculosis from cattle of some farms in north India--possible relevance in human health.

Background & objectives: Infection due to Mycobacterium bovis typically occurs in cattle and animals transmit infection to each other. The choice of appropriate clinical specimen is very important for isolation of M. bovis and M. tuberculosis from cattle. The present study reports the isolation of M.tuberculosis and M. bovis from different types of specimens from cattle suspected to be suffering from tuberculosis in certain organized cattle farms in north India.

Method: A total of 768 specimens (heparinized or EDTA containing blood (162), fine needle aspirates from prescapular lymph gland (PSLG,160), milk (154), pharyngeal swab (PhS, 98), rectal pinch (RP, 97) and faecal sample (97) from 161 cattle of organized cattle farms in north India suspected to be suffering from tuberculosis were analyzed. After decontamination by modified Petroff's method isolation of M. tuberculosis complex was done on Lowenstein-Jensen medium (with and without pyruvate). The culture isolates were identified as M. tuberculosis and M. bovis on the basis of biochemical tests.

Results: A total of 54 M. tuberculosis complex isolates were obtained, of them 40 were identified as M.bovis and 14 as M. tuberculosis. M.bovis were isolated from 12 of 38 animals in group A (Tuberculin +ve with signs of tuberculosis), 7 of 37 animals in group B (Tuberculin +ve and apparently healthy), 9 of 21 group C animals in (Tuberculin -ve with clinical signs of tuberculosis), 4 of 26 animals in group D (Tuberculin -ve and apparently healthy), 4 of 27 group E animals (having non-mycobacterial infection) and 4 of 12 animals in group F (having clinical signs such as debilitated condition, cough, decreasing milk production, etc). Maximum number of M. bovis (19/40, 47.5%) and M. tuberculosis (5/14, 35.7%) isolates were grown from prescapular lymph gland biopsy (PSLG) followed by blood from which 9/40 (22.5%) M. bovis and 4/14 (28.5%) M. tuberculosis were isolated. M. bovis [6/40(15%)] and M. tuberculosis [4/14(28.5%)] were also isolated from milk. Only 3/40 (7.5 %) isolates of M.bovis could be isolated from 97 rectal pinch followed by 98 pharyngeal swab 2/40 (5%) and 97 fecal samples 1/40 (2.5%) while 1/14 (7.1%) M.tuberculosis isolates were obtained from pharyngeal swab.

Interpretation & conclusions: Among the samples analyzed, PSLG was found to be most suitable specimen for isolation of M. tuberculosis complex from cattle and is thus of diagnostic importance. M. bovis in milk indicates the need to investigate the transmission to human in such settings. Isolation of M. bovis and/or M. tuberculosis from apparently healthy cattle indicates sub-clinical infection in the herd. Further, isolation of a significant number of M. tuberculosis from cattle suggests possible human-to-cattle transmission which need to be confirmed by prospective studies including tools like DNA fingerprinting.

Key words Bovine tuberculosis--Mycobacterium boris--Mycobacterium tuberculosis--specimen


Infection due to Mycobacterium bovis typically occurs in cattle but has been reported in other animals including dogs, cats, swine, rabbits, birds and man (1-5). While several investigators from western countries have stressed the possible zoonotic importance of bovine tuberculosis (1-5) very limited data on this aspect are available from Asian countries including India (6-8). Based on studies of slaughtered animals the incidence of bovine tuberculosis in cattle and buffalo in Pakistan has been reported to be varying from 2.25 per cent in 1969 to 7.3 per cent in 1989 (7-9). All these studies only suggest but do not provide clear evidence about the transmission chain including the zoonotic importance.

Animals transmit infection to each other through ingestion of urine, faeces and lymph, wound discharge, infected milk along with food and water. In the spread of disease from adults to the young stock of animals, milk as a source has been reported (10-12). Some investigation have pointed out the risk of human infection through unpasteurised, untreated consumption of milk or using raw milk for producing cream, butter or dahi (curd) among cattle owners and herdsmen in community (13,14).

Tuberculin testing has traditionally been used to determine the prevalence of infection in animals and human. This has been used as a mean to identify and cast all tuberculin positive animals, which could be an overestimate of true active infection. The standard single intradermal comparative tuberculin test (SICTT) using purified protein derivative (PPD) of M. bovis has been used to detect cattle infected with M. boris and prevalence of disease in cow twice as high as compared to heifers and bulls has been reported (14). In India, higher incidence of tuberculosis in buffaloes as compared to cattle has been estimated on the basis of tuberculin testing (15,16). There are many reports from India showing the presence of M. boris in milk (17,18) and in cervical lymph gland (19,20). A couple of years ago reports of increasing number of cases of bovine tuberculosis in Dharamshala (Kerala) have attracted attention. It was reported that 60 per cent of the total 520,000 cattle in the Kerala State were partially or fully affected by the tuberculosis disease and almost all crossbred cattle were suffering with tuberculosis (21). However, accuracy of these data needs to be established. In India, there is little information available on the transmission of bovine tuberculosis and its impact on human health. There is general impression that it leads to significant economic losses due to morbidity and mortality in animals. The exact magnitude of the problem can be known only by well-conducted studies. We report the isolation of M. tuberculosis and M. bovis from different types of specimens from cattle with varying clinical presentations and suspected to be suffering from tuberculosis in some organized cattle farms of north India.

Material & Methods

Samples: A total of 768 specimens from 161 cattle belonging to various clinical groups were procured during 1999 to 2001 from the cattle farm of Central Military Veterinary Laboratory (CMVL), Meerut Cantonment, Uttar Pradesh, for bacteriological analysis. These groups were: A-Tuberculin +ve and showing signs of tuberculosis, B-Tuberculin +ve and apparently healthy animals, C - Tuberculin -ve and showing clinical signs of tuberculosis, D - Tuberculin -ve and apparently healthy individual, E - Animal infected with nonmycobacterial infection (mastitis, enteritis, chronic mastitis, and pyrexia of unknown origin), F- Animal having clinical sign of debilitated condition, cough, decreasing milk production and laboured respiration. Sample analyzed were heparinized as well as EDTA containing blood (n=162), fine needle aspirates from prescapular lymph gland (PSLG n=160), milk (n=154), pharyngeal swab (PhS n=98), rectal pinch (RP n=97) and faecal sample (n=97).

Methods: The samples were processed for isolation of mycobacteria following standard procedures for homogenization, suspension, centrifugation and decontamination with 4 per cent NaOH (modified Petroff's method) (22). Rectal pinch (50 mg) was homogenized in 1 ml sterile normal saline, faecal samples (aprox. 100 mg) were mixed in 1 ml of normal saline and pharyngeal swabs were suspended and washed in I ml of normal saline. Milk (2 ml), fine needle aspirates from prescapular lymph gland (PSLG, 0.5 ml), heparinized as well as EDTA blood (0.5 ml) and all above samples were mixed with equal volume of 4 per cent sodium hydroxide and processed by modified Petroff's method of washing with water rather than neutralization recommended in the original method. Fine needle aspirates from prescapular lymph gland and heparinised blood were also decontaminated, in animal samples as an extra precaution, as there are chances of contamination during samples collection. A few drops (about 50 [micro]l) of processed sample were inoculated on Lowenstein-Jensen (L-J) media with and without pyruvate and incubated at 37[degrees]C in a BOD incubator for culture for a maximum period up to 8 wk.

Identification: Species level identification of growth of acid fast bacilli (AFB) positive mycobacterial isolates was done by standard biochemical tests [niacin production, nitrate reduction, catalase activity at 68[degrees]C and at room temperature, tween hydrolysis, arylsulphatase and thiophen-2 carboxylic acid hydrazide (TCH) sensitivity, etc.] as per CDC Manual (22). A combination of positive activity for niacin, nitrate reduction, TCH and negative activity for catalase at 68[degrees]C and arylsulphatase were considered as characteristics of M. tuberculosis while negative activity for niacin, nitrate reduction, catalase at 68[degrees]C, tween hydrolysis, arylsulphatase and TCH were considered as characteristics of M. bovis (22).

Statistical analysis: Data were analyzed by using statistical package STATA-7 State Corporation, Texas, USA. Chi square at 5 per cent level of significance was used to assess statistical significance of difference among the following data sets--(i) Isolation rates of M. tuberculosis complex (M. tuberculosis, M. bovis) among different clinical groups of animals (A, B, C, D, E & F). (ii) Isolation of M. tuberculosis complex among different type of clinical samples (blood, fine needle aspirates from PSLG, milk, pharyngeal swab, rectal pinch and faecal sample).


In present study, 54 M. tuberculosis complex isolates were obtained on Lowenstein-Jensen/pyruvate media out of 768 specimens, 40 of these isolates were identified as M. bovis and 14 as M. tuberculosis. Of the 40 M. bovis isolates, 12 were grown from 38 animals of group A (Tuberculin +ve and showing signs of tuberculosis), 7 from 37 animals belong to group B (Tuberculin +ve and apparently healthy animals), 9 from 21 animals of group C (Tuberculin -ve and showing clinical signs of tuberculosis), and 4 isolates each from 27 animals of group E (infected with non- mycobacterial infection (mastitis, enteritis, chronic mastitis, and pyrexia of unknown origin-PUO), 4 of 26 animals of group D (Tuberculin -ve and apparently healthy individual) and 4 isolate from 12 animals of group F (animal having clinical sign of debilitated condition, cough, decreasing milk production laboured respiration) (Table). Out of 14 M. tuberculosis isolates, eight were grown from 38 animals of group A, 2 each from 37 animals of group B and 27 animals of group E and 1 isolate each from 21 animals of group C and 26 animals from group D. When these clinical groups were compared with each other for isolation of M. tuberculosis complex (M. bovis and M.tuberculosis) no statistically significant difference was found.

Among the samples analyzed PSLG appeared to be most suitable specimen for isolation of M. tuberculosis complex as 19 of 40 (47.5%) isolates of M.bovis and 5 of 14 (35.7%) of M. tuberculosis were isolated from these biopsies followed by heparinized as well as EDTA blood [9 of 40 (22.5%) M.bovis and 4 of 14 (28.5%) M. tuberculosis]. M. bovis [6/40 (15%)] and M. tuberculosis [4/14(28.5%)] could be isolated from some of the milk samples. Only 3 of 40 (7.5%) isolates of M. bovis could be isolated from rectal pinch followed by pharyngeal swab [2/40(5%)] and faecal specimens [1/40 (2.5%)]. Maximum numbers of M. tuberculosis were isolated from PSLG [5/14 (35.7 %)] followed by blood and milk [4/14 (28.6%)] and 1/14 (7.1%) from pharyngeal swabs. There was no M. tuberculosis isolate from rectal pinch and faecal samples. The per cent of M. bovis isolates from different groups was 1.03 percentages (1/97) in fecal samples, 2.04 per cent (2/98) in pharyngeal swab, 3.09 per cent (3/97) in rectal pinch, 3.90 per cent (6/154) in milk, 5.56 per cent (9/162) in blood and 11.88 per cent (19/ 160) in PSLG. There was significant difference in percentage of M. bovis isolates among the different groups (faecal samples, pharyngeal swabs, rectal pinch, milk and blood, P<.001). However, if PSLG group was excluded from statistical analysis, there was no difference in the remaining groups. Thus PSLG was the only sample which was significantly different than others in terms of isolation rates and can thus be considered as appropriate type of sample for diagnosis of tuberculosis in cattle. Percentage of M. tuberculosis among different groups ranged from 1.02 per cent (1/98) in pharyngeal swab, 2.60 per cent (4/154) in milk, 2.47 per cent (4/162) in blood, none in rectal pinch as well as faecal specimens and 3.13 per cent (5/160) in PSLG. This difference in percentage of M. tuberculosis isolation was not found statistically significant among different types of samples.


Our study showed that prescapular lymph gland was the most appropriate specimens for isolation of M. bovis from infected cattle. There have been other studies showing relatively higher isolation of M. bovis from lymph glands and pus as compared to other specimens like liver and lung (9,23,24). Swollen lymph node especially of the head, and discharging lymph node abscesses were important clinical signs of tuberculosis infection in animals (25). Thus lymph glands could be recommended as a preferred specimen for confirmation of diagnosis of bovine tuberculosis. Faeces and milk are considered as important media for transmission of bovine tuberculosis (7,24). As is also evident from the data published by others blood could be used as specimen for detection of tuberculosis in cattle (26-28). Similar approaches have also been reported to be useful for diagnosis of mycobacterial infection in humans (29-32). It should also be kept in mind that detection of presence of mycobacterium in blood is handicapped by intermittent nature of mycobacteraemia (29) hence repeated blood samples need to be collected.

Tuberculosis infections in animals transmitted from men have been earlier reported from western countries (3,4,11). It would be important to watch animal handlers carefully, who would be the most probable category of suspects to have transmitted these infections to animals. Transmission could have been by aerosols or contamination of fodder due to indiscriminate spitting. Hutching et al (33) suggested that the possible route of human to cattle transmission is by inhalation of bacilli from grass contaminated with infected human urine, faeces, or sputum.

Smith et al (34) have suggested that there may be a small risk for transmission of tuberculosis carried by M. bovis from cattle to human, making continued vigilance particularly necessary. According to Hardie and Watson (35), approximately 1 per cent of human tuberculosis cases could be attributed to M. bovis (35). Milk and meat are one of the most important links between bovine tuberculosis and human beings especially children (7'24'36). Cosive et al (36) reviewed zoonotic tuberculosis due to M. bovis in developing countries and estimated that the proportion of human cases due to M. bovis accounted for 3.1 per cent of all forms of tuberculosis. Accurate information about tuberculosis in animals particularly its transmission to humans in India is speculative and studies using classical epidemiological as well as molecular typing should be conducted to determine the exact magnitude and also mode as well as chain of transmission (6,10,12,15-19). As setting of culture on L-J medium with pyruvate has become standard practice, accurate picture will emerge in future.

The isolation of M. bovis from apparently healthy animals shows active transmission in the infected herds and such findings have also been reported earlier (7,24,37). Significance of sub -clinical infection in terms of future development of active disease and transmission dynamics is not known and should be focused in future studies.

Conventionally, tuberculin reactivity has been used to identify animal infected with tuberculosis (7,14-16). Similar information has been generated in slightly different manner by gamma interferon assay (27,28). Our data and also an earlier report (38) show that tuberculin reactivity is not a reliable indicator of active disease and/or tuberculous infection in cattle. Half of isolates of M. bovis and M. tuberculosis were obtained from animals that were tuberculin negative. Thus our study showed wider circulation of M. bovis in this herd, which did not correlate with clinical findings and/or tuberculin reactivity. It would thus not be realistic to rely on this marker for control of tuberculosis in animals.

However, mere isolation of mycobacteria from animals can not establish the transmission pattern. It is well known that animals including wild ones, do suffer from M. tuberculosis infection (25). To establish the human sources as the cause of animal infection, M. tuberculosis isolates from the farm workers should be typed by molecular methods. The pattern of the animal isolates then must be matched with human isolates to establish transmission from humans to animals. Until this is established, it remains a hypothesis only that animals are infected by M. tuberculosis from human sources.


Authors thank staff from collaborating institutes and various scientific collaborators, technical colleagues especially to Shriyut Hari Shankar, Noel S. Singh and S. Ram from NJIL&OMD, Agra for technical support. Financial support from the Department of Biotechnology, Governnment of India, New Delhi is gratefully acknowledged.

Received August 18, 2006


(1.) Pavlas M, Mezensky L. The Epizootiological significance of positive bacteriological findings on Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Mycobacterium bovis in humans. Vet Med (Praha) 1982; 27: 641-9.

(2.) Collins CH, Grange JM. Zoonotic implications of Mycobacterium bovis infection. Irish Vet J 1987; 41: 363-6.

(3.) Hillerdal G, Kallamius G, Morver AD. Transmission of bovine tuberculosis from man to cat. Svenske Veterinertidning 1991; 43: 505-7.

(4.) Weber A. Bovine tuberculosis; Human as a source of infection. Tierzuchter 1992; 44: 42-3.

(5.) Moda G, Daborn C J, Grange JM, Cosivi O. The zoonotic importance of Mycobacterium bovis. Tuber Lung Dis 1996; 77: 103-8.

(6.) Lall JM. Tuberculosis among animals in India. Vet Bull 1969; 39: 385-90.

(7.) Jalil H, Das P, Suleman A. Bovine tuberculosis in dairy animals at Lahore, threat to the public health. Metropolitan Corporation Lahore, Pakistan. Available at bovinetb.htm 2003; accessed on 23.05.2004.

(8.) Chauhan DS, Katoch VM. Bovine tuberculosis in India: a zoonosis? Proc Natl Acad Sci India 2005; 75 B: 55-60.

(9.) Niaz N, Siddiqi SH. Isolation and identification of mycobacteria from cattle slaughtered in Pakistan. Vet Rec 1979; 104: 478-80.

(10.) Dwivedi JN, Singh CM. Pulmonary tuberculosis in buffaloes. Indian Vet J 1966; 43: 582-4.

(11.) Werne E. Transmission of tuberculosis to a herd of cattle by an animal attendant with renal tuberculosis. Monatshefte fur Veterinarmedizin. 1981; 36: 819-20.

(12.) Sharma AK, Vanamayya PR, Parihar NS. Tuberculosis in cattle: a retrospective study based on necropsy. Indian J Vet Pathol 1985; 9: 14-8.

(13.) Cotter TP, Sheehan S, Cryan B, O'Shaughnessy E, Cummins H, Bredin CP. Tuberculosis due to Mycobacterium bovis in humans in the south-west region of Ireland: is there a relationship with infection prevalence in cattle? Tuber Lung Dis 1996; 77: 545-8.

(14.) Bonsu OA, Laing E, Akanmori BD. Prevalence of tuberculosis in cattle in the Dangme-West district of Ghana, Public health implications. Acta Trop 2000; 76: 9-14.

(15.) Rawat LK, Kataria RS. Incidence of bovine tuberculosis in Madhya Pradesh as determined by double intradermal tuberculin test. Indian Vet J 1971; 48: 974-5.

(16.) Shukla RR, Singh G. Studies on tuberculosis amongst Indian buffaloes. Indian Vet J 1972; 49: 119-23.

(17.) Dhanda MR, Lall JM. Tuberculosis in man and animals. Indian J Public Health 1963; 7: 97-102.

(18.) Appuswamy S, Batish VK, Prakash OR, Rangunathan B. Prevalence of mycobacteria in raw milk sampled in Karnal, India. J Food Prot 1980; 43: 778-81.

(19.) Ahmed N, Batish VK, Grover S, Mittal RC. Detection of tubercular cervical lymphadenopathy of bovine origin in a woman by PCR-probe methods and culture technique. Indian Vet J 1998; 75: 1034-5.

(20.) Katoch VM, DBT project report 2002; Department of Biotechnology, Government of India. (BT/PCR 1503/01/60/ 99) PCR-RFLP based diagnostic assay for mycobacterial infection in cattle.

(21.) New Kerala. Published March India--Bovine TB alarms health officials in Dharamshala., accessed on September 6, 2007.

(22.) Vestal AL. In: Procedures for isolation and identification of Mycobacteria, U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, CDC Atlanta, Georgia, Publication No CDC-77-8230. 1977: p15-9.

(23.) Sulieman MS, Hamid ME. Identification of acid fast bacteria from caseous lesions in cattle in Sudan. J Vet Med S B Infect Dis Vet Public Health 2002; 49: 415-8.

(24.) Leite CQ, Anno IS, Leite SR, Roxo E, Morlock GP, Cooksey RC. Isolation and identification of mycobacterium from livestock specimens and milk obtained in Brazil. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 2003; 98: 319-23.

(25.) de Lisle GW, Bengis RG, Schmitt SM, O'Brien DJ. Tuberculosis in free-ranging wildlife: detection, diagnosis and management. Rev Sci Tech 2002; 21: 317-34.

(26.) Whelan AO, Coad M, Peck ZA, Clifford D, Hewinson R G, Vordermeier HM. Influence of skin testing and overnight sample storage on blood-based diagnosis of bovine tuberculosis. Vet Rec 2004; 155: 204-6.

(27.) Buddle BM, Ryan TJ, Pollock JM, Andersen P, de Lisle GW. Use of ESAT-6 in the interferon-gamma test for diagnosis of bovine tuberculosis following skin testing. Vet Microbiol 2001; 80: 37-46.

(28.) Wood PR, Corner LA, Rothel JS, Baldock C, Jones SL, Cousins DB, et al. Field comparisons of the interferon-gamma assay and the intradermal tuberculin test for the diagnosis of bovine tuberculosis. Aust Vet J 1991; 68: 286-90.

(29.) Hanna BA, Waiters SB, Bonk BJ, Tick LJ. Recovery of mycobacteria from blood in mycobacteria growth indicator tube and Lowenstein-Jensen slant after lysis--centrifugation. J Clin Microbiol 1995; 33: 3315-6.

(30.) Fandinho FC, Grinsztejn B, Veloso VG, Lourenco MC, Werneck-Barroso E, Joao E, et al. Diagnosis of disseminated mycobacterial infection: testing a simple and inexpensive method for use in developing countries: Pan Am J Public Health, 1998; 4: 43-7.

(31.) Esteban J, Molleja A, Fernandez Roblas R, Soriano F. Number of days required for recovery of mycobacteria from blood and other samples. J Clin Microbiol 1998; 36: 1456-7.

(32.) Pacios E, Alcala L, Ruiz-Serrano M J, de Viedma DG, Rodriguez-Creixems M, Marin-Arriaza M, et al. Evaluation of bone marrow and blood cultures for the recovery of mycobacteria in the diagnosis of disseminated mycobacterial infections. Clin Microbiol Infect 2004; 10: 734-7.

(33.) Hutchings MR,Harris S. Effects of farm management practices on cattle grazing behaviour and the potential for transmission of bovine tuberculosis from badgers to cattle. Vet J 1997; 153: 142-62.

(34.) Smith RM, Drobniewski F, Gibson A, Montague JD, Logan MN, Hunt D, et al. Mycobacterium bovis infection, United Kingdom. Emerg Infect Dis 2004; 10: 539-41.

(35.) Hardie RM, Watson JM. Mycobacterium bovis in England and Wales: past, present and future. Epidemiol Infect 1992; 109: 23-33.

(36.) Cosivi O, Grange JM, Daborn CJ, Ravijglione MC, Fujikura T, Cousins D, et al. Zoonotic tuberculosis due to Mycobacterium bovis in developing countries. Emerg Infect Dise 1998; 4: 59-70.

(37.) Kazwala RR, Dabron CJ, Kusiluka LJ, Jiwa SF, Sharp JM, Kambarage DM. Isolation of Mycobacterium species from raw milk of pastoral cattle of the Southern high lands of Tanzania. Trop Anim Health Prod 1998; 30: 233-9.

(38.) Neill SD, Hanna J, Mackie DP, Bryson TG. Isolation of Mycobacterium bovis from the respiratory tracts of skin test-negative cattle. Vet Rec 1992; 131: 45-7.

Reprint requests: Dr V.M. Katoch, Director, National JALMA Institute for Leprosy & Other Mycobacterial Diseases (ICMR) Tajganj, Agra 282 001, India E-mail:,,

K. Srivastava, D.S. Chauhan, P. Gupta, H.B. Singh, V.D. Sharma, V.S. Yadav, Sreekumaran *, S.S. Thakral * J.S. Dharamdheeran *, P. Nigam *, H.K. Prasad ** & V.M. Katoch

National JALMA Institute for Leprosy & Other Mycobacterial Diseases (ICMR), Agra & * Central Military Veterinary Laboratory, Meerut Cantt & ** All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
Table. Source-wise identification profile of M. bovis and M.
tuberculosis isolates from different clinical groups of animals

Diagnosis No. & category of 161 animals *

 A=38 B=37 C=21 D=26

M. bovis Total- 12 Total -7 Total -9 Total- 4
 (PSLG-8 (PSLG-3 (PSLG-2 (PSLG-1
 Blood-3 Blood-1 Blood-2 Blood-1
 Milk-1) Milk-1 Milk-3 Milk-1
 Ph.S.-1 Ph.S.-1 RP-1)
 RP-1) RP-1)

M. tuberculosis Total -8 Total -2 Total -1 Total -1
 (PSLG-4 (Blood-1 (Blood-1) (PSLG-1)
 Blood-1 Ph.S-1)

Total 20 9 10 5

Diagnosis No. & category Total
 161 animals *

 E=27 F=12

M. bovis Total- 4 Total -4 40
 (PSLG-3 (PSLG-2 (PSLG-19
 Blood-1) Blood-1 Blood-9
 Faecal-1) Milk-6

M. tuberculosis Total -2 0 14
 (Blood-1 (PSLG-5
 Milk-1) Blood-4

Total 6 4 54

* Clinical symptoms: A, Tuberculin +ve and showing signs of
tuberculosis; B, Tuberculin +ve and apparently healthy animals;
C, Tuberculin -ve and showing clinical signs of tuberculosis;
D, Tuberculin -ve and apparently healthy individual; E, Animal
infected with non-mycobacterial infection (mastitis, enteritis,
chronic mastitis, and pyrexia of unknown origin); F, Animal
having clinical sign of debilitated condition, cough,
decreasing milk production and laboured respiration. PSLG,
prescapular lymph gland; Ph.S, pharyngeal swab
COPYRIGHT 2008 Indian Council of Medical Research
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2008 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Srivastava, K.; Chauhan, D.S.; Gupta, P.; Singh, H.B.; Sharma, V.D.; Yadav, V.S.; Sreekumaran; Thakr
Publication:Indian Journal of Medical Research
Article Type:Clinical report
Geographic Code:9INDI
Date:Jul 1, 2008
Previous Article:Biological control of mosquito populations through frogs: opportunities & constrains.
Next Article:Investigation of a hepatitis A outbreak in children in an urban slum in Vellore, Tamil Nadu, using geographic information systems.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2018 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters