Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1

. .

.

! . . $% " # . . & ' ( )' . . $ %* . + & * .

* ',-, - ,! . (/' + * 0, !, . . . .

0, 1 2 . ! " .

3 ' " ',- $ * ',-, - ,! 3 4 ' 5' $ http:/www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

* ',-, - ,!

ISSN 1607-3894 (Print), ISSN 2071-1255 (Online)

$ 6 , " ,- 77,! 1 & '" (" ) % *+ ) "# " # $ % ' ,#' ' ) - # . / + .! *# *#

'6 2- ' '0+# ' 1 2 ' 3 # 4 *0 2- 0 # 4 + # *5 . " # % 7 + 2 # 7 4 778 .8 / + - 2 + # / $ %#) - % / 0 , " +/ " # $ " ) 9 *+# / : # $ $ ; *+ - &#< % ,# 0+ Index # Veterinary Bulletin :1# ? +# % + *+# . > / @ <)# 4 + ) CABI Publishing % % + * Veterinarius Directory of Open Access Journals,EBSCOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Library Products, HINARI (WHO), SCOPUS

, 5' / % ) / % A B 0 # C # D . %E # 7 B $ % ,# + % G ,31 H + .9 *+ # 0+ # F 3 , #B + # , ' ) " # $ + + ) :C H *5 : 6 % , ,' , 0 @ < % "36 .! *# *# & " (" C H # +) - ! " % ,# H 6A # .CD +) ; $ C iraqijvetsci@ yahoo.com

5 '

+' +# Microsoft word # 2 # # ) J ( # +) - , K " % # @ < 4 A 2 # Arabic transparent M# % 7# L

K " %#)+# K " A4 $ # + +# . * # # # )/5

%) # .% # A* @ < : ) 2 A* $ +# ( #" ) L x (D ) ' " 23 & / # P > / + # , $ # F 2 "+ % # % # " * A , 0+# + + # http://www.icmje.org K$# : +Q ) A $ '7 7- 6 % 1 ' R # " * A : ++ " # , % # C C #5 A* &#+ + . , # +) - % # @ < D . : # #

777 %( > % +# 4 # 4 0 ) â&#x20AC;&#x201C; # , *3 C 1 A* &#+ + ? +# . #+) ,# *3 ) - *3 +Q+# .J + . ) - *3 +A 2 ) â&#x20AC;&#x201C; T 77 9 K' 1 2 # : ? +# , M#6# A *+ )/ U /+ . '' % D . )< - & *' ' + ! " + # V A )+ % , %) , # 2 # 0+ : # 2 # K + 2 + 2 # C ,# K ++# . ) * ' $ ') # & + P 0 2 # + +# ., B : 7 /+ + # 7 ' +# 2 ' + + * F 0 " # * F J )< # ., . * F 2 3 # 2 *+ # # :77

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

- ;, 0, ,< ,! 3 5 P )5 * /+ .% / W % H % %# % B #' $ . *# 4 U# < & - D .YZ â&#x20AC;&#x201C; :YT X . " 77 T L .

[Z[ '1 ' + :% 5 % . ) , . % .; = ' ' * ' ! + % #) 4 " / P 0 + # :) 0 " + . 7 # .( +' ' ) ' + ) # #6 #A A 2 ) " 1+ # 0 5 # .; Z[ . *# : *# 77 6, 2 # % <' % 1 ' ' $ % 7 %# . / # K / ,# 0+ ' & '" ('" ' ) " # $ ( K +# , >B .! *# *# 3 ' " ',- $ * ',-, - ,! 3 4 ' 5' $ http:/www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

?BAA >A - >?@ ,! > * ',-, - ,! " ' 6

5'

%0 Brucella melitensis Rev. 1 U 0 R " % + " % "0+ # 2 + C #A 3 # \ > H

! ]8# # # " % D D# ; /+ # W R # " + 3

*# 0 5 % + % 1 ; /+# # & * R # % R A >

?# 6 2- D * # ) 6 2 .+ # > # R >

T

# # R *3 0 # # ) D 2 .+

% # ) # & ( " P $ & * %3 2 > 9

[

8# : < ^ @ M # D " % % & + ) & W # " + 3

T[

D ? A R 6 5 D @ U 0 1Q+ K $ ! "# % / >

LT

A" ? _ *F + 6 *# & % # Cryptosporidium baileyi # % A

# & ( :+ 2- % # # ) 2 +# 1 +# * /+ 0 - % *

X

#" - R - # 4 % " # %3 % +) - ?3 4R A) *# % > *

YT

0 5 & 2 + M 6 ( :+ - 1 D ; /+# %# + # % # ) `

( )

Brucella melitensis Rev. 1

( $ % &'

#

" !

" !

( *+ , ( ) ' %& # $ )

)'

# 5+ 6 + 4 ( *2 +, 3 2+, + $ , +( 1 -%. /0 . <= +<, 9 + 3 ;

: ' x +. ( 2 92+ 70 * 70 ( /8 *(8 7 (

,+: ; < 72+, *9# + 3 5 ; #3 * 6 +> + ? + ( 4 ( /+, 8 +!1 2 2; * 70 ( + D+( + , % E , , 2; /8 *(8 + D+( *; @A+ , / BC; D+( *2 +, 6 +> + ? + 70 (P<0.01) , 6 + 9 I+,. *+< +<, 9 + 3 70 % GE. , , .* 70 ( D+( 8( 2 + , +( /8 *(8 B. melitensis Rev. 1

Humoral immunity resulted from vaccination with Brucella melitensis Rev. 1 vaccine given subcutaneously and intraocularly in goats I. I. Aldabagh*, M. J. Mohamed and B. M. Yahiya Veterinary Hospital, Mosul, Iraq, *E-mail: imad_aldabbagh@yahoo.com Abstract The aim of this study was to evaluate the humeral immune response induced by administration of smooth strain of B. melitensis Rev. 1 vaccine (1-2Ă&#x2014; 109 viable organism per dose) given by subcutaneous and intraocular routes in goats. Rose Bengal test was done to ensure the absence of Brucella infection in experimental animals and the 2- ME agglutination test was used to evaluate the antibody titers. The results showed that subcutaneous group showed positive results in 80% of animals whereas 38.5% of intraocular group showed positive results.

Available online at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

/+, 8 + Q 3 6+ 8 P % * 9 +8

: 6 2

+ J + +!R : P 3; 2 *2 #>0 8 +8 %S 8!

T ( ) J # : 2 2+, + $ 9 8 1 # : P

P

:; 2 5 2 3 3 * 8 70 + ; > 6 A+ IgM U , 6 +> + ? * <

IgG U , 6 +> + ? 6 +8 /8 8 70

K ! 7 < J ? * # J

* B +! A+ 3 K 3 /+, 8 *+ ,L 8! 70 - := *2 #>0 7, 8 M+ ,L 70 - := #3

! 70 # + ( <+ .; : *+ ,L O # : * < *2 *+ +, M#

N 3 < 1 +8 8 70 K % 3 3

( )

& +*

: *9# K >? * * 2 , #<

8 7 +2 "+ ; I+,. $ I % *2 #>0 (G ) # + +!L N 3 7 +: > N 3

B. suis : # : * 3 U ,; *2 +, *; + 2$ C, %3? ,2 B. abortus B. melitensis 70 * 3 * > * +8 70 *+ * 3? * 2 , (, I+,. BC 7 2 +( ?

6 S! / /

+,V? 70 B. melitensis N 3 +.

8 , ; * # * U , ; * 7.

6 S! *=0 +2 < (G) N 3 70 3 > M+ ,; 70 # N 3 +2 ! / + 3$ :<; CFT / : + 3 RB +<, 9 7. 92+ +,V? " 3 7.

2ME 7 ! *9# + 3

B. abortus , Biovar 1* W,! Antigen suspension > N 3 + + ; +<, 9 + 3 * < V (X G) 6 2 : 8 /+ *; V (X) +( ? 70 #

B. melitensis U , * # N 3 ( @A+ , 1 + 3 3 + 6 S! / +,V? 70 Biovar 1 2 +.9 < /+ K V 70 C8# .(Y X) +<, 9

: P 3; /+, 8 +,V? +( ? 70 # N 3 P 3; /+, 8 N3 7 Z 8 W +. V K#< N 3 >0; *; \ 0 I $ + .[ + 92+ : /+, 8 4 ( " *2 * < # + +!L < * 5 , *+ > , 2 5+ 2; W 6 S! 6 2 I+,.

J > + 2+, / % /+, 8 * # * 3 U ,; * ,! /+8+( * U ,;

P 3? /+, 8 +,V? +( ? 4 ( !!3 70 3 Z 8 6 2 8 # D+( W ,! /+8+( : B. abortus, strain 19* W,! D+( D+( * < 7< # * P 3; 2 * ,! P 3; 2+, + + : $ *; K \,=0 #2+0 3

; J + +!L K $ Innate immunity

8, Z 8 \ I+,. .(E ) ! N 8 W 3 -%. 70 .( ) > 6 + < # DNA D+( M+ ,; * 2 , 65+ < ( 7 * 8< 92+ 3 Z 8; 70 B. Melitensis Rev. 1 5+ 6 D+( * + + ; N!3 ? D+( 6 2+, + $ 92+ +,V? 4 ( 70 3 /8 *(8 + 5+ 2R *< 92+ +,V? 4 ( +> ; N!3 7,+: D+(

J S * + 3 + 2 ocular route* 70 ( +

3 <= (Y ) +<, 9 + 3 ? ( 5 1 + 3 3 * 8 70 4 ( J * /+, 8 ( J S ( ) ,+: ; < 72+, *9# .6 + #3 * 2+, + $

Q < 5+> 70 K8 92+ 2 4 ( 5 ; 3 70 K + W 5 ; P , , C0+8 A+

2 +< ; < 0 W P , , 70 . 9# 6 ,+

#

M+ ,; * B. abortus strain19 antigen # > D+( .+ " /# 5 9< /8 *(8 Q > B. melitensis Rev. 1 5+ 6

' cz < M+ ,; * ) 2 / : x B. melitensis 5+ 6 D+( .(+ ,+ ; Veterinaria SA ' x ) * 70 ( Q > Rev. 1 cz Veterinaria SA < M+ ,; * ( 2 / : OMIGA < M+ ,; * +<, 9 .+ ,+ ; * ,+: ; < .6 8 < DIAGNOSTICS

< .BDH- chemicals , England < M+ ,; Germany Gerhard M+ ,; * NaCl

! * 7 4 8 >8 Buchman .* :8+

* D + 2= 7 8 92+ <% * G 3 /+ < +.5+ 21 7 6 8! +8 70 B ; E G /+, 8 * /+, 2 /

.Q

5+ * 6 0

O @ : 70 6 S ( + 9 K +,; 70 4 ( ! 92 Z 8 9< 9+B 1 / (,

Hemolysis 8 / BC; 7 /+, 2 /

/ + 3 +B 2 P 7< 7A 2 < , 2 + 3;

+<, 9 + 3 5 ; (6 2 ) 4 ( /+, 2 /C 8 : M%+ , W 2 ( ) 70 <% + < + 3 5 ; * 8 A E 6 8 70 ! (' ) 70 <% + <

,+: ; < 72+, *9# (K) (;)* 2 1 /+, 8 / : 2+ #3 2 (;) 2 /8( * 8 2 < > /8( /8 # D+( * ( . ) 6 8

(6 8 6 ) # D+( * 6 8 2 (K) 2

* 2 * /+, 2 /

* 70 ( + -#2; 70 + < /+, /C 8 ! !0 4 ( *

. 2+ #3 / + 3$ W 5 ;

( )

& / 0 .- , &

8 >8 (' ) 70 6 <% ( / 3

,+: ; < * . 0+>1 * ,+: ; < 9 < 7 4 8 * 1 (+ ( Y. ) E / 3 ( 5+ 70

! < * %E.

8 * . Q >; K +, +8 70 + 3 K +,;

? 2 K +,? W 1 + >8 ,+: ; < Q 3 ! * . 7,+:

? K ,? 70 W>

M9

,+: ; < 8 70 / , 7,+: K ,? * . (, I % W + Q 3 5 ; 1 Z +: K ,? * . (, M9

Z +: 1 . \, %3; % * +: K ,? 1 $ ! %<.

W > * . K +,? W 1 Q >; : .;

/ / / K +,? 70 ! 9 < 4 !; Z 8 7 2 E / X / G / X / E /

A GY 6 8 ,>+8 70 K +,? W>

K ,; 3& 8 #3 * @A+ , /; 2+ 6 .*9# \ 0 !8

D+( (K) 2 % GE. /8 D+( (;) 2

/+, 8 7 2 *; 7 2 * 70 ( P ,2 >? P 70 + , +2+ / BC; * 2 * , " 0

2 W (P<0.01) .( ) 9 + 3$ + $ , A , : ( )

[ , # D+( + 92+ 7 2 70 +<, *

* 70 ( /8 *(8 + .4 ( 4 ( (K) 2 4 ( (;) 2

4 ( * 70 ( + /8 *(8 + ** % GE. ** % E % !

70 * 8 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; G + $ A , : ( W 4 ( 2 *2 + , Q 3 ( ** . 2 < .(P<0.01) P ,2 & / 0 .- 3 4

'

+ 4 ( /+, W 6 + @A+ , /,+< *

E / *+< %1 6 +> + b + 2; >b W P /+, 8 / BC; 4 ( ,2 * 2 4 ( P , +( , " 0

5+ 2; *2 @ +, 6 +> + ? + *+< (P<0.001) 2 *2 (P<0.01) ,2 + , + /8 D+( .( ) * 70 ( + 8( (K)

* ) 1 & 7 # Fisher exact probability + 3 5 ; ( , + + ; +<, 9 + 3 @A+ , 2Nonparametric Q 3 2; : 7B0 *9# 2 *2 +, 6 +

/ 8 * +3 ( 7. *9# K !

8 5 ; ? K ; /+ 5+ 2^ +B : *< 5+!8L Z 8 Non parametric _ $ 7A+!8L ( +B * < 7 /+

8 70 7 # /+

*2 J+ Z 8 4> < 6 V

7 # 7A+!8L 8 +B2+>31 K 5+ 2^

3 W + * , " 0 ( ) ! * Z 8 6 + * < 5+ 2;

G / 2 E / / / / .7 2 @A+ ,

,+: ; < â&#x20AC;&#x201C; + 3$ 6 + K / 8 Multiple non + 3 3 + _ $ *(8 * 9 , +(

*9# + 3+ 6 +> + ? + : ( )

< 8( 92+ 7 2 70 ,+: ; < â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 72+,

* 70 ( /8 *(8 78+( * .4 ( *

4 ( (K) 2

* 70 ( + *** .G ÂąG.X'

4 ( (;) 2

4 ( /8 *(8 + ,*** . Âą .E Âą ## 7 + ( = 3 Âą 6 + K : ( W + , Q 3 ( *** . 2 < 70 * 8 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; G Q 3 ( ## .(P<0.001) P ,2 4 ( *2 (P<0.01) P ,2 * D+( *2 + ,

parametric comparisons Steel- Dwass analysis / Tukey 3 +

< + 7A+!8L 8 5 ; Equivalent .Ky - Plot 7A+!8L 8 @ +,

2*

& 0

+ @A+ , / 2; /+, W *; @A+ , / BC; %E , 4 (

/,+< 4 ( +!R G

( )

05

56

W P , , 70 6 1 * :8+ < A B ,+ B, + 2 70 3 7 , . %. D+ ,L

7 <+ .; * # J 2 6

D ; , 8 6 : + ,1 6 + 9

J

< C, J * N 3 +, ( ) 4 ( * 8 + M# 0 ,+< ; *2 #>0 M# +

/8 /$+8 * * < *2 #>0 J +,

.(G) J , 70 2+0 !3 V 92+ +,V? 70 # > /+8+( 6 2 / 3 / 3 70 , \ ( /+ 5 1 * V 2

* , +( P \,; V " 70 6 + < ( /+ P 8+, * 3 D+( U ,; 70 -%. /8 , 92+ 70 K,+ %. 7 S #>0 " 70 _ 3 ; /+8+( Z 8; 2 5 > 9+B 9 8 70 3 D+( 72 , D+ , +. <= *2

> +<, 9 + 3 5 ; *+< .92+ 70 72+, # + +!L * /+, 8 3 <= * ( 70 +8 +, ,+: ; < + 3 5 1 *+< (' Y ) - <%+ @A+ , \ + 4 ( , !+8 2+, + $ 70 , J+ 3,$ P9 *; *< ( G ) * 3& *< Z 8 5+ 2L ( Q# 3 1 7, D+( 2

* * 70 Innate immunity 2+, W +B

%S / % * *; P 3; 8+, * (E G) 8+, 2 2; + I /8 ,?+ , +( +

4 ( 2+, + $ * < C, N+! $ + 2+, + $ K +, Z 8 > J 6 ( * < ( ) > J * 9 70 6 + 9 W 2+, + $ 9 8 70 65+ < 2; /8 5+ 2L *(8 78+( , +( ,2 ( ) - <%+ @A+ , -%. " +

4 ( *; <% Z 8 +,V? 70 * 70 ( /8 ( 70 7 > 2+ 70 K * 70 / ( + 2+ 70 /8 *(8 D+( K + , +8 8(

( ) +8 9+B ( W 9+B " 8 70 70 7A+!8L 8 4 , <= *2 #>0 3 /# +

W + * ,

: 70 Non parametric V " + 2 D+ , + 2 .; <T + ! 6 + @A+ , +

. + < A+ 8L Z 8 @A+ , ( 70 7A+!8L 8 .P 3?

U 70 +8

)

1. Badakhsh FF, Carmichael LE, Douglas J A. Improved rapid slide agglutination test for presumptive diagnosis of canine brucellosis. J Clin Microbiol. 1982;15(2):286-289 .

2. Banai M. Control of ruminant Brucellosis by use of Brucella melitensis Rev. 1 vaccine: laboratory aspects and field observations.

Vet. Microbiole. 2002;20(90):497-519 .

3. Buchanan TM, Faber L. 2-Mercaptoethnol Brucella agglutination test: usefulness in predicting recovery from Brucellosis. J Clin Microbiol.

1980;11(6):691-693 .

4. Blasco JM. Existing and future vaccines against brucellosis in small ruminants. Keynote lectures of the 6th international sheep veterinary congress, Spain 2005 .

5. DĂ­az-Aparicio E , MarĂ­n C , Alonso-Urmeneta B, AragĂłn V, PĂŠrezOrtiz S, Pardo M, Blasco J M, DĂ­az R, MoriyĂłn I. Evaluation of serological tests for diagnosis of Brucella melitensis infection of goats. J Clin Microbiol. 1994;32(5):1159â&#x20AC;&#x201C;1165 .

6. FAO. Surveillance of ovine and caprine brucellosis (excluding Brucella ovis infection) in:Guidelines for coordinated human and animal brucellosis surveillance. FAO 2003 .

7. Kang S M, Compas R W. host responses from innate to adaptive immunity. Mol cells. 2009;27(1):5-14 .

8. Klein G C, Behan K A. Determination of Brucella immunoglobulin G agglutinating antibody titer with dithiothreitol. J Clin Microbiol.

1981;14(1):24-25 .

9. Ko J, Splitter G A. Molecular host-pathogen interaction in brucellosis: current and future approaches to vaccine development for mice and human. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2003;15(1): 95-110 .

10. Munoz PM, de Miguel MJ, Grillo MJ, Marin CM, Barberan M, Blasco JM. Immunological responses and kinetics of Brucella melitensis Rev 1 infection after subcutaneous or conjunctival vaccination in rams.

Vaccine 2008;26 (21):2562-2569 .

11. OIE. Caprine and ovine brucellosis excluding Brucella ovis. OIE Terrestrial manual, 2008. pages 974-982. Available from http://www. oie. int 12. Ruiz-Mesa JD, Sanchez-Gonzalez J, Reguera J M, Martin L, LopezPalmero S, Colmenero J D. Rose Bengal test:diagnostic yield and use for the rapid diagnosis of human brucellosis in emergency departments in endemic areas. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2005;11(3):221225 .

13. Runyon RP. Non parametric statistics: A contemporary approach.

Addison Wesley publ. co. Reading Massachusetts. 1977;pp:42-87 .

14. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Non parametric statistics. Online reference last modified on 20 June 2009. Available from http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Nonparametric_statistics .

( )

" # !

% #$ #$

! " ( + ( , # . / -+ ( , * &'() )

$ + 9 ': ; < , , = + : '> +" 8 + 7 4

7 + #" 4 56 , 3 2 ( 0, 1' ; A > (, 0 ( 6F %-D.E 4 ; %3B. ; ; " A > (, 0, " . - 4 ' ?

3 # + , " L' (, 0? 6F I J K '> A > + " ; ' I J %-B %- .D !(, 4

; (H 'G ) 9 G

; > + M + N(, NJ , E I J 7 ' ' .; ' I J 4

; % .BB %**.- 4 ; %* . %D3.E ; Capillaria O, + > + M

' (, I J8 0 ( .4 ; N(, N J , % E. % !(, 4

; :G'" 0 .P M

' (, I J Noticotylus attenuatus , # ( + ; .4 ; % ; % . !(, G + M

' (, I J8 Raillietina O, # ( , ! ' ' I J

Diagnosis of some helminthic eggs in faeces of ducks and geese in Ninevah governorate, Iraq A. F. Al-Taee, R. G. Mohammed and N. H. Mohammed Department of Microbiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq Abstract This study included the inspection of 80 faecal samples for each of ducks and from geese from different region of Ninevah governorate from December 2008 to July 2009. Mixed infection was the most predominant being 44.92% and 22.66% in ducks and geese respectively. Parasitic examination revealed the presence of 17 species or genera of internal warm in ducks and 12 species or genera of internal warm in geese. The most common nematode recovered in ducks and geese was Capillaria represented with 38.75% in ducks and 42.5% in geese, while the common trematode species were Noticotylus attenuatus represented with 10% in ducks and 17.5% in geese. Raillietina represented with 22.5% and 50% in ducks and geese respectively as a major cestodes genus recovered.

Available online at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

%

0 : 0( .(D ) 9 G 0) ; Q& M

(B *) , 7 '> ; ; > , R Domestic birds , +8 + P ; ? < + 1 A > G, ; N " N Wild birds , " : '> 7 = " "'

9 ', H(

Q () 4 #. 0 , I A > #., .' .(E) N, + (,) I !&" . " 4, 0 ,

P" ; . #> $ + $ ,

' + + 6 1

+ 9 :'(& Q 6 + + + M '' .( ) ;, + ' $ + N $ ;' : 5 >) + I 0 , + K ?"

5 ', +4 ; ." 1 0 P ' + ! ('

( )

' # + SPSS ;T $ X # ' A , >'( ' >'( . ( ' G ;' H + , 0 : '> >'( One way analysis + ' # ' .( ) P<0.05 ' < '( ,J Duncan,s test +",

+ " 'K 4

! $' ;' + ( = ' 0 ( L G Q 6 0 P # 6K ; + P # ( 0 6 < , , = ; 1 6K #

' 4

; + M

+J 7G" M ? ; J , + I ) ( S6K ' 9 T ( ,) .< , , =

'

&

56 , 3 2 #&> + ( S6K AT ', 0 =8 < . M

#$ , ; 4

+ #" 4 6 .+ M + 9 J , 4

A > ' 4 ; %3B. ; ; " A > (, 0? .%-D.E > + M + N (, N J , E I J 7 ' ' M , + " 4 ; N(, J , ; Capillaria O, # ( 4 ; E ; > + 4 ; %* . ; %D3.E 0? A > (, I J8 , , P&P 2 >G' ' . 0 .P 8 .( ) #

Noticotylus attenuatus , + " 4 ; + J , ; ; % E. % ' (, 0? 6 N J G K P" Raillietina O, # ( .( ) # ; ' I J 4

P&P G + ,8 O , 8 + + (, I J8 ; % . L A > (, 0? 6 4

+ $>G .(D) # 4 ; %

7 ) 4

7 ) + #" 4 56 , 3 H + J , &" 7$, ,( I F G8 ( + 0 ' JU = + 1 : '> % , + O, +J =, M?

V G ; G ; " " 0, 1' < , , G + 9 ': #&> Q 6 O .

4 $ : H ' . - 4 ' G , I' 3 # ) + , " " : =, " '(& 0 ; H1

4 , I J # $ V ' + J # ( % ?

0 $ : 0 #"G '> I 0 , 0 ., W : . >'( #&> + 9 G J '> ! ( ' .

G , () + M +J .(3) 0 .P M +J 7G" , ( O . >'( M 0 ( 0 0$>G ' :$

$T $> 0( ocular micrometer .( -) I J 'J)

= ; 2 : 4 + 3 + 3 4 ; > + M A > (,

0 , J :( ) #

.< , , ; A > (, (%) 4

* .

0 , J 4 ; D*

-

-

E.

-

-

* *

-

-

; A > (, (%) D3.E

E.

E.

D.E D.E D.E .

3 *

-

0 , J > + M

; Capillaria spp.

D Heterakis spp.

B Syngamous sp.

B Ascaridia galli * Acuaria sp.

3 Amidostomum sp.

B Echinuria uncinata * Trichestreagylus tenuis D Strongyloides ovium D Suplura sp.

D Oxyspirura sp.

-

B

Subulura brumbti Congylonema ingluricola

( )

= ; 2 : 4 + 3 + 3 4 ; 0 .P + M A > (,

0 , J :( ) #

.< , , ; A > (, (%) 4

E.

0 , J 4 ;

*

-

-

E.

B

; A > (, (%)

3.E 3.E

0 , J ;

3 E E

0 .P M

Noticotylus attennatus Ornithobilharzia prira Prosthogonimus spp.

= ; 2 : 4 + 3 + 3 4 ; G + M A > (,

0 , J :(D) #

.< , , ; A > (, % 4

E.

0 , J 4 ;

* * B

-

-

; A > (, % .

0 , J ;

3

-

-

E. B.

*

!( 4

; > + A > (, :(*) #

. (

0 G M

Railletina spp.

Davinea proglotina Hymenolepis spp.

Amaebotaenia spp.

I J) 0, " A > (, + (*) # + Z1' ,J < >) # $: , . H #$ #&> 4 ; ; 'G ; A > (, 0 P<0.05 , < '( #$ +J N , 0: '> , + R I J , P 7 $ 7 > ; $ + N , I J 0, " , ) H ; A > (, 7 '>' , P<0.05 , < '( ,J

0 &'> ' & ; . 1 +J 7 $ 7 > 0 1 8 . A > , % ' .# $: + ,

W + J , &" HT G A > K '> A > +8 AT ', ; % .BB ; %**.- 0? A > (, # ( % ; %D .*D : A > # ( + ; 4

; % D.DD ; % D.33 5 4 A > 4 ; (, + ;T $ ) # ' + Z1' ( ) # 4

+ #" + N , I J 0, " ; '> A > , ; .P<0.05 , < '( ,J 5 4 : A > A > + I J , " '> : A > L G' . 4

+ M 0$>G 6F .( ) # (P<0.05) 5 4 O, + M

.( ) #"G Capillaria O, Echinuria O, + M

.( ) #"G Railletina .(D) #"G uncinata

(%) A > (,

0 , J (

4

4

- .* - .D b a D 'G -B 3 .c a H -*.* 3*. a 3 a 7 $ -D.E 33. a B a E 7 > ,J , %

I G' J : '> 7 ) * P<0.05 , < '( ; > + M 7 '> A > , :( ) #

.4 + 3 + 3 4 0 , J

(

4

4

D .*D b b : A > D.DD D.33 a a B 5 4 A > .BB **.- b E cD '> A > ,J , %

I G' J : '> 7 ) * .P<0.05 , < '( (%) A > (,

E

( )

( : ) 4

A > ( AT ', #&> + + ' ; A > (, 0? 6 > + + : '> , H AT ', S6K 7 '>' %-D.E 4 ; % .3B 4

; " A > (, + "6 6 ( ) S "6 0? A > (, # ( W ( D) S

% . 0? , ; + +J K ( ; %D3.B ; Q ; ( *) L ( . 0, " + ;

%3 > 0 : A > (, 0? W #$ ; ; A > (, 0 $ 6 4 ; ( ) S

.% I + I J L'( ; > + M

A > (, # (' + , 9 J # J I N + " 4

; ,'( ]T G I J 4 <6?' W ' 7 = + M + P 9 J + "' ;' ! GJ)

0 , H '> ' + " > 0 : , + ( B) "6 . Q 6 ; N ( + " < >) < >) + : '> , A >' + I J 9 +

+

+ I 1) 4

; Q #P O,

" 9 J #

P ' 7 1 ; > M P" + .( ) 6? J , J , 7 1 + + 0, " ,'( ; 4 > + E ; NJ , 2 >G' ' 6 Nematodes , () + 6 ( E) S "6 H ! . 6K .4 ; , + 4 + P" 0, " , () + .( 3) AT ', H 7 '>'

W ; 4

I Q 6 ; ! ( <4

P 9 J + "' ;' ' ( 0 . + T 6R +J # ' ;' < > M ) + 0 G +

.( -) , () + ( 7T 1 " > + K + + " Capillaria O, + ; %D3.E 0? A > (, # ( 6 ,'( ; 4

+ S6K M H:' A > + .4 ; %* .

# G ; ( ) K ;' ( L', . +" > . N T N *B ; 9 $ ! R Capillaria , > 0, " S6K H + 6 * + " N$ : N B + + + ( ) " spp.

L, ( ) 6K ( .Capillaria spp , N > ,

, H (crossâ&#x20AC;&#x201C;infection) Q 'G A > I H I 1) #.

; Q 5 " < >)

, + . 4 ' , 'K) 0 +

; 9 P" 1 0 P ' .Capillaria spp ;$.'

2 + ( D) "6 . J

4 ( ; Capillarae O, + 1 ( ) #"G .* Ă&#x2014;

4 ( ; Railletina O, + 1 ( ) #"G .* Ă&#x2014;

( ; Echinuria uncinata , + 1 (D) #"G .* Ă&#x2014;4 4

3

( )

6F ; Q ; ( *) ( AT ', L F #$ ' H %:' 7 > I J ;K 0, " '> A > (, +8

+ 0 W 9 $ ; ; (D ) L #$ '

8 + J , A > + I J8 K + +

, A > N + " Q 6 ! ( +8 .'

0 : + ,8 P&P ;J W ' < ' , 0 , H H I F < 0 : +

, + P"U P 9 J + "' ;' .(DD) 0 , J , +(( ' > 0 ' ; 4

5 + 0 , H ,P S , + . ,AT ', + L , $ ' 44 0 ; '> ' . ,'( ; $>G + M

8 0, " .( ) (-) S

O, + + 5 # ; $)

' + R I J # 4 M J J 0 = Capillaria % '> % , ; N ' + " ) +

6?

Capillaria contorta , + + J8 9 P" + + I F < 8 $ ;(:,' < % R I 0 (, 8 . $

^ : ; K

N ,'> '

Noticotylus

, # (' + Trematoda 0 .P 6K K I G 4 + * + 3 ; attenuatus + J ,

+ , 4 , ; ( *) S Q 6 1

, ( ) S H %:' + G ; O, 6K + W ; , S6K ' Q 6 ( 6

0 $ " T T ; ' =

4 ;1.

S6 ; ( 7 1 ' W 0 .,'( ,) .9 P" + A > (, I J + Cestodes G + (, 8 0 : + L, I J # Raillietina O, 0 ( O, ' G + + ( B) "6 W ! $' ;' 0 G > + 9

' Raillietina '> + 5 ',X ; ) (F N : 1 ! (' 6F

+>P'

# ( H N ' N 4, ! ( ) + 0 = " G A > ,J . R I _ 6 ) R. , G A > ,J #( 0 , G .J R.

, I J ( 3) PJ " ( E) echinobothrida + ( 0? $ 9 G ;:T : ; tetragona + S6 A > + (, S6K + .

7 1 7 1 A > ( H( G',) I H 9 J + "' ;' (W O ,> # , ) # , ; (

,( ( (, .( -) + ' +" ; 9

4 ; A > (, + ;T $ ) # ' #&> + + ' . # $: ; + H ; P<0.05 ,J , I J) 0, " # $: + A > (, ; , 0 &'> = ' + ; (, + 6 (D ) ( -) S H %:' 6K ; % I 0 $ 9 # $: ; J 0, " A > 0 ; $) (, ; $: 0 ?' 0(

H ; ' 6 0?

'G ; 8 ' $) + I F Q 6 04J 8 G 6K > ; 2 ,' P 7 $ 7T 1 6? ' 9 ;' ' 9 J # J ;' #

. ; T 6? 0

$ (

+ A > 9 G (, ; ( 0 ?' W I _' .(D ) > + M 4

A > + ( #&> = . .%**.- ; 0? 6 '> , + + " > 0? 4 ; %D .*D (, : A > + " + ; 6K .% : A > % .BB '> A > (,

$ 1.

2.

Sonaiya EB. The countext and prospects for development of small holder rural poultry production in Africa. Rural Polutry Production.

Thessalonik, Greece. 1990;2:108-141 .

Awad AH, Ahmayah AH and Abdullah BH. Aquatic bird helminth fauna in Basrah province- Iraq. Acheck-List. Basrah J. Science.

1993;1:115-124 .

O " O " 5 0 : +J 0 ( . K ,; .D ,

" , '( ( .% â&#x20AC;&#x201C; #$ . , ; O"'(

. -EB .#$

4.

Magwisha HB, Kassuku AA, Kyvsgaard, NC and Permin A. Comparsion of the prevalence and burdens of helminthes infection in growers and adult free â&#x20AC;&#x201C; range chickens. Tropical Animal Health Production. 2003;34:133-137 .

5. Utpal Dand Biswas B. Prevalence of endoparasitic infections in duck (Anasplatyrhychos domesticus) visa â&#x20AC;&#x201C; a â&#x20AC;&#x201C; visits. public health significance in west Bengal. Indian Vet J. 1997;74:743-744 .

6. Ibrahim AI, Hassanin HH, ALy SE and Abdelaa AA. A study on some parasitic affection in domestic pigeons in Ismailia province.

Issuit Vet Med J 1995;67:153-158 .

7. Webster WA. Internal parasites found in exotic birds imported into Canada. Can. Vet J 1982;23:230 .

8. Charles, MH. Dignostic Veterinary Parasitology. 2nd ed. Mosby, Elsevier. 1998; pp:246-257 .

9. Soulsby E J L. Helminth, Arthropods and Protozoas of Domesticated Animals. 7th ed. London, Phyladelphia, Bailliere, Tindall, 1982 .

10. Foreyt WJ. Veterinary Parasitology. Reference Manual. 5th ed. Iowa State University Press. USA. 2001 .

#T ) .SPSS >'( .' ;T $ ) # ' .= : ,9 . .2008 ,+ ) ,+ J , I ) , G, 12. Kashid KP, Shrikhande GB and Bhojne GR. Incidence of gastrointestinal helminths in captive wild animals at different locations. Zoo's Print J. 2002;18:1053-1054 .

13. Abd El-Fatth Am. Some studies on helminths of domestic and wild birds. M. V. Sc. Thesis, Fa Vet Med (Kufr-El-Shekh). Tanta. Univ.

1996;pp: 50 .

;' +

( +( K % ' ;( ) . * â&#x20AC;&#x201C; #$ ; ; Q ; > 0 : ( .; J . - B: D / --*

.%

-

( )

25. Borgsteede FHM, Okulewicz A, Zoun PEF, Okulewicz J. The gastrointestinal helminth fanna of the eider duck (Somateria mollissimaL.) in the Netherlands. Helminthologia. 2005; 42(2):8387, .

15. Jensen Jand Pandy VS. Observation on helminths parasites of domestic fowl in Zimbabwe. Zimb Vet J. 1989;20:15-17 .

16. Hoberge EP, Lloy D and Omar H. Libyostrongylus dentatus. n. sp.

(Nematoda:Trichostrongylidae) from ostriches in North America with comment on the genera Libyostronglus and Paralibyostrongylus. J Parsitol. 1995;81:85-93 .

17. Muhairwa AP, Msoffe PL, Ramadhanis S, Mollel EL, Mtambo MM and Kassuku AA. Prevelence of gastrointestinal helminths in free ranged duck in Morogoro Municipality livestock. Res Rural develop.

2007;19(4):1-6 .

18. Wagner A and Ruedy D. The detection of endoparasites in birds at the Basel zoo, what role of wild birds play as carriers. Schw. Archiv Fur Tierh. 1981;123(9):467-481 .

19. Ashenafi H and Eshetuy. A study on gastrointestinal helminths of local chickens in central Ethiopia. Rev Med Vet. 2004;155(10):504507 .

, + : '" ,& ( ,+( ( , J . B

, ' " , '( ( .9 $ ; ,

.82 ,2000,9 $ 27. Calneck BW, Barness HJ, Bre A C W, Reid WM, Yoder H. Diseases of Poultry, 9th ed. Iowa University Press / Ames, USA. 1991;pp:723778 .

COLUMBIA 7 ) 0 : # ( . 4 , ,",4 . 3 ;'= % , M

< , , = ; LIVIA DOMESTICA ,#$

,

" , '( ( .Q K # . $&>, -3 29. Anisuzzaman, Ali MA, Rajman MH, Mondal MMH. Helminth parasites in indogenous ducks L. :Seasonal dynamics and effects on production performance. J Bang Agrl Univ. 2005;3(2):291-295 .

30. Fakae BB, Paul-Abiade CM. Rain season period prevalence of helminths in the domestic fowl (Gallus gallus) in Nsukka, Eastern Nigeria. Nig Vet J. 2003;24(1):21-27 .

; T M 0 : # ( . G K ( a J . . 2 -33 9 $ : ' " '( ( .9 $ 21. Fredensborg BL, Latham AD and Poulin R. New records of gastrointestinal helminth from the red-billed gull(Larusnovaehollandiae scopulinus). Newz J Zool. 2004;13:75-80.

22. Reissjg G E C, MMVS MV, Olaeche F, Phdi MV, Roles, CA and Msc MV. Parsitological findings of lesser ehea pterocnemia pennata(D'or bigh) in faeces from northern Patagonia, Argentina. Publication. Med Vet UACH Chile. 2001;33(2):247-251 .

G + M T ( . J +' I: $ .D ,

" '( ( . ; ; 1 4 $ .B* 2 . -3* .9 $

32. Ismail AW, AL-Hadithi and Abdul Jabar F. Epidemic study of some cestodes infecting the alimentary canal of Pigeons in Basrah. Bas J Agri Sci. 1989;2(1):199-208 .

; G + 1 $ >G' ( . = " . D ( .7 G) 7 , = ; + , P&P

. 2 B " , ' " , '(

.0 K Z ( +&( + F /O ! / , R + F + ( .DD ,R) ; > 0 : M O "8 M

,8 M ( #$ #$

! " #$ . , ; .D :( ) -/

%

24. Bishop CA and Thereifall W. Helminth parasites of the common eider duck, Somateria mollissima (L), in new foundland and labrader. Proc Heminthal Soc. Wash. 1974;41:125-135 .

( )

& % ! $ ! " # ! "# "#

$ % & ( + 1 0 " . / - + ) , '()* )

' â&#x20AC;&#x201C; " < + 8 (= "# , + 8 9 ! , + 9 : (; . + 9 + ) ( ) 5 ) 672 3 4 Staphylococcus D2 E + C, "19 ( .+ % ( A # @ ;< 2 ? ) 3 , + - " + , & %G. Staphylococcus aureus %H Sterptococcus spp. % H.I Corynebacterium % G. Bacillus spp. % . spp. % .G Micrococcus spp. % . Klebsiella spp. % .H Pseudomonas spp. % .- E. coli % .I Moraxella bovis , (%H .0) G & E 3 ) J 19 H 1 E 3, & .% . Proteus spp.

1 E < (%I .H) ) 3 ) + 1 E 3 &4 .(% .H) & ) E 3, & .(%0 .0) I ( K 3 ) +

Isolation and identification of conjunctival bacteria in cattle in Mosul H. H. Ali, H. F. Al-Abidy and N. S. Mechael Department of Microbiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq Abstract This study included examination of (120) eye swabs, from cows from different ages and regions in Mosul city. This study extended from September â&#x20AC;&#x201C; December 2009. The samples were collected from clinically healthy and infected eyes of animals.

11 bacterial species were isolated they included Staphylococcus spp. 22.4%, Bacillus spp. 18.2%, Corynebacterium 17.6%, Streptococcus spp. 7%, Staphylococcus aureus 8.2%, Moraxella bovis 10.6%, E. coli 5.9%, Pseudomonas spp. 4.7%, Klebsiella spp. 2.4%, Micrococcus spp. 1.8%, Proteus spp. 1.2%. The isolated bacteria were 170, Gram positive bacteria were 128/170 while Gram negative bacteria 42/170 (24.7%). Many types of bacteria isolated from healthy swabs 110 (64.7%) and 60 (35.3%) from infected swabs.

Available online at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

D + &( J ), U 9< +M RT 4 DT "&4 J

D 8 4 L J , & O 7& 8 V# 3 ,

D 8 " L J D # ; V 3 ,

( 9 , L 7 +< WQ + R .

3 , + E& #X ! ) L ( (,& D =, 8 ,. D 8 ( E + &( L % ( M ( % ( M + L < " 4( (0)

3 ( 3 ; + L Q , . + .( M , .

# ; 8 & . 3 , D +

L < +M 3 ) 19 ,N C

. , 3 ( 67 (2* 9 (, O 7 8 ; + ,) D 9 ), ( = ; R, # P ( $7

Q 3* + % ( M L +M .( ) + , S ;( 8 EM # & . 3 , D J

T 4 3* + $

( )

T 2 % , + Q ( ( J ."#

â&#x20AC;&#x201C; $ ( 2 9 ) 8 °0H 8 ,Q D %H U 9 $ ) + "& U 9 3 , 672 3 ,() T 2 3,Q D&, & &< )

+ZQ "&4 ) ( O 7 9 ) 8 °0H 8 & V # , 87 ;Z E "9 =( , 3 () ) U 9 O &4 3 () 3 ,() ( E W " (, &) &< , = (; 9 1 ;(,* &< '& 4 ' , ) &< D&, & &< &< ., 3 () ?= ( &< ! 1 + E + ) * 3 # = L V [ % . R ., &< U 9 .( 0) = (; 9 ,<

( &

3 Y U

8 EK + % ( M % ) ( ) ( EY( D( D9 8 " U 9 EY( 7T, D T U

+ . , 3 , D +1 % )(&

, U 9 2

: Q ?

O' J

V 3 , D +1

+ % ( K ) 3 ' 2< + +M (I ) " 1

T , ;E 3 1 M 1V R ( D2 . "

D S ! #( M + = ( + + #

"

+ O ,2 (H) .( R , . % ( M +

+ &( +< A ( C & D E E &( U M $ Y( D(

< 1. % ( M , . %1; "E , Q 3* + < +

+ = + < +

D 3 , + + &(

3 ) + 3 ) (G) + U M "#(

, ( , . % ( M 3* ( < Streptococcus Moraxella Listeria Mycoplasma Corynebacterium Micrococcus E coli Staphylococcus N 9 O ,2 ( -) & ) E

, E "19 ( +

D 3 , 3 ) + Pseudomonas Moraxella Bacillus Staphylococcus E 672 + E& +< 9 Corynebacterium Proteus +< J . + + #K Q 3* D 19 ( D 8 ( + &( + + E& D D 3 , E J ( + U M "#( + ;, U 9 < ( .( ) # E , E& + & #* , + % ( M J T "

+ E& O ,2

;, 3 1 *

3 1 * R 4 C '( ) 3 #* 4(,* & D( E E

3 4 D 1, % 7 + & ( , . % ( K Q 3 ) "., D D& , & " )* % 7

+ 3 ( M + &( N ( C 4 4< O 7&

.(-) : # 4< "'; =( + 9 + E 5 ;4( "19 U M ) 672 3 2 . 2 ( %), # ) .

*& 3 ) + = (; E 19 H 5 ;4( ( 3 , + ) ( ) V . + 9 + 87 ;Z 3, & J + % ( A # @ ;< 2 ? ) * 1V R ( D2 2 ? Q 3 '

+ 3 ) D2 (%00.0) 3, & , ;E 3 1 *

# = 3 ) + + % ( A # 3*

E 3*1 672 3=,# . . ) ( ) V

Staphylococcus spp. 3, & J D E C, U M ), Staphylococcus aureus E ), U 9 % .

3, & + D ( (;* 3, & D( G. % C , D 3= (; ), " % . Proteus spp. .( ) " D WQ & "1 %), E 3 ) + 1 E 9< C , < ( ) "

. . D +

T ), .

G. H .G G. H.I .I . . .H .

0G

0 0 0 G

G

H

1 E C , < Staphylococcus spp.

Staphylococcus aureus Streptococcus spp.

Micrococcus spp.

Bacillus spp.

Corynebacterium spp.

Moraxella bovis Escherichia coli Klebsiella spp.

Pseudomonas spp.

Proteus spp.

)& ( # ) . + 9 + ) ( ) R ( + - " + , & U M " < + 8 9 : (;

') , 3 4 @ , , ? + = (; ! , U=4() U M 3 .() 3* + + & 9 3 ) 4

7;< ( "#

$ % & R ( D ( .

D, C< 8 1 , ) " ; M ) 3 ,

P 1 (; % ,< U M 3 ., E ( C & "; U M .

Nutrient broth $7V ! U 9 .

% & (; U M 3 , 3 ., E "

( )

+ Micrococcus Streptococcus Corynebacterium ) + 19 ( D( E C=, 672 ) 3 ,

+< U M ( H) 4< .( I) ( &, D 8 . H U 9 3 ) . + 9 + 3 19 E + = (; ,< Staphylococcus Moraxella E 672 + ) "& &7 , Pseudomonas Pasteurella Proteus aureus 3 , + 3 19 E , 672 +< U M ( H) + R 3.=( . $ ( , . % ( A # ) 3* + 1 E 672 % N< D ,() Staphylococcus spp. E "19 +M .+

( K

1 + &( E + 9 672 % . 9 ), +

+ ),' Bacterial environment D E ^ , + . D U 9 (( D ,< R D

( ,< & +

+ ),X Q 8 ,. D + ;, , + & U M QK (

J

D Staphylococcus aureus E 5;* 8 4 3 Q D %G. ), 3 &4 D( ( 1,K (, Q D 3 19 D( Bacillus spp. E < .( H) ) 672 8 9 9 ,< C, 72 " 4 % G. ), ) 672 #9 Q;

( D D "&4 (( ( N + ),X Q * 7

, D2 E ; 8 L D 4 D2 , +

E. E "19 < .( G) E ; 8 # 5 ; 3

T

( E D Proteus Klebsiella coli + ),X Q 8 ,. ? + () Enterobacteriaceae ) + @ ;< 1 < U 9 (( 9 ,< L

+

< P & Y < D "&4 S ( ( D 3 ( , U 9

Moraxella E 3 &4 .( -) +

+ ),X Q 4N U 9 8 ( & Y E D2 % .I bovis

:, + ( (( +T + ),X ; + ,) + &< . D # ; E 672 +1; +& < ".,(( : Q ) _ ; ' S ( * E D2

L E 672 % )( 3 4 % 7 ) 8 4 (

infectious bovine keratoconjunctivitis +

% 2 $ ( " 1 =( E 672 + Q D 4 &) ( + = 7 2 Cytotoxin 1 =(

.( ) 3*

1 E . U M 3 ) + E& 3 4< ( 3 Q + E& # ) +

+

3 Q . E 672 + P 9

3* 7;Z( O 7 ' "& 4 + E& U M 3 < .( ) _' ()* + ( Q

( ) ) 3 ) + 1 E 3 &4 3 ) + 1 E 3, & + D %I .H . .( ) " D WQ & %0 .0 (I ) ( K & V #

1 E ), ) 3 ) V # ) E ), + U 9< D2 (%H .0) G .(% .H) & 3 ) + 1 E %), 9< ( ) "

. ( K ) 3 ) ( M ),

T

I.

0.

I

H

.

0.

I .I G

0 .0 I

) 3 ) ),

T . .H 0.

H.I .G G. . . .

.

I .H

1 E C , <

0G 0 I 0 0 0

Staphylococcus spp.

Staphylococcus aureus Streptococcus spp.

Corynebacterium spp.

Micrococcus spp.

Bacillus spp.

E. coli Klebsiella spp.

Pseudomonas spp.

Moraxella bovis Proteus spp.

, + E& O (4( E C , 3, &

D 8 ) C , < < U M "#( 8 ) 3 ) L

+ . + 9 + 87 ;Z 3 ) ) \T (, 3 ?< + E 3 19 J % 3, & E "19 ), +<

+ & . ) ( ) # = 3 ) R + : (; C, ] D2 19 ( H ) E 3*1

R ,() \T (, 3.=( .( ) " D + & E

E , 3, & J ( ) + "& Pseudomonas E. coli Bacillus Staphylococcus D P 19 ( P 4 Staph. aureus Moraxella Proteus D2 & E %H .0 ), +M . ) 672 ), E& D2 Staphylococcus spp. E ), U 9 E "19 ( ( ) R !=( 2 (% . ) 0

( )

,

11. Gouws JJ, Coetzer AW, Howell PG. A comparative microbiological study of clinically healthy eyes and those affected by ophthalmia in cattle and the association of noctuid eye frequently moths. South Africa Vet J. 1995; 66:160-169.

12. Zafer O, Ekrem K, Fikrullah K, Mahir K. Screening conjunctival bacterial flora and antibiogram teat in cattle. J Animal Vet Advance.

2005;4:845-847.

13. Alfred E. Barown Benson's microbiological applications. McGrow Hill Companies;2005.

$ % & .( &4 + E .( .J 72 1 ,K $ ,

$ 9 "#

D T 4 E + 3 #M .+) 2 ? # $ 4 . "#

.( () ) ) "# . , D ,N . . --G "#

1. Punch PI, Slatter DM. A review of infectious bovine keratoconjunctivitis. Vet Bull. 1984;54:193-207.

2. Aly MS, MohammedMH. Bacteriological studies of infection keratoconjunctivitis in dairy calves. Assuit Vet Med J. 1995;32:88-95.

3. Scott P. Infectious bovine keratoconjunctivitis Vet Practice.

1977;9:301-303.

4. Slatter D. Fundamentals of veterinary ophthalmology. 2nd ed.

Philadelphia W.B. Saunders Company;1990. pp:43- 52.

5. Ruehl WW, Mars CF, George L, Banks SJM, Schoolnik GK. Infection rate, disease frequency, pilin gene rearrangement, and pilin expression in calves in inoculated with Moraxella bovis pilin-specific isogenic variants. Amer Vet Res. 1993;54:248-253.

6. Willoughby RA. The prevalence of bovine keratoconjunctivitis in beef cattle herd in north eastern Queesland. Aust Vet J. 1977;53:128-131.

7. Knot JB. Ajinkya SM. A study on infection bovine keratoconjuncivitis in the young calves on the organized farms in and around Bombay.

India Vet J. 1980;57:87-88.

8. Slatter DH, Edwards ME, Wilcox GE, Ezekie D. Ocular inserts for application of drugs to bovine eye-effects of hydrophilic contact lenses. Aust Vet J. 2008;52:1-3.

9. Barber DM. Jones GE. An attempt to induce clinical infections keratoconjunctivitis in calves with naturally occurring Moraxella bovis infection. Vet Rec. 1988;122:210.

10. Evans K, Smith M, McDonough P, Wiedmann M. Eye infections due to Listeria monocytogenes in three cows and one horse. J Vet Digen Invest. 2004;16:464-469.

15. Dietz OJ, Wehr R, Thelmann A, Popp Buschmann W. New investigation on aetiology and treatment of bovine keratoconjunctivitis. Vet Rec. 1983;38:843-847.

16. Sarma BSC, Pathak J, Saikia, BNN. Therapeutic approach to infectious bovine kerconjunctivitis. Ind Vet J. 1989;66:767-769.

"# 9 . ) %) . H 5 H . -- 4, 9 & :!

18. Songer JG, Post KW. Veterinary microbiology. Bacterial and fungal agents of animal diseases. Elsevier Saunders;2005.

19. Quinn PJ, Markey BK, Carter M, Donnelly WJ, Leonard FC. Veterinary microbiology and microbial disease. Blackwell Publishing Company;2002.pp:106-123.

20. Quinn PJ, Carter ME, Markey B, Carter GR. Clinical veterinary microbiology. An imprint of Elsevier limited;2004. 284-286p.

21. Turnes C, Albuquerque IB. Serotypes and antibiotic sensitivity of Moraxella bovis isolated from outbreak of infectious bovine keratoconjunctivitis. Can J. Comp Med. 1984;48:428-430.

22. Sayed AM, Adel Fatah AM, Manao AM. Epidemiological view of infectious bovine keratoconjunctivitis in calves, Clinical symptoms, microbiological examinations and treatment. Assuit Vet Med J. 1995;100-105.

( )

!" ! & #$ #$

% ! "

( 12 0 # . / - #

,%" + ()*' )

# # .2 < = )7 > <'%2 %: .2 %: %$ ? %* ; 0 2 9 " %: 4 , 8 * 345 6 7)* <2 ) = )7 <% @ A " 6> 6,% B2= CD *, ,% > < E) * #$ , 6 F ) H 7 <'%2 < CD F G. A 2 I1, ? A " !

2G 7>) ? <'%2 " 6 G %.)2 7>) 7, A H 4 nephrosis J(" # $2 <1 ) *, < E) " 6 *, B2= CD % " 2 E$ !

2G < E) < M ) H 7 <%, 6 6 (7 N *, 6 <% = K%G) L ( : > " <% , , %CD % (7 I* )

<% " 6 6 % 1 O",) <'%2 < CD % " 6 (7 N *, 6 G I1, ? <% " , % (7 M%") *, I ) 6 (<%2 ) < #"G < !* ) <=$) 6) G2 O ., <'%2 < CD P 4 ( : > " 2 <% @ P 4 %:, " ! E * , ( % (7 ( % M ) %C) ' % (7 K%G) L ? " <% , 5 <2> * 345 ") P 4 H 7 & %, 6 I1, Q 2

" <% ,

%.)2 ( : > . > <'%2 2%$ 2 9 = " > < E)

Study of pathological changes of kidney associated with some diseases in broilers H. Kh. Ismail and M. Z. Mahmood Department of Pathology and Poultry Diseases, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq Abstract Seventy kidney samples of broiler chickens 3-6 weeks old were collected from private chicken farms in Mosul province, used to study gross and histopathological changes in the kidneys . The most prominent gross pathological changes were variable ranging from swelling and congestion of kidney with petechial hemorrhage on the cortex to swelling and congestion w while other cases of kidney appears pale and small in size. Histopathological changes of the kidneys were characterized by acute tubular nephrosis leading to necrosis and desquamation of epithelial lining the renal tubules degeneration of the epithelial cell of renal tubules to diffuse degeneration of the epithelial cells of renal tubules leading to necrosis and desquamation of epithelial cells. Additionally there is infiltration of inflammatory cells (Lymphocytes) in the interstitial tissue of the kidney. In other samples the histological changes appears as proliferation in the mesengial cell of glomeruli with sever hemorrhage in the interstitial tissue. Also there is hyaline degeneration in the renal glomeruli. Moreover visceral gout was seen in some samples of kidney characterized by deposition of urates as clefts in the lumen of renal tubules with infiltration of inflammatory cells especially foreign body giant cell and macrophages in addition to congestion of blood vessels and hemorrhage in the interstitial tissue. From the result of the present study it was concluded that renal pathological changes occurred in broiler chicken associated with many diseases.

Available online at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

( )

$

<' 2" % ) <% %C < M 0 * 2 <

! #"G A ? G % < $ # 1 %$) M " % ( +) P * (Microtome) K G 1%C .(-) * ' *" )% C , ) E $ % <E $

: S 9% %C, > , 2 F M % % )5' TL ? ) %$) ' H )* ? ,) 6 %: C <% %,$ 5 2 9% $%7 9% ) )

%$ % *%, ( <2 $ %C, % 6 2 9%),U I %") . %,$ 1%) ) % " H 7 )

*2) ! ) 4 ( ) % V 4E %C) (> A F * #(7 %C % )5' , 2 F M 6 1%C %C, 9% ! $) 6) .( ) " $%7

1 ) 6 :1 :

) 6) J%> " ) <(>= * B 7) (Electrolytes) # %C" J% (0 ) <%, ) 6V 4E # M ) )%, , ), ) F ) #(7 9% 6 1%C ) "

#M L ") !% * > < E) <% @ A L

)

=) >=7, F 2 <% ) ), ( +) 2

M <% %$W

* %" ) #M . *%* <%, " 6 1 ) C % )5 A L

P 4 6 ! * #

(X 8 ;) V%*7 <%"(5 ! *) 6) M

2 % < E) A 1 " ) 9% % 6 %$) . " < E) A J > *) * 345 6 %, %) 4 * #(7 " $%7 6 1%C ! $) 6)

2%$ A " *, ,% > < E) . 2 9% ) # .2 6 = )7 > <'%2

(&

& %, 9% 2 G) =$ J L

<'%2 A " 6 ,% > < E)

D2 %:M 2 " 7>) %.)2% < E) 345 < M ) = )7 > 6 ( #"G ) D=2 ^ * A 1, ?.

? ? , %. 2%G 2 F E$ A " < CD <'%2

. <'%2 ? 7>) ,.)2 A " <,%" H 7 <'%2 6

A 1, ?.

(Lobulation) B$=) F 5%D K >

,% > < E) <=$) % " .( #"G ) D=2 B$=) K > ? A " 7>) > <'%2

< CD H 7 <'%2 6 < % <%$ $= J()

D=2 A 2 I1,

? 7>) 2%G A " .( # ) (0 #"G ) )

<'%2 F4 7_ A " *, ? %. < CD 6 < M ) *, > < E)

= )7 > , %CD % (7 6 *",) < E) %C,_ %C,

Vacuolar <%*",) %C,_ %C ` <1 ) " <% , #"G ) %C, 7 6 7, Q 2 ? degeneration <1 ) V% < E)

6 *, B2= % " (+ ( #"G ) <%, G ,% * (E N*,) M%") D 2 > < E) " <% " < CD

6 (; #"G ) " G 6 7 F % 1 < M ) %:2> : > " <% " 7 CD 2 6 .(X 8 ("G ) % 1 2 %*)

G 6 %CD % (7 a%=),% *, < E) <1 ) H 7 <'%2

" <% , I % ) & >) ? " <% , , a(*, I* ) Q 2 (Star Shape) 6 , #"G < 6)

b G %.)2 ? H 7 " <% , F %CD <% , 6 ?* ) CD ^> I1,

% " (- #"G ) <'%2 6 (tubular dilatation)

6 A " ? %. C 6 *, B2= ^>

F 2 $%7 %C) ' % (7 S K%G)

<'%2 .( #"G ) " ) 6 F ,

%& ' 9 ) # .2 = )7 ?

6 * < %E 8 % CG F )= #$ , 6 2 4 9% B2 A * < ) 4L 8 1 ) CG Q 2 :%M 2 & %, 9% > <% ( Y CD 9 # .2

* , < % 1 <$$7 )7 A L %:M 2 & %, 9% ! ) 2 #$

% 6 ! " / L A " ,% <% [ I$ < G Y %G * J U

&M

%: =, "4 9% 2 G) =$ J L

. $ % %C, =$ J L A " <%, %: 4 , 8 ? ) <%, < > 4L %:M 2 & %, 9% 2 G) %C) M) % # % ) \ % = # 2 6 F: G% F E$ ? A L %C .) ) P 4

%* (8 +X) F ;

( )

? " ) 6 G I1, CD H 7 <'%2 6

<% " 6 6 % 1 O",) Q 2

%.)2 *,% ) )" V C G < 6)

" .( #"G ) O ., J %$ A " *, < E) <1 )

" <% , 6 F G *",) < E)

G2 <%2 A ) L < V 5 A < !* ) < M )

" <% , I ) 6 6 % G #"G < 1 ) (Cleft)

% (7 7 <% ) < 345 < 2

<% F , " ! E * , ( % (7

Q 2

" <% ,

b G 2 & %, < CD ( #"G ) H 7 & %, 6 I1, %.)2 ? " N *, 6 2> F ) 7, S .

b

%C D2 2 9 " 6,% CD :( ) #"G .( ) B$=) K > ? 7>) %.)2'

<'%2 6 " <%, ,% <% [ F G : ( ) #

. 2 9 = = )7 > F G %$' +++ ++ ++ ++ ++ +

O",) ^> ) 2 9 " 6 *, ? . :(0) #"G 6 7, Q 2 ? ( ) " <% , F %CD 6 = .+ Ã&#x2014; ") F .H & E E $ .( ) H 7 <% ,

,% > < E) " %.)2 7>) D=2 A 1, ?. ? " %.)2 7>) " !

2G 7>) B$=) F 5%D K > ? " 7>) 1, ?.

CD ? " !

2G 7>) %C 2 E$ " !

2G .F G * ) ++ : G +++

%C D2 2 9 " 6,% CD :( ) #"G .( ) 1, ?.

? %.)2' 7>)

^> ) 2 9 " 6 6 *, ? . :(+) #"G I1,

? ( ) % G ,% * . 6 N*,) <% , 6 *",) < E) ( ) " N *, 6 G . Ã&#x2014; ") F .H & E E $ .( ) " 8

( )

%

K( 1 ) P 4" 9% . V 4E

.( ) <%, %) =

> < E) %2 * <, >) 4 4L = )7 > .2 <'%2 " *, ,%

6 FT > <% h " %$L * NV%), < CD 7>) %: ,% < E) 345 <1 ) .2 <'%2 M"

) " ^ * A 1, ?.

? " %.)2

Acute nephritis " %2 !%C) ' <% ( < E) 345 .( ) F % 1 ^> ) 2 9 " 6 6 *, ? . :( ) #"G % (7 K%G) L ? ( ) " G 6 7 % (7 a%=), D2( ( ) " <% , %C) ' #"G < 6) %C= ) & >)

" <% , %CD . Ă&#x2014; ") F .H & E E $ .( ) 6 ,

^> ) 2 9 " 6 6 *, ? . :(8) #"G .( ) % 1 2 %*)

G f% ",

> .+ Ă&#x2014; ") F .H & E E $

^> ) 2 9 " 6 6 *, ? . :(;) #"G ( ) " <% " 6 G 6 f% ",

>

?* ) 7, ( ) 6 (7 N *, 6 I1, ? . Ă&#x2014; ") F .H & E E $ .( ) " <% , *+ 1%C I$ #> # Siller 6" %

[ 2) % "4 4L B%7 #"G " % #"G 6

I D > %2 g %) * %* ) " =$ J L 6 *, 6,% 6> B2= #.2

" <% [

> 9% 2 G) 1%C % %C) ( P 4 *, ,%

.

1 ) . M %C) ( ( : > 9% ! $) 6)

?* ) ^> ) 2 9 " 6 6 *, ? . :(X) #"G <% , , %CD % (7 a%=), ? " <% ,

" <% , %C) ' % (7 K%G) L ? ( ) " .+ Ă&#x2014; ") F .H & E E $ .( )

X

( )

!%C) %C 2%$ 4L Septicemic Diseases * % 345 #M <D2

%C 7, ( : >

.( ) Hog Cholera " % %$ 1%,7 6 < E) G ", 2%G %C " <,%" H 7 <'%2 < CD % " F1 ") < E) 345 #M L #"G D), `

345 &=)) ( ) (Chronic nephritis) 1 " !%C) ( !

2G f% ", A L ( ;) #" Y L %G % ? ), )" . ! *

" ! $) Q 2 ! * Q 2 " . ,

^> ) 2 9 " 6 6 *, ? . :(-) #"G 6 (7 N *, 6 F , F 2 %C) ' % (7 S K%G) L F .H & E E $ .( ) " <% , 6 7, ( ) . Ă&#x2014; ")

!%$ 2 9 " 6 6 *, ? . :( ) #"G A % K( !* ) Y D2( G2 O ., ( % (7 (i % %2 #"iG L < V 5 H & E $ . " ) 6 2 @ , " ( ) . Ă&#x2014; ") F .E ^> ) 2 9 " 6 6 *, ? . :( ) #"G )" A L " # 2)

" <% " 6 6 % 1 O",)

" <% , F %CD Ii* ) ? ( ) i*,% ) % 1 .+ Ă&#x2014; ") F .H & E E $ .( )

%$U , F % < E) 345 #M Q 2)

( ) 6 #*%" , #M 2 6 ( 0 ) M2% YD2' % ? < E) 345 <.=) % " 6 E.coli ,

. % " G ' M ) %$U H 7 <'%2 ,% > < E) < M ) % 9% 345 F G. A 1, ?.

? " !

2G 7>) % C)* , ( +) #" 3 "4 % ? <.=) < E) 345 <D2 P 4" 6 ( ' * *) <'%2 2 * < " M N 7 %2 6 < E)

M Salmonellosis ( , %* Streptococcus %$U ), F % " F G 6 I1, Q 2 .( ) H 7

" ! , ^> Y*=, & %* #"G :( ) #"G ( % %2 ( ) % K( < A %2 ") F .H & E E $ .( ) ( % (7 ( ) .+ Ă&#x2014;

-

( )

S % Vasculitis 6 j V% ! j %C) A L S) 6 %) %

7, %C 2%$ 6 (7 N *, 6 %C) ' % (7 K%G) L A L P 4" ( +) " <% , , %CD % (7 <% " *, > < E) <'%2 6 D2

V C G < 6) 6 % 1 E) % < M ) " A # < E) 345 #M Q 2 L *,% ) )" 345 <.=) .( ) 1 " !%C) %2

% a 6 ( ;) %M2% Y L #$ ) % ? < E) <1 ) % " 4C F1 @ ) 6) B1 ( ' * <% = K%G) % > <'%2 *, < E) <% , 6 *",) < E) ( : > 6 (7 N *, 6 Q2% YD2' % < E) 345 <C %G 4L " <% "

% G % F ` !%C) %$U %2 6 ( 8) G 1%",' %2 ), P 4 H1

(

" ) ! *

" 6 a ! $) 6) Dehydration .J% ! G " 2 A a F ? %. *, > < E) <2> % "

<1 ) 6) G2 O ., <'%2 " *, !* ) < M ) " <% , 6 F G *",) < E) 6 <%2 A ) < V 5 A Urates <

)%, > %2 O .,

" <% , I ) 4L Purine F % <%.)G B %, ' %2 6 6 #"G " & P %2 K F M" ), " 6 = D <% > " !%C) ! * " <% , P 2 B%$) F % L *, F % 1 A L S .

6 ) % *,

345 ( " ) Hyperurcemia 6 P %2 ( : > ( X) < 6 , #., 6 MS) F % 1 %:*%*2 P 4 " 9% 6 Uricase D,

G2 O ., Q 2L " .(8) G2 O ., ) " %* %CV% L %*

6 %: ) #M 2 < %> #M Nephrotoxic Agents

)2) . %CV% L %2 6 F " * % %), .( -) * %" % F % 1 A %) = B., A * " ) (<%2 ) < V 5 A < !* ) L ! E * 6 2 # %=) Q 2 A 1=2 ! ` .(8) Y L #$ ) % ? &=) 45 Foreign Body granuloma ( % M ) %C) % (7 " <% , < 2

S F P 4 , " ! E * , ( % (7

Q 2

" <% ,

b %.)2 :(> .(0 ) Y L %G % ? &=) 45 H 7 & %, 6 I1, #(7 * 345 6 NV%), .) % #" % ) 9% 6 " <% @ # 2 %$

" Nephritis " !%C) Nephrosis " J("

<'%2 6 " <%, C <% [ F G : ( ) #

. 2 9 = = )7 > %$' F G +++ ++ +++ ++ ++ ++ ++ + ++

*, > < E) *",) < E) 7, < E)

%.)2

" ) 6 I1,

" <% " 6 6 % 1 O",) %C) ' % (7 K%G) L

G2 O .,

6 < E)

" <% " 6 > .F G * ) ++ : G +++

< E) Q 2 < M ) *, > < E) %

<%*",) %C,_ %C ` <1 ) " <% , 6 *",)

4L ( X 8) Q2% YD2' % ? NV%), 345 &=))

. %2 6 Q 2 " <% , = O",) % 6 $%7 Electrolytes Imbalance # %C" % G 1 ) %=) f ), *%) G B., %2

" <% , F %CD *",) < E) Q 2) P 4" F 2 Hypoxia *" B., Ischemia H 4 <'%2 6 .( - X ) * % (7 *%*2 ),

<% " 6 < E) V% < E)

D2 P 4" Mesengial G % (7 M%") F % 1 M ) " ( +) #" Y L #$ ) % Y %G) < E) 345 cells %C) %$L , 6 < E) 345 #M Q 2) P 4" Streptococcal zooepidemicus 2 * < " % , 1 # 2 * %$U %2 6 Q 2) %*,U 6

F % 1 5 *, > < E) 345 ! * ( ) A L S 4 31 " ) F % 1 6 %) % 6

$ " F )= E> %=) Hypertension E> %=) Arterioscelrosis G ! $) Q 2 A L S

<%, G G F E$ = 6 % 1 < E)

<% , S > A L S) < E) 345 6 %) %

"

;) G G H 4 N)%, 6 , ! $)

" .( 0 H 7 <'%2 *, > < E) <2> % "

" 6 (7 N *, 6 7, F G *",) < E)

%.)2 ( : > %C) ' % (7 K%G) L ? " <% ,

6 < E) 345 #M Q 2) I1, Q 2

" A L M # $ L 4L M % N 7 %2

b M & )7 ! * Hematogenous &

( )

V 4` (0 ) * # %C, !% * F ), Q 2 %) B.,

* %" )

5 *, F % 1 ), .(00 0 ) .

6 A %: > M <%* = % N 7 % P 4 A I> !%C) ' * <%* = % N 7 $%7

" <% @ ! *) O %= N 7 % G % F ` !%C)

<% $. > < E)

CD ! *) %C

Picorna i

, ' .(0+) " 6 %2 * 6 %C %, $2 6) NV%), % P 4"

.( 8) Q2% 3 "4 % ? &=))

14. Sykes AA. Formation and Composition of urine. In:physiology and Biochemsitry of the Domestic fowl, edited by bell. D.T. and Freeman, B.M, London Academic Press. pp:237. Cited by Siller, W.G. 1981.

Renal pathology of the fowl Avian pathology of the fowl:A review.

Avian Pathol. 1971;10:187-262.

15. McManus MD, Carlton WW, Zachary J. Thomson's special Veterinary Pathology. 3rd. ed. 2001;Mosby.

16. Schreiner GF, Kissan JW. The urinary System In:Anderson's Pathology, 9th ed. By Kissane, J M Press Mosby. 1990;842.

17. Siller WG. Renal Pathology of the fowl, A review. Avian Pathol.

1981;10:187-262.

18. Wilson H. An experimental system for the study of specific pattern of cytoplasmic chang. Methods Acheiv Exp Pathol. 1969;4:92.

19. Dobyan DC. Cyst formation in rat kidney induced by cis-platinum administration. Lab Invest. 1981;45:260.

20. Siller WG, Dewar WA, Whitehead CC. Cystic dilatation of the seminiferous tubules in the fowl. J Path. 1972;107:191-197.

21. Lerner RA, Dixon FJ. Spontaneous glomerulo nephritis in sheep II. Studies on natural history, occurrence in other species, and pathologensis. Am J Pathol. 1968;53:50.

22. Leigh LC. Glomeruler capillary endothelcosis in sow kidney. Res Vet Sci. 1978;24:205.

23. Schneider P. Potasium hydrogen phosphate induced nephropathy in the dog. Vet Pathol. 1980;17:699-720.

24. Cheville NF. Ultrastructural of renal lesions in pigs with acute leptospirosis caused by leptospira. Pomona Vet Pathol. 1980;17:338.

25. Wright NG. Experimental canine adenovirus glomerulonephritis. Br J Exp Pathol. 1981;62:183.

26. Osteer DC, Siller WG. The histopathology of an enterohepatic syndrome of turkey poultry. Vet Rec. 1961;73:134-138.

27. Edgar SA, Cho Y. Characterization of infectious bursal disease.

Poultry Sci. 1972;71:66-69.

28. Austic RE, Cole RK. Impaired renal clearance of uric acid in chickens having hyperurticemia and articular gout. Am J Physiol.

1972;223:525-530.

29. Montali RJ, Bush M, Smith EE. Pathology of tuberculosis in captive exotic birds. In:Montali, R.J. (ed.) Mycobacterial Infections of Zoo Animals. Smith Sonian Institution Press. Washington, DC. 1978;209215.

30. Sokoloff L. The pathology of Gout, Metabolism. 6:230-234, Cited by Siller, 1981, Avian Pathol. 1957;10:187-192.

1. Sainsbury D. Poultry health and management, 3rd ed. Oxford, 1992;pp:101 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 108.

2. Swenson MJ. Duck's Physiology of domestic animals. 8th ed. Cornell University Press. 1970;pp:920 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 922.

3. David LG and Erick S. Renal and external regulation of blood fluid composition. In:Sturke's Avian Physiology. Edited by Whittw, G.C. 5th ed. 2008, Academic Press.

4. Fraizer K, Howes RL, Reece AW Cavanagh D. Isolation of noncytopathic viruses implicated in the etiology of nephritis and baby chuck nephropathy and serologically related to avian nephritis virus.

Avian Pathol. 1990;19:139-160.

5. Sokker BM, Hussen BM, Mohamed A. Renal Lesions in baby chicks dut to sodium chloride poisoning. Avian Path. 1983;12:277-28.

6. Hassan SM. Pathologic study of spontaneous Nephrosis â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Nephritis Syndrome in Broilers kept on high Calcium diet. Iraqi J Ve. Sci. 1994;7:171-179.

7. Riddle C. Developmental, Metabolic and Other non infectious disorder. In:Diseases of Poultry. Edited by Calnek, B.W, Barnes, H.J, Beard, C.W, McDougable, L.R. and Saif, Y.M. 10th ed., Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa, USA, 1997;pp:936.

8. Brown TP, Glisson JR, Rosales G, Villegas P, Davis RB. Studies of Avian Urolithiasis associated with an infectious bronchitis virus.

Avian Dis. 1987;31:629-636.

9. Luna LG. Manual of histological staining methods of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology. 3rd ed. The Blakiston Division, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1968.

10. Saif YM, Barnes HJ, Glisson JR, Fadly AM, Medouglad LR, Swayne DE. Salmonellosis. Diseases of poultry. 11th ed. 2003;573-574.

11. Cheville NF. Cell pathology. 2nd ed. Iowa State University Press.

Ames. Iowa. 1983, pp:306â&#x20AC;&#x201C;308.

12. Cheville NF. Ultrastructural and immunoflourescent studies of glomerulonephritis in chronic hog cholera Lab Invest.1970;22:458..

13. Sokker SM, Mohamed MA, Atwia M. Experimental induction of renal lesions in chickens, berl, Munch, Tierarztl. Wochenschr.

1998;111:161-163.

. *% 2 1 % 2 # . I G 5 D %2 * .0 6 )S .9 = 6 *" )( '% *) <% ' , # 2 * . --X #$

% ! " 6,%M 32. Blair R, Whiteheadf GC, Teague PW. The effect of distary fat and protein levels from cereal type on fatty liver and kidney syndrome in chickens. Res Vet Sci. 1975;76-81.

33. Chandra M. Occurrence and Pathology of nephritis in poultry. Acta Veterinaria. 1985;35- 319-328.

34. Maeda M, Lmada T, Taniguchi T, Horiuchi T. Pathological changes in chickens inoculated with the picorna virus avian nephritis virus. Avian Dis. 1979;23:589-596.

( )

* *! $ % & ' **! " # *

- +, +,

*

' # $ % & ' () ! "**

! "*

( 0 ( + 3 4 2 / 0 1$ .$(# )

( % : " :( ( & ,9 3" % ' 7 " 5 8$ " ( 5" 6$( + ' 5 $?> ?$(@ +, 0 ) $? - 0 % : 0 (> 2= 5 / +, < ;%" $ * $?> ?$(@ : " :( ( D $ ' ( 0> B $ 5 6C # 0:.$ 1 A : #

# 0:.$ $? ?$( D# 5 '

$ I < (% H. %=.F) 58 1 A : # + '

A : # $?# 5 D# 5 ' 0 % " (=H / F / ) 0 + ' $?# 5

0 # : AST 0 # 5 $ (# : " *

! )$ K % B $ 5 (=H / H / ) 0 1 : ' $ ( "

! )$ C% ' ALP * 3 : $ )( ) : LDH 5 $'. 0 L <: : ALT 0 # M cholesterol + $( ' triglycerides ( ' /./ Total bilirubin and Direct 1 ' 0

: ' ' 0:.$ 1 A : # * $?# + , # 5 < " albumin 0 # ' 0 $ N $( " *

7 )? .5 $?# O $ ( + , # M 3 :( ( & , : " #

Changes in some biochemical parameters accompanied with Brucellosis in native goats S. H. Arslan*, N. A. Al-Hussary**, Q. T. Al-Obaidi* and M. M. Hassan* * Department of Internal and Preventive Medicine, ** Department of Physiology, Biochemistry and Pharmacology, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq Abstract The aim of the study was to determine changes in some of biochemical parameters accompanied with brucellosis naturally infected native goats. The study included examination of 102 blood sera representing 396 native goats from different areas in Mosul city using rose bengal test, indirect ELISA test and tube agglutination test. Results showed that prevalence of brucellosis by using rose bengal test and indirect ELISA test was (6.8% and 24.5%) respectively. Titers of rose bengal seropostive sera ranged (1/80 -1/640), whereas titers of indirect ELISA seropostive sera ranged (1/40 - 1/640) using tube agglutination test. Results also showed significant increase in aspartate transaminase, alanine transaminase, lactate dehydrogenase and significant increased in alkaline phosphatase, there were also significant increases in glucose concentration, total and direct bilirubin, triglycerides and cholesterol, whereas total protein and albumin values were significantly decreased. All these parameters examinated on seropostive sera for indirect ELISA and tube agglutination tests in goats naturally infected with brucellosis compared with seronegative sera for same tests.

Available online at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

( )

Y ? P 3 / P < ( *:' : 6 3 ' $(. > " MD

+, +," - 5 $?# & 0 % (Âş â&#x20AC;&#x201C;) P % " 5C)%

+, 5 < I < + ' $? & Z $ . , *X (GĂ&#x2013;KHAN) P:6 ' $ ' 1 5 $ (%

(16) B.abortus / ; ? 5 D$( I < * $%

5 I < 1 A : # $? &

' 1 5 $ (% + ' $?# Q (

I < * $% *X (VMRD, Inc., USA) P:6 ' # B.abortus B.melitensis $ / , ? 5 D$( P:6 ' $ ' 1 0 :6 D$( + $(

/ ; ? 5 D$( I < * $% *X (GĂ&#x2013;KHAN) 5 I < # 0:.$ $? & # B.abortus .( =) P 1 A : # + ' * $?#

$ : + , I < % ' 5 $?# 5 > 0:.$ 1 A : # * $? M B $ 5 < 0 L D 5 ' $ (+, 5 < ) # Y) ( 5 < 0< .D" (=H / H / )

% ' 5 $?# 5 1 (+, 5 < ) 0 $?# aspartate 5 $ (# 0 : " Y alanin 0 # 0 : transaminase (AST) 5 $'. 0 L <: : transaminase (ALT) : ' $ Y I " D. lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) 3 I < $<# glucose concentration : ' ' triglycerides ( ' /./ : ' $ 3$

total and direct bilirubin 1 ' 0

indirect 1 A 0 5# B $ 5, ?$(

5# 0 1 0 5# R O X bilirubin PXL M albumin 0 # : ' $ 3$ ' 0

(Kits) P:L Y + % I < $<# 6( $

0 $ Y $

( ( ' 1 5 $ (%

Y $ ' ( )5 3 (% Total protein '

alkaline phosphatase (ALP) 3 : $ )() : " Y' ' 1 5 $ (% cholesterol + $( ' & @ ,% B $ + %$ $ . ( ) (Biomerieux) .( F) t-test $?

-" $ $?

P 1$ 7 # 0 :( ( 7

+ ( ( ) - 6 ( # - 1 0 " $(

6

( ' 0 # " 7 P Q 0@ 7 : $ (H ) ) $? (

( 0 R $$ P $ $ $ ) $? ( D% 0 Q ' 7 L $@$ ( ) 61> S 0 < ( < , < 1$ # M(

' $1 7 # P ' ,$ (? 7 ( (=) 5 / 0 ) $?

I * U K % 5 % " 1 T /@$ +.? 0 ) D 5 #

7 6 # ( %

%) V $ # ( ) P ( B " W X 5 % ,? 7 )?

% 6$ 0< B$ 8 K # - ) (

< P , : 5#.( $ (F) 1 Y $% % 0 $$ $ A# 5#.( Y' 7 ( (% " 7 ( (2) ( P , ,. 6$ ( (% 'X ( ) B.melitensis !

0 . (

/ :

6 :< $ B.abortus D6 . ( 0 ( ) Ocholi & , ( ( ) * ' % + ( 0 D :

: # + ' $? ?$(@ : " :( (

0> . $ I < (% F. %F.F) 58 P 1 A K %Z " P 1 A P 1 3 . ( / 3% 5 % " % ' " 5 8$ +: I < 7 - ; ?1$ $ ( ) ) $? +:< I < P 3 < / TXL & 0'

/ 0 ' I " D[ : 7 0 ' < / Q ?$( 0' # \ ' 3 $ A P % Q$ ( (% 5 3 X 7 + , $(> P ( B " %( $? ' 0 7 ; ?1$ I / 3 L , 5 $?# ( H) # 0:.$ + ' * $?> 6 D

" 5 8$ " + % 5 ( L# C

" :( ( & ,9 3" % ' . ( PXL 5 D % :

" )* %

+* #

2= 5 / +, < I < ( 5 > 0 ) $? - I < 5<: $ % : 0 ( ' ' I / %

%) 5 1 +,

F > 61 0 P $) ( : 61 3 1

0 0 (+ ) M $ . 2 > 8

: > " 5 D

3 5 ( ?$(

" ] 5 D / /?$ ' < ( H P 5' $

+, < ;%" +.? 0 B $ 5 6C . (

/ D $ ' ( 0> :

58 1 A : # + ' * $? ?$(@

0:.$ $? & $ ' $ I < (% H. %=.F) ( < ) + ' $?# 5 I < # H

( )

3 + / P % = 0 /' % 0 ' .( + ) (=H / I H / ) \ )?$ + , 5 < I < % ' 5 $?# B $ 5 6C

1 A : # $?# B $ 5 < $ :

: 0 # 5 $ (# : " *

! )$ K % ! )$ K % * 3 : $ )( ) : 0 # 0 # M 3 5 $'. 0 L <: : " *

.( + ) , 5 $?. ( + , # <

I / ) 0 R $ 6 ( < ) + % 0 5 3 + / P % +

( /

0 ' 3" ( < H) + ' $?#

F / ) \ )?$ 3 + / P % = 0 /' %

# 0:.$ $? B $ 5 6C> 0 % " (=H / I 0 ( < ) 1 A : # $?# 5

/ ) 0 R $ 6 ( < ) + %

3 + / P % +

( / I 3" ( < ) 1 A : # $?# 5

. L

, 5 $?# ?$(@ % : " . (

/ D $ '

# 0:.$ $? ?$( D]

=H = F H /

S S S

H S S

( % =.F H.

5 <

5 < , %)

( ( ) +

$?# !

+ '

1 A : #

.:( ( & ,. 3" : + , 5 : 7 " 5 8$ ( ) +

, 0@D ( 3 & ? ± +

** F. ± .== ** =. = ± H . * . H ± . 2 ** . ± .

( + , # <

$?# !

( 3 & ? ± +

H. ± .= ( $ / P % ) 5 $ (# 0 . ± .2 ( $ / P % ) 0 # 0 . ± .= ( $ / A) 5 $'. 0 L <: . ± F. ( $ / P % ) 3 : $ )() .(P<0.01)

N $( < P ( < 0< *

\.$?# ** .(P<0.05)

N $( < P ( < 0< *

\.$?# *

.:( ( & ,. 3" : + , > " % ' 7 " 5 8$ ( )+

, 0@D ( 3 & ? ± +

* .H ± . ** . ± 2.H ** . = ± H.H . H ± . * . ± .HF ** . ± .H= ** .2 ± =.F ** .=F ± .

( + , # <

$?# !

( 3 & ? ± +

. ± . 2 ( $ /+ ) : ' ' : ' $ . ±F. ( $ /+

' ) ' 0

. ± .H ( $ /+

' ) 1 0

. 2± . ( $ /+

' ) 1 A 0

. 2 ± . ( $ /+ ) ( ' /./ .H ± . ( $ /+ ) + $( ' . = ± .2= (+ / A) ' 0 $

. F ± . (+ / A) 0 # .(P<0.01)

N $( < P ( < 0< *

\.$?# ** .(P<0.05)

N $( < P ( < 0< *

\.$?# *

( )

" + $( ' : ' $ " ! )$ # ( 0 I ( ) Scott 5 ' 6$ ' +.$< $ K % 0 0' 5 $ 7 )? ( B $ 0 C% '. .' :.$ I ' : " 0 # : ' $ ' 0 $ : ' $ N $( TXL 5& ( + , # < M 3 , N:

( ) 6 +, $ $ B $ M 3 B $ ' , I

XL ' " Q , I 7 )? # 0 ( =) Newman 'X . ( & ,# 0< $ I * ' \ $ B ( +.? 0 # ($ 0 3" / ' > ( TXL 0 B$ $( T: ' $ 7 )? " % ' " 5 8$ K % " . (

" % ' 5 8$ ( $ a , :

.I ] ( :( ( & , :

: ' $ ( " *

! )$ # D > B $ 5

/./ 1 0

' 0

: ' ' N $( 5%$ + $( '

N $( 5%$ ( ' ' 0 $ N $( " *

7 )? M

" 1 A : # $?# 5 " 0 #

:( ( & ,9 3" : + , > .( + ) ( + , ] < M 3 ,' # :( ( & ,. ' ( 0 B $ 5 6C>

+ ' * $? ?$(@ +, " : "

$ I < (% H. %=.F) 58 1 A : # $ ( 2 ) 0 +' B $ 3 B $ PXL 5&

5 6C .7 ; ?1$ " 5 $?# Y) 5 ?$( : +, 5 < I < % ' 5 $?# B $ 0:.$ 1 A : # $?# B $ 5 < $ 5 $ (# : " *

! )$ K % # 0 L <: : 0 # 0 # : 0 # : ' $ N $( ! )$

3 : $ )() : 5 $'.

M 3 1 ' 0 N $( : ' ' N:

( ) M 3)$ 5& ( + , # <

T ? ' M 1$ ' .? " NX# I O X " ( 5 % !

M " * + %$ 5.D NX>

0 I N: P : ( 0 I ( ) " , 1 ( ) + % ' " 3$% ?D$ ( :( ( & " ! )$ # ( 0 0 % " . ) 3

%

6$ ' .? $ I N:

3 : $)() : K % C 7 I " D# 5 $ " Y ' (%= ) " P ' +, )

% C

/ :8$ ! )$ # ( 0> ( H) 7 , 5# % 0 $ ' " +, % NX# I

0 : ' $ "

' ( ), P 3 6$

/ ,# 0 0 R 1$ / 0

), P 3 " & ), +, " Q< )$ $ I L +.?

5 6C .( = H) % 5 ' ('$ I " D#@ /./ / $ 0 L N $( "

< )$ B $ M 3 , : " + $( ' ( ' I 1 *X ( ) M 53)$ ( + , # <

& , 0@D " 0 L N $( " ! )$ # /./ : ' $ " ! )$ # ( N:

:( (

X ( ) " ? 0 ) X

I

( '

/ ,# I ( TXL " ! )$ # N:

Stockham & 'X . ? 0 ) X I < * $%$ $ . (

,

*

' + 0 K% < $ .+,

1.

Al-Araji AHY, Nouri KA, Tawfik MR. Neurobrucellosis: report of Iraqi patients. J Fac Med. 1998;40(4):481-297.

2. Al-Ani FK, Al-Qaderi S, Hailat NQ, Razzia R, Al- Darraji AM, Human and animals Brucellosis in Jordan between 1996 and 1998: as study. Rev Sci Tech Off Int Epiz. 2004;23(3):831-840.

3. Al-Eissa YA. Brucellosis in Saudi Araba past present and future.

Annal of Saudi Medicine. 1999;19(5):403-405.

4. Darwish M, Benkirane A, Field investigation of brucellosis in cattle and small ruminants in Syria.1990-1996. Rev Sci Tech off Int Epiz.

2001;20(3):769-775.

5. Songer JG, Post KW, Veterinary microbiology.bacterial and fungal agents of animal disease.1st ed. Elservier, Saunders, Missouri.2005; pp.200-206.

6. Cutler SJ, Whatmore AM, Commander NJ. Brucellosis-new aspect of an old disease. J.of Applied Microbiol. 2005;98:1270-1281.

7. Smith HL, Kadri SM. Brucellosis in India:a deceptive infectious disease. Indian J Med Res. 2005;122:375-384.

8. Radostitis OM, Gay CC, Blood DC, Hinchcliff KW. Veterinary medicine, A text of the diseases of cattle, horses, sheep, pigs, and goats, 10th ed., W.B. Saunders Elsevier,London.2007;.pp.966-998.

9. Krieg NR, Holt JG. Bergeys Manual of Systematic Bacteriology. Vol. 1, Williams and Wilkins , Baltimore, London. 1984;pp.377-388.

10. Garrido F, Duran M, Macmillan A, Minas A, Nicoletti P, Vecchi G, Brucellosis in sheep and goats (B. melitensis) European Commission , Report of scientific committee on animal health and animal welfare;2001.

11. Ocholi RA, Kwaga JKP, Ajogi I, Bale JOO. Abortion due to Brucella abortus in sheep in Nigeria. Rev Sci Tech off Int Epiz. 2005;24 (3):973-979.

7 ; ?1$ 3 ( . ( +<:? < * ' % . $? ?$(@ N C" % " :< 0@D " :( (

' $( ( .N ?# , 5 $?# M : # . = +,

*

=

( )

cases in south eastern Anatolia Of Turkey.Yonsei Med J. 2003; 44 (1):33-44.

22. Stockham SL, Scott MA.Fundamentalsof veterinary clinical pathology , lowa state press ,USA; 2002. pp.251-277.

N C" % " . ( ,# . < +. Y . '.P $' %

% ' 7

. +,

*

5 8$ L < 0 ( < K " , .

A : ? " D6 . ( B ? % , D

( 3 % B$ Rev1 S R 3

. *

14. Delpino MV,Cassatro J, Fossat CA, Baldi PC. Antibodies to the CP24 protin of Brucella melitensis lack diagnostic usefulness in ovine Brucellosis. Vet Microbiol. 2003;93:101-107.

15. Ferreira AC, Cardoso R, Travassos Diaz I, Mariano I, Belo A, Rolao PI, Manteigas A, Pina FA, Correa DSM. Evaluation of a modified rose Bengal test and an indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for diagnosis of Brucella melitensis infection in sheep.Vet Res.2003;34(3):397-403.

16. Alton GG, Jones LM, Angus RD, Verger JM. Techniques for the Brucellosis laboratory. INRA, Paris, France; 1988.pp:63-129.

17. Wootton IDP. Microanalysis in medical biochemistry. Edinburgh and London;1974.pp: 156.

18. Steel RG , Torrie JH. Principles and Procedures of Statistics, 2nd. ed., McGraw , Hill Inc; 1985.pp: 120.

19. Hadad JJ, Al-Azawy ZS. Incidence of Brucellosis of sheep and goats in Ninevah Province Iraq. Iraqi J Vet Sci. 1990;4(1):27-33.

24. Braunwald E, Lsselbacher KJ, Petersdorf RG, Wilson JD, Martin JB, Fanci AS. Harrisons principles of internal medicine 11th ed. Mc Graw-Hill Book company, New York; 1987.pp. 1140-1163.

25. Hoover DL and Friedland AM. Brucellosis. In: Franz DR. Parott CD. Takafuji ET. (Editors) Textbook of Millitary Med. Medical Aspects of Chemical and Biological Defence Programs. USA; 2003. pp.513521.

24. Burrows CF. Liver disorders.In: Schaer M. Clinical medicine of the dog & cat. Manson publishing, U.K.; 2003.pp:69.

25. Grioriou I, Giannakaki A,Pagoni M, Karmiris TD, Mitsouli C, Nikiforakis E. Extreme hematological abnormalities associated with Brucellosis: Report of two cases. Haematology. 2003;6(1): 93 -96.

26. Newman DJ. Price CP. Renel function and nitrogen metabolites In: Burtis CA. Ashwood ER.(editors) Tietz â&#x20AC;&#x201C;Textbook of Clinical Chemistry W.B. Sounders Company, USA ; 1999.pp:1204-1270.

" . ( 7 , ?1$

( . ( , .

* ' $( ( .N C" % . ,+,

21. Gur A,Geyik MF, Dikici B, Nas K, Cevik R, Sarac J, Hosoglu S. Complication of Brucellosis in different age groups: Astudy of 283

( )

! % & $ "# ( &' &'

# $ % " ! ( 0 , 1 & . / - + *+,) )

'# .5189 : + 5%

0 % 51

8 ; 8. :56

1 4 3

+ - % , 2

& ) 0 8+ "8 0 B +C &*9 (&' 1 ( 8 % 4 ) = 1 1 > - 9 "1 0 ? ,) @A6 2

' % ,

, 2 "> " '+ 5+ 9 0 0E # + ? ,) 2' . 4 0 , 1 "8 3 D , @A6 5 2 , .%D 9 0 F ') ,1 2G H ' C ? ,) 0 9 0

Raphidscaris sp. 56 ( 5 B & ) 2 , J 1 "1 A @ ? , $ '+ 5+ 9 0 0 1 .Rhabdochona khazirensis 1 Cucullanellus minutus 1 3 K Eustrongylides sp.

Anisakis sp.

Detection of parasitic nematodes in some fresh water fishes in khazir river in Ninevah governorate A. F. Al-Taee and M. Gh. Zangana Department of Microbiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq Abstract A total of 200 freshwater fishes belonging to 7 species include, ALburnus capito, Barbus gryous, B. xanthopterus, Chondrostoma regius, Varcorhinus trutta and Liza abu, were collected form Al-Khazir river, Ninevah governorate (about 37 Km east of Mosul city), during the period from October 2006 to April 2007. All fishes were inspected for detection of nematode worms. The study reveals presence of 12 fishes infected with nematode worms, from the total fishes inspected with the prevalence of 6%. In this study also recorded 10 species of nematodes infecting freshwater fishes 3 genera of them recorded for the first time in Iraq are Raphidscaris sp., Anisakis sp. and Eustrongylides sp. in addition to the species Cucullanellus minutus, and Rhabdochona khazirensis as new species.

Available online at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

(

0 "+ + 0 % 0 P+ 5 ? ,! 3 E + + .( ) 51 0 +

#R B + ' 0 "1 % % , B Q - ++

S + ' , "1 .+C M

+ Q %++ 5+

+ % , B Q 0 ? A 0E * N K & T " *G+, 1 0 0 Q% 5 . &9 ' 0 N '

# + + "1 % E F AL 2 A ? ,!

+ , ,! 0

1 ! M ! 0 E ,1 3 E 0 & .

2 1 + C 3 E "F + 0E * N K 0 ,1O AG+

0 $

8 0 0 ? A .( ) 8 0 6

( )

? ,) 1 $ '+ 5+ 9 0 2 C . ,

6 '+ ? ,! ' 0E + 1 2 F : Q + N >1 .( ) & @A6 &9 5 6R 0 ? ,U Q%R N % 1 % N K $ ,+ 2 C M 0V ,1! 5 1 B - K R $ ,+ ,1! &*9 B " 0 N E 0R % . Q %+

1 2 E ( #A

0E 0 ,1O 3 V &.+1+ 6 R R ? ,! 2 C 5" B L R F 1 B ' ? ,! & 1+ ( % B

Diphyllobothrium latum % , 8 B % 9 B

Clonorchis sinensis ( 1 ' B ) 0 ,1O .(W) Gnathostoma spinigerum % 8 @ ) % 2 C , & 5 2 , 2

0V "1! X 5 G+ ) "1% B + B Q% ? ,!

2 C Y 98+ + Y9 F 2 ,

0 Q 0 +6 #P 3> :1 - 9 "1 5 ? ,!

3 E Z + H 1 ? A 3 E N 1 0T

) *$

- 9 "1 0 NQ B ' - % , 2 [ â&#x20AC;&#x201C; X

"1 A6 5 0

0 A 0 ' 0 "F 8 0 8+ "8 0 B +C &*9 ? A N E , ? ,R 3 E Z + + . 4 0 , 1 "8 "1 3+ D & !

F E 0 1R D 21 K+ > ? ,! 0 1R 4 ] F E 0 N NE 1 Cyprinidae 2 8 & 5 SK

6 % (D ) 3 E N +E Mugilidae .( )

. , ? ,!

1R ( ) &

]A 1 E

5 ,)

% , 1 (; 8. ) JR % 0 1 , # +E) 8 51 (0 . ) 0 % (5 - ) 5%

(# Q ) + (B- 9 R) 5189

Albornus capito (Heckel, 1843) Barbus grypus (Heckel, 1843) Barbus sharpyi (Gunther, 1874) Barbus xanthopterus (Heckel, 1843) Chondrostoma regius (Heckel, 1843) Varicorhinus trutta (Heckel, 1843) Liza abu (Heckel, 1843)

G' . & +, N 1 9 KE! 2 -E " V Z KR Petri Dish # + ( 5 2 K

Y.

.5

,C S &

. & +, # + ( &9 " 3 E ! 2 + R " 9 Helminths0 > * 2' Y.

, Z + 0 & -R . Swim Bladder #- G J % .: 9 9 0 0E H S+ # + ( 5 XK

Z K , 0 2 9+, 2 C 3 E Q

3 E % - 51 1 5 2>C Q 2+ Q

+` ? A N. ) "' 98+ M G Glycerine Ethanol .( ) 6 %A 5+ (F 5 "1 , XaK 9 0 0 ]A 1 S K + & !

3 E ? A 2 K Q ((F ) B & 1 +%* &

2 + 2' 8 G 2 L - SF 8

+ . $, " K + + 9! ,. " 2) % 0 , , &*9 2 1 + ? A ( ) & 0

F ,V

Cyprinidae

2 8

]

Mugilidae

$ % 5 2 C H +9 3 V 2 1 2 "+ 'V 0E # + M G &'

5 # 3 E % +,* M R 5 &.1 E 2 + .2 C

JC1 5 2 1 M 3 E Y C E 2 R ^ Q M G _ W B 1E *Q 5 5 >C+

.5 + 5 "' B %A . $, ? ,U 8+ C' 2 R 51 5 , 9 1E 5 (8 & ? A (4) & 0 9R (8 & E Q (X ) ] 9 + 3+ JR 0 + 9 & 3 E '*G L 3 V & ) (8 "1 0 + % , , 0 . @A6 2 -R 6 % , 5 1 . 1 R K 9 KE! S '+

+ > * B 0 5 , Z + Y 5 , Z + 0 +,+ 5+ Nematodes 9 0 . 1 0 K" B 1. 2 ' 6 8 ! S ,

.] 9 + C Z + " '+

( )

. , C 9 "1 0E , 1+ +C

0 + ' . , ) "1 0E ' . .( ) Procamallanus J1 2 B ' 2 , ? A% .% . ' ,1 2 %8 0 % % , 5 sp.

C 9 "1 9 ? , &%+ % # % J

5 5 C 0 % B- + L 9 KE)

>C &

. M

.D &

.5 . .

C 5 Raphidascaris sp. J1 2 0 + ' 2 "> H % .4 ' ,1 2 %8 5%

? ,

* 5 9 S , 3 E .'+ 2 @A6 2

"%*+ 0 @A6 - ++ .( Z C8 8G

E) 3 .+C+ Z 9 3 + #A 5F E) :C8 0 1,) , L @ C8 H*Q C #

& 3 E N K E N 9+ 9 &%+ % . C+9 3 ,

.4D 2 % & .B- .1E 1 &%8 ,

E) &

. c & . M

. , . 0E ' .

. 5F ) ' N .+ , Z'+1 5 X.+ , 1+ +C

.(W

5 Porrocaecum sp. J1 2 B ' >

2 &%8 3 E % .D ' ,1 2 %8 51 ? , ( 8G

* 5 9 S , .'+ + N C N

N E "%*+ 0 @A6 - ++ .Z C8

L 5F E) c 0 "> " 3 N & .0 1,) , B G' B E 3 , :C8

. #

E) & . "K E W. . 0E ' .

.W c &

. . , S , 3 E Anisakis sp. J1 2 0 + ' 2 ,

5%

% , 5 ; 8. % , 5 % - ++ .5 + 3 E % . % ' ,1 2 %8

0, 2 A >C & + , "1 0 % 2 N K E N 9+ 9 &%+ % Q @ C8 &%8 5

3 & ++ B , C 9 "1 , & 3 E & B ' % 8 &%8 3 E "1 5 S '+ . .(D ) ' .WW M

D. W Rhabdochona khazirensis sp.

1 Z'

Y 98+ + ; 8 % , 5 ? A B & ) 9 0 0 n. ' ,1 2 %8 ' C ? ,!

1R 0 B

%A H 1) 0 0 +1Q 0 H*Q 3 E QE . % 3 E

"1 % H 1) - ++ 0 K "

. H 1) & > L ' 0 % %A J%E

& 0 9 0 2 9+, H C +9 - % + ) B %4 & 1 Q & 5 2 K

& 1 Q 0 , % ) % & 1 Q Q .( . ) % & 1 Q Q .( .

0

+ R 0 - Q .( . ) % & 1 Q Q .( . ) : , 1% 0

+ R 0 - ^ - Q .( . ) 1% 3 G+ - SF 8 3 E 2 1 XK + Q .( . . 8 L , EO BENQ DC E600 1 % 2 9+, &% K 2 , . 2 2 C L +

' R Ocular Micrometer 1 , J . , 5 C . , @A6 5 2 -E 5+ 2 C Y 98+ ( + X $+% 5 B %A S + C 0 E 3 E +E H 0 E 3 E (

) &Q B % .( W ) &Q &F ,

+$ B + &*9 - 9 "1 0 B ' % , 2' b 4 0 , 1 "8 3 V D & ! 0 8+ "8 0 , & ,+ + 9 2 C "+ 'V 0E # + M G ,1 ' C ? ,) 5 9 0 ' .%D ' $, , 9 0 X - + 0 ( ) &

? , 5 ') X

F ') ,1 "CF K Cucullanus 1 0 %A B B 3 E Q[E H - 9 2 %8 51 % , 0 5 ) - 5 pseudeotropi &%8 2 A , + B 56 % .D ' ,1 : 1 0 $1 &% 3 E 2 H*Q C 51 , 0 % N + # G - 3 .+C 5 KE c

-" & A .Pseudobuccal Capsule A % C >C & "1 ] - 9 2 0 ] - 1 Q +C B 2 0 ] - Preanal 9 Postanal 9 2 0 ] - Q*Q 9 Z + & . "K E . B &

c & . :K E . $A % # C . . ) "1 0E ' .

.

3 E & A # + . B 0 5 1A - &

. 5 , 1+ & . "1 &% & 0 +% 8 . . ] 9 + 0E @

Philometra 1 0 3Q1 B B 3 E QE % ,1 8 % , , Z + &9 5 abdominalis "1 0 "1 0 @A6 - ++ .%W. ' B 0 %+ A 2 - 3 .+C+ 3Q1* C 9 . "K E W. B &

J &%+ %

( )

"1 .% . ' ,1 B 5%

% , C 9 "1

>C ? + + . K 2 ) 5 5 C 0 % B- L = 9) KE) B L .5

J1 + G 9 0 0 ] - 3 E aQE [

B

8 % , , Z + 5 Eustrongylides sp.

1 , 0 .%W. ' ,1 2 %8

, Z + &9 #- G J % & Z+ %A

C % #- G J % 0 2 3Q1)

"1 . N K E N 9+ 9 089 &%+ % 2 0 & , ] 9 - + B % 3'9 %A C 9 Q*Q 3Q1* C 9 "1 0 - + & . C 9 "1 N Y 'C @A6 0 ' 0 % + B % Y '

1 +% 2 3 E M F + $ % +

D. 3Q1) & . .D :K E %A &

0E + + 'E . 3Q1) ? + + .4 "K E

. 3Q1) 5 c &

. D , .

C 9 Y 'C 2 - + 1E .(

) ' 0 B % E "1 2 9 - 8 3 E 3Q1*

+ % . Ă&#x2014; . 6 &%8 F M

M 5 9 8G .( W B ' ) 1 + 0 1 3 E 2 + & 1 +%* & Q + $ , 2 - + M @A6 . .4 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; . 4 0 " 2 + 9 2 "1

H 1) - ++ ? A% . %A & 1 . .

>C 3 E # + +

) "+ "1 0 % # L - 0 F- 3 ,. ] + & c " B ' M 3 E # + 3Q1) , .(4 B ' ) 5 KE -

C 9 "1 , 0 9) H Q 5 , 1+ +C X.+

M E ' & 1 &%8 3 E 0 %+ N B- + 3Q1* ] 9 + X.+ N K E N 9+ 9 . :

& . H 1) 5 M .( B ' ) :+ E 1E - & . :K E .

C >C c 0 5 K - &

. c 0 # G " 9 0 1 3 E # + + &%8 K M . .W . .

9 ? + +) . D Ă&#x2014; . 6

>C : + @ C8 H*Q C + 0 % %A - + &% & 5F E : &'+ = Q '

? + ? A% .

C >C

E) c 0 0 + ' ) .W , . 0E + + 'E . %A :+ "1 . :K E . %A & .(

5 0 + ,+ 0 + ' 0 + 1, 3 E # + + C 9

1 A6 ,+ + . "1 &% & &

: #A - 9 "1 , 3 E Rhabdochona khazirensis .B & ) J1 + N B G' 2 Y 98+ + % 5 * B 8 9 2 , 0 Rhabdochona sp.

? ,!

1R 5 'O X

F 'O ,1 "CF K $, , Nematodes 9 0 X - + ( ) &

. ' C 'O X

) , Z +

)

) S ,

) S , % S ,

)

)

)

) , Z +

'O ,1 % F .D W. . .4 .D

. .W

.

W.

2) E 2) E ' ' C

.

1 # (

Z K % ,

5 C

** 51 Cucullanus pseudeotropi ** 8 Philometra abdominalis ** 0 % Procamallanus sp. Larva ** 5%

*Raphidascaris sp. Larva ** 51 Porrocaecum sp. Larva ** ; 8. * Anisakis sp. Larva ** 5%

** 5189 * Cucullanellus minutus ** ; 8. # Rhabdochona khazirensis sp. n. ** 5%

Rhabdochona sp. Larva ** 8 * Eustrongylides sp.

5 5 C Z K ** ( 5 B & ! & ,+ *

( )

Philometra

1 ! "1 :( ) B '

C >C (bc) 5 K (mo) abdominalis .X10 # G = (go) ' . (nr)

Raphidascaris 5 C 9 "1 :(W) B ' .X10 , C 9 F "1 (pbe) ] 8 + (a) sp.

Anisakis sp. 5 ! "1 :( ) B ' .X10 &%+ % (cu) C >C (bc) @ C8 (L)

Philometra

1 3Q1! , 1+ +C :( ) B ' .X10 &%+ % (cu) ( ",) abdominalis

5 ! "1 :( ) B ' (nr) C >C (bc) @ C8 (L) Raphidascaris sp. .X10 ' .

Anisakis sp. 5 C 9 "1 :(D) B ' .X10 , C 9 F "1 (pbe)

( )

R. khazirensis 1 %A C 9 "1 :( ) B ' .X10 3'9 (t) , C 9 F "1 (pbe)

1 3Q1! ! "1 :(4) B ' 5 K (mo) C >C (bc) khazirensis .X10 # G = (go)

1

R. khazirensis 1 3Q1! C 9 "1 :( ) B ' (vu) M g + M (u) & A - &%8 > ) C 9 F "1 (pbe) M (o) Q1) , 1+ +C .X10 ,

Rhabdochona

%A ! "1 :( ) B ' .X10 &%+ % (cu) @ C8 (L) Eustrongylides sp.

Eustrongylides

1 %A C 9 "1 :( ) B ' .X10 % +8 +C (co) 3'9 (t) sp.

R. khazirensis 1 %A ! "1 :( ) B ' . (nr) C >C (bc) 5 K (mo) .X10 # G = (go) '

W

( )

1 %A ! "1 : ( ) B ' c (oe) C >C (bc) Cucullanellus minutus .X10 ) (i)

1 3Q1) ) "1 :( ) B ' (cu) C >C (bc) @ C8 (L) Eustrongylides sp. .X10 &%+ %

Cucullanellus 1 %A C 9 "1 : ( D) B ' ] 9 + 0 . 9 & 2 > ) minutus .X10 % +8 +C (co) ( ",R)

> ) Eustrongylides sp. 5 C K : ( W) B ' .X40 . B 8. &9

Cucullanellus .X10

1 0 9 0 H*Q 3 E QE N 9

5 H 1) 0 0 +1Q

%A Cucullanellus minutus 0 - ++ .% . ' ,1 2 %8 5189 % ,

. ) Z + > &+ + 26 C' 0 2 A "1 % . . H 1) 5 &

%A 0 & H 1) M

. %A 5 &

. M

>C , 5

B - S+C C . . W 1E X.+ B G' 2 H*Q + N 1 GK C 3 ,. L , c 0 1 *% 1E C + Q*Q ] -) 9 & 2 %A ? + . - 0 $ . X.+ . 0 % C 9 0 3 ) Z'+1 Z 9 X.+ H 1) 5 , 1+ +C % +8 +C .( 4 D ) ' ,

1 3Q1! ! "1 :( 4) B ' @ C8 (L) c (oe) ) (i) minutus

( )

5 Procamallanus sp. J1 2 2 ' 2 , (C++ % . 'O ,1 21 % 0 % % , R Z' X , 5 , 2 C'

A6 0 N NE 1 ( 5 & h, ( ) & 0 %A ? ,R R 5 ( ) & 0 P. viviparus 6 J1 ^ % , 5 ( ) :,C1 1 & , Mystus halpensis @A6 5 0 % % , & ,+

Mastacembelus semach .( 5 Procamallanus J1 N NC K , 3 E Raphidascaris sp. J1 2 2 'V 2 , 2G 5%

? ,R 5 U 5 9 S , .( ) 5 %A X :+ C' (C++ % .4 'O ,1 5 ? ,! 0 1 #R 5 J1 A"

1 #R & , 5 C & ,+ A ( 5 . , 2 , , 5 5%

? ,R 5 .Raphidascris sp .( 5 & ,+ &

Porrocaecum J1 + 2 B 'V 2 , ,1 2G 51 % , ! 5 9 S , 3 E sp. &h , .( ) @ %A X :+ C' (C++ % .D 'O 5 :E 1 Porrocaecum J1 N + N E 1 ( W) > 5 "1 5 + % , 5 , Z

% . 5 C A" , 'O ,1 21 % 0 j*'

[ , 5 , 'O ,1 X .C+ 56

5 Porrocaecum J1 + 1! 51 Q 6 & ,+ A6 @A6 5 5 C N N C K 51 ? ,R & ,+

(

. , J1 + 2 2 'V , 5 2

! 5 ; 8. ? ,R 5 % S , 3 E .Anisakis sp

% 'O $,1 21 % 5%

? ,!

X 2 @A6 2 C' : 8++ 5 + 3 E % .

5 Anisakis J1 X + 1 #R & , ( ) @ %A 5 2 C @A6 & ,+ A ( 5 . , 2 , 0R N E .( 5 & ! 5%

; 8. ? ,R 0 ,1) 3 V &.+1+ 5+ K &

0 + 2 @A6 $ ,+ H . F 1 ? ,! & 1+ ( 0E .( ) Anaphylactic reaction , , % , R 5 Cucullanellus minutus 0 2

5 : 8++ % . " 'O ,1 2G B 5189

1 A6 0V 3 V 8R 0 A ( ) @ %A X "+ C'

+O 5 ? ,! 5 Cucullanellus J1 X +

6

1 #R . , 2 , 5 & , ( 5 5+ ,

A A @ ? ,R 0 1 #R 5 J1 A"

5 5189 ? ,R 5 Cucullanellus minutus 1 & ,+ .( 5 & ,+ & R , @A6

Cucullanellus 1 3Q1! C 9 "1 : ( ) B ' + (a) ) (i) , C 9 F "1 (pbe) minutus .X10 ] 8

,- 2 Q + " 9 0 "1 9 2 C 0 AL 0 N - "%*"+, &*9 0 ? ,) 3 E , .( D) C +9 F % % 1 % N K " Z K Cucullanus pseudeotropi 1 , 9 0 0

51 % , R 5 5 C A" B 'V 2 "> H & , 1 A6 Z' : 8+ % .D 'O ,1 21 %

1 &h , [ ( W) :+ %A #A Z' X , 5 "1 5 # ? ,R R 5 ( 4) Cucullanus cyprini Z ' 0 % ? ,R 5 ( ) :,C1 1 &h , 3 C % 51 1 ? ,R 5 ( ) : , % Q Q B 5 5 ; 8. ? ,R 5 ( ) : h , i G 5 "1 5 .C. pseudeotropi 1 ( W) 2 , &' 5 "1 0 j*' > 5 "1 5 ? 8 - ? ,R 5 0 3 ER 56 % . , ? + 5 'O ,1 21 %

Z > 3 V $ ,

, 5 'O ,1

[ 5 C , ZF K + R H + ( ++ 5 0 0 1 A" N NC K 51 ? , & ,+ . , 5 Philometra abdominalis 1 B 'V 2 , (C++ % .W 'O 2G

8 % , 5 , Z + #A Z' X , 5 & , 1 2 C'

( ) ( 5 B & !

1 A6 & , .( ) @ %A

3 "1 5 8 ? ,! 5 , Z + 5 5 . 5 51 Q , 5 1 A6 & ,+ .

8 ? ,! 5 , Z +

D

( )

) "1 &%8 , Z + 5 "

J1 1! ) "1 : 8 #A 0 @A" 56 , @A6 0V ) ( ) 5 % Eustrongylides J1 + G 0

0E Z8%+ 5+ B

J1 A6 1 B B 0) ? ,! 5 Eustrongylides B 1. 5 ++ G 0 B 8 L Z

6 %

" 5F "1 Z K 56 5+ ? ,! % K" Z K ) $*6) 0 " 1+ 1E $ '+ ? ,!

"+ 5+ H Q 2 3 E (& ! 5 ,

KE* 5 9 S , 3 E .+,+ 5 , Z + 3 V ? ,! 5 J1 A" G 0 + $ , 0V . 9 0R %A H ( ) @ %A 3 V X , 5

E. ignotus 1 0R 2 + Q 2 , M

56 Mosqueto fishes M

? ,R 5 B ' ? ,! @A6 , &9 5 "+ B & %+ 0V 3 E B :1 . , 2 , M +, &*9 0 0 + ? ,R 0 #R 5 J1 A"

1 #R ( 5 & , 5 Eustrongylides sp. 5 C & ,+ A A @ .( 5 & ,+ & , 5 8 ? ,R

1 B 'V 2 , ,1 21 % , 5 ; 8 % , R 5 n.

J1 + 1R R 2 h , [ .% 'O Z' A A @ ? ,R 5 Rhabdochona 0 + R 5 N NE 1 R. tigrae 1 ( ) R. 0 E 1 NK ( ) Z'

&' 5 "1 0 0 E 1 "C' R. grandipapillata mesopotamica 5 "1 5 C % 51 1 R 5 B & !

0 9k 5 B & ! R. belichii 1 ( ) & , ( W) &'

( - R ) ( % R ) 0 % ? ,R R 5 .

"1 5 C % 51 1 R 5 R. mesopotamica 1

? ,R 5 R. belichii 1 ( W) 2 , G 5 ! % % ? ,R 5 R. grandipapillata 1

8 %8 2 C' Z +9+ 0 j*' > 5 "1 5

1! 0E , 5 & , R. khazirensis 1 : 8+ "1% ( ) 6 %A 5+ 1! 0E N . , B %A &%8 ! "1 2 C' M 5 R. belichii 1 ! "1 : 8+ R. khazirensis 1 H 1V 5 c "1 1 R. belichii 1 H 1V

%A c &%8

1 H 1V 5 0 %+ C +9 0 %+ 0 E 1 *% H 1O C 9 * N 1 : 8 - $ % + B - > L R. khazirensis L B

R. belichii 1 H 1V 5 0 %+ . N ' R. khazirensis 1 5 0 %+ %A R .$ % + #P B - "1 &%8 Z +9+ R. belichii 1 %A 0 > LR ' R R. 1 %A 5 5+ ? + 0E " C 9 "1 !

& 1, 9!

1 C 9 "1 5 + belichii R. khazirensis 1 %A C 9 "1 5 & 1, 1

9 ? + + R. belichii 1 5 M . N B ' 0 %+ R. 1 M ? + + ) 1 0 *% 5 0 1 6 1 A6 A . N 9 khazirensis

A @ ? ,R 3 E &C + Rhabdochona J1 ( 5 B & ! & , J1 A6 0 1 J 9 6

.( W) 5 Rhabdochona sp. J1 + 2 2'l98 b 'O ,1 2G 5%

% , ! 2 , 2 @A" C 9 ! "1 &%8 ( + % .

? ,R & ,+ A ( ) 1E %A Z' X Rhabdochona J1 N N C K , @A6 5 5%

.( 5 0 0 0 1Q B 'V , 5 2

J1 X + 9 0 0 1 (3Q1 %A) 2G

8 % , 5 , Z + 5 Eustrongylides sp.

+ "1 3 E 0 @A6 2'l98 b %W. 'O ,1 21 % H 0 0 3 E +E) Eustrongylides J1 Rhabdochona khazirensis sp.

( %, $ % B E 3 V .+ %8 0 Q .+ .H A6 V +V 5 E C "+ 6 , #

' ? ,! ] +1V + 2 , ,R .5 E 0 , > C 0 , . . &' 81 E % B E 5 C + 9 0 3 E , . 0+ 0 $ 1 . : &' .( +, , ) ( 5 A @ ? , 0 1R . 4Y W &'

&9 AG ' % "+ 6R % , B Q .m E Z , .

B - 5 ^ 9 2 , 5 . . W 1, W 4.

Hoffmann GL. Parasites of North American freshwater fishes. 2nd ed.

Comstock Publishing Associates, Ithaca, New York;1999 .

+ & ! - 5 ^ 9 ( ? , . 1 6 . ^ 9 2 , -% 2 81 $1 K + 3 V 2 8. . 44 G â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 8 O ( ) 5

+ H Q - 5 ^ 9 ( ? , . 1 6 .D

% ? ,! + 3 V ( 1 Q ] + ) Z1 E- % 8 . W B '

7.

Lasee B. Laboratory Procedures Manual- Version 2. 0, Chapter 8.

Parasitology. La Crosse Fish Health Center. Onalaska, Wisconsin;2004 .

4

( )

K" B 1. C 0 S, .B & -1 5 E E # E , . .( +, , ) Q Q B 5 ? ,!

1R M

.4 Y 4 G : G

8.

9.

19. Ali NM, Salih NE, Abdul-Ameer KN. Parsitic fauna of some freshwater fishes from Tigris river, Baghdad, Iraq, IV: Nematoda. J Biol Sci Res. 1987;18(3):35-45 .

20. Martins ML, Yoshitoshi ER. A new nematode species Goezia leporine n. sp. (Anisakidae) from cultured freshwater fish leporinus macrocephalus (Anostomidae) in Brazil. Braz J Bio. 2003;63 (3):Wikipedia the Free encyclopedia. http:// www. en. wikipedia/ wiki/ Anisakis, 2007.

21. Wikipedia the free encyclopedia. http://www.en.wikipedia/wiki/ Anisakis, 2007.

22. Rahemo Z. Rhabdochona tigrae sp. n. (Nematoda, Rhabdochonidae) described from afreshwater fishes, Varicorhinus trutta heckle, from river Tigris, Iraq. Acta Parasitol Polonic. 1978;25(29):247-251 .

23. Rahemo ZIF, Kasim MH. Two new species of the Rhabdochona Railliet. 1916 (Rhabdochona) from afreshwater fish Cyprinion macrostomus Heckel, from Iraq. Jap J Parasitol. 1979;28(6):371-376 .

24. Nazar MA, Nabeel ES, Kefah NA. Parasitic fauna of some freshwater fishes from Tigris river, Baghdad, Iraq. IV. Nematod Bid Sci Res. 1987;18(3): 64-78 .

25. Yanong RPE. Nematode (Roundworm) Infections in fish. Circular 91.

Department of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS). University of Florida. 2006.

10.

11.

12.

13.

Stewart DB, Bernier LMJ. Common parasites, Diseases and Injuries of Freshwater Fishes in the Northwest Territories and Nunavunt, Canada. 1999;6 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 22, 36 .

Upton SJ. Animal Parasitology, Biology 625, Laboratory Manual (PDF Version). Kansas State University. 2005;26-29, 36 .

Bykhovskaya-Pavlovskaya IE, Gusev AV, Dubinia MN, Izyumova NA, Smirnova TS, Sokolovskaya IL, Shtein GA, Shulman SS and Epshtein VM. Key to parasites of freshwater fish of the USSR, Moscow. 1964 .

Yamaguti S. Systema Helminthum, Vol. 3, Part 1 and 2. The Nematodes of Vertebrates. Intersci Pub INC Ltd. New York;1961.

Yamaguti S. Systema Helminthum, Vol. 4. Monogenea And Aspedocotylea. Intersci Pub INC Ltd. New York. 1963 .

Mhaisen FT, Ali NM, Abul-Eis ES, Kadim LS. First record of Dactylogyrus achmerowi Gussev, 1955, with an identification key for the Dactylogyrids of fishes of Iraq. J Biol Sci Res. 1988;19 (suppl. 1) : 887-900 .

5 A @ ? , 2 C & , . ' 1 j C% ! E . W : G .( +, , ) ( 0 j*' > 5 "1 .4 Y G

"1 ? , M 2 C 3 E 2 , .0 E &, 5 E . j*' .( +, , ) ? % 5%, . 1 1E % $ - .D Y 0 j*' :0

+ B - ? ,! 2 C M R . K 0 0, . D . B ' $ + 1 5 H 5

17. Ali NM, Al-Jafery AR, Abdul-Ameer KN. Parasitic fauna of freshwater fishes in Diyala river, Iraq J Biol Sci Res. 1978;18(1):163181 .

( )

**& ' ! ( ) % * !" # , * *

+ ' ( ) & $ $ % # ! " **

* ( &+/ 0 1 -./% )

*+,

7 < = + :+0 & 0; (& +/ ) $+ 7+ 8" / + 5 9. " / 234 5" 6./

B .C 5 ." 8" 73+ 3C . .@ / # ? +0 + ;

> , &# HVT CVI 988 ? +; &+0.; = 3) +6 +0.; G . > HI+. 5 6J .+ F +" ( G . +; +) B D+>#% $ E 0 . + -C :+F. &+) L % ; 8B" +; 8 / K;B + .+ F +" ( 73+ $ 8" * @ +

J;- = + 4 E 0 . +M 16 13 + N -C @ 9* & ). 8. B + -C :+F. # 8" @ + < = 3 5 *; M B ( KC + " + . 0# )F L # B + -C 5+ .

J; + ) 8 +; &+ F ; + -C 234 & @ ) # E 0 . >+ < B + -C :+F. & %O 10 7 4 + % -C B + -C 8" 8 / $+BC J; 0" + F +" . M

* +M 13 P

Effect of Marek's vaccine on some lymphoid organs in layers H. A. Hassan* and T. S. Qubih** * Ninavah Drugs Industries, ** Department of Pathology and Poultry Diseases, College of Veterinary Medicine, Mosul, Iraq Abstract The aim of the study was to examine experimentally the gross and histological changes in layers (ISA Brown) inoculated with bivalent vaccine (CVI 988 and HVT) intramuscularly at one day of age. Samples of spleen, thymus and bursa of Fabricius were taken at different period post vaccination. Results indicate, gross changes were characterized by atrophy of thymus and congestion, congestion of spleen, with presence of serous fluid in bursa of Fabricius in some samples. Histologically, the spleen at early stage, infiltration of lymphocytes was low and then relatively an increased in number on post vaccination days 13 and 16. Also there was high infiltration of these cells around the splenic artery in addition to their aggregation in the nodes.

The bursa of Fabricius showed decreased infiltration of lymphocytes on days 4, 7 and 10, where as these cells increased in infiltration on day 13 after vaccination.

Available online at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

S*

.(2) Q B +F. +*- +M BC +M /+/ .(3) + & & 8" R"+F.) $ > ,+ / +G = + $ > E 0 . # & ' 8 .% N >N & ) 0; 8"

Q B #+ D+ # & . E 0 . &+" = 3 $ > +*; '3 5 & 0; 8" Q B +6> . T "U

8. C / B $ N & = + $

?I+F 4 / I @ * 5 < B 8

7+ ( *.

L Q B 34

.(1) 6F 4 2 .B & $ +; )F R* C L # M + .# Q 6 I+# M * 8> ( / +; . . .'

( )

&0; & + +; 8" 5 9. J; + / .@ / 8 / K0 &0; & L N + N 8" J; 3 7 < :+0 +0 + ? +/ ?

8" +M* *C B + -C 8" + -C 8" / @ + < J; R %O @ / # ? $ N ( 0 8" 13 10 +. + N 8" B J ; / @ + < J; + ) @ / # ? +0 + @ + < 5 +) 21 19 16 + N 8" B + -C 8" *+C (2 1 &+. * ) 31 28 + N 8" @ ) / 8" @

& F ; +M ;> & ) ;N ( 8" +6 .

B + -C 8" / @ + < J; + ) +; + ;N B .C + -C 234 (2 @ *) B 5 0# )F + -C $

+M > J; + ) @ 9* +M * *C

8" J; 0" + F +" ( + . <- + -C

:+0 5 0; 8.

73+ & / & 7 4 L N + N ( 8" B + -C 8" /

7 < = +

10 + N 8" + @ / # +6. +0 + F +" ( 8" + -C 8" / @ + < J;- " E 0 . +M 13

8" / @ + < & & ; 8" (3 @ * ) + F +" (4 @ * ) @ / # 8" + +M6 +F &+) F# ?/+.

B + -C

J; 0" E 0 . & 28 8" + . I+4 #V

0. $ > #+ & ). +6# V 5+;+0 R < ./. .(4) + + G H @D+B) +0 J"+; 8" 5 / 8"

% 8 * + ./ &O $ > E 0 . +M (HVT) W +G 8 * (Respens Strain) CVI988 .(5) 2 ; :+0 + ./ & >" HI+. 8

+ 5 9. " L / 234 5" 4 0" = 3

G . G B D+>#% $ 8" W ;. 8. /

:+0 > , &# E 0 . +F +" ( +; .(HVT CVI 988) 7 < = + - (. )% %

+/ ! ;

T " / 234 8" C./

/ + F ) F & $+ 7+ (ISA) :+0 +M ;0 +MC " 20 (@ /) ;0 Y +6 15 +MC " 35 , &# Q0B C T "N 234 E 0 . . W ; 7 < / ' ( ) 8" & ; 5 8" +6. . . >

.$ &# +6>

< K+B 8" *

+ (HVT) W +G 8 * & 7 < :+0 ./ 8" J B; (Rispens CVI 988) N 8 * :+0

. > 8" 0.1 # 5 +) I+/ & . 8 +

@ / T " ;0 T "N & 5+ # 5

W ; +6 . .

31 28 25 22 19 16 13 10 7 4 & T " .

5+ # ? + N 234 & ) 8" .

5>B; . ;0 # & &+C " @ / #

8" ( +; G . + F +" ( ) G . / 5+ # .%10 + . D' & + B +69 * & ) + 5 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 4 = / / 5+ ? 0. . .(6) & / % & /) .+ 6 +

"'

( *. 8. 6 > 5%+; & = + $ \ L # @ / 8" GV. E 0 .

5+6 N $+ 7+ E 0 .

G . @ Y ; 8" > J; + + # .$ < . # B + -C 8" 8 / $+BC L O ( /

7 4 84 &0; L N + N -C 73+ $

L O ( /

( G . ) 9 $ 8" &+0.;

10 34 .7 < :+0 + ./ . E 0 . # #+B.

; I% . % R L O +F & 3 (7) & G;+ ? ,B. :+0 E 0 .

G . @ Y 8" + # 5 9. *; .Rispens 8" 9* L N + N 8" J; 0" +; KC + " +

13 10 7 4 F. 8. &+0.; W ; +; ; 8" +; ; +0 7 < = + :+0 &0;

& 3 (8) & G;+ ? ,B. 34 &0;. 8. / 5%+; 8" / . > & 8 + +; & L +F .&0;. 8. 5%+; ? +0 &0; B + -C K0 W ; L +F & 3 (9) & G;+ ? 50B. = 3) 7 < :+0 + &0; B + -C 8" 8 / 8 / 5 + 3O > L O ' ] + (IMDV & HVT) ; 8" 9. J; = 3) . ;0 Y / 5%+; +

/.

8" 73+ $ < . # G . @ Y > J; + + # 8" &+0.;

@ F+

+/

84 L N + N . 9 $

8" R +0.; +; > L N + N 8" J; = 3) 8" +; ; +0 E 0 .

13 10 7 4 + N ;+ & +; ; 8" 9. J; + ) @ / ? + :+0 + 5 0; 8. 5%+; 8" ( +; ; ) ' ) ; R %O E 0 . +M 31 28 19 16 + N 8" +M * *C

= 3) .@ / # ? +0 & 8" 9. J;- ( 73+ $ 8" ;> I /

? &+0.; J;

# ? +0 7 4 + N 8" 5*;" 8. + F +"

( )

8" +M* *C :+0 + 5 0; 8. 5%+; 8" R C>. +; L O ( /

&0; +M 31 28 19 16 + N 3O & 8" 9. J;- R %O & @ ) 5+ )

.(9) ;0 Y / 5%+; + 5 +

7+ T B + F +" ( & 8 / ? 0 :3 @ * @ + < J;- + @ F# 7 < = + :+0 R; 0 .

234 > 5+ 8" B + -C 8" / .X 145 .H&E & . (F) 5+ P E 0 .

7+ T " +; & 8 / ? 0 :1 @ * B + -C ? . J;- + 28 CVI988 HVT periarterial Lymphatic sheath &+ F ; 8B 9 8" .X 180 .H&E & .@ F+ (A) &+ F ; (PALS)

7+ T B + F +" ( & 8 / ? 0 :4 @ * @ + < J;- M+ 19 7 < = + :+0 R; 0 . & +6 .

5+ 8" B + -C 8" @ ) / .X 115 .H&E & . (F) / +; 8 / K0 E 0 . & L N + N 8" J; 0" +M / + +M * *C +; $ N ( 8" B + -C 8" J ; + ? ,B. 34

/ 5%+; ? +0 7 4 + N 8" B + -C ? < . 8" 9. +J;% & 3 (10) &+G;+ 2 )3 & (8) W;+ 2 )3+ ? ,B. = 3) . B 5 0# & ). ? ( B + -C 8" 8 / K0 ) > & 8 + +; &+ J; + ) .L N + N -C &0; @< @ *

:+0 E 0 .

7+ T " +; & 8 / ? 0 :2 @ * B + -C ? . J;- + 31 CVI988 HVT .X 180 .H&E & .( 6/% ) nodules 5 0# )F L #

( )

% 0"

5%+; 8" / @ + < + 53C 13 10 + N 8" + -C 5 +)" 22 19 16 + N 8" + .7 < = + :+0 ;0 ? +0 G) @< B + -C 8" / @ + < / @ + < 5 +)" 31 28 + N + &0;. 8. 5%+; &+ F ; @<) .

B + -C 8" ;>

I+4 $ 8" / @ + < *; = 3) +; 8" @

.(11) & G;+ ? , + . 34 <-

+ -C 8" Q 9. J;- + F +" ( L O / + + $ 8" ;> I /

J; &) ( ; + 3O 7 4 + N 8" 7 < = + :+0 &0; 73+ & 3 (7) & G;+ ? ,B. 34 &0;. 8. 73+ + 5

( ; 8" 9. ; ;> I% . % R V ) + 3O BH16147 TMC (Rispens) @ . &0; + F +" 8. HI+. ? ,B. = 3) &0;. 8. 73+ ? 5

.&0; 73+ $ 8" &+0.;

+6 # + *; :+0 &0; 7 4 L N + N 8" J; 0" +M / + # B + -C 8" 8 / K0

7 < = + / @ + < J; &) &0;. 8. 73+ ? +6. +0 31 28 25 22 19 + N -C B + -C 8" J ; .@ 9* + -C G . ;> 5 +) 8. +M

K0 W ; ) & 3 (9) & G;+ 2 )3+ ? ,B. 34

:+0 &0; L % + % -C B + -C 8" 8 / = 3) ;0 Y 73+ ? 5 + 3O 7 < = + 8" @< / @ + < *; + ./ 8" + ? ,B. .+M 28 @ CN + N 8" B + -C &+0.; ? G . &+0.;

> W; 34 & H. ./ .E 0 .

B + -C :+F. +;

( ) @ + # L O 0. )F + &+G;+ 0. + 6 # L # & $ $ N /+I ' .W; 34 D O 8" *

1. Fred D Bernd K Karel A S. Avian immunology 10thed ElsevierAcademic Press ; 2008.p360.

8 +

. @ < +G & $ . ]" 8 C F . . *

+ 8 W;

3. Saif Y M Barnes H J Glisson J R Fadly A M McDougald L R Swayne D E.Diseases of poultry ,11thed Ames , I A; Iowa State University Press.2003; pp:408.

4. Calnek B W Witter R L. Marek's disease. In B W Calnek H J Barnes C W Beard L R McDougald Y M Saif (eds). Diseases of Poultry, 10th ed.

Ames, IA; Iowa State University Press. 1997.pp369.

5. Basher H A Qubih T S Hassan S M Azab V A. Comparative efficacy of Marek's disease vaccines. Iraqi J Vet Sci.1991;4(2):147-151.

6. Culling C F A Allison R T Barr W T. Cellular pathology technique 4thed Butterworth;1985.p78 7. Karpathy R C Firth G A Tannock G A. Derivation safety and efficacy of a Marek's disease vaccine developed from an Australian isolated of very virulent Marek's disease virus. Aust Vet J.2002;80(1-2):61-66.

8. Taniguchi T Yuasa N Sato S Horiuchi T. Pathological changes in chickens inoculated with reticuloendothelial virus contaminated Marek's disease vaccine. Natl Inst Anim. Health Q (Tokyo).1977.

9. Pruthi A K Gupta R K Sadana J R. Efficacy of bivalent vaccine against Marek's disease. Res Vet Sci.1987;4292:145-149.

10. Baigent S I Davison T F. Development and composition of laymphoid lesion in spleen of Marek's disease virus infected chickens, of Marek's disease. Avian Pathol.1999;128:287-300.

11. El-Shamy S A Abd El-Hafez A. Clinical and Pathological study on Marek's disease in broiler chickens in upper Egypt. Assiut Vet Med J.2003;44(96):228-238.

( )

! Cryptosporidium baileyi ! " #$ #$

% & ' ( !

( %, / # - . # ! *+,) )

"# 4 3 4 %;6% #$ / % 2 : 7 8 9 ) %$6 5 & 2+ 3 4 %2 , 0 1 : 7 8 9 ) %$6 A 2 ,/ 0/%( .?% > ! : Cryptosporidium baileyi : < : + = 8 + %$6 : ; 0% I H G + 3 4 %;6% G F% ( : (C D $ + 3 5 E % +5 .% % 2 > ! : : + : 8 A 2! L ; F ( 5 0 8+, .C. baileyi K/% / J 8C+ + ?% > : < F% (!

= 8 O /5 N2 A 2 8 > : : < F% (! M + ?% /5 N2 %E ,/ . PC - # 8 > 3 5 N2 %E , .= 8

3+2 %P2 G > 0*; :

+ 3 4 %;6% R% %8 : :/ %8 F(/+ A 2 H

0% %QG : 8/

= 8 O

0% %QG 8/+ N2 - = 8

/5 % ! .0% %QG T + : : < U%(+ S ( 5!

3 4 %;6% 8 %-/! #(C 3 5 0 + :+ R% D + :

0% %QG % *8 >*,/ H U(! S C ( %E; !

S C - %, 0% I F</ 0N2 - = 8

: % ! .R% V < +8 0%- : S / %2! %P+ % *8 M%C+ . - %, % (

Experimental histopathological study of chicks infected with Cryptosporidium baileyi isolated from wild pigeons in Mosul S. S. Al-Mahmood Department of Pathology and Poultry Diseases, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq saevan981@yahoo.com e-mail: Abstract The aim of this study was to investigate naturally occurring cryptosporidiosis in pigeons in Mosul city as well as the pathology of experimental C. baileyi infection in chicks. Prevalence of the naturally occurring cryptosporidiosis in the pigeons was 30% according to morphological features of the isolated oocysts and distribution of the lesions of the experimental infection in chicks, the cryptosporidium was diagnosed as C. baileyi. Using a dose of 1000 oocysts, the infection was induced in chikens. Oocysts shedding was noted in the infected chickens at the 7th post â&#x20AC;&#x201C; infection (p.i.) day and increased till the 15th p.i. day. Infected chicks showed dullness and anorexia. Microscopically p.i. day 7, there were necrosis of the tips of some of the intestinal villi, mucinous degeneration of the intestinal mucosa, and the presence of large numbers of the parasite in the tips of the intestinal villi. On p.i. day 10, necrosis of the tips of the villi was more extensive and the necrotic cells were sloughed into the lumen and accumulated as debris. Inflammatory mononuclear cells were seen infiltrating the various layers of the intestine. Similar but more extensive lesions were seen on p.i. day 15.

Available online at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

( )

$

0% < F% (! +

.( ) S %2 S 2 , / â&#x20AC;&#x201C; # G L $ 8+,%

% ! ?% 8 OY , XW1 : 8+, A 2 #$ / 2 " , Rose G

/ ( / ! : > XW1 0/%( 2 'C8 5 /$ J%< ! : & ' R% & % D 0 5! _ Âą _ S 2

E % 8+, + T W( + S + # 2 #(C %P 5 # $2 + R%; Balb/c / 2 PC A 2 & ' ( H %+ +8 0%/ 2 0 + S + # S 2 XW1 # GP D 0 5!

F% (! 5 & 2+ 0%/ 2 H 0*; G J2 + # ( ) : % ( Cryptosporidium 0% < . , ' % + : %P 8+, (a+ C. baileyi : < F% (! #G5 + F% (! #G5 0 8 R 4 + A 2 % 2 : K$ 8C+ %E- %, $8C % 2 0*; b 8 9 0% < ) - ',2 Cryptosporidium 0% < XWP %$ F% (!

(a+ $ 8C+ 0%L $ 8+, + % ( .( #G 0 8 :7%P/ =+%/ : F/ W1 0% < 8+, .( ) S %2 S 2 , / # G KL $ 8+,%

# ) % ! F% - Ocular meter lens + / ,

%P+/ %- U ( ) b 8 9 0% < F% (! ( 5

R%P+/

.( ) F% ( XW1 % % 0%,% - H F% (! 8 0%5 0W8! - %, 0 8 # + H % : %E -2) %P 8+,) 0%/ c 24 ' / 8+,% < " 5 0 5! %1 F/ (a+ PC E % % ! O ?% > 3 4 &

/5 ?% 0*; 7< G 0%/ 5 0$2 U . 2

# G L $ F% (! R% 54

O % > H #+ + /5 .S %2 2 , / % < : 0 ;

R% 0%/ 5 0W8!

7<

.( ) : ,/ H -+ R 4 L % Cryptosporidium

%,/6 ( +C 7 8 9 ) R

W1 ! 2 F% (! # %/+ /5 = 8 A 2

2

+ Sporozoasida D/$ Apicomlpex C H %+ F/ F/ Cryptosporidiidae 7%5 Eucoccidiorida : F/ W1 ! 3 5 D + + .( ) Cryptosporidium .( ) Tyzzer G %+ % # O %

: ++ :+ < : ) C. bealyi : <

+ .( ) % : / W1 J 8C+ + W4

K+N2* ( : ;P G%P : :,%,! #(C : < W1 #$2+ S C% : < S% 2 S .( ) :,</+ G%P :

H F% (! # %/+ /5 S D7%; %$4 .( ) ' C X% H ! <

',/ % 3 4 #$+ %5 %$4 ',/ : < ' , $%8 2 ?% > ! % : % 3 4 #$+ 0%

+

/ % ( ( S 2+ 0% ) : ? +

% 2 : ?% ?% : : < .( ) %1 Q

: : < + &

#(C % %$6 0)%2 : %;6% S C %$6 0)%2 : % C % ' H 0% * # C+ (Y) R%

1 :,%, H 3 4 : % ?G+ ! ( &W #%P,6 0)%2 , N2* % ( J 8C+ : 0% *+84 ' , % S C %$6 T*P+, : %<+ D T*P+, : # 8 %E; ! .(O) X% (Z C. baileyi / %P/ ; F/ W1 ! (

5 (

[) #$ / : X + :+ ,/ ; 0 L+ 3 5 D + ; , W 2 ?% > : ;P G%P : < GQ %P , Cloumba livia % 2 3 5 0 +5 :+ , XW1 0R% ; 0% I , C. baileyi : < #G $ ( . 2 ?% > ! : : + = 8 ! %&

C. : < #G5 (a+ % 5 0 +5

% 2 0*; : b 8 9 0% <

(a+ .baileyi - % S %2 S 2 , / â&#x20AC;&#x201C; # G L $ 8+,% & > T W( % 2 # G F% (! 0%,% #2 + - % C. baileyi : < % 0%,% - H : X + ;< (% : < +8 : < + .( ) ( 7< ?% > !)

2 / ,/ C. : < F% (! 5 2+ # ! , 0 !

8+, A 2 . + 5 : 8+,+, :+ baileyi

( 0% %/ \ ,! (& % 2) 7% % $ + [/ / S +< #$

% / & ' :2 C+ ' ( +

[/ / %L

A%2 H %P+/ %- X % $ + &W % 2 : (C

% 2 /

% 2 ! + U 2 %-+

Columba livia 1 K : ,) rock dove & 8$ XW1 0*; 0$2 J< : 7% #( H; + ( )

( )

: %P2 G E # #(C C%

: : < c 8 H / %- # #(C 0/%( %P/! )4 0*;< /5 H % XW1 > ! 3 5 2 C+ <$ R 4 /5 % ! %-+2 N2 8 5 R% 54 C5 F %8

%E ,/ % ! > R% ! : S C , + 3 4 D < .0% %QG 3 5 8/ < < 0% ! 0N2

?% > #( ; F ( 5 3 4 ,/ % % !

0*;< : C. baileyi : < + 5 DC( + - 2 H ( #(C F% (! M G H %, /5

- # 8 > 3 5 N2 %E , + G -+ #%P,6 X% T*P+, % G D T*P+, PC F %8 /5 2 C+ <$ R 4 /5 H +

> XW1 R% ! 0/%( 8 5 R% 54 C5 N2 - %E ,/ % ! c 8! " %/ : 2%C %-+2) S C 8/ H 0% %QG : : < + #2 + F ( 5 3 4 ,/ % % ! .

0% %QG D, +

S C ; 0% * 0/%( - 2 ?% > #( ; 0-</ 5 R% 54 H W/ #%P,6 N2

. 8 5 R% 54 C5 A %U /5 > F ( 5 8+, + 5 : +

, =7%+/ 3 5 E % +5 2 ?% > #( ;

+ 5 0*;< J2 =7%+/ 0/%( W4 XW1 M G H %, /5 C. baileyi : < + 3 5 0/%( 8 5 R% 54 S +< -+ H F% ( N2*+ 2 : ( #(C ) C5 F %8 /5 %1 C! : : < + 0% *5 ! S , 5 > ! 3 5 H W/ %E , > 3 5 N2 % ( .%1G T*P+, 3 4 0 ! :+ PC - # 8 0% *5 C%

/5 #%P,6 N2* %2 0 + D*5 R% 54 C5 F %8 3+2 K+ C 0 G &W

f </ T W( R% T*P+, S % G N2 % ( 8 5 <$ R 4 /5 H % ; > H + f 5 R% 54

O % /5 2 C+

3 4 %P/ L+ C R% %-+2 N2 8 /5 Q % K C R% 0/%( 2 :7 P- ! <$ , ; 0% *5 ! N2*+ C5 F %8

.S , 5 > ! 3 5 H %, /5 N2 - : ,/ J2< 3 4 ,/ % % !

0% %QG 8/+ N2 8 5 R% 54

F(/+ E %C+/ # 0)%2 N2

( #(C)

0 1 C % ( ( #(C)

% *8 :/ %8 /5 % ! (Y #(C)

0% %QG : : < U%(+ XW1 - D, + A 2 8/+ S C H, + N2 C%

% G H 8 %-/! #(C R% D + : 0% %QG

> ! , 8) H % , 8 3 4 0 , % !

E 7% 5 0 5! ( 7 C5 S $ 5 #(

F% (! 5%$+ 0%5 U .?% > /: < ; F (

8+,%

O % /5 0*;< 0$2 0 + /5 ( ) S %2 S 2 , / â&#x20AC;&#x201C; # G L $ : 0 ;

R% ,/ 0%/ 5 0W8! > H .: ,/ H -+ R ! L % % < % ! %E8 5 XW1 : 8+, .S , 5 ( % ! > ! Y + 5 ( F% (! 8 5 + 5 0 5! " 5

, : 0 2 :+ C. baileyi : < 0 5a S , 5 % ! .& ' / 8+,% < /5 .& ' / 8+,% < " 5 - R% *( 0*;< 0%/ 5 0$2

O % #+ + S %2 S 2 , / â&#x20AC;&#x201C; # G L $ +5

S , 5 > + 5 > ! : 0 ;

R% 0W8!

O % /5 .: ,/ H -+ R 4 L % % < '&

( %$6 ,/ ! %2 , =7%+/ 0 PN! % % 2 : (F/ 2+ ) b 8 9 0% < C. ) / WP %$6 ,/ 0/%( & % 2 7% &! . % 2 &! % [ (baileyi , / # G L $ ' #5%<+

=7%+/ 0 PN! %2 R 2 %-/

0 PN S %2 S 2

/ 0% < + 3 5 ) 2+% %P #G 0 8 R 4

%5 #(C Cryptosporidium F% (! 0%,% # %( C. baileyi 1 / ! N2

.( *(C ) + ( % .O Ă&#x2014; .Y XW1 : < + (% ! N2* ,/ \7 C J2 /5

F %8 /5 ?% > ! : ,/ : C. baileyi C. baileyi 0% < + N2 5 XW1 R% 54 C5 G : : < F% (!

N2 % ( R% : F% (! 0%,% 0- % + %E; ! :+ ?% > ! ,/ % % ! ( + ( % .O Ă&#x2014; .Y) 0/%( :+ : < C. : < + #2 XW1 + N2*+ 7< 3 4 .baileyi F (

! , XW1 0 PN! %$e ; 0% * PN+ 2 ?% > #( ; # 8 0 C :+ %$6 C5 F %8

)4 F% (! + 5 DC( + % ( - PC -

( )

T + 5 : %-+2 :/ %8 F(/+ S C % *8 M%C+ % 0%8 =,/+ (O #(C) " %/ F %8 /5 % ! .([ #(C) % 2<$ : %P+ ) H 2+ ( #(C) 8/+ S C 0% %QG 0/%( C5 0%- : %P+ ) % *8 D U( M%C+ H %P;

U%(+

+ H ( #(C) R% V < +8 0% %QG 0% %2 3 5

8 %-/ : : < < +8 .( #(C)

N2* 2 ? > ! 0*; / 5 .( ) #(C , / # G L $ .( P, ) C. baileyi : < F ( .Ă&#x2014; S (+ S .S %2 S 2

0 8 R 4 & % 2 0*; / 5 .( ) #(C C. : < F% (! 5

N2* %P 5 #G

S .S %2 S 2 , / # G L $ .( P, ) baileyi .Ă&#x2014; S (+ ? > R% : :; 5 H - .( ) #(C

H %, /5 C. baileyi : < %E + = 8 2

0% %QG 8/+

N2* = 8 . Ă&#x2014; . , ) ,( +% P L $ .( P, ) ()

9 0% < ( %$6 ,/ ! , XW1 0

%$6 ,/ 0/%( % / & % 2 : % 0/%( b 8 : < WP %C+/) ,/ ! W4 % [ :1 C. baileyi : < WQ N/ %-+ ',2 % â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 0/%( % : %U2% %C! .( ) FAO S 2+ V %+ 5 G

% 2 : C. baileyi : < %C+/ ! 3 4 ( [) XW1 K 0R% % 3 5! :1 % % 02 + : H, #(C 3 % 2 ( 3 4 T W cG

, %P 0 P+C :+ 2 "% 2 % 2 +

$ 5%, W1 ( ) /(,6 S 1%- :/ $%8 $

F (

N2* & % 2 0*; / 5 .( ) #(C S 2 , / # G L $ .( P, ) C. baileyi : < .Ă&#x2014; S (+ S .S %2

Y

( )

0%,% 3 4 ,/ % % ! ( . Ă&#x2014; .Y) , XW1 0/%( % 2$ N/ 0 %C 4 ',2 C. baileyi : < : : < + T W( ( ) ( .Y Y. Ă&#x2014; . .[) X (! % - % 0R% ?% > ,/ H %- 8 : 0% < XW1 + ! 3 4 %C! W ( Y) /%

0% %QG % *8 G* + %, ? %8 : / WP = 8 &! A 2 5 T W( 7 P 0% $- : < F% (! 8 5 K7% 54 /5 7< 7< %$4 5 ( O) X (! % W1 E% 7%P/ C. baileyi

"7%-2 " , % 3 4 E %/+,4 .C. baileyi / WP .C. baileyi 1 / % H % #(C G (

" F(5 3 5 %P + %U( ' , %$6 S % G 3 5 )4 %C+/) :1 / G L - % 2 K 3 &W .( ) #$ / : $%8

C R% 2 :

? > R% : :; 5 H - .( ) #(C

H %, /5 C. baileyi : < %E + = 8 2 L $ .( P, ) :/ %8 F(/+

N2* = 8 . Ă&#x2014; . , ) ,( +% P

? > R% : :; 5 H - .(O) #(C

C%

/5 C. baileyi : < %E + = 8 2 %P<, +

0% %QG - 8/+

N2* = 8 ,( +% P L $ .(M) :/ %8 F(/+ ( P, ) . Ă&#x2014; . , )

? > R% : :; 5 H - .(Y) #(C

H %, /5 C. baileyi : < %E + = 8 2 .( P, ) 8 %-/ H T %C+ : <

= 8 . Ă&#x2014; . , ) ,( +% P L $ ' , T W C. baileyi 1 : < ! (a+ +

S %2 S 2 , / # G L $ H F% (! #5%<+

/ W1 0% < $%8 2%+< 0% * 3 5! &W

% 0% N/

U2% X (! % W1

0% < % +, ( 0R% :+ ( ) R 2 %-/ #(C ( L $ Cryptosporidium F/ F% (! 0%,% ! % ( 2+% %P %2 : 0/%( W4 % ,% - 2 ; 0R% G

? > R% : :; 5 H - .([) #(C

C%

/5 C. baileyi : < %E + = 8 2 L $ .( P, ) % 0%8 =,/+ N2* = 8 . Ă&#x2014; . , ) ,( +% P O

( )

R%

PN N2* K/% 2

,! G % ++ S +< = 8 8/ A 2 ' , 2 > ! : 2* #7%

.R% /% : DG/ D, +

? > R% : :; 5 H - .( ) #(C C5 F %8 /5 C. baileyi : < %E + = 8 2 0% %QG - C H, 8/+ N2* = 8

. Ă&#x2014; . , ) ,( +% P L $ .( P, )

? > R% : :; 5 H - .( ) #(C C5 F %8 /5 C. baileyi : < %E + = 8 2 : : < U%(+ )

N2* = 8

S L$ %-/ #(C

8 %-/)

0% %QG .O Ă&#x2014; . , ) ,( +% P L $ .( % P, ) H %, /5 N2 - : ,/ J2< 3 4 ,/ % % !

0% %QG 8/+ N2 8 5 R% 54

:/ %8 F(/+ E %C+/ # 0)%2 N2

: : < U%(+ 0 1 C % (

% *8 S C H, + N2 C%

/5 % !

0% %QG R% D + : 0% %QG XW1 - D, + A 2 8/+ :/ %8 F(/+ S C % G H 8 %-/! #(C

0%8 =,/+ " %/ T + 5 : %-+2

/5 % ! . % 2<$ : %P+ ) % *8 M%C+ % 2+ 8/+ S C 0% %QG 0/%( C5 F %8

: %P+ ) % *8 D U( M%C+ H %P; H < +8 U%(+

+ H R% V < +8 0%- 0% %QG 0% %2 3 5

8 %-/ : C. baileyi : < #( K R% % H "<++ :1 .

; 0% g A 2 3 5 (! W ( Y O) +, ! 3 4 %C! % ( C. baileyi : < S 7%5 P %C ,/ ; 0% I PN : S % G ' , / G S +< SG ,/ ; * :1 0% %QG : : %P+ ) % *8 M%C+ ! % ( b 8 9 0% < cW 5 +%/ %P+ % +, )4 :1 % R% 0%- \ ,! : ++ :+ % *8 : #$%2 H, +

0% % < ' , #$%2 cW W1

0% %QG

? > R% : :; 5 H - .( ) #(C C5 F %8 /5 C. baileyi : < %E + = 8 2 %QG H

%QG %2+ N2* = 8

. - -2 - : %P+ ) % *8 M%C+ ( P, ) S % . Ă&#x2014; . , ) ,( +% P L $ # %( = 8 A 2 , XW1 =7%+/ %; ! 0 PN!

5 R% 54 H %, /5 + 5 !

S 2 , / # G L $ G J2 " 5 8 ! ! 0 (! :+ H H " % + W1 S %2 #*8 S% 2 S ++ C. baileyi $%8 b 8 9 F/ .( O [ ) O â&#x20AC;&#x201C; : 0/%( :+ /% ; 0% I 3 4 ,/ % % !

3 4 %P/* %P/%-+2 R% ' 2C N2 R%

% H "<++ % P " %/ : 2 :7 P- ! <$ +, /5 K/ (! W ( ) #( KN2) [

( )

< ; % *8 3 5 &WL+ U%(+ : <

%

0% < U%(+

/ ! 3 4 ( ) %C! A 2 #(C R% /% : b 8 9 0% < $%8

8/ #(C 3 5 ( %P / % *8 S %,8 ' , :,%,! .D + : D, +

Cryptosporidium : < J 8C+ #G5 .#;% , %< , 2 . # : < ; , #%P,6% %$ #

parvum %E 5%/ U

, 7< : R 2 02+ CV K; +

. J Y #$

% :#$ .( +, % %, ) 12. Altman RB, Cabb SL, Dorrestein GM, Quesenberry K. Avian Medicine and Surgery. Saunders, Philadelphia, 1997.

13. Tully Jnr TN, Lawton NPC, Dorestein GM. Avian Medicine.

Butterworth / Heinemann, Edinburgh, 2000.

14. Lazo A, Barriga OO, Rdeman DR, Bech-Nielsen S. Identification by transfer blot of antigens reactive in the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) in rabbits immunized and a calf infected with Cryptosporidium sp. Vet Parasitol, 1986; 21:151-163.

15. Lunna LG. Manual of histological stann9ng methods of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology. 3rd ed. The Blackstone Division, McGraw â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Hill Book Company, 1968, New York.

16. Sreter T, Varga I. Cryptosporidiosis in birds. A review. Vet Parasito., 2000;87:261-279.

17. FAO. Distribution and epidemiology of C. baileyi in Far East and Arabia Nation, 2005, www.FAO.org.

$ *( :, + F 7 3 4 -+ (C % A2% -+ . P A2% Rh %

!

1.

OIE World Organization for Animal Health. Manual of Diagnostic tests and vaccines for terrestrial animals. 5th. 2005 Ed. Retrieved from Internet: http://www.Oie.int./.

2. Xiao L, Fayer R, Ryan U, Upton SJ. Cryptosporidium taxonomy: recent advances and implications for public health. Clin Microbiol Rev, 2004;17(1):72 â&#x20AC;&#x201C;97.

3. OIE World Organization for Animal Health. Manual of Diagnostic tests and vaccines for terrestrial animals. 2nd. Ed, 1999, Retrieved from Internet: http://www.Oie.int./.

4. Keusch, GT, Hameer D, Joe A, Kelley M, Griffith J, Ward H. Cryptosporidia â&#x20AC;&#x201C; who is at risk?. Schweiz Med Wochenscher, 1995; 125(18):889-908.

5. Rhee JJK, Sen YS, Park BK. Isolation and Identification of C. baileyi from Korean chicken. Korean J Parasitol, 1991;29:315-324.

6. Taylor MA, Geach MR, Cooley WA. Clinical and pathological observation on natural infection of Cryptosporidium baileyi and flagellate protozoa in birds and Broiler. Vet Res.1999; 145: 695-699.

7. Hassl A. An asymptomatic and clinical signs of Cryptosporidium baileyi in avian sp. Herpetozoa, 1991;4:127-131..

X% %$ : Cryptosporidium : < + .0 / % <, %/P .[

5 $ S %;2 : % 2 .0 , / ;8 , . [ 3

C/ ,! : $ , . < +8 $

. J 19. Hussan AL. Cryptosporidium baileyi in pigeon in Egypt and North Africa. J Parasitol, 2006; 32(12): 123-131.

20. Mathewo CJ. People feeding habits (Pigeons as main idol). Nat Geo Mag. 2008;139(3): 1611-1821.

R $ 8C+ 0 % +8) SR%<( / %- . ,% % # 8 . %, ) c / / N %2 : #%< * 2 : 7 8 9 ) .Y â&#x20AC;&#x201C; J #$

% :#$ .( +, % 22. Bird RG, Smith MD. Cryptosporidiosis in man: parasite life cycle and fine structural pathology. J Clin Microbiol, 1980; 123: 217-233.

23. Richard LG. Cryptosporidiosis: an emerging, highly infectious threat.

Emer Infec Dis. 1997;3(1):51-57 24. Casemore DP, Armstrong M, Sands RL. Laboratory diagnosis of Cryptosporidium baileyi infection. J Clin Path. 1985; 38: 1307-1341.

25. Cha-Gu SURL, Se-Min Kim, Hyeon-Cheol KIM. Viability of preserved cryptosporidium baileyi oocysts. Korean J Parasit.

2003;14(4):197-201.

26. Fayer R, Speer CA, Dubey JP. General biology and histopathological changes caused by Cryptosporidium baileyi. CRC press, Florida, 1990;PP:1-30.

27. Ditrich O, Palkovic L, Sterba J, Prokopic J, Loudora J, Giboda M. The first finding of C. baileyi in man. Parasitol Res.1991;77(1):7-44.

28. Mosier DA, Oberst RD. Cryptosporidiosis. A global challenge. Ann NY Acad Sci, 2000;916:102-111.

29. Current WL. Cryptosporidiosis. In: Diseases of poultry, 12th ed.

Calnek BW, Barnes HJ, Beard CW, McDougald LR, and Saif YM. (eds) Mosby Wolfe International, 2009; 883-890.

30. Blagburn BL, Lindsay DS, Giambrone JJ, Sundermann CA, Hoerr FJ. Experimental cryptosporidiosis in broiler chickens. Poult Sci.2003; 128:442-449.

J #$

% :#$ .( +, % %, ) < +8 .O R %-+/ + 5%/ 7% , . ,2 & % 2 #%/ ( .

% :#$ .(X +( 2 !) c / / N %2 : 7 8 9 ) . J #$

7 8 9 ) R 7% : , . 2 : & G . #% +, %P$ 8C+ : < 0 ;+, #G5 Cryptosporidiosis .(X +( %, ) ?*

%2 ( 0%+% / 0%$ 8+,

. J L % : L

( )

! "

% #$ #$

! " ( + ) , # - . * + ) , * '()& )

# ! ( $ ,8 7 2 ) /$40 6( - 5 + " / ( 3 40( #12 ) / 0 > 2 + % ;. ; - / ( / "0 + 6 %;*.** /: #12 ), 7 28 " / ( / "0 95

), >" " / ( > + " % .? ), -, / " > #12 ( " %?;. @/ (

> EB (, / D8 ! 4 #4 ) ) A + BC 6 ,- #'4 + ( A ) ( A 8

6 $ 6 " " ! ( I

> ( +- + 2 ) ;H " E ), G9 F 5 7 2 # , " / (

> 5 +2 'A " '" I

L I ,& K ( ( '4 J 0( $ " / ( / $2 + #

. 1" + -( " '4 6 ( 4,

C M",(

#> ( " E ), 6 G9

Diagnostic and experimental study of Corynebacterium renale isolated from urinary tract infection of cattle S. A. Hussein Department of Microbiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq Abstract The study includes isolation and identification of Corynebacterium renale from urine of cow apparently suffering from urinary tract infection. C. renale represent highest isolate 49. 99% followed by Corynebacterium pyogenes 24.24% from the total number of Corynebacterium 74.23%. on the other hand Staphylococcus saprophyticus also isolated from urine samples 25.75%. Since C. renale was isolated at highest rate we studied its pathogenesis via inoculation of isolate intraperitoneally into white Swiss mice. Results showed that C. renale type I has ability to produce kidney damage after 48 hr. post inoculation revealed embolic glomeruler nephritis with less number of C. renale, also there is infiltration of polymorphnuclear inflammatory cell and nephrosis, in addition to vacular degeneration, coagulative necrosis with blood vessel congestion in liver tissue.

Available online at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

# & 6 $ ,

$ , >'> " / (

! #"0 > K9O + "( ( ) A 5 >" F >

! ) K " I O8 / 9 I ,& ( ! P

>"8 ,8 " Q ,- Q D 7 2 % $( & 7 2 (

- I " / ( > N ( ( .(@)

-

6 / ) " / ( > ( " ! ( #> (

! ( F

> N ( ( .( ) - & 6 , > ! ( A

( )

4(,& ) 7 2 , / () / C 4() /&1 /C,$ > Mannitol salt agar Media 4( (4 4() ( )

" / (4& .( ) " / ( > ,( / ") +1

0

) ) X 4() " L ( / , / + 2 # $ ( 6( P@ L

L M 4 7 2 / , / ) ! # . - L L /,- 2 #" + B F'> + 1 type I C. renale > 6 > % + K H Ă&#x2014; @ 1 " ( 7 2

$ - 5 ) 4 2 + ( 6 # / K () + "( - #B ) 62 1 ) + # . - /,- â&#x20AC;&#x201C; ;H â&#x20AC;&#x201C; ; 0( C$ / 8 +- - , MC, + BC A / :( ) +- + 2 ) *S ? .( @

; ) # " + ( " , - % # ( ] + C # 6 / , /( > 4 / , " () # () - / > S N ) VB 0 7 /

! #"0 L 0 / I (2& : $ VB 0 " /: $ + " .( ;) + ) & + )" (

K (C ( 6 R (

1 C

" ), $ / , + : + 12 +"

S Q9O 1 K 4 1 5 7 2 ( +2 'A .(;) ( 7 2 - " ( ) 2 # 2 ( ( K 4 .(? S) ) > ( 9 ) + C 9 >" ( T +) / ( E 4 - ! $( 2 )( #

+ N ,O + > + $' ) ) 6 K " 2 A ,2 , - & 6 E 4 F 7 2 + - C 9:( ,2 ,) + K # $C U ( # & 7 2 " + " ! (,& K >"

#$ & +2 'A $&

$ # )( & E 4 F B - & 6 # & # $ K &

,2 0 # $(& #'4 + E 4 F .

K ,- W 4 # ()& 6 > V - ( K 0 # () .(H ;) O1 $& 0(,( " K )-

! ( & I ) / ' #> ((

# ( K >" # 4 ! (, 0 7 A4 /& X 6 "2 & + "

! " X 6 V - L ( #> (( , / & .(S ) J -( U1, +2 'A , > +4>(

(' )

% &' $

/ ( > /, " #12 ), 7 28 +5 EB (, /, ), -, / " > ( ( %?;. @ ), 6 7 2& " / ( /, " % .?

2 + % ;. ; - / ( ( ( %;*.** EB (, VA ( ) # .( ) # / ( > - & + 1 >

" / (4&

" / ( ,( EB (, VA (@) # . $ ./ ") + ,

, 4( 7 2 ( !) N 9

% , - + BC 0( C$

!

0 D # & , " / ( > 6 > A / :( ), L - D( + 6 + ( " 6 .+- + 2 ) ; N 9

# - 6 - & + 9 , (SS) L ( # - , #$ , 6 C (4 # - + 2 1 " # - , 0 - , # - K #$ - , 6 ) / D 6( ,) ;

/&'0 - , ( ,2 # / , 2 /94 ! ( / '2 / 9 4( L # + 7 & / - # O - & /$ % : " - 6, , 6 / A

- ( .+ (2 ) + # #'4 / ,

V- 1" 1 6 & / , 2 / ) 6", " " Blood agar " ) 7 2 !) /,A Nutrient agar 9: "& MacConkey agar / () /$ > 2 ) ; K Y @? K .(*) "( 1 ( ,( ) Q9O 7 2 ,

Hoyles

. - & + 1 > !), 2 ( ) #

% " ), ?;. @

% ), ;*.** ;. ; .?

6 "

;*

@@ S ?

SS

> , C. renale C. pyogenis Staph. saprophyticus

@

( )

.

1 >

" / (4& :( ) #

Strain

Biochemical tests U Ni Ox Ca I glucose Maltose sucrose Xylose C. renale + + + + C. pyogenis + V V + Staph saprophyticus + + V + + U: urea , Ni: nitrate reduction , Ox: oxidase , Ca: catalase , I: indol, +: positive result , -: negative result , V: variable result.

O 4( !) " / ( , (@) #

./ ") C. renale types C. renale (I) C. Polisum (II) C. cystiti dis (III)

+ -

U + + +

glucose + + +

Acid form Maltose Sucrose V -

+ #" 6 + -( D +- + 2 ) ;H

/ D - + ( " 6 4A(

L " + ( " 6 " " ! (

+ ( " ), L - '4 U >" J 0(

2 & + -( L 6 $ 'A ( ) K $ " +( 6 G , K ( ( & '" D L " / , U ( L) ( +2 4,

C M",( D " ( ) K $ "

+ -( L 1" #

" '4 6 ( .(@) K $ 1"

/ ( E 4 _ " 6 6 ), L - :( ) K $ VA +- + 2 ) ;H

(# & , ) " .š " '" D L " / , U ( L) ( .450 Ă&#x2014; + ) & + )" (

/ ( E 4 _ " 6 6 ), VA +- + 2 ) ;H

# " '4 6 ( + )" ( .² 1"

N

L - :(@) K $

(# & , ) " 4,

C M",( + -( L š 1" .560 Ă&#x2014; + ) &

/ ( E 4 _ " 6 6 ), L - :( ) K $ VA +- + 2 ) ;H

(# & , ) " + -( $ 6 $ 6 " " ! (

K ( ( & '4 U >" J 0( L š 2 & .450 Ă&#x2014; + ) & + )" ( .² " +( 6 G ,

+ ( " + #" 4A( O 0 +- + 2 ) ?

/ & "( D - b ), 0 !

0 L "

@

( )

+ I )( #'4 + + () & $( B )4 7 O ) I,& N 9 ( ) + (, 6 6 " 62 , XC4 /'AC 1 6 ) #B ) / , " D,( DC 6 L 0( 6( / , 1 6 O ) " ) + ) .( S) / " + "( 7 2 D 4, / ( > #12 ), + ) Q9O EB (, / A

( ( , !), 7 2 " / ( / "0 2 /, " I(2 Saiek I #$ ( I 0 9O - / (

+ 7 Yanagawa 0 " ( H) (2 Braun ( ?) + " N 9 G12

" / ( 6O "( /&1 >" 6 ( *) $( & U () # & E ), 6O K ,- ,1 I 2 #$ +2 ,() 6 #1 ), /C (4 + G12 ( ) ,P& 6 I 0 ) G 9 6

/ ( $& 7 A 2 >" - & + " U'(4& N 9

K ,- + >" 1 /, " )

# & ! ) 6O / ( M, ( " ( ) - & 3 4 #"0 / , 6 ! ( & 6 + ( > ( K A # 2 > Q9O N'(

-( N 9

K ,- J ) % $( & 6 O ) 9 ( ) Urease 1 1, "'( +2 'A # + 6 ) ,( 6 1 + - 0( ' + " + +" O ! $ 9 X + 7 2 & 6 ( .( @) 4& 1 7 ) 0(, Q9O (% .? ) -, / " / ) " , " N 9 G1

> / ) 6 12 ( > K ( " / (

, (, / 0, + "(

, > 1 P 1 (, > , " (@) 2 6 6

/ C 9 G 4 /&') N ( ( DC (&') X N ( (

A $& (( ,

1:( , 9 #-(,( > + G 7 $ ,2 1 $ 7 .( S) $(

K ,- 7 / 6(

" "0 / (4& EB (, /, "

K ( 3 40( D, 6 - /&1 7 2 .( ) C. renale type I # & , " / ( + " D, ), A ) ( - ( @) A >"& + , 9O > + +" + 6( / & +2 ( 6 +- #'4 + # " " + #" 6 > >" - Q9O ( 9 A ) ) + BC + ( U D,( " , " - " / ( E 4 F 6 K C" .( @) G 4& 6 A /

1 C > " E ), A ) / D F 7 2 C. renale type I # & , " / (

D 9 +- + 2 ) *S ? ;H / (C #'4 G9&

( L K 0 >" +" + ( " 6 C, K "9 (;) K $ 6 ( 4,

" / , , '4 / , L 1" + -(

D " .( ) K $ 0 !

0 4A( + " - +- + 2 ) *S ,2

K "9 / & / "( - ), " + ( " + #" 6 .K 0 >" ," " + ( " + #" 6 C,

/ ( E 4 _ " 6 6 ), L - :(;) K $ VA +- + 2 ) ?

(# & , ) " 4, L š " / , , D '4 ( .560 Ă&#x2014; + ) & + )" ( .² 4& X 6 6 (

/ ( E 4 _ " 6 6 ), L - :( ) K $ VA +- + 2 ) ?

(# & , ) " + )" ( .š / , L 1" + -( . Ă&#x2014; + ) &

* ) 6( X & + 6 1 X ( c - & 3 $4 I 7 2 0 + ! $( ;

( )

5.

D '4 6 " / ( > / $2

Q9O % (4 7 2 > K "c 9

" / , ), ) / D " .(; @) G9& F '

9 Acute cell swelling 4 ( F

( 9 '4 " / ( > % (4 7 I ) 1, 1 +2 ' b A toxic substances ) X

6( ( ) , 7 # ( 7 2 # 9 1

+ 6, ( '4 D

( 6 ( / -( G9 ! )( ( & '4 J 0( D " 4 ( 1 7 2 > K 7 G1 9 G , K ( F 7 2 2 )( 6( " B ) X (

.( ) ( () 6 + -( & " '4 6 C M",( D + > Q9O K 7 2 A & 6 1" K & .( @) " E ), G9 F 7 2 9O # 6 ), / :( 8 D( + 6 1 I"'( &

N 9 ( @) 6 % > # 4 L, 6 4" # 9 6B 2 6" 0 .( ;) '4 , " / ( > + ) Q9O + E(,(),

" '4 6 d G9 F 7 2 K - # & F ,(, + , 2 1 # 9 ! ) 9O "

Q9 G 4& ,& 7 2 U

+2 'A ) ,:,

.% #"0 () >

Quinn PJ, Carter ME , Markey B, Carter GR. Clinical veterinary microbiology. USA Mosoby. An imprint of Elsevier Ltd. 1999; pp:137â&#x20AC;&#x201C;143.

" X A !, X ) .+) 2 e .S

: : .( () ) ) .#

6- - 6 ( )

. *H : 7.

8.

Prescott ML, Harley PG , Klein AD. Microbiology. 6th ed. Mc Graw â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Hill Inc. 2005; pp:528 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 529.

Quinn PJ, Markey BK, Carter ME , Donnelly WJ , Leonard FC Veterinary microbiology and microbial diseases. UK: Blackwell Science Ltd. 2002; pp: 55-59.

1 6 > e 4& +2 ( . ) () 2 +

) .*

: #$ ( () ) ) .#$ , 6 - f 6

. S #$

10. Brooke GF , Butel JS , Morse SA. Medical microbiology. 23th ed.

USA: Mc Graw Hill Co. 2004;pp: 212-217.

11. Mims C, Dockrell MH, Goering VR, Roitt I,Wakelin D, Zuckerman M. Medical microbiolog. 3th. ed. Mosby. An Imprint of Elsevier; 2004.

12. Henderson LC, Kadis S, Williel JRC. Influence of iron Corynebacterium renale-Induced pyelonephritis in a rat experimental model. Infect Immun. 1978;21:540-545.

13. Shimono E, Yanagawa R. Experimental model of Corynebacterium renale pylonephritis produced in mice. Infect Immun. 1977;16:263267.

14. Luna LG. Manual of histological staining methods of the armed forces institute of pathology. 3th ed. New York: Mc Grow Hill Back Co. 1968;pp: 38â&#x20AC;&#x201C;76.

.U) + C$ 7 ) 0 # 0 .

6 6 1 A / &

> - / ) ) * : ? .

.V 9 - & .3 @ â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 16. Coles EH. Veterinary pathology. 4th ed. Canada :W. B. Sounders Co. 1986;pp. 448â&#x20AC;&#x201C;462.

17. Saiek AH, Sayed A, Rayhib MF. Studies pyelonephitis and cystitis fattening buffalo-calves in Assiut governorate. Assiut Vet Med. 2000;44: 65â&#x20AC;&#x201C;77.

18. Braun U, Kuss K, Wehbrink S, Rauch S , Pospischil A. Clinical and ultrasonographic finding, diagnosis and treatment of pylonephritis in 17 cows. Vet J. 2008;175:240-248 .

19. Yanagawa R. Causative agent of bovine pyelonephits corynebacterium renale, Cory. pilosum and Cory. cystitis. Prog Vet Microb Immun. 2:158â&#x20AC;&#x201C;174.

)

! " K 2 7 -( "0 F -( ( O ) X & &

.F 9O 1 , 6 2 C

3 40( #12 :+) I" 6 # 0 ,1 . ,P& 6 ! ( & ) > , ? .

.#$ , 6 9 .3 H â&#x20AC;&#x201C; S* :

1.

21. Kunin N, Calvin M. Urinary tract infection detection, prevention and management. 5th ed. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins. 1997;pp: 312320.

22. Koneman EW, Allen SD, Dowell VR , Janda WM, Schreckenber PC , jrwcw. Colour atlas and textbook of diagnostic microbiology. 5th ed.

Philadelphia : Lippincott â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Raven Publishers. 1997;pp: 121-163.

23. Radostits OM, Gay CC, Blood DC, Hinchcliff KW. Disease of urinary system: Veterinary medicine a textbook of the diseases of the cattle, sheep, pigs, goats, horses. 9th ed. New York: W. B. Saunders Co. 2000;pp: 479â&#x20AC;&#x201C;498.

24. McGavin MD, Zachary JI. Pathologic basis of veterinary diseases. 4th ed. Mosby Elsevier. 2007; pp:664-667.

25. Samuelosn DA. Textbook of veterinary histology USA: Saunders, An imprint of Elsevier; 2007.

2.

3.

Jerusik J R, Kadis S, williel JRC, Richard E. Experimental rat model for Corynebacterium renale â&#x20AC;&#x201C; induced pyelonephritis. Infect Immun.

1977; 18(3):828-832.

Radostits OM, Gay CC, Hinchcliff KW, Constable PD. Veterinary medicine. A textbook of the diseases of cattle, horses , sheep , pigs and goats. Part II. 10th ed. Saunders Elsevier An imprint of Elsevier Ltd; 2007. pp;789 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 791.

Radostits OM, Gay CC, Hinchcliff KW, Constable PD. Veterinary medicine. A textbook of the disease of cattle , horses , sheep , pigs and goats. part I. 10th ed. Saunders Elsevier An imprint of Elsevier Ltd; 2007. 559-562.

2 / ) ) & 2 ) !) .; . ** 0, 2 " : % 4- #$ . > .3 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; *?

( )

! " # & $% $%

" #

! ( - * $ 0 1 / $ , - .) + ()*' )

*' 7 ' 6 - 9 :

-( 2 ! - )# ' 5( 67 8# !

2 * 3! 4)* ? @ 32 ) 2 : - =*> ( 4.> / ) - ? @ 32 ) 2 -( 2 - =*> + ;2! ) < 2 - # C 9 * -> C ) 3 4D .$% ! # # 0 - 4 A) ) - * (# - ( * ) - ! 4% 9.) ) ) *' - ? - - ) H @ (% +.+ % F) 3E :

-( 2 ! *'

' 3 .

-( 2 ! *' - -

* ; 9.) 3 $ %2)* I 3 @ : $(9 - -( 2 (% . ) Nematodirus spp (% F. /) Heamonchus spp (% +. J) Ostertagia spp (% . ) Marshillagia spp ; 9.) ) 0! : ! > (% +. J) Oesphagostumum spp (% F./+) Cooperia spp (% /.J ) Strongyloides spp

Ostertagia (% + . ) Strongyloides spp (% + . ) Nematodirus spp (%F . ) * spp Marshillagia ) ' .(% . ) Trichuris spp (% . ) Chebertia spp (% ) Cooperia spp (% ) Heamonchus spp (% ++. ) spp 9 .K' !

2.

L M $ :4 9 3 2 H @ 4)D2( ) ) * 3 ( ? 3 .

E#/ E . @ % - )# ' 9)* - * C ) - - ) $ 4*'

.

L % : 4* N -

- @ *' ! % H 3 : P $ ' *' ! %/ 3E (@ 67 8# H @ 6 2 6 32) -02 0 - )# ' 67 8# 3E 0! : ! > N * P(P 3E ) ) 4 H 3 )* -( 2 ! 5(

< P P D2( * 3 ( 7 8)9 5(

9 3 2 2 ! RM -*2) D2

$ ' *' Q (% ) 3 # # !

6 : < 2 6 ? . < 2 3 2 !

6 % ! -*2) # ) $#.

I (9 # ! "

I 89 - 2 ! % % (9 2 $

M9 : # ) 2 6 - H @ 7 M0 @ (@ 67 8# - )# ( - * 6Q? - C) )* 6 * @ N 0 M 2 (9

.:

-( 2 ! *' 7 '

Efficacy of $abamectin in lambs and goats naturally infected with gastrointestinal nematodes in Mosul city S. D. Hassan Department of Internal and Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq Abstract The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of abamectin in lambs and goats naturally infected with gastrointestinal nematodes. The study was conducted on 300 lambs, from both sexes, at age ranged between 6-9 months, and 150 native goats from both sexes, at age ranged between 1-2 years. The total infestation rate with gastrointestinal nematodes were 54% and 53.3% in lambs and goats, respectively. Results of fecal culture for obtained larvae 3 revealed the presence of seven genus of

( )

nematodes in that included Marshallagia spp. (66.6%), Ostertagia spp. (53.1%), Haemonchus spp. (24.7%), Nematodirus spp.

(16.67%), Strongyloides spp. (9.8%), Cooperia spp. (4.4%), and Oesophagostomum spp. (3.08%), where as in goats the following genus was obtained included Marshellagia spp. (46.3%), Nematodirus spp. (37.5%), Strongyloides spp. (37.5%), Ostertagia spp. (33.7%), Haemonchus spp. (15%), Cooperia spp. (15%), Chabertia spp. (6.25%), and Trichuris spp. (2.5%).

The most important clinical signs that were detected in lambs and goats were emaciation, pale mucous membrane, easily detached hair and wool and diarrhea. Abamectin at dose 0.2 mg/kg body weight subcutaneously (single dose) had an efficacy of (97%) in the first week and increased to (100%) to the end of the study, whereas in goats it was (100%) started from 1st week after the treatment to the end of the study period. Treated animals showed gradual improvement in presenting the clinical abnormalities. Total red blood cells count, hemoglobin concentration and packed cell volume were increased significantly.

Total white blood cells count and eosinophils were decreased significantly compared with control the group. In conclusion abamectin had a high efficacy in the treatment of gastrointestinal nematodes in lambs and goats.

Available online at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

%

Moxidictin (MAX) - )# *# Doramactin (DOR) $ ! N* $#. 9)*) Abamectin (ABM) - )# '

- * ' 7 QE ) 3 2 ! W% 9 " ! 2 $#. X ) ) S Q# D2 - M H ) )

3 - L % Q? Y - # ( + )

4 # S Q#

8 - N* 48 H

- 4) 8# -@ (M! ( F) 8 )9 4 @ & 4* N - - 3 0 *' - M

! 9)*) 3 # ) $ : 8 $ : :

. ! N* $#. - )# ' 9)* .( ) 3 * H @ 6 * -':E H ! M' 6 E% 3 ) I $ 0 -

*' - E 3 - H @ 6 * $ 9 ! 9)* S Q# 0

T #*' 6 # 6 E% Strongylus 3 )* Z 9' 7 ' 6 - -@ (M! 9 -

0) * VQ? 3 M $ Q? 9)* P 2 D ( ) :

-( 2 ! - )# ' $ 02 ( 8# D2( N *' 7 ' 6 - 9 * !

H ! M' 3 -> $ 3 PA) . *' 7 ' 6 - C 9 6 .

3 )# !' @ 2 Abamectin - )# '

0 2 3 )#( - = M@ - - #)) )

- 3 ! 4 ) ) ) Macrocyclic lactones = 0) 3 )# !' @ S ) ) Streptomyces avermitilis

*' - M 8 ! N* L T8 # H @ " )2) ) ' % 9 %8 3 8

6 3 )# 8 ( # 3 # P# "Q B1a (H2B1a - )# 8 ' - )# ' ! * * $#. 6

) P 6 %' - # - )# 8 ' -@ - )# ' L )9 ( ) - #)

. K 4 ! C-23 C-22 - 6

avermactin B1a - %J - L U C : - - )# ' 3 )# 8 ' $ @ N -> .( ) avermactin B1b - % (F +) 3 ) # 3

# 3

? * $ 4*) N *) -@ U* ? - #) VQ? 3 ' 3

? ) 9 H 3 ( " )9' 5 9 $ 9 3 ' R *) ) .K -@ 6 @ $ # 3 * $(9 - $ 8 .) ' $(9 @ * M@( Gama

( ) 3 0 VQ? $ 2 6 .) Hydrophilic por - * $ 0)* (GABA) Amino Buteric Acid

Fipronil dieldrin 4 M - ) - 3

3 ' 3 $ @ VQ? - 3 P) Avermactin - 3 %8 ! % $ P) ? )

3 4 - GABA 2) - :) 4 # 8 .( ) %

- 3 P ! 0 2 3 )#( H 6 .' 3 ) L 3 Q - 3 - L %# M - 0 3 8 H @ 6 * 7 M0 6 # 4) ? S Q# N*

6 9' 3 * ! .( J) 3 2 - * ' !

- ) Macrolide Endectocide (ME) $ 3 # 32 % - )#

Ivermactin (IVM) - )# 8 ' 4 M

&' - 2 -( 2 - =*> + ;2! * 3 .

4 A) ) ( 4.> / ) - ? @ 32 ) - * (# - =*> 3 M) $% ! # # 0 -

*' 7 ' 6 - 9 -( 2 5(@ @ # 3 @ = *> + H ' - )@ H 3 * * -: - E#/ E . @ % - )# ' 3 02 3 ! ! # . 3 ) *2 32) -02 & -@ @ # 3 @ = *> + P @

* â&#x20AC;&#x201C; &. ;2! M * 3 . # .

K 9 6 * J

( )

H @:

-( 2 ! (% +.+ % F) 3E # C 9 ) *' - ? - C ) 3 4D> _ ) ? : 3 @ : $(9 - -( 2 ! 4% 9.) ) +. J) Ostertagia spp (% . ) Marshillagia spp Nematodirus (% F. /) Heamonchus spp (% Cooperia (% /.J ) Strongyloides spp (% . )sp $ ) (% +. J) Oesphagostumum spp (% F./+) spp .(

32 ) - * (# - 2 : - = *> ! # # 0 - 4 A) ) ( * ) ? @

9 2 : - =*> J 3 M) $%

- )@ H 3 * *' 7 ' 6 - 7 T8 3 02 5(@ @ # 3 @ = *> H ' @ # 3 @ =*> P @

@ T8

0)* - : 3 @ N ) .

K 9 6 * 5( )@ - 0 # )*( L 8# 9)* "> 7 9)* $ :

-( 2 - ! 6 *

' ! 3 - T8 3 P 8%

! ! 3 % 9.) )9 H 4 0 ) F 3 . ) 4 % 9 3 % 28 7 '

* ) 0 N . #* $ 2 9)* 8 0 3 $ %2)* : : 0 - 0

@ *2 & -@ 5( 67 8# C 9 6 . 0) 9 0) ) )* S 0 *2 : 3 # ! I

$ 2 I @ H @ )@' ( 67 8# : )' *2 ( ) 5(

4 *

*' 7 ' 6 - ( ) $

.

9 -( 2 - 2 ( ) !

* % . % +. J % F. / % . %/.J %F./+ %+. J

#) J J F

J

-

Marshallagia spp Ostertagia spp Heamonchus spp Nematodirus spp Strogyloides spp Cooperia spp Oesphagostumum spp

â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 5( $ 2 I @ 5(

2 I @ Ă&#x2014; = ( 67 8# 5( $ 2 I @

Marshillagia ) ' ; 9.) ) 0! : ! > (% + . ) Nematodirus spp (%F . ) * spp ++. ) Ostertagia spp (% + . ) Strongyloides spp (% ) Cooperia spp (% ) Heamonchus spp (% $ ) (% . ) Trichuris spp (% . ) Chabertia spp .(

*

- - ($ ) 2* ) # # )*( ! - ($ ) NM 6Q - 2 Ethylene Diamine Tetra acetic Acid P9) N H @ " )2) - ! (6 * 5( ) - )@ (# - (EDTA) ( )

5( $ "> ( ) ' ! :

-( 2 3 % 28 7 I E )9 H 3 0 P 5( - 2 3 # # *2 3 . 4 @

Hemoglobin M9 : # ) Total erythrocyte count Packed cell % % (9 2 concentration Total leukocytes count I (9 @ volume Differentional I (9 0 8) *2

%2 C ) $ 2) ) .( ) *2 leukocytes count = %2 C ) $ 2) ! SPSS %2' C 9)* .( J)

4 *

*' 7 ' 6 - ( ) $

.

9 : - 2 (J ) !

* %F . %+ . %+ . %++. % % % . % .

#) + + +

-

Marshallagia spp Nematodirus spp Strogyloides spp Ostertagia spp Heamonchus spp Cooperia spp Chabertia spp Trichuris spp

(' - = *> (+ ) ;2! $(9 - * C ) 3 4D C 9 - * (# - : - = *> ( ) -( 2 *

*' - :

-( 2 - =*> ( F )

H @ )@ C 9 6 . - * C ) 3 4D # -( 2 ! : - K $# 2 I @

/

( )

> * 6 )! $

8) C 9 * 4 ! 3 )* )

*' ! (% ) ( 67 8# 3E 0! : !

5( $ N 0 5(

< P P $ ' $

8) C 9 * 4 ! )* ) 6 * @

.( $ ) * 6 )!

9 -( 2 ! - )# ' 5( 67 8# C ) 3

- I @ $ :)9 $(9 - *' - (@ 67 8# * ( M J ) H : ! 2

* ( M ) H P $ ' *' $(9 (%/ ) 3E < P P *' $(9 (% ) 3E (@ 67 8# 4 ! )* ) 6 * @

5( $ N ) 0 67 8# 3 # - 2 ! . * N * $(9 I Y @ $ :)9 $(9 - 9 : ! (% ) 5(

Q ( M ) H : ! 2 - I

< P P *' H )* 5( - $ ' *' 4! 3 )* ) 6 * @

5( $ N ) 0 .( $ ) * N * $(9 I Y -( 2 - $# !

6 % * C ) 3 4D 7 -

- )# ' :

3 # # ! (P<0.01)

6 : < 2 5(

(9 2 $

M9 : # ) 2 ! (P<0.01) "

I 89 D2 - 2 ! % % @ N 0 3 M 2 I (9 #

.( $ ) 6 *

- C 9 3 . C 9 - <(P H 3 * :

% ) 3E * (: K/ M â&#x20AC;&#x201C; ) L 89

) 6 . * ) C 9

) H @ (%

H @ (% % ) 3E * (: K / M * (: K/ M > ) . C 9

) .(+ $ ) ) H @ (% % ) 3E -( 2 ! *' - C 9 6 . (+) $

.:

. C 9 % %

C 9 6 . * ) C 9 % %

L 89 C 9 % %

- 2 -( 2 :

* 3 (@ - 9 :

-( 2 3 @

9 .K' 2.

L M $ :4 # 8 )9 $ 4*'

.

L % : 4* N -

.(F$ )

-( 2 ! C 9 * - * C ) 3 4D> 0 * -: - E#/ E . @ - )# ' $ ' *' ! (% +. +) H 3M89 32) -02 P *' ! % (@ 8# (% . ) H P 6 * @

5( $ N 0 5( - < P

. ) H @ (J ) ! *' - 9 :

-AM H @ 6 ? D 4 * * 3 ( (F) $

:

* %F . % %J. % . %J.

-( 2 3' 2 @ + F

* % . % % F. % ./ % .F

3' 2 @ J J F

F

* 3 (

L M $ :4 9 .K' 2.

L % : 4* $ 4*' H $ 4*'

.6 * 5( )@ 5(

$ :

-( 2 ! *' 7 ' 6 - C 9 * ( )$

F

(% ) (% )+ (% ) (% )

(% ) (% )+ (% ) (% )

(%+. +)F (% )+ (% ) (% )

(5( $ ) (%FF) + (% )+ (%F ) (% +.+)

3 @ % 28 +

9 3 2

5(

6 * 5(

6 *

@

@

@

@

-( 2 :

( )

.6 * @

5( $ N 0 :

-( 2 5( )@ ! *' - I @ ( ) $

(% ) ++ (% ) F/

F

(% ) + (% ) F

(%/ ) J + (% ) J

JJ + F

5(

6 * 5(

6 *

' @

@

@

@

9 3 2

-( 2 :

.( ) 5( $ N 0 :

-( 2 5( )@ !

! 3 E) ( ) $

:

5(

( ) aa . Âą ./ aa .FFÂą .+ aa . Âą ./ Âą . aa+. . Âą+ . .+Âą . . FÂą .F aa . ÂąF . Âą .+

-( 2

.+FÂą+.J .FÂą . . Âą .

5(

( ) aa . JÂą . aa .FFÂą/. aa .JJÂą .

.+ Âą+./F .F Âą . + . JÂą +.

.F Âą .

aa .+FÂą .

.+ Âą .

J. Âą + . . Âą . .+Âą . . ÂąJ. . Âą .

.FÂą+/.+ .JÂą+J. % 3'

. FÂą F.+ .JÂą . % 8 (9 .+Âą . .+Âą . % 3 6 2

aa . Âą . . Âą . % 3 M 2 . Âą .+ . /Âą . % 3 0 .P<0.01

Z )* @ "

& !

(aa) * 0 9 Âą$ $P ) 0

5( $

5( $ 106

Ă&#x2014; ) # 2 3 # #

) / E M9 : # ) % % % (9 2

) # 103Ă&#x2014;I (9 #

)*

*' - C 9 # * - * 3 4D # ( ) N ) VQ? 0)) (% +.+) 3E : ! * $ Marshillagia spp * H @ 3 *

.( ) & * N VQ? &8)) Trichuris spp % 32) E# / E . @ - )# ' H @> 3 8) $ ' *' ! % / 3E 02 (@ 67 8# ! 5(

< P P - @ *' ! % H c ! % ( 8# * 3E : !

-( 2

< P P *, H c 3 )* $ , *, $ , W 9)*' 7

( 67 8# R 5(

@ D2' < 2 ( J) N ) VQ? &8)) $% ! 6

0 - M 8 & -@ - )# ' 9)* (% / ) 3E (@ 8# H @ -AM ! - )# 8 ( (% +) (@ 67 8# H @ "Q - )# 8 ' N 0 M 2 3 ! - )# 8 ' 9)* - H * Z:

6 E% 3 ) ! - $ - W 0 32 % 308) # ( /) M 3 * ! 9)* 6 P# 6 .)

(

8 H . < 2 (+ ) N * C )

6 - # %' * - * C ) 3 4D> ) VQ? (% F) 3E -( 2 ! *' 7 '

* H @ 3E ( /) N - $# C ) 0 * H @ (% . ) Marshillagia spp %'

% * $ 3 # % 3E N ) VQ? 308) (% +. J) Oesphagostumum spp ? spp. MarshillagiaT - #Q < 2 ( , )- $# N 38 )9 Z 9' ' - - -AM ! =@ . P#' * H @ Chabertia spp. $ * < 2 ( +) C )

$ * ( F) S Q# $% ! -AM ! % $ D! 2 ! =

P#' ? Heamonchus spp

% * H @ $ * < 2 ( ) N ) 38 )9

VQ? Z:

$% ! -AM ! Ostertagia spp H 9)* 3 2 H C ) ! 3 !()9' 8 )9 ) D S Q# * 4 ! 3 ) L D ( ) * 4 ! 3 ) & L D

( )

308) K' ! 7 ' 6 - M - )# ' $ M $ 9 ! @ (@ 8# D2' < 2 (+ ) N =M @ W > (+ /) - $# D2' # 7 ' 6 - -02 & -@ E#/ E . @ - )# ' 9)* # .(% ) 3E (@ 8# * H @ 32) -( 2 - $# !

6 % * C ) 3 4D> 5( 7 -

- )# ' :

M9 7 2 3 # !

6 : < 2 I 89 D2 # % % (9 2 $

"

I 89 N I (9 # ! "

VQ? &8)) 6 * @ N 0 M 2 (9 !

- )# 8 ' 7 @ - H . < 2 ( /) N ) -*2) < 2 ) - : H Z @ T8

.-AM !

6 % !

12. Lamba J, Suchy J , Staud E. Eficacy of orally adminstaration of ivermactin against larval stage of bot fly Cephenemyia stimulator in roe deer. Act Vet Brno. 1997;66:51-55.

13. Young KE, Jensen JM , Craig TM. Evaluation of anthelmintic activity in native wild ruminant by fecal egg redicition tests and alarval development assay. J Zoo Wild life Med. 2000; 31:348-352.

14. Prichard RR , Roulet H. ABC transporters and betatublin in macrocylic lactone resistance prospects for marker development.Parasitol. 2007; 123:1123-1132.

15. Mckellar QA , Jackson F. Veterinary anthelmentics old and new Tren.

Parasitol. 2004;20:456-461.

16. Anon N. Manual of Veterinary Parasitological Laboratory Technique.Technical Bulletin Minesitry of Agricultar, Fisheries and feed agriculture development advisory services her majestys stationary London. 1977;pp:2-16 17. Coles EH. Veterinary Clinical Pathology. 4th ed., WB Saunders Co., Philadelphia;1986.P.12 - 56,375-378-441.

18. Statistical Package for the Social Science Advance Statistic TM Version 11.5 (2002).SPSS Inc,Chicago II.

C 9 2 #

* * L . P @ ) . / * $% ! 2 - M ! 7 ' 6 -

.2008 $%

" # )* 6 * ! - )# 8 d $ : 67 8# .- 2 @ . 2 . " # )* * . K, ! 8 - H @ .1997$%

!

6 - ! * . 2 $ @. * . # )* * $% 6 : Y Q 2 -AM . /JJ $%

"

% )

" # $ - <2 @ ) .$%

22. Muslih NJ, Zanggna IK , Arsalan SH. Incidence of various clinical diseases in sheep and gaots in North Iraq (Mosul). Int J Anim Sci. 1988;3:157-163.

23. Kadhim JK. Asurvey of Gastrointestinal parasites of sheep in Iraq ,Trop Anim Hlth Proc. 1972;4:109-112.

1. Korystov YUN, Mosin VA, ShaposhnikovaVV, Levitman MKH, Kudryavtsev AA, Kruglyak E B, Sterlina T S, Viktorov A V, Drinyaev VA. A comparative study of effects of a versectin c, abamectin and ivermectin on apoptosis of rat thymocytes induced by radiation and dexamethasone. Acta Vet Brno. 1999;68:23-29.

2. Adams HR. Veterinary pharmacology and therapeutics , 8th ed., Iowa State Press,BlackWell publishing Company; 2001. pp:963-968.

3. Ludmerer SW, Zheng Y, Hirschberg B, Cully DF, Smith MM. Assoctation of RDL and Glucl proteins within ivermactin receptor from Drosophilia melanogaster. Society of Neurosciences Astract.1999;29:592.

4. Smith MM, Warren VA, Thomus BS, Brochu RM, Ertel EA, Robrer S, Schaeffer J,Schmatz D, Peuch BR,Tang YS,Meiuke PC,Kaczorowski GL and Cohen CJ. Nodulisporic acid opens insect glutamate-gated chloride channels;Identification of a new high affinity modulater. Biochem. 2000;39:43-55.

5. Ana G , Ana M. Gial transporters ot glutamate ,glycine and GABA I Glutamate transporters. J Neurosc Res. 2001; 63:453-460.

6. Hu J, Liang P, Shi X , Gao X. Effects of insecticides on fluidity of mitochondrial membranes of diamond backmoth ,Plutella xylostrlla ,resislanst and susceptible to avermectin. J Insect Sci. 2006; 40:37-41.

7. Franklin A. Pharmacology ,National Verterinary Medical series.1996; 251:14-16.

8. Kita K. Advances in drug discevery and biochemical studies. trends Parasitol. 2007;23:223-229.

9. Mckellar QA , Benchaoui HA. Avermactins and Milbemycins. J Vet Pharmacol. 1996;19:331-351.

10. Molymeux DH. Drug treatment for lymphatic filariasis and onchocerciasis. Trends Parasitol. 2003;19:51-52.

11. Pound JM, Miler J A , Oehler DD. Depletion rate injected and ingested ivermactin from blood sraum of perneal white â&#x20AC;&#x201C;tail deer ,odocileus virginianus (Zunmermann) (artiodactyla)(ervidae). J Med Entomol. 2004; 65-68.

R* .L @ -'

L @ - ? * R % # . . F .$ D! 2 K ! 7 ' 6 - I

. /J @ :

25. Alani AJ , Rhaymah MSh , Al-Amary AM. Anthelmintic trials in sheep infected with various helminths in Mosul, Iraq. PIVISTA Di Parassitologia. 1993;10(2):313-320.

2 : C 9 (@

* . * M9 - *2 . # , )* * , $% 0 ! 9 3 8 . $%

, " 27. Rhaymah, M. Sh. Prevalence of intestinal helminthes in domestic goat in Mosul, Ninevah, Iraq. Irq J Vet Sci 2000;13(2):33-42.

28. Kaplan RM. Drug resistant in nematodes of veterinary importance:astatus report.Trends Parasitol 2004;20:477-481.

29. Kaplan RM, courtny CH, Kunkle WF, Zeng GY, Jernigan AD , Eaglesan JS. Efficacy of injectable abamactin agansit gastrointestinal nematodes and lung worms of cattle.Am J Vet Res 1994;55(3):353357.

30. Wooster MJ, Woodgate RG and Chick BF. Reduced efficacy of ivermactin ,abmectin and moxidectin against filed isolated of Heamonchus contortus. Aust Vet J. 2001;12:40-42.

31. Mahfooz A , Masood M Z , Yousaf A ,Akhtaer N , Zafar A. Prevalence and anthelmintic efficacy of abamectin against gastrointestinal parasites in horses. Pakistan Vet J.2009;29:253.

32. Hienze Mutz EM Pih SR , Bairden K, Baggott DG, Armour J, Bruth D , Gramer LG. Efficacy of abamactin agansit nematodes in cattle Vet Rec. 1993;132(2):35-37.

( )

" #

! ,

) & & ! +) & * & ('% & ! & $

) * + ! #

( ' $ ! "# $ % &

!

, -.

-.

( 5 + - 3 4 2 01 / ) -. "& 8 17 , # 5 9 : 3 5 ) "1 $ ) # 5 ( 5 8 17 % # 6 721 -+ 1 $ @1 5 A2! ) # < white side test ) 17 ? . = ; < ; 5 18 -. # 5 CD 1# ) @: . ( 5 A2!

! !2 ) .

8 < 1 )/+ ).72 .' ) 1 % B & !1 9 (! 5 !

1 7 3# ) ! ) (%= ) )* $ "& ( 1 ! # # Staphylococcus aureus 9G 3# ) ! @1 1 (% . ) @ + # )* F Staphylococcus scirui % # G-ve !

! ) .

5 -! ) ! (% . ) # Streptococcus spp. ) ( (% =. ) ! .(% . ) # Micrococcus 3 ) ! 7 (%H. ) # Arcanobacterium pyogenes % # & coccobacill.

5 5 B I 1 CNS % # 3 Staphylococcus sciuri Arcanobacterium pyogenes5 CD 1# ) @: .Penicillin G. Ampicillin 5 5 B 3 ) ; 5 "& Ciprofloxacin Chloramphenicol

Isolation and identification of some bacteria causing subclinical mastitis in cows.

B. A. Abdulla 1, M. M. H.Al-Jammaly2 and A.S. Sadoon3 1

Department of Biology, College of Science, 2 Department of Internal and Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Animal Resources Department , College of Agriculture and Forestry. University of Mosul, Mosul , Iraq.

Abstract Isolation and identification of different type of bacteria from milk samples of 20 clinically healthy cow from different area in Mosul city between the period from May 2007 to May 2008 was carried out. The quality of the milk was screened using white side test. Identification of the isolate was carried out depend on the morphology of colony and biochemical test. The results indicated that total percentage of the infectivity of milk was (80%). The coagulase negative Staphyloccoci (CNS) was dominant. The more frequent from them was Staphylococcus sciuri which was (21.8%) followed by Staphylococcus aureus (18.7%), Streptococcus spp. (15.6%) then G-ve Coccobacill, Arcanobacterium pyogenes (9.3%) and Micoccocus (3.1%).

Staphylococcus sciuri and CNS were more sensitive to Chloramphenicol and Ciprofloxacin but resistance to Ampicillin and Penicillin G. Available online at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

&"

5 ) % B -07 5 @ 7 5 + @ - 21 ( ) $ @1 / F < L 9 # 9 ( !1 1 (

1 ! * .

( ) B IG9 5 1 7 1# K 3# ) ! (

* $ . 'G J / 9 5 % B $ @1

, 5 ; -.1 "1 ) B 9 +K # 3 0 #

( )

$ < K 9 : ' 5 $ "& .(H) 5 + $ @1 / < & B/ G9 % B J G9 F "& 5 1 ( 5 1 9 9/ :#

9 A21! "1 1 17/ ( . .7

5 #0 5 ! U J / 5 F "& 7 ) " ) # 5 @# ! 5 K < 5

@1 9 ? &

( IG9 < U B "3 1 5 #1 .$ @1 / G9 F "&

# 3 3 / "& % B $ @1 J # ( ) B < 9

3 / $ 5 -+ 1 D ) B N ) IG9 # 5 1 < @1 3 ) "& J 07 "& + O # * $ @1

1 ( ) $ @1 0 ) 0 '

5 $

A.11 G @ % #/ 5 Staph.Sciuri % # & 3 $0! -( ) # J O @2 1 9 21#

( IG9 1 G - 7 #K/ 3 / P

5 $ 1 "@& Q G 5 K < R2# #

$1 11 ! * .

9 & ( M) 5 #0 J / K 8 17 @ :1# K O 8 -!2 T 9 # < ( S 5 !1 / ! 1 0B& ) 9 ! 5 71 < @1 3 + 1 1

+ 1 ! 7 P 1# O ) 1# < ) 1# - +17 5 + C1#1 / @# / ' 3 + 1 8 8 + ! /

B. 7 DNase 7 P 1# < @1 "& 5 11

< -B& -!2 #1 B. glucuronidase galactoside U O @ *. @1 1 + 11 $ . !

@1/+ J U 5 0B& " ! J / 5

@1 "& ) 811 . + 09 9+ & 5 C1 # + #K/ N A B

!

-B81 - 1 < ( IG9 + 1 1 ( ) ( # , 3 1 "D 31# !

5 -( 11 F B - 5 @!01 CNS Lipase, Leucocidin, Haemolysin, -( ) # 8 G D 7 F < 9 Protease Lecthinase, DNase V $ @1 ! 5 #/ "& . -! 2 5

5 $ 1 ( 5 5 0B& 5 1 $ @1

./ )/ 5 ) F .1 / -! 2 5 ( ) 3 / "& % B $ @1 ! ) # "& B "9 % B $ @1 "& @ @ "1 (

11 ( 1 "1 Arcanobacterium pyogenes -7 1 G J F + @1# 1 ) # 5 "& ! ) @1 -( 3 J / 5 $ 1

"& -. 8 $ @1 D $ @1 3 / "& % B $ @1

1 / !2 3 / "& % B $ @1 G7R .(=) + #7

) 0

+ 1 'G , & -!2 @# ( 1 < 11 @2 5+ 5 3&

-! + 1 -!2 .5 ) < " 1

) B/ J < & B/ $ @1 0 9 : ) 0

1 / A 87 $ @1 @& ) 1 $ @1/ + @ @:1 0& ' ) 1 $ @1 / . + @ ) 0 Q #9 F < -D/ Q #9 5! 5 < ) 0 ' Somatic cell count Scc 07 % 81 -( $ @1 /

/0 1 & ) 1 9 : 3 5 $ # (= ) )

& :# 2 ) 1 ) # W 7 < 5 1# 5 9 < / ) & 5 6 71 1 G ) # O # 3 1

"# # "& $ 5 - ( ) 3 OB

$ "# $ % & "& F 17 < ) 3# 9 3

( ) % B $ @1 ) 17 @ ) "D

P+ Q G White side test ) 17 < 1 O % + ! 1

. !

9 - 5 5 1 X < @. & $ # 5 ) W 7 CD 1# )#

); # ( ( )

+ 2 < ) 2# $ 5 $ !

X3 .( )

T "& , / )#B !

/ < 1# 8 ) 1 ) 3# M ( 5

- 1#

- 9 ! 71#/ < 8

! !2 ) 17/ ) ' 7 ( % # 1 @8 #.1 J * )/+

.( ) ) B 17 20 3 # M . $ ) # 5 CD 1# ) B

(%= ) # 5 5 G 7 # = 5 5 !& ' ) 1 % B $ @1 . K ) #

.( - ) (% ) # # = 5 # # < ! * . )/+ ) @:

3 ) 7 @ & ) !2 8 17 % # < ) + 1 ) 5 "& (%H. ) # Arcanobacterium pyogenes 5 5 # < 1 17/ 3# ) !

90 )# ! W # < ) + 1 (%M . ) )/+ IG9 - ) (% .=) )* Staphylococcus sciuri ( .(

M

( )

% B $ @1 5 + ( D $ # ( )-

.$ # M "& ' ) 1

3# ) !

1 D # ( ) -

"& ' ) 1 % B $ @1 / 1 17/ .$ # = "& 3 / % D # .=M . H =. =M3. =M. =M.

)/+

M

M

#

D % M . =. .

H. H. . .

+ W # / Staph.sciuri Staph.epidermidies Staph.saprophyticus Staph.hyicus Staph.chromoyenes Staph.xlosus

71# )/+ J 6 & U 1 !

IG9 : 5

) B J I 1 5 5 B )/0 Ciprofloxacin

Ampicillin 5 5 B 3 Chloramphenicol

.(M - ) Penicillin G

)/+

M

+ W # / Coagulase Negative Staphylococcus Staphylococcus aureus Streptococcus spp.

Arcanobacterium pyogenes G-ve Coccobacilli Micrococcus spp.

Candida spp.

%

3# ) ! < # $ # )

! !2 ) 17/ CD 1# )# !

17/ "& 3 )/+ IG9 J < ) "1 .( - ) ( ) 1 6 721 :#

Maltose

Lactose

Glucose

Nitrate

Gelatinase

Vp

Urease

DNase

Slime

Pigment

Coacgulase

Oxidize

catalase

. 3 / "& ' ) 1 % B $ @1 5 +

( W # 0

! ) 17/ ( ) -

d d + + d d +

d + d + + + d +

+ + + + + + + +

+ + + + + + +

+ d d d + +

/ + d d d

d + + d + + +

/ + + + + + + +

+ + d + d + d

d d + +

/ d d +

+ -

+ + + + + + +

( % #/ Arcanobacterium pyogenes Staph.sciuri Staph.epidermidies Staph.saprophyticus Staph.hyicus Staph.chromogenes Staph.xylosus Staph.aures

. *1 (d) 170 ( ) 170 (+) 4 3

O 381 5 !1 Q G ) 0 ' @: U 8!

G ) 17 5 ) @: ! ( ) 5 0B& ( ) N U !L G9 6 721 "& -+ CD 1# ) @: .A ! K O -@ N# !

8 17 W # < D ( +

( ) G < ! * . ( )

5 -! O )381 Q G %9.3 # ) 7 $ 5 ! ( 5 "& W < ( M) W

3 / "& 5 ! U % B $ @1 / " D

) 1 .Z # 5 IG9 -07 5 :

# 81 )# ! 3 / "& % B $ @1 / ./ )/ P0 < Q G "& $ ?+

- P0 1

) B ) 0 U 817 Q G ) 1 <

( % #/ J

9 $ 5 ! $ @1 / 5 5 J F < 3 @ CNS [ ( 1

( )

D 7 5 @!01 < ( IG9 B

1

heamolytic exotoxin, neuraminidase, protease -[[( ? 7\ & -

5 0B& dermonecrotic exotoxin Pylosin(PLO) cholesterol-dependent cytolysin (CDC) -(

Q G

D0 07 1 < @ 5

11 G ! ) ! 9

"& . .7 $ @1 / F 1 .(=)

. ) B )/+ J

3

D # (M)-

Erythromycin E10

Ciprofloxacin Cip5

Chloramphenicol C30

Penicillin G P10

Ampicillin Am25

( % #

R

S

R

S

R

S

R

S

R

S

M

=

M

M

H

M

=

Stahp.aureus

H

M

M

M

M

Staph.sciuri

M

M

M

Staph.sapropyticus

Staph.epidermidies

Arcanobacterium Pyogenes

.Resistance 3 (R) Sensitive W (S) + 7 < @1 Stahp.sciuri ( 5 U D + $ 5 ( 5! 11 G + # 10

5 - ! ! + 5 # / "# / J O 3 5 !1 Q G ornithine "# / J 5 + 1 + ! / 17 < 1 .( ) G @ ) 17/ 5 17/ G9 F CNS )/+ +#/ 1# Staph.sciuri ( , 8 17/ G@ CNS ( % # 3 5 C ! ! :#/ 3 Q G! ( ) F I !G O , 11 Q G

IG9 5 !L G9 ( ) 9 !G "1 1 6 721 3 Staph.sciuri 5 ) @: ! B ( ' 5 5 B 3 ) CNS % # I 1 ) 5 "& Penicillin Ampicillin Q G Ciprofloxacin Chloramphenicol 5 5 B -( 11 G ( ) 8 7 ( M) O )381 5 3 5 5 ! *1 ( 5 3 , .( ) 7\ O < " ( # < N

1 17/ @ # 3# ) ! ) J F "& W # / 5 9 K < N

( ) 5 -! O )381 5 !1 Q G

$ "9

( 5 "& ( =) O ,811 / @#! # ' ) 1 % B $ @1 )/ W D ) "1 # 5 (! # IG9 (% M. ) A017/ < # IG9 "& A017/

(% =. ) "& 1 ( ] # F 5 ? 7; 3 # 5 < 3# ) ! $

D < @1 < & B/ B - 5 N! 1 9 K 5 U 2* 1 < - 1 "1 P 1# -+ # ) @: .( H) $ @1 / F # *

@ -.

1 3 # "9 (%M . ) CNS ( ( =) N - @# / ( ) N (! ( ) )# ! G Staph.sciari "9 ^ !1 )/+ IG9 (! )# !

O 381 K 5 !1 Q G (%=. ) @1 # .( )5 -!

3 5 Staph.aureus % # + 1 1 17 ' - -07 5 CD 1# ) @: W# G@ 1 % #/ < Staph.sciuri ( @# B 5 CNS ( ! .( ) O )381 Q G +#/ G9 P 1# - 5 Q 1 1 CNS 5 W # / J 5 :

( 1 D 7 J P 1# < @1 3 ( 1 B ) @: 5 "& ' - + 10 + 7

&" *

' $ ! - 5 F 1 .-.

( )

& -

In:world Buffalo congress, 5., coserta anais Caserta;1997-b. pp.635638.

15. Langoni H, Domingues PF, Molero Filho JR, Baldini S. Etiologia sensibilidade bacteriana da mastite subclinical em bufalos (Bubalus bubalis) ARS veterinaria-2001;17(3):213-217.

16. Shitandi A, Anakolo G, Galgalo T, Mwangi M. Prevalence of bovine mastitis among small holder dairy herds in kenga. Ls Vet Med Associ J. 2004;59(12):100-112.

1.

2.

1# K 3# ) ! ( .

-& # - @1 . )/ "& Coagulase-Negative staphylococcus (CNS) 1 7 ! 1 . 3 / "& ' ) 1 % B $ @1 .-.

' $

3.

4.

18. Kudinha T, Simango CI. Prevalence of coagulase-negative staphylococci in bovine mastitis in zimbabwe. J S Afr Vet Assoc.

2002;73(2):62-65.

19. Jones GF, Ward GG. Cause, occurrence and clinical signs of mastitis and anorexia in cows in awiscon in study. JAVMA. 1989;8:11081113.

5.

6.

1! $# J .- ( - +7 I + . $ ! 1 . 3 / "& % B $ @1 J . H H * '

7.

21. Waage S, Mork T, Poros A, Aasland D, Hunshamar A, Odegaard, SA. Bacteria associated with clinical mastitis in dairy heifers. J Dairy Sci. 1999;82:712-714.

22. Sitta A, Lin J, Morrison D, kolawole D. Isolation and molecular characterization of multiresistant staphylococcus sciuri and staphylococcus hemolyticus associated with skin and soft tissue infections. J Med Microbiol.2004;53:51-55.

23. Costa EO, Benites NR, Guerra JL, Meliville PA. Antimicrobial suscepability of staphylococcus spp. Isolated from mammary parenchymas of slaughtered dairy cows. J Vet Med B. 2000;47:22103.

8.

9.

10.

11.

* . ( 6 721 -+ : ! A W3 . M ? # # :& "& W "& % B $ @1 / ! . -.

.' $ ! 1

12.

25. Uppal SK, Singh KB, Bansal BK. Antibiogram of bacteria isolation from clinical and subclinical cases of mastitis in buffaloes. Buffalo J. 1998;2:253-258.

26. Teuber M. Veterinary uses and antibiotic resistance. Microb.

2001;4:493-499.

13.

14.

Blood DC, Radostitis OM. Veterinary medicine:Textbook of the disease of cattle, sheep, pig, goats and horses. 7th ed, London, Baillere & Tindall;1989.p: 40-41.

Heringstad B, Chang YM, Granoia D. Genetic association between animals susceptibility to clinical mastitis and protein yield in Norwegian dairy cattle. J of dairy Sci. 2005;88:104-1514.

Gentilini E, Denamid G, Betancor A, Rebuelto M, Fermepin MR, Detorres RA. Antimicrobial susceptibility of coagulase-negative staphylococci isolated from bovine mastitis in Argentina. J Dairy Sci.2002;85:1913-1917.

Igimi SJ, Atobe Y, Tohya Y, Inoue E, Takahashi E, Konishi S. Characterization of the most frequently encountered staphylococcus SPP. In Cats Vet Microbiol. 1994;39:255-260.

Daki I, Morisson D, Vukovi D, Savi B, Shittu A. Isolation and molecular characterization of staphylococcus sciuri in the hospital enviroment. J Clin Microbial. 2005;43(6):2782-2785.

Stepanovic S, Daki T, Morrison D, Haus T. Identification and Characterization of clinical isolation of members of the staphylococcus sciuri groups. J Clin Microbial. 2005;43(2):956-958.

Pengov T. The role of Coagulase negative staphylococcus SPP and Associated somatic cell counts in the ovine mammary gland. J Dairy Sci.2001;84:572-574.

Stefani T, Rudnick B, Helen Jost Stephen J. Billington Transcriptional regulation of pyolysin production in the animal pathogen, Arcanobacterim pyogenes Available online at www.sciencedirect.com. Vet Microbi. 2008;132:96-104.

Quinn PJ, Carter ME, Markey B, Carter GR. Clinical veterinary Microbiology. Mosby, Elsevier Limited, London;2004. P.118-126.

Coles EH. Veterinary clinical pathology, 3rd edition, W.B. Saunder company, Philadelphia;1980. pp: 438-354.

Collee J, Marmion BP, Fraser AC, Simmons A. Mackie Mccartney practical medical microbiology 14th ed., Churchill Livingstone, New York;1996. pp: 245-258.

Koneman EW, Allen SD, Janda WM, Schreckenberger PC, Winn WC. Color Atlas and Textbook of Diagnostic microbiology, 5th ed.

Lippincott-Raben publishers Philadelphia;1997. pp.132-134.

Pyorala S. New strategies to prevent mastitis. Repod Dom Anim.

2002;37:211-216.

Costa EO, Garino JRF, Watanabe ET, Ribeiro AR, Vezon P, Baruselli PS, Paske A. Study of mastitis among ten dairy buffaloes herds (Bubalus bubalis) in the vale do Ribeira, sao Paulo, Brazil.

Editor-in-Chief Prof. Dr. Fouad K. Mohammad (BVMS, MS, PhD) Editoria Secretary Dr. Nabeel A. Al-Hussary (BVMS, MSc, PhD) Executive Editorial Board Prof. Dr. Mohammed N. Al-Shahery (BVMS, DSc) Prof. Dr. Samih H. Arslan (BVMS, PhD) Prof. Dr. Fadwa K. Tawfeek (BVMS, MSc, PhD) Dr. Talal H. Hussein (BSc, MSc, PhD) Dr. Tariq S. Qubih (BVMS, MSc, PhD)

Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences is printed and organized by: Prof. Dr. Muneer S. Al-Badrany Dr. D. M. Aziz Dr. M. O. Abdul-Majeed

Staff of the editorial office Dr. Nibal S. Michaeel Dr. Zeena Tariq

Papers published in the Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences are available online as pdf files at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences (Iraqi J. Vet. Sci.) ISSN 1607-3894 (Print), ISSN 2071-1255 (Online)

Instructions to Authors Aims and scope Iraqi J. Vet. Sci. is a national, scientific and refereed journal published by the College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq. It publishes in Arabic or English original and distinguished research papers, short communications, research notes, case reports and reviews in all aspects of veterinary sciences.

General Manuscript shall be considered for publication only with the understanding that they are neither under concurrent consideration by any journal nor have been published elsewhere. Manuscripts are subjected to peer review for their scientific merit. Accepted manuscripts will become the property of Iraqi J. Vet. Sci. The journal is published two times a year. It is indexed/abstracted by CABI Publishing, U.K. in Index Veterinarius and Veterinary Bulletin, Directory of Open Access Journals, EBSCOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S Library Products and HINARI (WHO), SCOPUS. Manuscript submission Manuscripts must be submitted by one of the authors designated as the corresponding author who has the full approval of the co-authors for handling the manuscript during submission, peer review and corrections. Submit the original and two copies of each manuscript to: Editorial Secretary, Iraqi J. Vet. Sci., College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq. In addition to the printed form, the final copy of the manuscript should be provided on a CD. We prefer submission of manuscripts by e-mail attachments sent to: iraqijvetsci@yahoo.com Manuscript preparation Manuscript should be computer typed in Microsoft Word using a 12-point Times New Roman font, single-spaced throughout the text, including figure legends, tables and references. Use A4 paper for typing. The typed area should be 15 cm width x 24 cm height. All pages, including the title page, must be numbered. General instructions on how to prepare a manuscript are given in the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals issued by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (http://www.icmje.org). The manuscript, subdivided by one-line space between headings, should be organized as follows: Title page The first page of the manuscript includes the title (capitalize only the first letter) of the article, followed by one-line space and the names of all authors (no degrees) and their addresses for correspondence, including the e-mail address of the corresponding author. The first letter of each name and main word should be capitalized. The title, author's name and affiliation should be centered on the width of the typing area.

Abstract The second page contains the abstract which should be 150-200 words in single paragraph and presents the main findings. For indexing purposes, a list of 3â&#x20AC;&#x201C;5 key words in English and not included in the title should be typed below the abstract. An Arabic abstract is required for papers written in English. It should follow the English abstract.

Introduction Describes briefly the background of the investigation with updated information and states the aim of the study.

Materials and Methods Provide sufficient details to enable the experiments to be reproduced. Support the techniques and methods used with references. Investigations on animals must comply with institutional and/or equivalent guides for the care and use of animals. Metric and standard international units should be used in this section and throughout the manuscript.

Specify the computer software used for statistical analysis and define statistical terms, abbreviations, and symbols applied.

Results Present the results and their significance clearly. Graphs and tables should be self explanatory. Do not repeat in figures or in the text the data presented in tables. Tables and figures should be numbered by Arabic numbers in the order of their mention in the text.

Discussion Deals with critical review and interpretations of the results, and supported by relevant updated references. Repetition of data should be avoided. It should end with brief conclusions. In Short Communications, Results and Discussion may be combined.

Acknowledgements Include the sponsor, funding agency, provider of major facilities and the names of those who contributed substantially to the work but do not fulfill the requirements for the authorship.

References References to literature should be numbered (in brackets) consecutively in the text in the order in which they are first mentioned, and listed at the end of the manuscript. Titles of journals should be abbreviated according to the List of Journals Indexed for MEDLINE (ftp://nlmpubs.nlm.nih.gov/online/journals/ljiweb.pdf). Personal communications or unpublished data should be mentioned in the text, but not included in the list of references.

Examples Journal article: Bingham CM, Wilson PR, Davies AS. Real-time ultrasonography for pregnancy diagnosis and estimation of fetal age in farmed red deer. Vet Rec. 1990;126:102-106.

Book: Wanamaker BP, Pettes CL. Applied pharmacology for the veterinary technician. 1st ed. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Company; 1996. 372 p.

Chapter in a book: Chabala JC, Miller MW. Chemistry of antiprotozoal agents. In: Campbell WC, Rew RS, editors. Chemotherapy of parasitic diseases. New York: Plenum Press; 1986. p. 25-85.

Dissertation: Zhao C. Development of nanoelectrospray and application to protein research and drug discovery [dissertation]. Buffalo (NY): State University of New York at Buffalo; 2005.

276 p.

Master's thesis: Roguskie JM. The role of Pseudomonas aeruginosa 1244 pilin glycan in virulence [master's thesis]. Pittsburgh (PA): Duquesne University; 2005. 111 p.

Journal article on the Internet: Polgreen PM, Diekema DJ, Vandeberg J, et al. Risk factors for groin wound infection after femoral artery catheterization: a case-control study. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol [Internet]. 2006 Jan [cited 2007 Jan 5];27(1):34-7. Available from: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/ICHE/journal/issues/v27n1/2004069/2004069.web.pdf Internet Webpage: AMA: helping doctors help patients [Internet]. Chicago: American Medical Association; c1995-2007 [cited 2007 Feb 22]. Available from: http://www.ama-assn.org/.

Publication cost Manuscripts are only accepted after payment of the publication cost by the author(s) whose name(s) appear in the paper. The current publication cost of a regular research paper is 50000 I.D. payable to the Iraqi J. Vet. Sci., College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul , Iraq.

Papers published in the Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences are available online as pdf files at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 Contents Research articles

Page

Changes in some blood parameters in lactating female rats and their pups exposed to lead: effects of vitamins C and E H. M. Jassim and A. A. Hassan

1

Histopathology of virulent Newcastle disease virus in immune broiler chickens treated with IMBO速 O. G. Mohammadamin and T. S. Qubih

9

Effects of Bemiparin and Heparin on blood pressure, renal and liver function tests and platelet indices of salt-loaded uninephrectomized rats K. Dizaye, I. M. Maulood and D. Q. Gallaly

15

Effect of Nigella sativa (seed and oil) on the bacteriological quality of soft white cheese S. D. Alsawaf and H. S. Alnaemi

21

Effect of Diarrheastat速 and Enrosol-S速 on rumen ecosystem in rams M. O. Abdul-Majeed

29

A comparative study for lung biopsy in dogs O. H. Al-Hyani

35

Uterine prolapse in a jenny: a case report O. I. Azawi

41

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (1-7)

Changes in some blood parameters in lactating female rats and their pups exposed to lead: effects of vitamins C and E H. M. Jassim and A. A. Hassan Department of Physiology, Biochemistry and Pharmacology, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq (Received February 17, 2009; Accepted April 15, 2010) Abstract The present work was designed to examine the changes in some blood parameters in lactating rats treated with lead acetate (10 mg /kg B.W. orally) and its interaction with vitamin E (600 mg/kg diet) or vitamin C (100 mg/kg B.W. orally) during lactation period (20 days) and their pups. Administration of lead acetate to the female lactating rats caused a significant decrease in packed cell volume (PCV), hemoglobin concentration (Hb), red blood cell count (RBC), body weight, mean corpuscular heamoglobin concentration (MCHC) whereas the white blood cells count (WBC), total proteins, the percentage of monocyte and mean corpuscular volume(MCV) significantly increased administration of lead acetate to female lactating rats produced a significant decrease in PCV, Hb, RBC, MCHC, body weight, and the percentage of the neotrophils in their pups.

But the WBC count, total proteins, the percentage of lymphocyte, monocyte, MCV a significantly increased in their pups.

Treatment dams with vitamin E concomitantly with lead acetate increased the PCV, Hb, MCHC, whereas percentage of monocyte significantly decreased, PCV, Hb, RBC, the percentage of neutrophils a significantly increased, whereas WBC count, the percentage of lymphocyte decreased significantly in their pups of this group of dams. Treatment dams with vitamin C concomitantly with lead acetate significantly increased the PCV, MCV, whereas percentage of monocytes significantly decreased, but Hb, PCV and RBC significantly increased in their pups. It could be concluded that treatment female lactating rats with vitamin E or C concomitantly with lead acetate exert an antioxidant effect on blood constituent in dams and their pups and vitamin E more effective than vitamin C. Keywords: Lead acetate; Lactating rats; Pups; Complete blood picture.

Available online at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

:

# # " !

$% % & '( $ %

)* ( !)* ! % & ' #

$ !

"

! &0 #" / #" 100) 3 &

(26 / #" / #" 600) 34 &

5 2 * (#

&/ # &0 & #" /#" ,-) $ *; ! % & ' ;< ( !)* /: . 4 " (# 8-) / % 7 )* (#

&/ # &

4 0

# &0 # )* &

= 0

)* # ; 7 ; 7

)* ? ; ! ;

% # )* ; 7 0 !> ;

)* # ; $ *; ! % & ' ;: @ : ( !)* /: .2

# ! ? ; # & 0 A 2

&

4 0

# )* &

= 0

1

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (1-7)

7 ; 7

)*

)* ? ; 2

# ! ;

% # )* / & 4 " # )* # ; 7 0 ( !)* 5 34 &

! = ! . 4 " ; !; # . ; 2% *; !; 7 ; 7

)* ; ; 2

&

4 0

&

= 0

; , ; ! 0 ! ? ; # )* &

= 0

# )* 3 &

! = !> A . / D'4 " ; !% *;

)* C ; % # )* 7 ; 7

)* ? ; ; 2

# # )* # ; 7 0 ( !)* 5

. 4 " ; !

# )* # * # &

= 0

& ; !% *; %

>G F ( !)* 5 3 A 34 &

! % & ' ;: &A & E ; F .3 & G &

> A 34 & G

>G & , 4 " ! = H # ! ; @ / 7 ) Mosul, at (3-4) months of age, they were housed in polypropylene cages under controlled conditions of temperature (18-20) c° and lighting (10 hours light /14 hours dark). The dams were supplied a standard pellet diet and tap water ad libitum.

The dams and their pups were randomly divided at the first day of parturition in to four groups (5 dams /group).

The first group received tap water (1ml/kg BW) during lactation period(20 days) serve as control. The second group received lead acetate (10 mg /kg B.W. orally) during lactation period (20 days), lead acetate dissolved in distalled water and given at volume of 1ml/kg (4). The third group received lead acetate (10 mg /kg B.W) concomitantly with feeding of vitamin E (600 mg / kg diet) during lactation period (11). The fourth group received lead acetate (10 mg /kg B.W. orally) concomitantly with vitamin C (100 mg /kg B.W.orally) during lactation period (12).

At the end of the experiment (21day) body weights of dams and their pups were recorded, blood samples collected from dams and their pups from the eye vein and placed in tubes which contain anticoagulant (EDTA) for complete blood picture. Also blood samples were collected into clean dry centrifuge tubes allowed to clot, serum separated after centrifugation at 1500 rpm for 15 minute. Hemoglobin concentration was determined by Sali method (13). Red and White blood cells count were counted per cubic millimeter of blood by Hemocytometer (13). Packed cell volume determined by microhematocrite capillary tube and Microhematocrite centrifuge (12000 circle / minute) for 10 minutes (13). Differential Leucocytes count (DLC) Thin blood film was prepared and stained with Gimza (13).

Mean corpuscular volume (MCV), mean corpuscular Hemoglobin (MCH) and mean corpuscular Hemoglobin concentration (MCHC) were calculated (13). Determination of total protein by using Biuret method (14).

Introduction Lead is non-essential heavy metal widely distributed in the environment, chronic exposure to low levels of this agent is one of the problems of public health, due to its toxicity, Source of lead exposure may include air, water, food, soil (1), breast milk can however be pathway of maternal excretion of lead and this toxin impact most severely on the newborn (2,3). Lead produce toxicological and pathological effects on central nervous system, peripheral nerves, kidneys and hematopoitic system (1), as well as infertility (4). Lead is known to induce oxidative stress leading to tissue damage (5), and lipid peroxidation by inhibiting the synthesis of some antioxidant enzymes such as phospholipids hydroperoxidase glutathione peroxidase (PHGPX) (6).

It has long been known that heamatopoiesis and heme synthesis affected by lead poisoning (1).

Lead can cause damage in the erythrocyte, originating defective cells, preventing them from carrying oxygen also it produce high blood pressure that increases the risk of heart attack (7).

An increase in oxidative damage to body cells and tissues is balanced by powerful enzymatic and non enzymatic antioxidant defense system that scavenge and suppress the formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and protect cells from lipid peroxide â&#x20AC;&#x201C; mediated damage (8) e.g. (Carotinoids, vitamin E & C, Flavonoids, GSHPeroxidase, Soperoxide â&#x20AC;&#x201C; dismutase, Catalase) (9).

Vitamins C&E are great powerful antioxidants, protect cells from oxidation, vitamin C is biological reducing agent, vitamin E act by giving up of its electrons to the electron deficient free radicals making it more stable (10). Both vitamins C & E helping to prevent degenerative disease such as cardiovascular diseases (10).

Materials and methods

Statistical analysis Our data were analyzed statistically using one â&#x20AC;&#x201C; way analysis of variance. Group differences were determined

Twenty female albino rats (dams) obtained from the animal house of Veterinary Medical College, University of

2

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (1-7)

acetate caused a significant increase (P<0.05) in the hemoglobin concentration. But vitamin C did not affect significantly in hemoglobin concentration compared with group that treated with lead acetate alone.

Table (2) shows a significant increase (P<0.05) in monocytes percentage in lead acetate group compared with control group. No significant differences occurred between groups in the percentage of neutrophiles, lymphocytes, esinophiles and basophiles.

Treatment of dams with lead acetate caused a significant increase (P<0.05) in the mean corpuscular volume (MCV) and significant decrease (P<0.05) in mean corpuscular heamoglobin concentration (MCHC) (Table 3). Treatment with vitamin E and lead acetate produced a significant increase (P<0.05) in the mean corpuscular heamoglobin concentration (MCHC) as compared with lead acetate group. Treatment with vitamin C produced significant increase (P<0.05) in MCV as compared with lead acetate group.

using Duncan multiple range test. Statistical significance was considered at (P<0.05) (15).

Results Administration of dams with lead acetate during the lactation period (20days) produced a significant decrease (P<0.05) in body weight, packed cells volume, hemoglobin concentration and red blood cells count as compared with the control group (Table 1), whereas a significant increase (P<0.05) in the white blood cells count and total proteins compared with control group. Treatment dams with vitamin E or C concomitantly with lead acetate during lactation period caused a significant increase (P<0.05) in packed cell volume compared with lead acetate group, and closed to control value group. Treatment with vitamin E or C did not affect significantly in body weight, red blood cells count, white blood cells count and total proteins compared with lead acetate group. Treatment with vitamin E and lead

Table (1) Body weight, packed cell volume, hemoglobin concentration, red blood cell count, white blood cell count and total proteins in lactating female rats treated with lead acetate and its interaction with vitamin E and C. Total Body Packed cell Hemoglobin Red blood White blood volume concentration cell count Protein weight cell g % g/100ml ×106 ×103 g/100ml 261.4±1.4 31.8±0.5 15.4±0.8 5.6±0.2 3.7±0.4 4.38±0.7 Control (Distal water orally) a a a a b b Lead acetate 198.4 ± 7.8 28.2±0.7 10.9±0.6 3.4±0.3 5.4±0.4 6.66±0.9 (10mg/kg B.W. orally) b b b bc a a Lead acetate (10mg/kgB.W.orally) 229 ± 10.1 34±1 15.7±0.8 4.1±0.1 4.6±0.2 6.32±0.2 +Vitamin E (600mg/diet) b a a b ab ab Lead acetate (10mg/kgB.W.orally) 197.4± 16.1 38±1.3 11.5±0.7 4.3±0.2 4.7±0.3 7.13±0.6 +Vitamin C (100mg/kg B.W. orally) b a b c ab a Values were expressed as means ± S. E., Values with different letters in column are significantly different (P<0.05), Number of animals 5 female rats / group.

Treatment groups

Table (2) The percentage of neutrophils, lymphocytes, eosinophils, basophiles and monocytes in lactating female rats treated with lead acetate and its interaction with vitamin E or C. Neutrophils % Lymphocytes % Eosinophils % Basophiles % Monocytes % 20.2±2.6 75.2±3.1 2±0.4 1.4±0.2 1.4±0.2 Control (Distal water orally) a a a a b Lead acetate 23.8±1 70±0.5 1.2±0.4 1.8±0.2 3.8±0.9 (10mg/kg B.W. orally) a a a a a 1.4±0.4 Lead acetate (10mg/kgB.W.orally) 21.6±1.1 73.8±1 1.4±0.5 1.4±0.4 b +Vitamin E (600mg/diet) a a a a Lead acetate (10mg/kgB.W.orally) 18.2±2 77.6±2.3 1±0.5 1.2±0.4 1.4±0.6 +Vitamin C (100mg/kg B.W. orally) a a a a b Values were expressed as means ± S. E., Values with different letters in column are significantly different (P<0.05), Number of animals 5 female rats / group.

Treatment groups

3

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (1-7)

Table (3) Mean corpuscular volume, mean corpuscular heamoglobin and mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration in lactating female rats treated with lead acetate and its interaction with vitamin E or C. Mean corpuscular Mean corpuscular Mean corpuscular volume Heamoglobin Heamoglobin Concentration fl pg g/100ml 57.2±2.1 27.6±1.3 48.4±2.1 Control (Distal water orally) c b a Lead acetate 85.8±8.1 33.4±3.8 38.6±1.8 (10mg/kg B.W. orally) b ab b Lead acetate (10mg/kgB.W.orally) 83.4±2.9 38.6±2.9 46.2±3.1 +Vitamin E (600mg/diet) b a a 103.8±4.1 35.4±1.4 33.8±1.3 Lead acetate (10mg/kgB.W.orally) a a b +Vitamin C (100mg/kg B.W. orally) Values were expressed as means ± S. E., Values with different letters in column are significantly different (P<0.05), Number of animals 5 female rats / group.

Treatment groups

Treatment of dams with lead acetate during the lactation period produced a significant decrease (P<0.05) in body weight, packed cell volume, hemoglobin concentration and red blood cell count accompanied with a significant increase in white blood cell count and total proteins in their pups compared with pups of control group (Table 4).

Treatment of dams with vitamins E or C produced a significant increase (P<0.05) in the packed cell volume, hemoglobin concentration and red blood cell count of their pups as compared with the pups of the lead acetate group.

Treatment of dams with vitamin E concomitantly with lead

acetate produced a significant decrease (P<0.05) in white blood cell count of their pups.

Administration of dams lead acetate produced significant decrease (P<0.05) in the percentage of neutrophils accompanied with a significant increase (P<0.05) in the percentage of lymphocytes and monocytes in their pups compared with pups of control group (Table 5). Treatment the dams with vitamin E and lead acetate concomitantly produced significant increase (P<0.05) in the percentage of neutrophils, with significant decrease in the percentage of lymphocyte in their pups compared with lead acetate group.

Table (4) The body weight, packed cell volume, hemoglobin concentration, red blood cell count, white blood cell count and total proteins in pups from dams treated with lead acetate and its interaction with vitamin E or C. Total Body Packed cell Hemoglobin Red blood White blood Protein weight volume concentration cell count cell g % g/100ml ×106 ×103 g/100ml 25.2±0.3 23.9±0.3 9.5±0.3 3.9±0.2 3.5±0.1 4.27±0.3 Control (Distal water orally) a b a a b b Lead acetate 14.9±0.5 21±0.9 7.2±0.3 2.5±0.1 4.7±0.4 6.85±0.5 (10mg/kg B.W. orally) d c b c a a Lead acetate (10mg/kgB.W.orally) 23±0.7 26.9±0.7 9.6±0.3 3.1±0.1 3.7±0.2 5.9±0.3 +Vitamin E (600mg/diet) b a a b b a 18.4±0.7 26.8±0.4 9±0.2 3.1±0.2 4.7±0.2 6.52±0.5 Lead acetate (10mg/kgB.W.orally) c a a b a a +Vitamin C (100mg/kg B.W. orally) Values were expressed as means ± S. E., Values with different letters in column are significantly different (P<0.05), Number of animals 22 pups / group.

Treatment groups

Mean corpuscular heamoglobin concentration decreased significantly (P<0.05) (Table 6), whereas the mean corpuscular volume significantly increased (P<0.05) in pups from lead acetate treated dams as compared with control group.

Discussion The results of the present study demonstrated that lead acetate administration to female lactating rats during result in significant decrease in body weight, PCV, Hb, RBC count, MCHC and a significant increase in WBC count,

4

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (1-7)

MCV, total proteins in the dams and their pups compared with control group. This finding therefore corroborates similar findings reported by Teijon et al (16), Mugahi et al (17) and Khan et al (18) in mice, whom observed a significant decrease in body weights, erythrocytes number, hemoglobin concentration in rats that injected with lead as acetate acetic acid. This decrease in the body weights can be due to gradual toxicity that lead causes in the animals (16). Lead acetate is a toxic metal known to exert oxidative stress on multiple organs (19), it can be transferred from the maternal to the infant through milk when there is maternal exposure to lead (3). Anemia is one of the early

manifestations of lead poisoning, it result from reduction of the life span of circulating erythrocyte as well as by inhibition the body's ability to make heamoglobin by interfering with several enzymatic steps in hem pathway (1,16). Ferrochelatase, which catalyze the insertion of iron into protoporphyrin IX, is quite sensitive to lead (1).

Erythrocyte Na-K-ATPase is some what inhibited by lead suggesting a loss of cell membrane integrity this may account for the shortened lifespan of erythrocytes (1), also lead can cause damage in the erythrocytes originating defective cells that are eliminated by spleen and their hemolysis (16).

Table (5) The percentage of neutrophils, lymphocytes, eosinophils, basophiles and monocytes in pups from dams treated with lead acetate and its interaction with vitamin E or C. Treatment groups

Neutrophils % Lymphocytes % Eosinophils % Basophiles % Monocytes % 23.9±1.7 71.3±1.9 1.8±0.3 1.8±0.7 1.4±0.4 Control (Distal water orally) a b a a b Lead acetate 19.2±0.7 75.8±0.7 0.8±0.1 2.4±0.2 2.8±0.3 (10mg/kg B.W. orally) b a a a a Lead acetate (10mg/kgB.W.orally) 23.3±0.7 70.5±1 1.0±0.6 1.3±0.2 1.9±0.4 +Vitamin E (600mg/diet) a b a a ab 18.4±0.7 76.6±0.9 0.2±0.1 2.7±1.2 2.1±0.5 Lead acetate (10mg/kgB.W.orally) b a b a ab +Vitamin C (100mg/kg B.W. orally) Values were expressed as means ± S. E., Values with different letters in column are significantly different (P<0.05), Number of animals 22 pups / group.

Table (6) The mean corpuscular volume, mean corpuscular hemoglobin\ and mean corpuscular heamoglobin concentration in pups from dams treated with lead acetate and interaction with vitamin E or C. Mean corpuscular Mean corpuscular Mean corpuscular volume Heamoglobin Heamoglobin Concentration fl pg g/100ml 63.9±4.7 28.1±3.5 39.7±1.3 Control (Distal water orally) b a a Lead acetate 86.1±2.5 30.1±1.3 34.5±1.7 (10mg/kg B.W. orally) a a b Lead acetate (10mg/kgB.W.orally) 90.2±2.8 32.3±1.4 35.8±1.6 +Vitamin E (600mg/diet) a a b 87±5 29.4±1.7 34.1±1.1 Lead acetate (10mg/kgB.W.orally) a a b +Vitamin C (100mg/kg B.W. orally) Values were expressed as means ± S. E., Values with different letters in column are significantly different (P<0.05), Number of animals 22 pups / group.

Treatment groups

In the present study the increase in the mean corpuscular volume and the decrease in the mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration of dams that treated with lead acetate and their pups may result from the toxic effect of lead acetate that affect on red blood cells count and heamoglobin concentration, because the validity of these indexes is influenced by the value of red cell count, hemoglobin concentration and packed cell volume (13).

In the present study oral administration of lead acetate caused significant increase in the white blood cell count and monocytes percentage in the dams and their pups, on the other hand treatment of dams with lead acetate produced significant increase in the lymphocyte percentage and significant decrease in the neutrophils percentage in their pups. Opposite results has been reported by other investigators (16), suggested no changes in the white blood

5

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (1-7)

toxicity. As an antioxidant vitamin C protect folate, vitamin E and polyunsaturated substance from destruction by oxygen as they move throughout the body (28).On the other hand vitamin C did not reverse some of blood parameters like white blood cell count, total protein, MCV, MCHC in the dams and pups this may result from the dose of vitamin C, rout of administration, duration of treatment, individual variations between the animals.

cell count in rats treated with lead. Gheng and others (20) Have reported that lead increases lipopolysacharide (LPS), lead to liver injury and over expression of monocytes and macrophages, lipopolysacharide causes liver injury at high doses but non injurious inflammation at low doses, this may result in the increase of white blood cell count. These different findings reported in the peripheral blood cell is probably result from effect of lead on progenitor cells (20).

Concomitant administration of vitamin E and lead acetate during the lactation produced significant increase in the packed cell volume, heamoglobin concentration, mean corpuscular heamoglobin concentration, and significant decrease in the monocytes percentage of dams. In addition treatment of the female rats with vitamin E and lead acetate produced significant increase in the packed cell volume, heamoglobin concentration, red blood cell count, neutrophils percentage, and significant decrease in white blood cell count, lymphocyte percentage of their pups.

Similar results has been reported by (21), suggested that administration of vitamin E to dams exposed to oxidative stress by cadmium chloride during lactation decreased the adverse effects produced by cadmium chloride on blood parameters in weaned pups. The main function of vitamin E is as a chain – breaking free radical trapping antioxidant in cell membranes and plasma lipoproteins, it react with lipid peroxide radicals formed by peroxidation of polyunsaturated fatty acids before they can establish chain reactions (10), vitamin E play a role in the protecting tissue from oxidative damage especially at the early stages of life, it transported to the infant during the lactation and pregnancy (22). Murray and others (10) reported that deficiency of vitamin E produce anemia in the infant by hemolysis of red blood cells and decrease in the heamoglobin production. Vitamin E deficiency enhances the susceptibilities of animals to hemolytic effect of lead poisoning (23), vitamin E useful in order to protect membrane-lipids and to prevent protein oxidation produced by lead intoxication (24).

On the other hand vitamin C given with lead acetate in the group 4 produced significant increase in the packed cell volume in the dams, in the pups vitamin C treatment result in significant increase in the packed cell volume, heamoglobin concentration, red blood cell count. Recent studies by (21) has shown that treatment of dams with vitamin C and cadmium chloride during the lactation period produced significant increase in heamoglobin concentration, packed cell volume in the dams and their pups. Ascorbic acid is great antioxidant and helps in the protecting the body against pollutants (25). The effects of vitamin C on blood parameters and anemia may result by increasing the iron absorption in gastrointestinal tract (GIT) and enhances iron bioavailability (26). Wang and others (27) reported that vitamin C is effective in reversing reactive oxygen species (ROS) induced mouse embryo

References 1. Doull J, Klaassen CD, Amdur MO. Casaratt and Doulls Toxicology.

2nd ed. United state, Macmillan publishing co. 1980. pp:415–421.

2. Ettinger AS, Tellez – Rojo MM, Amarasiriwardena C, Gonzalaz – Avila M. Levels of lead breast milk and their relation to maternal blood and bone lead levels at one mounth postpartum. Environmental health perspectives 2004;112 (8):926 –931.

3. Gulson BL, Jameson C W, Mahaffey KR, Mizon K J, Patison N, Law AJ, Korsch MJ, Salter MA. Relationships of lead in breast milk to lead in blood, urine, and diet of infant and mother. Environ Health Perspe.

1998;106 (10):667–674.

4. AL- Jobory STA. Reproductive efficiency of suckling rats treated with lead acetate during lactation:Role of vitamin E. M.SC. Thesis, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, 2006; pp:50. (in Arabic).

5. Flora S, Pande M, Kannan GM, Mehta A. Lead induced oxidative stress and its recovery following co-administration of melatonin or nacetylcysteine during chelation with succimer in male rats. Cell Mol Biol 2004;50:543–551.

6. Kang JK, Sul D, Kang JK, Nam S, Kim H, Lee E.Effect of lead exposure on the expression of phospholipids Hydroperoxidase Glutathione peroxidase mRNS in the rat brain. Toxicolo Sci. 2004;82 (1):228–236.

7. Vaziri ND, Liang K, Ding Y. Increased nitric oxide inactivation by reactive oxygen species in lead – induced hypertension. Kidney Int 1999;56 (4):1492–1498.

8. Ferrari CKB. Oxidative stress pathophysiology:Searching for an effective antioxidants protection. Int Med J 2001;8 (3):175–184.

9. Bendich A. Antioxidant micronutrients and immune response in Bendich and Chandra, R.K. (eds), Micronutreints and immune function, Annals New York Academy of Sciences 1990;587:172–178.

10. Murray RK, Granner DK, Mayes PA, Rodwell VW. Harpers illustrated biochemistry. 27th ed. United States of America, Mc Graw – Hill Companies. 2007;pp: 489–505.

11. Alkattan M. Effect of using some antioxidants on production performance and some physiological characters in laying hens. Ph.D dissertation, College of Agriculture and forestry, University of mosul,2006.28p.(in Arabic).

12. AL-Babily EOH. Effect of sodium nitrate on spermatogenesis in rats.

M.Sc. thesis, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul.

2007; pp:22. (in Arabic).

13. Jain NC ed. Schalm s veterinary hematology. USA, Lea and Febiger 1986;pp:276–82.

14. Wotton LD. D. Micro analysis in medical biochemistry. 5th ed.

Edinburgh, Churchill Livingstone 1974; pp:156–159.

15. Bruning JL, Kintz BL. Computation handbook of statistics.

Illinois:Scott, Foresman and Co. 1977.

16. Teijon C, Delsocorro JM, Martin JA, Lozano M, Bernardo V, Blaco D. Lead accumulation in rats at non acute doses and short periods of time:Hepatic, renal and hematological effects. Ecotoxico Environm Restor. 2000;3(1):36 –41.

17. Mugahi MH. Heidari Z. Sagheb HM. Barbarestani M. Effect of chronic lead acetate intoxication on blood indices of male adult rats.

Daru 2003:11(4) 147-151.

6

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (1-7)

18. Khan MSH. Mostofa M. Jahan MS. Sayed MA. Hossain MA. Effect of garlic and vitamin B-complex in lead acetate induced toxicities in mice.Bangl. J Vet Med. 2008;6(2):203-210.

19. Hus PC, Guo YL. Antioxidant nutrients and lead toxicity.

Toxicol.2002;180 (1):33–44.

20. Gheng Y, Yang B, Yie liu M. Lead increases lipopolysaccharide – induced liver – injury through tumor necrosis factor – α overexpression by monocytes / macrophages:Role of protein kinase C and P42/44 mitogen –activated protein kinase. Environmental Health Perspectives 2006;114 (4):507–513.

21. Hassan AA, Effect of antioxidants on certain physiological and biochemical aspects in female rats treated with cadmium during pregnancy and lactation. Ph.D thesis, College of veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul. 2006;PP:35p. (in Arabic).

22. Debier C, Larondelle Y. Vitamin A and E:metabolism, roles and transfer to offspring. Br J Nutr 2005;93(2):153 – 174.

23. Levander OA, Morris VC, Higgs DJ, Ferretti RJ. Lead poisoning in vitamin E-deficint rats. J Nutr 1975;105 (11):1481 –1485.

24. Rendon – Ramirez A, Cerbon – Solorzano J, Maldonado – Vega M, Quintanar – Escorza MA, Galderon – Salinas JV. Vitamin – E reduces the oxidative damage on delta – aminolevulinic dehydratase induced by lead intoxication in rat erytheocytes. Toxicol In vitro 2007;21 (6):1121–1126.

25. Zahang J, Jiang S, Watson RR, Antioxidant supplementation prevents oxidation and inflammatory responses induced by sidestream cigratte smoke in old mice. Environ Health Persp 2001;109:1007 – 1009.

26. Marisnn G, Shari H, Brenda M. The role of antioxidants in arsenic and cadmium toxicity. Altern Med Rev 2003;8 (2):106–128.

27. Wang X, Falcone T, Attaran M, Goldberg JM, Agarwal A, Sharma F. Vitamin C and vitamin E supplementation reduce oxidative stress induced embryo toxicity and improve the blastocyst development rate.

Fertil Steril 2002;78 (6):1272 – 7.

28. Grodner M, Long S, De young S. Foundations and clinical applications of nutrition anursing approach. 3ed ed. China, Mosby 2004. PP: 167 – 199.

7

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (9-13)

Histopathology of virulent Newcastle disease virus in immune broiler chickens treated with IMBOÂŽ O. G. Mohammadamin and T. S. Qubih Department of Pathology and Poultry diseases, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq (Received September 9, 2009; Accepted April 15, 2010) Abstract The effect of feed additive IMBO was investigated on histopathology of Newcastle disease virus in broiler chickens. Result osf this study showed no differences in histological changes of virulent Newcastle disease virus in vaccinated chickens treated with IMBO compared with non-treated chickens.

Keywords: IMBO; Histopathology; Humoral immunity; Newcastle disease vaccine.

Available online at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

ÂŽ

! % & ' $ # #

()* - ) " . / , ) ". ! 0( 1 # + , )* &'( # $% " !

1 - ) " . / , ) ". ! 0( 1 45(6 3 # " ! 78 .3% 2 2 1 .9 : 2 . ; + 9 <; 2

Part of the MSc thesis submitted by the first Author to the College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul. microbials or microbial cell preparations with a beneficial effect on the health and well-being of the host (6). Probiotic represents one of the natural substances that influence adaptive immune responses by activating the innate immune system (7), and enhancing the systemic antibody response to some antigens in chickens (8).

Recently, the beneficial effect of BiominÂŽC-X (Enterococcus faecium + prebiotic+cell wall extract) on humoral immunity to Newcastle disease vaccine of commercial broilers was studied (9). In addition (10) found that giving Enterococcus faecium in the feed had insignificant effect on Newcastle antibodies test on day 37of the rearing period and showed on day 57 as well. An experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of

Introduction Newcastle disease virus (NDV), is a member of the genus Avulavirus within the Paramyxoviridae family (1). It causes a highly contagious and fatal disease for, commercial broiler chickens and wild bird species. Infected birds show gastrointestinal, respiratory and nervous signs, with mortality up to 100%, depending upon pathotype of the virus (2,3). Histologic changes following virulent NDV infection include, depletion of lymphoid tissues and necrosis in various visceral organs (4). Histopathology of NDV varies and can be affected by strain of the virus and host species, the method of infection, host immune status and virus dose (5). Probiotics are defined as direct feed

9

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (9-13)

sections (4-6 µm) were stained with haematoxylin and eosin. The slides were coded and examined with light microscope.

Biomin®IMBO(Biomin G.T.I. GmbH., Ember AG-Austria; containing Enterococcus faecium 5×1011 cfu /kg, prebiotic, cell wall and algae extracts) on histopathology of different tissues of vaccinated broiler chickens exposed to virulent NDV.

Serological Tests Blood samples were taken from chicken groups before and after challenge. Antibodies to NDV were quantified by hemagglunation inhibition test (HI) using the diluted serum-constant virus procedure according to (12).

Materials and Methods Commercial day-old Hubbard-Flex broiler chicks were procured from a local supplier. Birds were reared in cages in separate rooms at the animal house, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul and fed ad libitum with a Hubbard-Flex recommended diet. Ambient temperature, lighting, ventilation and other environmental conditions fully met the requirements for management of Hubbard-Flex birds.

Results Histopathological Changes Bursa of Fabricius Bursal sections from negative control G1 did not reveal any histological changes. On day three post-challenge, sections from challeneged groups; G2, G3 (Figure1a) and G4 revealed reduction in size in bursal follicles, lymphocyte depletion in bursal follicles, formation of intrafollicular glandular structures with enormous proliferation of fibrous connective tissue in interfollicular space. Bursal lesions were more severe in G2 (positive control) compared with G3 and G4 groups. At seven days post-challenge, sections of bursa from groups G2, G3, and G4 revealed changes similar to those observed in 3 days post challenge.

IMBO® (Biomin G.T.I. GmbH., Ember AG-Austria, contains Enterococcus faecium 5×1011 cfu / kg, prebiotic, cell wall and algae extracts. IMBO was added to the feed free from antibiotics as recommended by the manufacturer and administered till one day before challenge.

Experimental design One day-old Hubbard-Flex broiler chicks were randomly divided into 4 groups (30 birds/group). Gorup 1 was the negative control(not-challenged) and Gorup 2 was the positve control (challenge), Group 3 (vaccination+ challenge), and Group 4 (IMBO+vaccination+challenge).

Thymus On day three post-challenge, tissue sections from all challenged groups except G1 showed histopathological changes. In G3 and G4 there was lymphocyte depletion in cortex and medulla. Also, thymic sections from G2 (Figure 1c) group revealed total depletion and disappearance of lymphocytes in cortex and medulla with only islands of lymphocytes remained in cortex. On day seven postchallenge, sections of thymus from groups G2,G3, and G4 revealed changes similar to those observed in 3 days post challenge.

Vaccination Groups G3 and G4 were vaccinated with enterotropic strain (Cevac®Vitapest L) at day 7 and LaSota (Cevac® NEW L) at 21 day of age, individually by oral route, using 1 ml syringe and injected with 0.1 ml of killed ND vaccine (Cevac®Broiler NDK) at seven days of age.

Challenge virus At 39 day of age, chickens were intramuscularly inoculated with virulent field NDV strain (obtained from the Microbiology department, College of Veterinary Medicine, Mosul University). The virus titer was determined to be 1×106.5 EID50 / 0.1ml.

Spleen On day three post challenge, sections from G2, G3 (Figure 1b), and G4 groups revealed histoathologic changes irrespective of IMBO supplementation when compared with G1. Lymphocyte depletion in splenic lymphoid follicles was the most prominent lesion found, the lymphocyte depletion was characterized by fewer lymphocytes than normal. Furthermore, splenic sections from G2 group revealed total depletion and disappearance of lymphocytes in periarteriolar area. The splenic sections from G4 group which was submitted to dietary IMBO also revealed histopathologic changes similar in severity of group G3 (no IMBO supplementation). On day seven postchallenge, sections of groups G2, G3 and G4 revealed changes similar to those observed in 3 days post challenge.

Histopathology Three chickens from each group were examind microscopically at 3 and 7 days post virulent NDV inoculation. Tissue samples from bursa of Fabricius, thymus, spleen, proventriculus, duodenum, and cecal tonsils from chickens were removed. The organs were fixed in 10% neutral buffered formalin (100 ml formalin (40%), 4 g sodium phosphate monobasic, 6.5 g sodium phosphate dibasic and 900 ml D.W) and processed for paraffin embedding according to (11). The histopathological

10

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (9-13)

a

b

c

d

Figure 1: (a) A section of the bursa of Fabricius from G3 group 7 days post-challenge. Severe glandular transformation of lymphoid follicles (Red arrow) and thickening of interfollicular connective tissue(Blue arrow) could be noted. H&E. (90×).(b) A section of spleen from G3 group at 3 days post challenge.Lymphoid depletion(Blue arrows) could be seen. H&E. (90×).(c) A section from the thymus from G2 group at 3 days post-challenge. Severe lymphocyte depletion both in cortex(A) and Medulla(B) could be seen H&E(90×).(d) A section of proventriculus from G4 group at 3 days post-challenge. Shortening of villi(Blue arrow) and infiltration of lymphocytes in mucosa(A) could be seen. H&E.(90×). lymphocytes in mucosa (Fig. 1) compared to the control group. On day seven psot-challenge, proventricular sections from all groups revealed lymphocytic infiltration in lymphoid follicles and shortening of proventricular papillae.

Proventriculus On day three post-challenge, proventricular sections from G2, G3 and G4 (Figure1d) groups mainly showed lymphocytic infiltration in lymphoid tissue, shortening of proventricular papillae and diffused infiltration of

11

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (9-13)

The tissue sections from bursa of Fabricius, thymus, spleen, proventriculus, duodenum and cecal tonsils at 3 and 7 days post-challenge, revealed histopathological changes and were mainly characterized by lymphocytes depletion in all challenged groups. The depletion of lymphocytes is a common feature of virulent NDV strains (14,15). The histopathological changes were more prominent in G2 (positive control) group compared with G3 and G4 groups.

The absence of antibody in G2 group increased pathogenicity of challenge virus, hence increased severity of histopathological changes (5). When treated with IMBO, vaccinated birds showed significantly greater antibody response to ND vaccine than that of the vaccinated birds not treated by IMBO, but it did not modify the tissue changes when exposed to challenge with virulent NDV. Histopathological changes did not differ in IMBO and non IMBO treated G4and G3 groups. (9) also reported that feeding chickens Biomin®C-X enhanced humoral immunity to NDV, but did not ameliorate histopathological lesions in chickens challenged with virulent Salmonella enteretidis compared to control.

In the present study, although IMBO enhanced humoral immunity, but did not ameliorate histological changes induced by virulent NDV.

Intestine On day three post-challenge, sections from duodenum in G2, G3 and G4 groups revealed thickening and fusion of villi in comparison to G1 group. On day seven psotchallenge, histopathological lesions in all groups revealed changes similar to those observed in 3 days post challenge.

Cecal tonsils On day three post-challenge, microscopical sections from G2, G3 and G4 groups revealed lymphocyte infiltration in lamina propria as well as infiltration of lymphocytes between mucosal glands compared to G1 group. On day seven psot-challenge, sections of cecal tonsils from groups G2, G3 and G4 groups revealed changes similar to those observed in 3 days post challenge.

Serology The means of HI antibody titer (log2) before chllenge of G1, G2, G3 and G4 were 0,0, 5.3 and 7.2, respectively. The post-challenge values were 0, not done, 10.17 and 10.5, respectively (Table1).

Table 1: Geometric mean HI antibody titer (log2) in chickens with or without IMBO supplementation, before and after challenge with NDV.

Acknowledgments Days After challenge The researcher is grateful to the College of Veternary Medicine, Department of Pathology and Poultry diseases for facilties provieded.

Groups

Before 7 14 challenge Ac A G1 0 0 0A A No No G2 0 B B G3 5.333±0.42 10.17±0.48 9.667±0.56 B C B 10.5±0.43 10.833±0.54 B G4 7.167±0.31 (G1) No IMBO, no vaccine and no challenge (referred to as negative control). Challenged groups: (G2) No IMBO + No vaccine (G3) No IMBO + vaccin and (G4) IMBO + vaccine, A–C Means within a column lacking a common superscript differ (P < 0.05), Values of HI titre ± SE, No: not done

References 1. Mayo M A. A summary of taxonomic changes recently approved by ICTV. Arch Virol.2002;147:1655-1663.

2. Alexander DJ. Newcastle disease virus and other avian paramyxoviruses, In: Swayne DE, Glisson JR, Jackwood MW, Pearson JE and Reed WM (Eds.).Laboratory Manual for the Isolation and Identification of Avian Pathogens, 4th ed. American Association of Avian Pathologists, Kennett Square; 1998. pp:156-163.

3. Alexander D J. Newcastle disease. Br Poult Sci.2001;42:5-22 4. Alexander DJ. Newcastle disease and other Paramyxoviridae infections. In: Calnek BW, Barnes HJ, Beard CW and McDougald L, Saif YM, (Ed.), Diseases of poultry. 10th ed., Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa; 1997. pp:541-570.

5. Alexander D J. Newcastle disease, other avian paramyxoviruses, and pneumovirus infections, In: Saif YM, Barnes HJ, Glisson IR, Fadly AM, McDougald JR and Swayne DE (Ed.). Disease of Poultry, 11th ed. Iowa State University Press, Ames;2003. pp: 63-92.

6. Nemcová R. Criteria for selection of lactobacilli for probiotic use. Vet Med.1997; 42:19-27.

7. Maldonado Galdeano C, Perdigo G. The probiotic bacterium Lactobacillus casei induces activation of the gut mucosal immune system through innate immunity. Clin Vaccine Immunol.2006;13:219226.

8. Haghighi H R, Gong J, Gyles C L, Hayes M A, Sanei B, Parviz P, Gisavi H, Chambers J R, Sharif S H. Modulation of antibody-mediated immune response by probiotics in chickens. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol.2005;12:1387-1392.

Discussion Under conditions of this study, histopathological changes occurred in all challenged groups irrespective of IMBO supplementation, which agrred with (13). The histopathology of the organs following NDV infection varies with the clinical signs and gross lesions and was greatly affected by the strain of the virus and host immunity. Despite vaccination, solid immunity does not develop against NDV. Vaccination prevents disease, but not infection. When vaccinated birds challenged with virluent ND viruses, replication and shedding of the virus occur.

12

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (9-13)

9. Al-Dalo NR. Effects of probiotics on some aspects of pathology and productivity of chicken broilers. [Ph.D. Thesis]. College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul. Mosul. Iraq; 2007.

10. Emad J K,Amjad H E. Study of some impact of Enterococcus faecium as probiotic on chick 2-Newcastle disease antibody and white blood cells. Iraqi Journal Vet Med.2007;31(1):78-86 11. Kiernan JA. Histochemical and Hitochemical Methods. 3rd. ed.

Butterworth / Heinemann, Oxford;1999. pp:109-113 and 200-210.

12. Mayo M A. Virus taxonomy-Houston. Arch Virol.2002;147:10711076.

13. Hamid H,Campbell RSF Lamichhan C. The pathology of infection of chickens with the lentogenic V4 of NDV. Avian pathol.1990;19:687696.

14. Brown C, King DJ, SealB. Pathogenesis of Newcastle disease in chickens experimentally infected with viruses of different virulence.

Vet Pathol.1999; 36:125-132.

15. Kommers GD, King D J,Seal B S, Brown CC. Pathogenesis of chicken-passaged Newcastle disease viruses isolated from chickens and wild and exotic birds. Avian Dis.2003;47:319-329.

13

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (15-20)

Effects of bemiparin and heparin on blood pressure, renal and liver function tests and platelet indices of salt-loaded uninephrectomized rats K. Dizaye*, I. M. Maulood** and D. Q. Gallaly* * College of Medicine, Hawler Medical University, **College of Science, Salahaddin University, Arbil, Iraq E-mail: kawadizayee@yahoo.com (Received January 21, 2010; Accepted May 19, 2010) Abstract Low-molecular-weight Heparins (LMWHs) are being preferred to unfractionated Heparin (UFH) because of their superior convenience and comparable or slightly better toxicity profile. This study was designed to investigate and compare the effects of LMWH (Bemiparin) and Heparin on hemodynamic parameters, liver and renal function tests and platelet indices of saltloaded uninephrectomized hypertensive rats. The experimental rats divided into two groups. The first group included 18 hypertensive rats. Hypertension induced by unilateral nephrectomy and high NaCl loading with 4% NaCl in diet for 4 weeks.

The rat models were subdivided into three groups, each subgroup consists of six rats. The first subgroup served as a positive control. The second subgroup received a daily intraperitoneal (I.P) injection (250 unit/kg) of Bemiparin for thirty days. The third sub group received daily I.P injection (250 unit/kg) of Heparin for thirty days. The second group included six rats underwent sham operated surgery and served as a control group. Blood pressure was recorded in conscious rats by the tail-cuff plethmography method. At the end of the experiments, blood samples were collected from the rats for determination of serum creatinine, blood urea nitrogen, serum total bilirubin, serum sodium, potassium, calcium, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase (ALP) concentrations and platelet indices. Compared to sham control rats, Systolic blood pressure in uninephrectomized loaded with a high salt was significantly reduced by administration of both Bemiparin and Heparin. Serum K+ and Na+ levels of hypertensive rats were significantly increased. Bemiparin significantly lowered serum K+ and Na+ levels of uninephrectomized rats, while Heparin did not change serum K+ and Na+ levels. The rise in both blood urea and serum creatinine of salt-loaded uninephrectomized hypertensive rats were significantly (P<0.05) reduced by Bemiparin and Heparin administration. There were no significant changes in the liver function tests and platelet indices of all the experimental rats. The results suggest that Bemiparin has more beneficial effects than Heparin in improving blood pressure and renal functions by affecting serum levels of sodium, creatinine and urea. Unlike Heparin, Bemiparin did not lead to hyperkalemia in hypertensive rats.

Keywords: Nephrectomized hypertensive rats, Bemiparin, Heparin, Blood pressure, Liver and Renal function tests.

Available online at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

!" % & " ' # $ * .$ / ** + , ' -* ()

**

* .

- ." (UFH) , " % ! & ' ( )*+ (LMWH) ! " 7 8 1 "9 ' 1 :" ; < LMWH UFH 1 2 " ' ( 34 / 56 1 .. / 1 /- . :) 7 @ >"/ NaCl ; < = > 6: , ; = > "/ 6 * ?

-+ +

15

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (15-20)

= > "/ :) * 12 >"/ :) 7 C6 AB ; + < 1 "4 . "< ; " 6

F 1 ) ' 2 & @ 2 ; 6 1 /- .& / & , (%D) " NaCl ; < = > 6: , ; ( : /, > GHI) ' 2 < 1 < . , / < ; + ' 2 < 1 "< . < C6

1 "4 . C 2 2 , UFH ( : /, > GHI) 1 < C 2 2 , C ;' " 4: < Bemiparin 6 1 ' < 1 " !' * ., / < 1 "< (Sham) < C6 F / ' 2 < N >K - ' 1 '+ * / / " ' "' ' " L ( M 6 1 - (Sham)Q < ' ( . ?

-+ + * ALP P < ( " 7/ 7 ' * AST, ALT ' O UFH Bemiparin < / S 6: , " = >R "/ 1 ' > * P ' 4 SBP = "/ N79 ; Bemiparin Q = :) 6 * / " = "/ 1 * U 7" . / " = "/ * P ' :" P ; UFH ! T ' / " :) 7 @ >"/ S , " = >R "/ 6 * ' " ' "'

+ 7 8 1 "9 * ' 1 :" P !8" .UFH BemiparinQ < (P<0.05) P ' 4 N79' :) />" * UFH 2 , * . (Bemiparin) LMWH V "' "(" . " 1 ' > & * ?

-+

7 @ > ; Bemiparin T UFH L . ' "' ' " N79 ; < 5 2W" 3 8 . :) 6 * hyperkalemia ; / " concentration of serum albumin and increased serum urea, uric acid and creatinin concentration were normalized by LMWH treatment (10). Animal studies have shown that both Heparin and LMWH decrease bone necrosis (11).

Moreover, Olayinka, (12) concluded that LMWH can lead to hyperkalemia. However, Korea-Michowtiz etal (13) explained that the effect of LMWH on serum potassium may be aldosteron independent.

Abdel Salam et al. (14) demonstrated that total serum bilirubin was increased in rats treated with conventional Heparin; while alkaline phosphates was higher after LMWH treatment. Their results suggested a beneficial effect for nadroparin and enoxaparin in the treatment of patients with obstructive jaundice or cholestatic liver disorders (14). Few studies have yet been conducted to test the effects of UHF and LMWH on blood pressure, electrolytes, and liver and renal function tests in nephroctomized salt loaded rats. The aim of this study was to investigate the beneficial and adverse effects of LMWH (Bemiparin) and Heparin in experimentally induced hypertensive rats.

Introduction Heparin, a commonly used anticoagulant agent, is frequently used for the prophylaxes and treatment of deep venous thromboembolism. As with most medications, Heparin has a significant side effect profile. Two of its most important side effects, major bleeding and hyperkalemia, may be devastating without immediate diagnosis and treatment (1,2).

Treatment with Heparin has beneficial effects in diabetic nephropathy (3). Heparin also has inhibitory effects on smooth muscle cell proliferation and may be useful for long term treatment of patients with atherosclerosis with the aim of regression of atherosclerotic lesions (4). Reantragoon et al (5), demonstrated that Heparin suppresses thrombin stimulated endothelin-1 production in endothelial cells which is consistent with its reported effects of lowering blood pressure.

LMWHs are being preferred to unfractionated UFH because of their superior convenience and comparable or slightly better toxicity profile. Bemiparin sodium is a new second-generation LMWH. Bemiparin has the lowest mean molecular weight (3600 Da), the longest half-life (5.3 h) and the largest antifactor Xa: antifactor IIa ratio (8:1) of all LMWHs (6). The distinctive characteristics of LMWH have resulted in decreased rates of bleeding and equivalent rates of thrombocytopenia compared with UFH (7). LMWH has evident advantages over conventional Heparin with chronic renal failure and concomitant arterial hypertension (8).

LMWH showed favorable out come in bleeding time, whole blood clotting time prothrombin time, platelet count, fibrinogen, blood urea and serum creatinin (9). Furthermore Deepa and Varalakshimi found that decreased

Materials and methods Animals Male albino rats (Rattus norvegicus) weighing 300-375 grams were used in the present study. During the experimental period, six animals were kept in each cage.

The room temperature was maintained at 25 ยบC. A 12 hr light/dark cycle was set (15). Rodent food rich in nutrient and tap water were supplied.

16

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (15-20)

Experimental design The experimental rats were divided into two groups.

The first group included 18 rats which were fed a high-salt diet (4% NaCl), for 4 weeks and underwent uninephrectomy (16). The animals were allowed to survive after each operation and were monitored in the postoperative period with daily weights and close observations of their behavior. The rat models were subdivided into three groups, each subgroup having six rats.

The first subgroup served as a positive control. The second subgroup received a daily I.P injection (250 mg/kg) of Bemiparin for thirty days. The third sub group received daily I.P injection (200 mg/kg) of UFH for thirty days. The second group included six rats underwent sham operated surgery and served as a control group.

ALT, ALP, creatinine, urea, total bilirubin and calcium were estimated spectrophtometerically by their standard biochemical kits (BIOLABO, France). Serum sodium and potassium were determined by flame photometry (JENWAY, Model 8515 PFP 7).

Blood pressure and heart rate measurements Systolic blood pressure (SBP) and heart rate were measured by the tail-cuff plethymography method in unanaesthetized rats prewarmed for 20 minutes at 37 °C in a thermostatically control heating cabinet. The tail pressure pulsations were detected with a pneumatic pulse transducer (ADInstruments, power lab 2/25).

Animals were adapted to the blood pressure measurement procedure three times before the first pressure recording was made. Pressure and heart rate values were obtained by averaging 3-4 individual readings.

Statistical analysis revealed that, SBP was significantly increased (P<0.01) in salt-loaded uninephrectomized rats (132.16 ± 2.414 mm Hg) compared to the control group (110.86 ± 2.963 mm Hg). Administration of Heparin (250 units/kg/day) and Bemiparin (250 units/kg/day) for thirty days to hypertensive rats resulted in significantly decreasing blood pressure in both Bemiparin-treated hypertensive rats (110.63 ± 2.777 mm Hg) and Heparin treated hypertensive rats (116.61 ± 3.44 mm Hg) (Table 1).

Compared to the control group (297.6 ± 7.05 BPM), the heart rate was also significantly higher in salt-loaded nephrectomized rats (349.08 ± 15.55 BPM). Both Bemiparin and Heparin administration were unable to significantly change heart rate of salt-loaded nephrectomized rats (Table 1).

Statistical analysis All data are expressed as means± standard error (M±SE) and statistical analysis was carried out using statistically available software (SPSS Version 11.5). Data analysis was made using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The comparison among groups done using Duncan test. P<0.05 was considered as statistical significance.

Results

Chemical analysis At the end of the experiment, rats were sacrificed, blood samples were collected and sera were separated from whole blood samples immediately by centrifugation. Serum AST,

Table 1: Effects of Bemiparin and Heparin on systolic blood pressure and heart rate in salt loaded nephrectomized rats (n=24).

Systolic BP (mm Hg) 110.86±2.9630a 132.16±2.4141b 110.63±2.7774a 116.61±3.4433a

Treatment Control Salt loaded uninephrectomized rats Salt loaded nephrectomized rats + Bemiparin Salt loaded nephrectomized rats + Heparin Different letters indicate significant difference at P<0.05.

Serum calcium tended to increase in salt-loaded nephrectomized rats, Bemiparin and Heparin failed to attenuate the rise in serum calcium (Table 2). Serum sodium levels of salt-loaded nephrectomized rats were markedly increased. Administration of a daily I.P injection of (250 mg/kg) of Bemiparin significantly (P<0.05) lowered serum sodium. Heparin significantly increased the serum potassium (5.580 ± 0.1356 meq/l) level of salt loaded nephrectomized rats. Compared to the positive control group (4.520 ± 0.2332 meq/l) Bemiparin did not

Heart rate (beat/minute.)

297.6±7.0506a 349.08±15.5551b 316.2±16.9557ab 314.8±9.4496ab

significantly change serum potassium (4.780 ± 0.1530 meq/l) concentration.

Neither salt-loaded nephrectomized rats nor Bemiparin and Heparin significantly changed serum AST and ALT, while serum alkaline phosphatase tended to increase in saltloaded nephrectomized rats from 35.175± 3.7929 in the control group to 66.00± 4.3302 in the salt-loaded nephrectomized rats. Bemiparin treatment of salt-loaded nephrectomized rats did not alter serum alkaline phosphatase, while daily I.P injection of Heparin (200 mg/kg) for thirty days caused a small insignificantly

17

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (15-20)

Unilateral nephrectomized and NaCl treated rats did not show significant change in platelet count, mean platelet volume (MPV) and plateletcrit (PCT) relative to control group. Moreover, Bemiparin and Heparin treated saltloaded nephrectomized rats did not change platelet indices as seen in (Table 4).

reduction in its serum level, whereas, no statistical differences were detected in serum total bilirubin in all the treated groups (Table 3).

Our results demonstrate that both blood urea and serum creatinine were reduced significantly (P<0.05) by Bemiparin and Heparin administration (Table 3)

Table 2: Effects of Bemiparin and Heparin on serum calcium sodium and potassium in salt loaded nephrectomized rats (n=24).

Treatment Serum calcium (mg/dl) Control 8.1500±0.1284a Salt loaded uninephrectomized rats 8.7000±0.1140b Salt loaded nephrectomized rats + Bemiparin 8.6250±0.0487b Salt loaded nephrectomized rats + Heparin 8.5400±0.1600b Different letters indicate significant difference at P<0.05.

Serum Na+ (meq/l) 149.4±2.4113a 165.0±0.9486c 155.8±2.9223ab 159.6±3.3407bc

Serum K+ (meq/l) 5.120 ± 0.243ab 4.520 ± 0.2332a 4.780 ± 0.1530a 5.580 ± 0.1356b

Table 3: Effects of Bemiparin and Heparin on liver and kidney function tests in salt loaded – nephrectomized rats (n=24).

Treatment

ALT (U./ml)

16.1501± 0.2224 a 16.6001± Salt loaded uninephrectomized rats 0.8074 a 16.750± Salt loaded nephrectomized rats + Bemiparin 0.3041 a 16.100± Salt loaded nephrectomized rats + Heparin 0.6753 a Different letters indicate significant difference at P<0.05.

Control

AST (U./ml)

ALP (U./L)

20.125± 0.2416 a 20.300± 1.1410 a 20.325± 0.1391 a 20.160± 1.1655 a

35.175± 3.7929 a 66.00± 4.3302 c 58.200± 3.8131 bc 54.040± 1.1289 b

Blood urea mg/dl 25.805± 0.3489 b 25.300± 1.1887 b 15.400± 1.3293 a 14.300± 0.4147 a

Serum creatinine mg/dl 0.3000± 0.0836 a 2.0400± 0.7187 b 0.5000± 0.0316 a 0.7800± 0.2709 a

Serum total bilirubin mg/dl 0.1250± 0.0193 a 0.1200± 0.0200 a 0.1250± 0.0194 a 0.1200± 0.0200 a

Table 4: Effects of Bemiparin and Heparin on platelet indices in salt loaded – nephrectomized rats (n=24).

Treatment Platelet count (x103/µL) MPV (fL) PCT(%) Control 581.4±4.802a 4.8000±0.2302a 0.2940±0.0128a Salt loaded uninephrectomized rats 651.01±15.381a 4.6800±0.1319a 0.2740±0.0270a a a Salt loaded nephrectomized rats + Bemiparin 523.4±107.87 4.3200±0.2477 0.2180±0.0371a a a Salt loaded nephrectomized rats + Heparin 537.01±35.396 4.2800±0.1881 0.2380±0.0239a Different letters indicate significant difference at P<0.05, MPV = Mean platelet volume, PCT = Plateletcrit. resistance, a condition strongly associated with hypertension due to excess production of endogenous aldehyde.

Bohlerder et al. (21) and Kobori et al. (22) concluded that renovascular and salt loaded hypertension may be due to increased Ag II rather than rennin. A previous study demonstrated that high salt intake along with unilateral nephrectomy (UNx) produced accelerated hypertension within 3-4 weeks in dogs (23). Experimental studies confirmed that renal damage greatly enhanced by uninlateral nephrectomy and high salt diet (24).

Hypertension that was detected in salt-loaded nephrectomized rats was reduced and returned close to the

Discussion The results of the present study showed that unilateral nephrectomy along with salt diet increased SBP. This elevation in blood pressure may be result from peripheral vasoconstriction and a decrease in renal blood flow and GFR (17). Several studies found that the mechanisms by which salt increases BP may result from an alteration in renin-angiotesin and nitric oxide (NO) levels, increased oxidative stress and damage to kidneys (18,19). Whereas, Vasdev et al. (20), suggested that insulin resistance may be a major mechanism by which high salt intake increases blood pressure. High salt intake increases insulin

18

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (15-20)

smooth muscle cells (VSMCs) tone that is characteristic of established hypertension (31). Eiam-Ong et al. observed that hypercalcemia could influence BP by direct action on the VSMCs, or by inducing increments in blood levels of various vasopressive substances (32).

Neither salt-loaded nephrectomized rats nor Bemiparin and Heparin significantly changed serum AST and ALT, while serum alkaline phosphatase tended to increase in salt-loaded nephrectomized rats. The reason behind this elevation may be due to the necrotic and oxidative action of liver tissues which cause leakage of these enzymes from hepatocytes as a result of hepatocytes membrane damage (33). The results presented that both blood urea and serum creatinine were reduced significantly by daily intraperitoneal injection of both Bemiparin or Heparin. Reports related to the effects of LMWH on blood urea and serum creatinine are very limited. However, there is evidence that decreased concentration of serum albumin, urea, uric acid and creatinine were normalized by LMWH treatment, Bemiparin and Heparin treated salt-loaded nephrectomized rats did not change platelet indices relative to control group. This finding is consistent with the observation of Paul et al. (9) who found a favorable outcome in bleeding time, whole blood clotting time, prothrombin time and platelet count.

control values by both Bemiparin and Heparin administration. Reantragoon et al. (5) demonstrated that Heparin suppresses thrombin-stimulated endothelin-1 production in endothelial cells which is consistent with its reported effect of lowering blood pressure. On the other hand, the available evidence showed that LMWH has advantages over conventional Heparin in the conservative treatment of patient with glomerulonephrits, with chronic renal failure and concomitant arterial hypertension (6).

The mechanism by which Bemiparin reduces blood pressure is not well understood. One possible hypothesis is that Heparin could reduce blood pressure through renninangiotensin-aldosteron system rather than the involvement of sympathetic nervous system which can increase heart rate elevation. Both Bemiparin and Heparin administration did not significantly change heart rate.

Results of the current study revealed that serum sodium and potassium were increased in uninephrectomized rats that received 4% NaCl. Johnson et al. (25) demonstrated interstitial accumulation of Agngiotensin II positive cells as the reason for primary sodium retention in patients with nephrotic syndrome.

It is well known that renal effects of Agngiotensin II include a decreased glomerular filteration rate which will reduce the filtered sodium load, an increase in tubular sodium reabsorption and impairment of pressure natriuresis (26). In addition, decreased NO level in uninephrectomized-salt loaded rats resulted in decrease in urinary excretion of sodium, potassium and water which in turn increase serum levels of sodium and potassium (27).

Moreover, Schiffrin and St-Louis, (28) found that atrial natriuretic peptide receptor are down regulated after sodium loading in uninephrectomized rats.

Administration of Bemiparin significantly lowered serum sodium and returned close to the control values.

However, unfactionated Heparin could not reduce serum sodium significantly. Hyperkalemia that was induced by Heparin was not observed in Bemiparin group. This result may be due to that Heparin induces hypoaldosteronism leading to hyperkalemia (1). Interestingly, for the first time; this result showed that Bemiparin unlike other LMWH did not cause hyperkalemia. Olaynnka, concluded that LMWH like UFH can lead to hyperkalemia (12).

Moreover, short-term treatment with LMWH (nadroparin) induces a significant increase in serum potassium level but the related incidence of relevant hyperkalemia is low (29).

Serum calcium tended to increase in salt-loaded nephrectomized rats, this is in agreement with the finding of Beevers et al. who reported that contraction of smooth muscle cells is related to a rise in intracellular Ca+2 concentration (30). Tierney et al. elucidated that an increase in intracellular Na+ may lead to increased intracellular Ca+2 concentrations as a result of facilitated exchange and might explain the increase in vascular

Conclusions The results suggest that Bemiparin has more beneficial effects than Heparin in improving blood pressure and renal functions by affecting serum levels of sodium, creatinine and urea. Unlike Heparin, Bemiparin did not lead to hyperkalemia in nephrectonized salt loaded hypertensive rats.

References 1. Gonzalez-Martin, G; Diaz-Molinas, M. S; Martinez, A.M and Ortiz, M:Heparinâ&#x20AC;&#x201C;induced hyperkalemia: a prospective study, Int Clin pharmacol ther toxicol, 1991, 29(11):44650 2. Su HM, Voon WC, Chu CS, Lin TH, Lai WT, Sheu SH.: Heparininduced cardiac tamponade and life-threatening hyperkalema in a patient with chronic hemodialysis.Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2005 Mar;21(3):128-33.

3. Oturai, P.S: Effects of Heparin on vascular dysfunction in diabetic rats, Clin. Exp Pharmacology Physiol, 1999, 25 (5-6) 411-4 4. Currier, J.W; Pow, T.K; Haudens child, C.C; minihan, A.C and Faxon, P.P:\low molecular weight (enoxaparin) reduces rest enosis after iliac angioplasty in the hypercholesterolemia rabbit, J. Am. Coll Cardiol. 1991, 17 (6) : 118-125.

5. Reantragoon, S; Arrigo, L.M; Seouol, M.M; Dweck, H, S and Rosenfeld, L: Specific Heparin fractions suppress endothelin-1 production in cultured human umblieal vein endothelial cells, Arch Biochem Biophysics, 1994, 314 (2): 315-32.

6. Andre Planès, du Mail, La Rochelle: Bemiparin: a review of its use in the prevention of venous thromboembolism and treatment of deep vein thrombosis. Drugs. 2003;63 (21):2357-77

19

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (15-20)

21. Bohlender, J. Menard J. Ganten D. and Luft F.C.. Angiotensinogen concentrations and renin clearance: implications for blood pressure regulation. Hypertension. 2000 35:780–786.

22. Kobori, H. Nangaku M.L. Navar G. and Nishigama A.. The Internal Renin-Angiotensin System: From Physiology to Pathology of Hypertension and Kidney Disease. Pharmacol Rev. 2007, 59: 251287.

23. Badyal, D.K. Lata H. and Dadhich A.P.. Animal models of hypertension and effects of drugs. Indian Journal of pharmacology.

2003, 35: 349-362.

24. Richard, P.E. Van D. Howard J.J. and Abraham P.P.. Blood pressure and the susceptibility to renal damage after unilateral nephrectomy and L-NAME induced hypertension in rats. Nephrol Dial Transplant.

2000,15: 1337-1343 25. Johnson, R.J. Herrera J. Schreiner G. and Rodríguez-Iturbe B..

Acquired and subtle renal injury as a mechanism for salt-sensitive hypertension: bridging the hypothesis of Goldblatt and Guyton. N Engl J Med. 2002,346: 913-923.

26. Makino, A. Skelton M.M. Zou A.P. Roman R.J. and Cowley A.W..

Increased renal medullary oxidative stress produces hypertension.

Hypertension. 2002, 39: 667-672.

27. Huang, W.C. and Tsai R.Y.. Nitric oxide synthesis inhibition retards surgical reversal of one-kidney goldblatt hypertension in rats.

Hypertension. 1998, 32: 534-540.

28. Schiffrin, E.L. and St-Louis J.. Decreased density of vascular receptors for atrial natriuretic peptide in DOCA-salt hypertensive rats. Hypertension. 1987, 9: 504-512 29. Gheno G, Cinetto L, Savarino C, Vellar S, Carraro M, Randon M. : Variations of serum potassium level and risk of hyperkalemia in inpatients receiving low-molecular weight Heparin. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2003 Sep;59(5-6):373-7. Epub 2003 Jul 8.

30. Beevers, G, Gregory Y. H. and Eoin O. B.. The pathophysiology of hypertension. BMJ. 2001, 322:912-916.

31. Tierney, L. M. Stephen J.M. and Maxine A. P.. Current medical diagnosis and treatment. 2001 McGraw-Hill companies, Inc. 32. Eiam-Ong, S. Pongsak P. Visith S. and Narongsak C.. Acute hypercalcemia induced hypertension: The role of calcium channel and alpha-1 adrenergic receptor. J Med Assoc Thai. 2004, 87(4): 410-416.

33. Bhattacharjee, N.; Surajit, P. and Anisur, K.. Amelioration of carcinogen-induced toxicity in mice by administration of a potentized homeopathic drug, Natrium Sulphuricum. Canc Res. 2007, 200, 10:111. .

7. Carlson, M, K; Gleason, P.P and Sen. S: Elevation of hepatic transaminase after and review of unfractionated and Low molecular weight Heparin-induced hepatotoxicity, pharmacotherapy 21 (1): 2001108-113.

8. Kovaliv, Y,B: Glycosaminoglycan renal function – basic and clinical aspects, meal pregl, 2007, 60 (2): 9-13.

9. Paul,V; Pudoor, A; Earali, J; John, B; Anil Kumar, C.S and Anthony, T. Trial if low molecular weight Heparin in the treatment of viper bites, J. Assoc. Physicians India, 55 : 338-342.monitoring of Heparin, British society for Haematology, 2007133, 19-34 10. Deepa, P.R and Varalakshimi, p: protective effects if certoparin sodium, a low molecular weight Heparin derivative, in experimental atherosclerosis, 2004 Clin Chem. Act. 11. Muir,J.M;Hirsh,J and Weitz,J.I: A histomorphometric comparison of the effects of Heparin and low-molecular weight Heparin on cancellous bone in rats.Blood, 1997, 89:3236-3242 12. Olayinka, A,O: Low molecular weight Heparins can lead to hyperkalemia, the interner Joumal of Geriatrics and Grontoloy, 2005, volum 2, number 2 13. Koren-Michowitz, M; s Avni, B; Michowitz, Y; Moravski, G; Efrati, S and golik, A: Early onset of hyperkalemia in patients treated with low molecular weight Heparin: a prospective study, pharmacoepidemiol Drug, 2004,13 (5): 299-302 14. Abdel-Salam, O.M; Baivony, A. R; Ameens, A and Hassan N.S: A study of unfractionated and low molecular weight Heparins in a model of cholestatic Res, 2005 51 (1): 59-67 15. Krinke, G. J..The laboratory Rat. Academic press. 2000A Harcourt Science and Technology company Sand Diego.

16. Rothermund, L; Susanne, L; Peter, K; Martin, and Reinhold, K: Renal endothelia ETALETB receptor imbalance differentiates spontaneous hypertension, Hypertension, 200137: 275-290 17. Carlstrom, M. Sallstrom J. Skott O. Larsson E. and Persson A.E..

Uninephrectomy in young age or chronic salt loading causes saltsensitive hypertension in adult rats. Hypertension. 2007, 49(6): 134250.

18. Cubeddu, L.X. Alfieri A.B. and Hoffmann I.S.. Nitric oxide and salt sensitivity. Am J Hypertens. 2000, 13: 973-9.

19. Bayorh, M.A. Ganada A.A. Socci R.R. Silvestrov N. and Abukhalaf I.K. The role of oxidative stress in salt-induced hypertension. Am J Hypertens. 200417:316 20. Vasdev, S. Gill V.D. Parai S. and Gadag V.. Effects of moderately high dietary salt and lipoic acid on blood pressure in Wister-Kyoto rats. Exp Clin Cardiol. 2007, 12(2): 77-81.

20

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (21-27)

Effect of Nigella sativa (seed and oil) on the bacteriological quality of soft white cheese S. D. Alsawaf and H. S. Alnaemi Department of Veterinary Public Health, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq (Received September 22, 2009; Accepted January 17, 2010) Abstract The effect of Nigella sativa seed (1% and 3%) and oil (0.3% and 1%) on some food poisoning and pathogenic bacteria as well as on the total bacterial count TBC (cfu/g) in soft white cheese prepared from raw ewe's milk and labratory pasteurized ewe's milk inoculated with Staphylococcus aureus, Brucella melitensis and Escherichia coli at a concentration of 1Ă&#x2014;106 cfu/ml were carried out. Cheese samples were examined for bacterial count at: zero, 2nd, 4th and 6th days of storage at refrigerator temp. Results showed that there was Significant decrease (P<0.05) in TBC, Staphylococcus aureus, Brucella melitensis and Escherichia coli count in cheese samples treated with N. sativa seed (1% and 3%) and oil (0.3% and 1%) with pronounced concentration dependent inhibition in contrast to control cheese samples which exerted significant increase in bacterial counts as it reached 2.8Ă&#x2014;107, 2.95Ă&#x2014;106, 2.22Ă&#x2014;106 and 2.885Ă&#x2014;106 cfu/g for TBC, Staph. aureus, Br. melitensis and E. coli respectively at the 6th day of storage at refrigerator temp. N. sativa oil (0.3% and 1%) was significantly more affective (P<0.05) as antibacterial agent than seed (1% and 3%) respectively. No significant differences (P<0.05) in the susceptibility of Staph. aureus, Br.melitensis and E. coli to the antibacterial effect of N. sativa seed (1% and 3%) and oil (0.3% and 1%) were observed in treated soft white cheese.

Keywords: Nigella sativa; Bacteriological quality; Soft white cheese.

Available online at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

Nigella sativa

"# $ %& ' ! ( ( (

&) &' %() # # *+ , - . Nigella sativa " # $ %

! , () ( 5 ( * 2 3* , 4 2 & (TBC) .+ - . / % Staph. aureus 7* 2 7

# 5 * 2 (TBC) .+ - . 6 *+ 2 * & " ? / <:=Ă&#x2014;: $ E. coli * 7 94 Br.melitensis 8 # - ? @ E. coli * 7 94 Br.melitensis 8 # Staph. aureus 7* # ( ( $ %C %: $( " # % 2 A # 2 + * . & (TBC) .+

( * ( ! * I' ( * JK+ . 8 & 2$ 2 < H ,G , ! : 4 & %: %=.C $ " # (L " # (%: %=.C) $ (%C %:) % 2 A * . & # .+ & (P<0.05) 2 ( + * . JK+ / % 2 N - . . $ % 2 # $ - . M 9 .

8 (# ( 7* ( .+ O # .+ & * . ! # 2 N # & & - . T/ <:=Ă&#x2014;G.PPS <:=Ă&#x2014;G.GG ,<:=Ă&#x2014;G.RS ,Q:=Ă&#x2014;G.P - ? * 7 9A

21

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (21-27)

2( (P<0.05) ( * +

%: %=.C $ " # $ JK+ . 8 & 2$ ( 2( # # & (P<0.05) * L . K .& - . %C %: $ % " # % (%: %=.C) ( $ (%C %:) %

! * 7 9A 8 # 7* . , 4 2 & " #

Introduction

Materials and methods

Soft white cheese locally made from sheep's and/ or goat's milk are available in Mosul market during spring season. The cheese is made directly after milking, without any heat treatment. Thus, the traditional way of making this type of cheese lacks the simple hygienic measure even in the way for its display in local market. Frequently, some consumers suffer from diarrhea, gastrointestinal pain and brucellosis (1).

N. sativa seed (Black seed) is a plant which has been used for centuries for medicinal and culinary purposes and reported to possess a number of pharmacological properties, including antimicrobial activity (2).

Staph. aureus is a pathogenic bacteria which can affect any part of the body causing several diseases as septicemia, brain abscess, and enterocolitis (3). Because of the frequent contamination of milk from dairy personnel, and the high incidence of Staphylococcal mastitis in dairy herds, the most commonly occuring type of food poisoning is due to enterotoxin-producing strains of Staph. aureus (4).

Br.melitensis is the most common species in the genus Brucella in several parts of the world (5). Br.melitensis can infect human and animal causing brucellosis which is a systemic disease which can cause different clinical manifestations (6). The danger of contracting brucellosis through the consumption of unpasteurized raw milk and dairy products drew the attention of public health authorities in many countries to impose quarantine regulations governing the consumption of such products (7).

E. coli also is a food pathogen, strains of this species express potent toxins and cause serious gastrointestinal infections. Additionally it can result in life-threating systemic disease (8).

Although optimum growth temp. is 37Ë&#x161;C for Staph. aureus, Br.melitensis and E. coli, Staph. aureus can grow at temperatures slightly above 5Ë&#x161;C, Br.melitensis can survive at 5Ë&#x161;C for long periods of time and are part of a so-called "new problem" with dairy products, while E. coli exhibit competetive growth in milk at 5Ë&#x161;C (9).

Therefore, this work was planned to build up information on the effect of N. sativa seed and oil on growth and survival of total bacteria, Staph. aureus, Br.melitensis and E. coli in soft white cheese during manufacturing and storage at refrigerator temp.

The bacteria used in this study are known to be the cause of disease in human and some are known to be involved in food poisoning.

Staph. aureus was obtained from Mr. Omar Hashem Sheet, Department of Veterinary Public Health, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul.

Br. melitensis was obtained from Miss Amera Ali Ahmed, Department of Basic Science, Nursing College, University of Mosul.

E. coli was obtained from Mrs. Noor Abd Alhafez Jerjees, Department of Biology, Education College, University of Mosul.

Each isolate was confirmed by reculturing on the selective media and by performing the biochemical tests (10).

Staph. aureus and E. coli were propagated in Nutrient broth at 37Ë&#x161;C for 24h. Two transfers were made prior to inoculation, the cfu/ml was determined using Mannitol Salt Agar and MacConkey Agar as a selective media for Staph. aureus and E. coli, respctively.

Br.melitensis was propagated in Brucella broth at 37Ë&#x161;C for 48h. Also two transfers were made prior to inoculation, the cfu/ml was determined using Brucella Agar as a selective medium (11).

The procedure described by (12) was used for preparation of soft white cheese.

For total bacterial count (TBC), raw ewe's milk was used for preparation of soft white cheese. For other treatments raw ewe's milk was labratory pasteurized at 63Ë&#x161;C for 30 min. Pasteurized milk was divided into three categories, each category was inoculated with one type of bacteria under study (Staph. aureus, Br.melitensis and E. coli) to yield a concentration of about 1Ă&#x2014;106 cfu/ml.

Samples from raw and inoculated milk were taken to determine the initial count of bacteria (11).

Raw and each category of inoculated milk were divided into five equal parts. The first one was considered as a control, while the 2nd and 3rd parts were mixed with 1% and 3% of N. sativa seed and the 4th and 5th parts were mixed with 0.3% and 1% of N. sativa oil (cold pressed). These concentrations of N. sativa seed and oil were used as 1% and 3% of N. sativa seed approximately contain 0.3% and 1% of it's oil respectively.

Samples from finished cheese were examined for TBC, Staph. aureus, Br.melitensis and E. coli count. Finished

22

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (21-27)

The corresponding results obtained from cheese prepared from milk inoculated with Staph. aureus at a level of 1×106 cfu/ml (control) and stored at refrigerator revealed that Staph. aureus count significantly increased (P<0.05) from 2.7×106 cfu/g in the finished cheese (zero day) to 2.95×106 cfu/g at the 6th day of storage. It was obvious that there was significant differences (P<0.05) in Staph. aureus counts between control and N. sativa seed and oil treated cheese samples in the finished cheese and during it's storage at refrigerator temp. Firstly Staph. aureus counts increased in finished cheese prepared from milk inoculated with the bacteria and treated with N. sativa seed and oil with a minimum increase (1.19×106 cfu/g) observed in the 4th treatment. Significant differences (P<0.05) in Staph. aureus counts between treatments were recorded at zero time except between 1st and 2nd treatments and between 2nd and 3rd treatments which increment in counts was not significantly different (P<0.05). After that, Staph. aureus counts significantly decreased (P<0.05) in treated cheese with N. sativa seed and oil during storage at refrigerator temp. - in contrast to the control cheese samples- as it reached 2.57×105, 1.5×105, 1.74×105 and 8.5×104 cfu/g in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th treatments, respectively at the 6th day of storage except 4th treatment at the 4th and 6th days of storage where decrease in counts was not significantly different (P<0.05). At the 2nd and 4th day of storage results showed significant differences (P<0.05) in Staph. aureus counts between treatments with the exception of 1st and 3rd treatments and 2nd and 3rd treatments which differences were not significant (P<0.05). No significant differences (P<0.05) in Staph. aureus counts were observed between treatments at the 6th day of storage of treated cheese except 1st and 4th treatments which Staph. aureus count was significantly different (P<0.05). As mentioned in table (1), results showed that there was significant differences (P<0.05) in counts of Staph. aureus between control and between treatments regardless of storage period. But no significant differences (P<0.05) in counts between 2nd and 3rd treatments was noticed (Table 2).

From data in Table (3) it was evident that Br.melitensis counts increased as it reached 2.23×106 cfu/g at the 2nd and 4th days of storage, then slightly declined to reach 2.22×106 cfu/g at the 6th day of storage of control cheese samples prepared from milk inoculated with Br.melitensis at a conc. of 1×106 cfu/ml. This incriment and decline in counts of Br.melitensis was not significant (P<0.05), where as there was significant differences (P<0.05) in Br.melitensis counts between control and treated cheese samples in the finished cheese and during storage at refrigerator temp.

Br.melitensis counts also increased in the finished cheese prepared from milk inoculated with the bacteria and treated with N. sativa seed and oil to record a minimum increase in counts (1.29×106 cfu/g) in the 4th treatment at zero time.

Br.melitensis counts were significantly different (P<0.05)

cheese were stored at refrigerator temp. (5±2˚C). Sampels from the storage cheese were examined in the 2nd, 4th and 6th days of storage for count of mentioned bacteria according to (11).

The data were Statistically analyzed using Sigma Stat for windows Version 3.10 (2004). Analysis of variance procedures appropriate for either a two-way completely randomized design for data involved in the effect of different concentrations of bacterial inhibition materials (N. sativa seed and oil) and storage durations and their interaction and a one-way completely randomized design for data concerned with degree of bacterial sensitivity to each concentration of the inhibitor, according to (13).

Significant differences (P<0.05) among treatment means were detected based on Duncan Multiple Range Test (14).

Results The results illustrated in Table (1) verify that there was significant increase (P<0.05) in TBC in finished (zero day) and stored (2nd, 4th and 6th days of storage at refrigerator temp.) cheese (control) as it reached 2.8×107 cfu/g at the 6th day of storage. Also significant differences (P<0.05) in TBC between control (continue increasing) and treated cheese samples were observed. Cheese samples made from milk treated with 1% (1st treatment) and 3% (2nd treatment) of N. sativa seed and 0.3% (3rd treatment) and 1% (4th treatment) of N. sativa oil also showed an increase in TBC in the finished cheese with a minimum increase (6.2×106 cfu/g) was reported in the 4th treatment. This incriment in counts was significantly different (P<0.05) between treatments, except 2nd and 3rd treatments were not significantly different (P<0.05). Results referred that there was a significant decrease (P<0.05) in TBC in treated cheese with N. sativa seed and oil during storage at refrigerator temp. until it reached 1.95×106, 1.2×106, 1.34×106 and 9.4×105 cfu/g in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th treatments, respectively at the 6th day of storage with the exception of 4th treatment during the 4th and 6th days of storage which the decrease in TBC was not significantly different (P<0.05). Significant differences (P<0.05) in TBC between treatments at the 2nd day of storage were observed.

But no significant differences (P<0.05) between the 1st and 2nd treatments and 2nd and 3rd treatments were recorded.

During the 4th and 6th days of storage also there was significant differences (P<0.05) in TBC between treatments except between 1st and 3rd treatments and 2nd and 3rd treatments at the 4th day of storage and between 1st and 3rd treatments and 2nd, 3rd and 4th treatments at the 6th day of storage where TBC were not significantly different (P<0.05). Regardless of storage period results showed significant differences (P<0.05) in TBC between control and between treatments with the exception of 2nd and 3rd treatments which was not significantly different (P<0.05).

23

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (21-27)

between treatments at zero time. During storage at refrigerator temp., results showed significant decrease (P<0.05) in counts of Br.melitensis in treated cheese sampels until it reached 4.5×105, 2.9×105, 3.2×105 and 2.2×105 cfu/g in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th treatments, respectively at the 6th day of storage. Significant differences (P<0.05) in Br.melitensis counts were observed between

treatments of cheese at each storage period in refrigerator, except between 1st and 3rd treatments, 2nd and 3rd treatments and 2nd, 3rd and 4th treatments at the 2nd, 4th and 6th day of storage, respectively where differences in counts were not significant (P<0.05). Control and treated cheese samples showed significant differences (P<0.05) in Br.melitensis counts between them, regardless of storage period.

Table 1: Effect of Nigella sativa (seed and oil) on the means of TBC (cfu/g) during manufacturing and storage of soft white cheese at refrigerator temp.

Treatments (cfu/g) Control 1% Seed 3% Seed 0.3% Oil 1% Oil 1.8×107 8.5×106 7.4×106 7.6×106 6.2×106 0 a b c c d 2.2×107 4.7×106 4.1×106 3.8×106 2.8×106 2 e f gf g h 2.4×107 3×106 2.2×106 2.5×106 1.5×106 4 i j k kj o 2.8×107 1.95×106 1.2×106 1.34×106 9.4×105 6 m n o on o 2.3×107 4.5375×106 3.725×106 3.81×106 2.86×106 Treatments effect A B C C D • Horizontally different small letters within each storage period are significantly different (P<0.05).

• Vertically different small letters within each treatment are significantly different (P<0.05).

• Different capital letters within last raw (treatments regardless of storage period) are significantly different (P<0.05).

Storage Period (days)

Table 2: Effect of N. sativa (seed and oil) on the means of Staphylococcus aureus (cfu/g) during manufacturing and storage of soft white cheese at refrigerator temp*.

Treatments (cfu/g) Control 1% Seed 3% Seed 0.3% Oil 1% Oil 2.7×106 1.56×106 1.49×106 1.4×106 1.19×106 0 a b bc c d 2.74×106 8.2×105 6×105 6.9×105 3.2×105 2 a f g fg h 2.83×106 5.1×105 3.2×105 4.4×105 1.7×105 4 an j k jk mp 2.95×106 2.57×105 1.5×105 1.74×105 8.5×104 6 n o op op p 2.805×106 7.8675×105 6.4×105 6.76×105 4.4125×105 Treatments effect A B C C D • Horizontally different small letters within each storage period are significantly different (P<0.05).

• Vertically different small letters within each treatment are significantly different (P<0.05).

• Different capital letters within last raw (treatments regardless of storage period) are significantly different (P<0.05). * Bacteria was added to the milk used for preparation of soft white cheese at a conc. of 1×106 cfu/ml.

Storage Period (days)

control and treated cheese samples in the finished cheese at zero time and during storage at refrigerator temp. As in control cheese sampels, at beginning E. coli counts increased in the finished cheese prepared from milk inoculated with the bacteria and treated with N. sativa seed (1% and 3%) and oil (0.3% and 1%) to record a minimum

Results recorded in Table (4) revealed that E. coli counts increased significantly (P<0.05) from 2.585×106 cfu/g in the control cheese samples at zero time to 2.885×106 cfu/g at the 6th day of storage of cheese prepared from milk inoculated with E. coli at a level of 1×106 cfu/ml.

E. coli counts were significantly different (P<0.05) between

24

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (21-27)

increase (1.45×106 cfu/g) in the 3rd treatment at zero time.

E. coli count was only significantly different (P<0.05) between 1st and 3rd treatments and 1st and 4th treatments at zero time. Later, E. coli counts significantly decreased (P<0.05) during storage of N. sativa seed and oil treated cheese at refrigerator temp. as it reached 7×105, 4.5×105, 4.5×105 and 2.5×105 cfu/g in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th treatments, respectively at the 6th day of storage. But no significant decrease (P<0.05) was observed in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th treatments at the 4th and 6th days of storage and in the 2nd and 4th treatments at the 2nd and 4th day of storage.

Every storage period showed no significant differences (P<0.05) in E. coli counts between treatments with the exception of 1st and 4th treatments at the 2nd day of storage, 1st and 3rd treatments and 1st and 4th treatments at the 4th day of storage, and 1st and 4th treatments at the 6th day of storage where differences in counts were significant (P<0.05). As mentioned in Table 1 and 2 significant differences (P<0.05) in E. coli counts between control and between treated cheese samples were observed, regardless of storage period, except 2nd and 3rd treatments which difference was not significant (P<0.05).

Table 3: Effect of N. sativa (seed and oil) on the means of Brucella melitensis (cfu/g) during manufacturing and storage of soft white cheese at refrigerator temp*.

Treatments (cfu/g) Control 1% Seed 3% Seed 0.3% Oil 1% Oil 2.2×106 1.85×106 1.41×106 1.59×106 1.29×106 0 a b c d e 2.23×106 1.12×106 8.9×105 1.06×106 6.3×105 2 a g h g i 2.23×106 7.5×105 5.1×105 5.9×105 3.6×105 4 a k m m n 2.22×106 4.5×105 2.9×105 3.2×105 2.2×105 6 a p q q q 1.0425×106 7.75×105 8.9×105 2.22×106 6.25×105 Treatments effect A C D E B • Horizontally different small letters within each storage period are significantly different (P<0.05).

• Vertically different small letters within each treatment are significantly different (P<0.05).

• Different capital letters within last raw (treatments regardless of storage period) are significantly different (P<0.05). * Bacteria was added to the milk used for preparation of soft white cheese at a conc. of 1×106 cfu/ml.

Storage Period (days)

Table 4: Effect of N. sativa (seed and oil) on the means of E. coli (cfu/g) during manufacturing and storage of soft white cheese at refrigerator temp*.

Treatments (cfu/g) Control 1% Seed 3% Seed 0.3% Oil 1% Oil 2.585×106 1.85×106 1.65×106 1.45×106 1.55×106 0 a b bc c c 2.735×106 1.1×106 8.5×105 8.5×105 6×105 2 aj e ef ef fi 2.83×106 8.5×105 6.5×105 5.5×105 4×105 4 aj h hif ik im 2.885×106 7×105 4.5×105 4.5×105 2.5×105 6 j kh kmi km m 2.75875×106 1.125×106 9×105 8.25×105 7×105 Treatments effect A B C C D • Horizontally different small letters within each storage period are significantly different (P<0.05).

• Vertically different small letters within each treatment are significantly different (P<0.05).

• Different capital letters within last raw (treatments regardless of storage period) are significantly different (P<0.05). * Bacteria was added to the milk used for preparation of soft white cheese at a conc. of 1×106 cfu/ml.

Storage Period (days)

25

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (21-27)

The information obtained by the achieved results in Table (5) proved that there was no significant differences (P<0.05) in the mean values of examined bacterial counts (Staph. aureus, Br. melitensis, and E. coli) within the same

treatment in cheese samples prepared from milk inoculated with these bacteria and treated with N. sativa seed (1% and 3%) and oil (0.3% and 1%) after 6th days of storage at refrigerator temp.

Table 5: Comparison of the antibacterial activity of N. sativa seed and oil towards bacterial types under study in soft white cheese.

Bacterial type

1% Seed 7.8675×105 ± Staph. aureus 1.8658×105 a 1.0425×106 ± 1.98104×105 Br. melitensis a 1.125×106 ± E. coli 1.70115×105 a • Vertically similar letters are not significant (P<0.05).

Mean ± Se 3% Seed 0.3% Oil 6.4×105± 6.76×105 ± 1.96086×105 1.72758×105 a a 7.75×105 ± 8.9×105 ± 1.60732×105 1.82795×105 a a 9×105 ± 8.25×105 ± 1.75895×105 1.50641×105 a a

1% Oil 4.4125×105 ± 1.66539×105 a 6.25×105± 1.55878×105 a 7×105 ± 1.92251×105 a

days. Another study (20) indicated that milk treatment with oil of black seed (0.5%) gave good results for holding the raw milk quality in acceptable level for 19 hours at temp.

25˚C and for 5 days at 5˚C. The results of water extract of N. sativa seed treatment (0.5%) and the oil treatment (0.2%) showed less shelf time 17 hours at 25˚C and 4 days at 5˚C while water extract treatment at a conc. of 0.2% gave an acceptable result in the milk quality preservation 11 hours at 25˚C and 3 days at 5˚C comparable with control which gave shelf time 13 hours at room temp. and 1 day at 5˚C. Finally the investigator recomended the use of water extract and oil of N. sativa as natural preservative materials for raw milk.

Several studies in vitro refered to the antibacterial effect of extracts and oil of black seed against Staph. aureus and E. coli (2,21-24). A great inhibitory effect of concentrated crude aqueous extract of N. sativa seed on Brucella bacteria was reported by (25). Whereas (26) recorded a slight antibacterial effect of N. sativa oil on E. coli while aqueous and alcoholic extracts showed no effect on this bacteria.

Our results are in agreement with those obtained by (2,27) who showed pronounced concentration dependent inhibition of all the bacteria tested (Table 1-4).

The present findings in Table 1-4 revealed that N. sativa oil (0.3% and 1%) was significantly more affective (P<0.05) as antibacterial agent than seed (1% and 3%) respectively. This is primarily belongs to the presence of Thymoquinone TQ (2-isopropyl-5-methyl-benzoquinone) which considered as one of the major components of N. sativa volatile oil, but which is also present in the fixed oil (28,29). Antibacterial effect of TQ was due to the inhibition of RNA and protein synthesis (22), as well as α-Pinene (The unsaturated bicyclic monoterpene hydrocarbon) which

Discussion It was clear from the forementioned results there was an obvious increase in bacterial counts in finished cheese at zero time (Tables 1-4), this incriment primarily belong to that all the organisms present in the milk become part of the fresh curd flora, being concentrated in the curd (4).

It could be noticed the high counts of the bacterial types (TBC, Staph. aureus, Br.melitensis and E. coli) in control soft white cheese in contrast to the rapid reduction of bacterial counts in cheese containing N. sativa seed and oil added during preparation. Results are in agreement with those observed by (15) who showed similar antibacterial activity of N. sativa seed on Staph. aureus in Domiati cheese and with the results obtained by (16) who mentioned that E. coli was not detectable after three and two weeks of storage at room and refrigerator temperatures respectively for cheeses perpared from milk inoculated with the bacteria (2×104 cfu/ml) and treated with 5% and 10% of sod. chloride and N. sativa seeds at a concentration of 1% and 3%. Also the results agree to a certain extent with those reported by (17) who indicated that adding of N. sativa seed at a conc. of 1% to the processed cheese inhibited microbial growth and with the results recorded by (18) who noticed an inhibitory effect of essential oil of N. sativa on microorganisms especially on the total number of bacteria, coliform bacteria, lipolytic and proteolytic bacteria during storage of soft white cheese treated with the oil at a ratio of 0.5% of curd weight at 5˚C for 28 days. Similar inhibitory influence induced by N. sativa on microorganisms in yoghurt was reported by (19) who showed that addition of alcoholic extract of black seeds in a conc. of 3% was caused prolongation of it's keeping quality from 7 to 14

26

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (21-27)

9. Robinson RK. Dairy microbiology. The microbiology of milk. 2nd ed.

Elsevier Applied Science, London and New York. 1990; 1: 147.

10. Koneman EW, Allen SD, Janda WM, Shreckenberger PC, Winn WC. Color atlas and text book of diagnostic microbiology. 5th ed. J.B. Lippincott-Raben Publisher, Philadelphia; 1997.

11. APHA, American Public Health Association. Compendium of methods for the microbiological examinations of foods. 2nd ed. APHA, Washington, DC, USA; 1992.

12. Fahmi AH, Sharara HA. Studies on Egyption Domiati cheese. J Dairy Res 1950; 17: 312-327.

13. Steel RG, Torrie JH. Principles and procedures of statistics: A biometrical approach. 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill, New York; 1980.

14. Duncan DB. Multiple range F-test. Biometrics. 1955; 11: 1-42.

15. Sabreen MS. Incidence of Staphylococci microorganisms in Domiati cheese and the effect of Nigella sativa on the growth of Staphylococcus aureus. 7th Sci Fac Vet Med Assuit Univ; 1996.

16. Wahba NM, Ali MM, Ahmed EK. Effect of Nigella sativa and salt on the growth and survival of E. coli O157: H7 during manufacture and storage of Damietta cheese. Assiut Vet Med J 2004; 50(100): 74-83.

17. Al-Neaaemy ZN. Study the improvement of dispersability of processed cheese using emulsification substances and different mixtures of fat percents. MSc thesis. College of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq. 2008.

18. Badawi Skh, Al-Badrany HS, Hasan GhM. Using of essential oils extracted from some spices to extend the shelf life of soft white cheese. Mesopotamia J Agri. 2009;37:125-130.

19. Thaher AA, Al-Tamee II, Muhyaddin MO. Inhibitory action of Nigella sativa seed extracts against some microorganisms and use of them in prolongation of keeping quality of yoghurt. Al-Anbar J Agri Sci. 2003;1:224-234.

20. Hussen FF. Using of Al-Baraka (Nigella sativa L.) seeds and oil as natural preservative materials for raw milk. Tikrit J Agri Sci. 2006;6:12-20.

21. Morsi NM. Antimicrobial effect of crude extracts of Nigella sativa on multiple antibiotics-resistant bacteria. Acta Microbiol Pol 2000; 49(1): 63-74.

22. Kahsai Aw. Isolation and characterization of active ingredients from Nigella sativa for antibacterial screening. MSc (Chemistry), East Tennessee State University, USA; 2002.

23. Mashhadian NV, Rakhshandeh H. Antibacterial and antifungal effects of Nigella sativa extracts against S. aureus, P. aeroginosa and C. albicans. Pak J Med Sci 2005; 21: 47-52.

24. Al-Salman HK. Antibacterial and antifungal activity of volatile oils of some medicinal plants. Iraqi J Desert Studies. 2008;1:91-103.

25. Al-Sultan SA. The inhibitory effect of some medicinal plant extracts to Brucella bacteria (in vitro studies). MSc thesis. College of Science, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq. 1993.

26. Shareef AY, Al-Chalabi KA. Effect of some medicinal plant extracts on the growth of some gram +ve and gram â&#x20AC;&#x201C;ve bacteria. Rafidain J Sci. 2001;12:37-46.

27. Hanafy MSM, Hatem ME. Studies on the antimicrobial activity of Nigella sativa seed (Black cumin). J Ethanopharmacology 1991;34:275-278.

28. Burits M, Bucar F. Antioxidant activity of Nigella sativa oil.

Phytother Res 2000; 14: 323-328.

29. Ali BH, Blunden G. Pharmacological and toxicological properties of Nigella sativa. Phytotherapy Res 2003; 17(4): 299-305.

30. Porter NG, Wilkins AL. Chemical, physical and antimicrobial properties of essentials oils of Leptospermum scoparium and Kunzea ericoides. Phytochemistry 1999; 50(3): 407-415.

31. Al-Azzawy TZ. Isolating and identifying Brucella melitensis from different sources and studying the effect of some factors. MSc thesis.

College of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq.

2004.

32. Hadad JJ. Veterinary microbiology.1st part. Mosul: Dar-Al-Hikma for Printing Publication; 1991. 173 p (in Arabic).

also present in N. sativa volatile oil and exerts antibacterial action (30). So bacterial types present in cheeses treated with N. sativa oil will be more exposed to the antibacterial action than those present in N. sativa seed treated cheeses.

Results showed no significant differences (P<0.05) between test bacteria in their susceptibility to the antibacterial effect of N. sativa seed and oil (Table 5).

These results were in contrast to those indicated that the antibacterial activity of N. sativa seed and oil was more against gram +ve bacteria than gram â&#x20AC;&#x201C;ve bacteria (2,24).

This perhaps because those studies were performed in plates (in vitro), while our research included study the antibacterial effect of N. sativa seed and oil in cheese prepared from milk inoculated with the test bacteria and treated with it. Cheese constituents may affect on the susceptibility of bacteria to seed and oil of N. sativa as sod. chloride at a conc. of 5% was added during manufacturing of soft white cheese, this may adversely affect on growth of Br.melitensis and E. coli and then increase susceptibility of these bacteria to the N. sativa seed and oil (16,31) comparable to Staph. aureus which can grow at high concentrations of Nacl may reach 10% (32).

Acknowledgments Authors wish to thank the College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul for support and providing facilities. Dr. Talal Hameed Kindly contributed with his knowledge and performed careful statistical analysis.

Appreciation is also extended to Mr. Omar Hashem Sheet, Miss Amera Ali Ahmed and Mrs. Noor Abd Alhafez Jerjees for cooperation in providing the strains of studied bacteria.

References 1. Saleem RM, Dosh NA. Inversion of local soft sheep's cheese to hulloum cheese. Proc 10th Egyption Conf Dairy Sci and Techn; 2007: 443-449.

2. Salman MT, Khan RA, Shukla I. A study of Nigella sativa seed for antimicrobial activity with special reference to resistant bacteria.

Available from [Internet]. http://openmed.nic.in/49/01/9Summary.doc.2005.

3. Levinson W, Jawetz E. Medical microbiology and Immunology.

Examination and board review. 6th ed. McGraw-Hill, International Editions, Health professions series; 2000: 334.

4. Robinson RK. Dairy microbiology. The microbiology of milk products. 2nd ed. Elsevier Applied Science, London and New York.

1990; 2: 282.

5. CFSPH, Center for Food Security and Public Health. Brucellosis.

Available from [Internet]. www.pnas.org/cgi/doi.2003.

6. Levinson W, Jawetz E. Medical microbiology and Immunology. 7th ed. McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.; 2002: 138-139.

7. CDMP,Communicable Disease Management Protocol. Brucellosis.

Communicable disease control unit, Manitoba Health: Novem; 2001.

8. Tortora GJ, Funke BR, Case CL. Microbiology. An Introduction. 7th ed. Benjamin Cummings, an imprint of Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.; 2001: 697.

27

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (29-33)

Effect of DiarrheastatÂŽ and Enrosol-SÂŽ on rumen ecosystem in rams M. O. Abdul-Majeed Department of Internal and Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq e-mail: mohammad_osaamah@yahoo.com (Received December 30, 2009; Accepted April 15, 2010) Abstract The effect of two antimicrobials (DiarrheastatÂŽ and Enrosol-SÂŽ) on sheep rumen ecosystem (pH, viscosity, microbial activity and protozoal activity) was investigated in adult rams. The rams were randomly divided into two groups; each group included four rams dosaged orally one time daily for three successive days according to the manufacturer recommendations.

Ruminal fluid was analyzed before dosage, after 24 hrs of the first, second and third doses, and after 3, 7 and 10 days after the last dose (3rd dose). No significant differences in ruminal fluid pH and viscosity with oral antimicrobial administration were noticed. Microbial activity tests used (methylene blue reduction test and floatation/sedimentation test) showed a significant reduction of microbial activity of rumen (P<0.05) without differences in staining characters of bacterial population. Protozoal activity of the rumen was influenced significantly (P<0.05) by oral antimicrobials with some differences between DiarrheastatÂŽ and Enrosol-SÂŽ. It was concluded from this study that dosing of DiarrheastatÂŽ and Enrosol-SÂŽ orally to rams one time daily for three successive days had an obvious effects on microbial and protozoal activity of the rumen.

Keywords: Ruminal fluid; Microbial activity; protozoal activity; Rumen microflora; Sheep.

Available online at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

Enrosol-SÂŽ DiarrheastatÂŽ

#) " +, ' () * (Enrosol-SÂŽ DiarrheastatÂŽ)

!" #$ % 9) " 0" "4 5 6 7 34 /0 1 2 * ' ,"0 ) 3

3

.

-

3 " 7; " ' 9 + < 7 < = < '> 4 "4 * 4/ % .( 4 * C

5 ) @ 46 4 0 AB "4 ) @ 46 * 0 ? = % . "

* 0 .

- #) +", 9 G=+" ' .(

) < ,) 4 @ 46 ' 9 EF D ", ) *

3

H3 " " ",I J " .< 0 4 ; "4 + ) @ 46 H+", *

3

(P<0.05) L >, ( 0 " / > ", .) .", @ 46 (P<0.05) 7 7 ? !" ) 3 ? !" / " .< 0 4 ; "4 + ' M " N , * Enrosol-SÂŽP DiarrheastatÂŽP @ 46 9 0 O" "0 .< 0 4 ; "4 + ) .*

9 3 7= 7 !" Q " ' 9 + < 7 < = < '> 4

29

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (29-33)

four rams each. The first group was dosaged Diarrheastat® (each ml contain: neomycin sulphate 1mg, sulfadimidine 2mg and sulfadiazine 3mg)/ Al-Faiha for Veterinary Industries, Syria. The second group was dosaged EnrosolS® (each ml contain: enrofloxacin 100mg)/ Veterinary and Agricultural Products Mfg. Co. Ltd (VAPCO), Jordon.

According to the manufacturer recommendations, the rams were dosaged orally one time daily for three successive days. Ruminal fluid were analyzed before dosage, after 24 hrs of the first, second and third doses, and after 3, 7 and 10 days after the last dose.

After restraining the rams properly, ruminal samples were collected by stomach tube with the aid of a vacuum pump, then filtered through a metal sieve and subjected for analyses (12).

Ruminal pH was measured immediately after collection using wide range pH paper (7) using pH value of 2-12, Macherey-Naged GmbH and Co., Germany.

Viscosity of the ruminal fluid was determined according to (13). Rumen samples were centrifuged for 1 hr at 5200 rpm to remove debris, protozoa, and most of the bacteria.

Measurements of relative viscosity were made at 25ºC with an Ostwald viscosimeter, which is 'U' shape tube with two bulbs, two marks and capillary bore in one arm (Fig. 1).

After the centrifugation, the rumen sample was drawn into the upper bulb of viscosimeter by suction, then allowed to flow down through the capillary into the lower bulb. Two marks (one above and one below the upper bulb) indicate a known volume. The time required for the level of the fluid to pass between these marks is proportional to the kinematic viscosity.

The time required for the fluid to pass between two marks, upper mark and lower mark, through a vertical capillary tube was determined. The time of flow of the fluid under test was compared with the time required for water, which is a known viscosity liquid. The viscosity of rumen fluid (millipascal-second "mPa.s") was determined using the following equation (14):

Introduction Ruminal ecosystem is a stable and highly diversified consisting of bacteria, ciliate protozoa, anaerobic fungi and bacteriophage; performing the function of bio-conversion of feed into volatile fatty acids which serve as a source of energy for the ruminants (1).

The ruminant's diet is the major influence on the nature of the rumen environment. Factors such as composition of the feed, the degree of physical processing and the presence of feed additives all affect the numbers, proportions and digestive activity of rumen microorganisms (2). Most predominant rumen bacterial species are susceptible to low concentrations to many antibiotics. Therefore, there has been interest in attempting to control the rumen fermentation by feeding these compounds, but usually for only a short time after the first supplementation to the diet (3). Many compounds, such as tylosin, monensin and flavomycin, used to alter rumen fermentation to improve efficiency of feed utilization (3-5).

On the other hand, (6) mentioned that oral administration of antimicrobials in ruminants is highly problematic which may cause damage to the ruminal microflora or have an undesirable selective effect. Oral administration of antimicrobials may cause a significant disruption to the ruminal flora, which may result in a syndrome of ruminal stasis, anorexia and depression (7).

Moreover, Adams (8) denoted that chronic oral dosage with an antimicrobial agents can suppress microfloral activity, and thereby disturb carbohydrate digestion which is an essential function of fore-stomach. Therefore; Radostits et al. (7) recommended to re-establish the ruminal flora by cud transfer after the course of orally given antimicrobial agents.

There are few studies indicating the effects of antimicrobials on rumen, Gupta and Rai (9) referred to the effects of different antimicrobials on ruminal micro-flora and protozoal motility in their chronological order. Das (10) added that oral administration of tetracycline hydrochloride to healthy calves significantly reduced ruminal microflora.

Natively, Phillip (11) indicated that administration of some antibiotics like oxytetracycline and sulfonamide for 3 successive days to each drug to buffaloes showed significant changes in ruminal pH and various microbial activity tests.

The aim of this study was to investigate the antimicrobial effects of Diarrheastat® and Enrosol-S® on the ruminal ecosystem in rams.

η1 =

p1 t1 η2 p2 t 2

Where, η1= viscosity of unknown liquid p1= density of unknown liquid p2= density of known liquid t1= time of the unknown liquid t2= time of the known liquid η2= viscosity of known liquid

Materials and Methods Adult Awassi rams bred in the Animals' House of College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul were used. The rams were randomly divided into two groups,

30

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (29-33)

The data were analyzed statistically using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to detect the significant variation among treatments.

Results Properties of ruminal fluid are presented in (Table 1).

The results showed no significant differences in pH and viscosity of ruminal fluid after oral administration of Diarrheastat® and Enrosol-S® in comparison with predosing.

The results indicated that there were a significant prolongation (P<0.05) in methylene blue reduction time after the second dose of Diarrheastat® and Enrosol-S®, and returned to normal ten days after the third dose (Table 2).

The most prolongation in methylene blue reduction time was noticed after the 3rd dose (15.25 ± 2.06) in Diarrheastat® group, and (17.75 ± 1.60) in Enrosol-S® group in comparison with before dosages, (2.75 ± 0.25) and (2.50 ± 0.29), respectively (Table 2).

Floatation/sedimentation test had a significant differences (P<0.05) after oral dosing of Diarrheastat® and Enrosol-S®. There were a reduction in the time needed to forming of sediment after 2nd, 3rddose, and 3 days after the 3rd dose in both drugs (Table 2). The longest time of floatation/sedimentation test was found 3 days after 3rd dose, it was (19.75 ± 3.64), (18.00 ± 2.00) in comparison with post-dosage (6.50 ± 0.65), (6.75 ± 0.25) in Diarrheastat® group and Enrosol-S® group, respectively (Table 2).

The results indicated that the protozoal activity was affected with oral dosage of antimicrobials. Diarrhea-stat® had a rapid and prolonged inhibition action on protozoal activity than Enrosol-S® (Table 3).

The result showed no differences in Gram staining characters of bacterial population of the rumen after oral administration of Diarrheastat® and Enrosol-S® in comparison to pre-dosing.

Fig. 1: A diagram of Ostwald viscosimeter. (a) lower bulb, (b) capillary bore, (c) lower mark, (d) upper bulb, (e) upper mark. (14).

According to Rosenberger (15), 20 ml of ruminal fluid was mixed with 1 ml of 0.03% methylene blue in a test tube and let to stand at room temperature. The time needed to decolorize the color and leaving a narrow ring of blue color at the top of tube was indicated.

For estimation the Floatation/sedimentation time, ruminal fluid sample was put in test tube and let to stand.

The time needed for completion of sedimentation was indicated (15).

The motility of the protozoa were examined in a fresh film under low power magnification, and indicated as follow (15): +++ highly motile and very crowded. ++ motile and crowded. + sluggish motility and low number.

0 no or sporadic alive infusoria.

Gram staining characters of the bacterial population of the rumen were observed. According to Guinn (16), Gram stain smears were made from ruminal fluid for direct microscopic examination to indicate the changes that occurred in microflora after dosages.

Table 1: Properties of ruminal fluid pre- and post-dosages with Diarrheastat® and Enrosol-S®.

Parameters Dosages Diarrheastat® Pre-dosage 7.18 ± 0.118 Post- 1st dose 7.35 ± 0.189 Post- 2nd dose 7.40 ± 0.087 Post- 3rd dose 7.48 ± 0.231 3 days after 3rd dose 7.50 ± 0.041 7.38 ± 0.239 7 days after 3rd dose 10 days after 3rd dose 7.18 ± 0.063 values are means ± standard error of mean.

pH Enrosol-S® 7.18 ± 0.048 7.38 ± 0.085 7.40 ± 0.091 7.45 ± 0.087 7.40 ± 0.058 7.20 ± 0.108 7.13 ± 0.075

31

Viscosity (mPa.s) Diarrheastat® Enrosol-S® 1.03 ± 0.028 1.02 ± 0.025 1.04 ± 0.034 1.02 ± 0.031 1.03 ± 0.044 1.02 ± 0.015 1.02 ± 0.027 1.02 ± 0.025 1.02 ± 0.033 1.02 ± 0.017 1.02 ± 0.021 1.02 ± 0.008 1.02 ± 0.020 1.01 ± 0.022

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (29-33)

Table 2: Activity of microflora of ruminal fluid pre- and post-dosages Diarrheastat® and Enrosol-S®.

Parameters Methylene blue reduction (minutes) Floatation/sedimentation (minutes) Diarrheastat® Enrosol-S® Diarrheastat® Enrosol-S® Pre-dosage 2.75 ± 0.25 2.50 ± 0.29 6.50 ± 0.65 6.75 ± 0.25 Post- 1st dose 6.25 ± 0.85 5.25 ± 0.75 9.50 ± 0.96 11.25 ± 1.89 Post- 2nd dose 10.50 ± 1.89 * 9.50 ± 0.96 * 14.25 ± 2.02 * 15.25 ± 2.75 * Post- 3rd dose 15.25 ± 2.06 * 17.75 ± 1.60 * 19.25 ± 2.84 * 16.50 ± 3.02 * 14.00 ± 2.74 * 10.50 ± 1.04 * 19.75 ± 3.64 * 18.00 ± 2.00 * 3 days after 3rd dose 7 days after 3rd dose 11.75 ± 0.95 * 9.25 ± 1.65 * 8.75 ± 0.48 8.00 ± 0.41 10 days after 3rd dose 3.25 ± 0.25 2.75 ± 0.25 6.25 ± 0.48 6.00 ± 0.41 values are means ± standard error of mean, * Significant differences vertically at (P<0.05).

Dosages

Table 3: protozoal activity of rumen pre-and post-dosages Diarrheastat® and Enrosol-S®.

(17) added that the viscosity was also affected by pH, reaching maxima between pH 5.5-5.8 and between 7.5 8.5.

Ruminal dysfunctions could be due to usage of antimicrobials, which suppress microflora activity of the rumen, and thereby disturb the digestion (8,20). This was noticed through the microbial activity tests used in the study (methylene blue reduction test and floatation/ sedimentation test) that showed a significant reduction of microbial activity of rumen. A significant pro-longation in methylene blue reduction time (reduction time increased) encountered after the second dose of Diarrheastat® and Enrosol-S® indicate to inactive ruminal microflora (12).

Also, Floatation/ sedimentation test was significant after oral dosing of Diarrheastat® and Enrosol-S®, which referred to inactive ruminal microflora. These results of present study agreed with Phillip (11) who found significant changes in time needed for methylene blue stain reduction and sedimentation activity test in buffaloes after administration of antibiotics. Also, they agreed with Das (10) who mentioned that oral administration of tetracycline hydrochloride to healthy calves significantly reduced ruminal microflora. Furthermore, Hungate (21) reported the inhibitory effects of antibiotics on the rumen microorganisms through the pure cultures of rumen bacteria which were founded to be inhibited by penicillin, terramycin, aureomycin, streptomycin, chloromycetin, sulfidine and norsulfazole.

Protozoal activity of the rumen was influenced by antimicrobial drugs with some differences between Diarrheastat® and Enrosol-S® (Table 3). This result agreed with the reporting of Phillip (11). Similar results were noticed in case of indigestion (22). Absence of ruminal protozoa is a reliable indicator of an abnormal state of the rumen (7). Diarrheastat®, which contain sulfonamides, had a rapid and prolonged inhibition action on protozoal activity than Enrosol-S®; since sulfonamides activity against some protozoa (23).

Protozoal activity Diarrheastat® Enrosol-S® Pre-dosage +++ +++ Post- 1st dose ++ +++ Post- 2nd dose ++ ++ Post- 3rd dose + + + ++ 3 days after 3rd dose 7 days after 3rd dose ++ ++ 10 days after 3rd dose +++ +++ +++ highly motile and very crowded, ++ motile and crowded, + sluggish motility and low number.

Dosages

Discussion Various tests were used in this study to evaluate the effects of oral administration of different antimicrobials (Diarrheastat® and Enrosol-S®) on rumen ecosystem in sheep. The study investigated properties of ruminal fluid (pH and viscosity), activity of the microflora, protozoal activity and staining characters of bacterial population as a reflection of rumen ecosystem.

No significant differences in rumen pH with oral antimicrobial administration was noticed in this study; since the pH of ruminal fluid is mostly dependable on the nature of the diet and the time interval between the last feeding and taking a sample (7, 17).

Viscosity of the ruminal fluid showed no significant differences in this study. This could be due to the type of diet which could affect ruminal viscosity (17,18). Gutierrez et al. (13) mentioned that the Glucose-containing polysaccharides may a contributing factor in viscosity changes. The viscosity tends to be higher when concentrates are fed (17,19). On feeding a high carbohydrate diets, certain species of bacteria proliferate to large numbers resulting in production of insoluble slime causing marked increase in ruminal viscosity (7). Church

32

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (29-33)

7. Radostits OM, Gay CC, Hinchcliff KW, Constable PO. Veterinary medicine. A textbook of the diseases of cattle, sheep, pigs and horses.

10th ed. Saunders Elsever. London. 2007;179:311-336.

8. Adams HR. Veterinary pharmacology and therapeutics. 8th ed. Iowa State University Press. A Blackwell Publishing Co.2001;23,38.

9. Gupta GC, Rai P. In vitro studies of some chemotherapeutic agents in rumen liquid in zebu. Indian J Vet Med.1987;7:101–105.

10. Das SN. A study on the effect of HB strong on ruminal microflora for improved digestion in cattle. Indian J Indigenous Medicines.1992;9(1 and 2):31-36.

11. Phillip QA. A study of the changes in the ruminal contents of buffaloes accompanying of digestive disorders. Diploma report.

College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul; 2007.

12. Pugh DG. Sheep and goat medicine. W. B. Sanders Company.2002;pp:69-70.

13. Gutierrez J, Davis RE and Lindahl IL. Some chemical and physical properties of a slime from the rumen of cattle. Appl.

Microbiol.1961;7:209-212.

Available from: http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/beef4008 14. Gohel M, Parikh R, Popat A, Mohapatra A, Barot B, Patel C, Joshi H, Sarvaiya K, Baldaniya L, Mistry P, Parejiya P, Parmar R, Nagori S, Patel T. Pharmaceutical Suspensions: A Review. 2007. Available from: http://www.pharmainfo.net/free-books/pharmaceuticalsuspensionsa-review 15. Rosenberger G. Clinical examination of cattle. 2nd ed., Verlag Paul Parey, Berlin and Hamburg, Germany.1977;204-212.

16. Quinn PJ, Carter ME, Markey B, Carter GR. Clinical Veterinary Microbiology. 1st ed. Elsevier Ltd. London. 1999.

17. Church DC. Digestive Physiology and Nutrition of Ruminants, Metropolitan Printing Co., Portland, Oregon, Volume 1- Digestive Physiology, 2nd ed., 1976.

18. Creţescu I, Dan D, Constantin M, Sorin V. Rheological study on the ruminal fluid in small ruminants. Archiva Zootechnica.2005;8:158168.

Available from: www.ibna.ro/arhiva/AZ%208/AZ%208_17%20Cretescu.pdf 19. Meyer R M, Bartley E E. Bloat in cattle. XV: the relation of viscosity and cell-free polysaccharide content of rumen fluid to feedlot bloat. J Anim Sci 1971;33:1018-1021.

20. Godfrey S I, Nagaraja T G, Winslow S W, Rowe J B. Rumen microbial adaptation to long-term feeding of virginiamycin in sheep fed barley and Virginia-mycin as a supplement. Australian J Agri Res.1995;46(6):1149-1158.

21. Hungate R E. The rumen and its microbes. Academic Press Inc., New York. 1966;407-408.

22. Steen A. Field study of dairy cows with reduced appetite in early lactation: clinical examinations, blood and rumen fluid analyses. Acta Vet Scand. 2001;42:219-228.

23. Blood DC, Radostits OM. A textbook of the diseases of cattle, sheep, pigs and horses. 7th ed. Bailliere Tindall. London. 1989;137-140.

Gram staining characters of bacterial population of the rumen after oral administration of Diarrheastat® and Enrosol-S® showed no differences; since the dense of rumen microbial population depends on the continuous supply of the digestible feeds included in the ration (21).

Effect of antimicrobials on rumen fluid were detected after a short period of administration of antimicrobials in this study, while Adams (8) and Gupta and Rai (9) indicated that chronic oral dosage with antimicrobial agents can suppress ruminal microflora activity. Therefore, other broad studies are needed to evaluate the differences between the short and long dosing effects on ruminal activity.

From this present study, it can be concluded that dosing of Diarrheastat® and Enrosol-S® orally to rams one time daily for three successive days had an obvious effects on microbial and protozoal activity of the rumen.

Acknowledgements The author thanks the College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul for supporting this study.

References 1. Kamra DN. Rumen microbial ecosystem.

Current Science.2005;89(1):124-135.

2. McAllister T. Learning more about rumen bugs: genetic and environmental factors affecting rumen bugs. Southern Alberta Beef Review.

2000;2:1.Available from: http://www.usask.ca/wcvm/herdmed/appliedethology/articles/0001d.html 3. Church DC. The ruminant animal digestive physiology and nutrition.

A Reston Book Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, USA. 1988:pp139.

4. Schelling GT. Monensin mode of action in the rumen. J Anim Sci.1984;58:1518-1527.

5. Edwards JE, McEwan NR, McKain N, Walker N, Wallace RJ. Influence of flavomycin on ruminal fermentation and microbial populations in sheep. Microb.2005;151:717-725.

6. Peltoniemi O, Pyörälä S, Rantala M, Kaartinen L, Myllyniemi A, Kaikkonen R, Rinkinen M, Helin H. Recommendations for the use of antimicrobial agents in the treatment of the most significant infectious diseases in animals.2003.

Available from: http://wwwb.mmm.fi/julkaisut/tyoryhmamuistiot/2003/tr2003_9a.pdf

33

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (35-40)

A comparative study for lung biopsy in dogs O. H. Al-Hyani Department of Surgery and Theriogenology, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq (Received April 9, 2009; Accepted April 15, 2010) Abstract This study was conducted to compare two techniques for obtaining lung biopsy in dogs. Twelve adult dogs from both sexes were used in this study. The animals were divided into two groups, each group contained six dogs. In both groups, the animals were applied under right thoracotomy for lung biopsy collection from the middle lobe. In group one the lung biopsy was obtained by removal of a piece of lung tissue with a scalpel and the cut edge was sutured by two rows of continuous horizontal matters and simple continuous patterns where as in group two the biopsy was collected using a therom-cautery device and the cut edge was left without suturing.

Gross and histopathological changes were examined on postoperative days 15 and 30. The gross pathological changes in group one after 15 day revealed presence of severe adhesions between the cutting site and pleura where as the adhesion was less after 30 postoperative day. The pulmonary tissue at site of biopsy collection relatively became hard especially near the suture line. Group two showed no adhesion on postoperative day 15 but the adhesion appeared on postoperative day 30 between the sites of cauterization with the other lung lobes which varied from simple to moderate adhesion while the lung tissue at cauterization site had approximately the same consistency of normal lung tissues. The histopathlogical changes in group one was characterized by formation of inflammatory nodules and high infiltration of inflammatory cells particularly polymorphonucular cells with presence of pulmonary hemorrhage and edema in the cutting site. Group two showed lesser histopathological changes and they were associated with lesser mononuclear inflammatory cells where as hemorrhage and edema were not developed on the cutting site. In conclusion, the use of thermo-cautery device to obtain the lung biopsy is simple, fast, less invasive and more aseptic than use the cutting and suturing method.

Keywords: Thoracotomy; Lung; Biopsy; Dog. Available online at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

1 % 0 / , -. % ) * +

( '% "%& $

$ !"# 5

+

4% * 4 , 3 2

'% "% , & +7 & ( 67 ( '% "%& 9 " , 8 67$ + . %

$ % < $ $ % - + / ( ; :' '3 *% ( .+ % < $ $ %

= . ( '% "%& %

- 4 . , & +7

: 3 AB ?@ 7 '% "% $ 4

0 D / 2 2 E : /C < $ $ = / 2 / %

0 + . + % $ 2 % $ ( '% "% $ + ( ; 5 .

-*-

35

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (35-40)

2 E )

-*- E3 2 . ) # /

: 3 / % - + $ + ( ; ' , 3 = / F %. ( 6 + $

$ , & 4

0

+ .+ ( ;

$ 8 / 5 . G H J < $ $ + ( 1' '% < F = *% % 8 E *% I / 8 , 3 4K = =

8 E *% 2 I / F = / 4

0 8

# / + - 8 '

( '% "%&

= . % . L E .< $ $ ( 1' '% . % < $ $ % < $ -H - 2 thromboplastin time (PTT). In addition, lung biopsies should not be performed if other tests indicate the patient has enlarged alveoli associated with emphysema, pulmonary hypertension, or enlargement of the right ventricle of the heart. Like other surgical operation, lung biopsy procedure can cause some postoperative complication such as hemorrhage, infection, pneumonia and pnemothorax, but in patients which had some pulmonary defects and undergoing open biopsy procedures, the risk of these complications is higher (2). The thermo cautery device used in this study was recently manufactured in the Department of Surgery and Theriogenology, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul by Aziz et al.

(13) and its was used successfully in many surgical operations such as partial splenectomy in dogs and ovarioectomy in equidea (14,15).

The aim of this study was to collect lung biopsy through lateral thoracotomy approach as well as comparing the gross and histoathological changes between incision and suturing versus cauterization for obtaining the lung tissue biopsy.

Introduction A lung biopsy can be defined as a collection of a small piece of lung tissue by different approaches for diagnosis of different lung diseases like tumors and certain infections (1,2). Lung tissue is composed from vascular network to carry blood and bronchial structure that carry air to oxygenation the blood. Resection this type of tissue poses two problems to a surgeon; achieving homeostasis of vascular tissue and achieving pnemostasis of bronchial structure, additionally since these problems usually involve lung tissue that is frequently diseased. The diseased lung is often over distended or inflammed then resulting in fragile, friable tissue. Consequently variety of techniques are available to surgeons as means of controlling homeostasis and pnemostasis in lung tissue which include suturing, application of clips, radio frequency energy or other energy applications. The post operative air leaks is the most frequent complication after lung surgery regardless of whether an operation is performed by thoracotomy or by use of endoscopic techniques (3). Therefore the surgeon should reduce air leaks by careful suturing, stapling or electrocautery as well as by using other different methods for seal the lung such as using fibrin glue (4-7).

The diagnosis of pulmonary disease in dogs is very challenging so the lung biopsy is used for diagnosis and treatment of such lung diseases (8). Biopsy of the pulmonary parenchyma remains the technique of choice when diagnosis is absolutely required (9). Lung biopsies can be done by 4 ways either by: 1) bronchoscope biopsy, 2) needle biopsy, 3) thoracoscopic surgery, 4) open chest biopsy (2,10,11). Others depend on diagnosis of lung disease through cytological and histological evaluation of diseased tissue which usually reveals a definite diagnosis.

The cytological evaluation for samples can be obtained through transtracheal washes, bronchial brushing, bronchoalveolar lavage, transthoracic lung aspiration and transthoracic needle biopsy where as for histologic evaluation may be obtained via either atransbronchiolar approach or lateral thoracotomy (12). Lung biopsy is contraindicated in cases that suffer from a bleeding disorder or abnormal blood clotting because of low platelet counts, or prolonged prothrombin time (PT) or partial

Materials and Methods Twelve adult dogs from both sexes were used. The animals were divided into two groups of six dogs each. In group one the biopsy was obtained by excision and suturing where as in group two the biopsy was collected by using a thermo-cautery device. In both groups, right thoracotomy approach was used for biopsy collection. All the operations where performed under general anesthesia using atropine sulfate at dose (0.1 mg /kg, I.M.) as a premedication followed by administration of combination of xylazine and ketamine (2 mg / kg + 10 mg / kg, I.M., respectively). The animals where connected with the positive pressure ventilation machine for maintenance of the respiration during the thoracotomy. The right site of the thoracic cavity was prepared for aseptic surgery and skin incision was induced along the 6th rib, then the latissmus dorsi was incised over the rib. The serratus ventralis and external abdominal oblique muscles were located and retracted to expose the rib. The periosteum on the lateral surface of the rib was incised and reflected, and then the rib was resected

36

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (35-40)

at the costochondral junction. The periosteum of the inner surface of the rib and pleura was incised as stump incision during the expiratory pause and extended with scissors. The middle lobe was selected for biopsy collection. In group one, a crushing forceps was applied at a distance of 5 to 8 cm from the edge of the middle lobe then continuous horizontal matters suture was placed proximal to the forceps. The lung tissue was excised just between the suture lines and forceps and leaving a margin of tissue 2 to 3 mm distal to the suture. The cut edge was closed by using a simple continuous patterns, where as in group two, thoracotomy was performed as in group one, but the biopsy collection was accomplished by using a thermo cautery device after placing the crushing clamps instead of cutting and suturing method. The thermo cautery device was placed proximal to the crushing clamps, firstly an intermitted electrical current was applied to produce a cauterization and coagulation zone around the crushed area to reduce hemorrhage, and then continued electrical current was applied for excision of the biopsy. In both groups, the site of tissue excision was checked for post operative leakage or bleeding then a chest tube was applied to reduce the rate of post operative pnemothorax. Thoracotomy incision was closed by closing of pleura and periosteum with lock stitch followed by suturing of the muscles by simple continuous pattern using cat gut suture and finally the skin was closed by horizontal interrupted pattern using silk. All the animals were administered after operation with a systemic injection of penicillin streptomycin (0.1 ml / kg) daily for 5 days and treated the wound daily with antiseptic spray.

The gross and histopathological changes of the site of biopsy collection were examined on postoperative days 15 and 30.

Figure 1: site of biopsy on postoperative day 15 in group one.

Results

Figure 2: site of biopsy on postoperative day 30 in group one.

Gross pathological changes Group one, after 15 day, showed severe adhesion between the sites of biopsy collection with pleura. This adhesion was markedly decreased after 30 postoperative days. In group two, there was no adhesion formation on postoperative day 15, but mild to moderate degree of adhesion was developed between the site of the biopsy with the caudal lobe on postoperative day 30 (Figures 1-4). Both groups showed complete bridging to the edges of the incision on postoperative day 30. By finger palpation on the site of biopsy collection hard nodules was felt at the site of suturing in group one especially after 15 day where as in group two the site of biopsy had normal texture of the lung tissue. Both groups show no leakage from the site of the biopsy collection.

Histopathological changes Animals in group one after 15 postoperative days showed presence of adhesion formation between pleura and lung tissue with inflammatory nodules around the line of the incision. Near the suture material there was proliferation of fibroblast, collagen fiber with newly formed capillaries.

Hemorrhage, edema, and emphysema were associated with proliferation of pneumocyte type II and little area of atelectasis, Also other sections showed infiltration of polymorphonucular inflammatory cells (Figures 5, 6), where as after 30 postoperative day there were presence network of fibrin, newly capillaries and collagen fiber, Hemorrhage, atelectasis, interstitial emphysema and infiltration of mononuclear inflammatory cells (Figures 7, 8). In general, disorientation of lung tissue structure with rearrangement of bronchioles was seen.

37

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (35-40)

lumen. Also, some area of alveolar atelectasis showed the presence variable size of vacuoles in tissue. The epithelium of mucosa of bronchioles showed squamous metaplasia (Figure 11).

Figure 3: site of biopsy on postoperative day 15 in group two.

Figure 5: Photomicrograph of lung tissue in a dog on postoperative day 15 in group one showed granulation tissue formation (collagen fiber and fibroblast) (A), hemorrhage (B) and inflammatory nodules (C) (H&E 35X).

Figure 6: Photomicrograph of lung tissue in a dog on postoperative day 15 in group one showed area of atelectasis (A), infiltration of polymorphonucular inflammatory cells (B) (H&E 90X).

Figure 4: site of biopsy on postoperative day 30 in group two.

In group two after 15 postoperative days, newly granulation tissue appeared with infiltration of mononuclear inflammatory cells. The capillary bed was congested; proliferation in pneumocyte and the wall of the blood vessels was thickened with hyalinization and vacuolation especially near the area of cautery. The changes included area of atelectasis and thickening in the wall of the alveoli with the presence of serous exudates within the lumen.

Other sections showed hyperplasia and squamous metaplasia of the epithelium of mucosa of bronchioles and the lumen contained serous exudates (Figures 9, 10). After 30 postoperative days there was granulation tissue with infiltration of little of mononuclear inflammatory cells. The septa of the lung between the lobules suffered from thickening and proliferation. The wall of alveoli was distracted without presence of serous exudates within the

Figure 7: Photomicrograph of lung tissue in a dog on postoperative day 30 in group one showing the presence of fibrin (A), newly capillaries (B) and collagen fiber(C)(H&E 90X).

38

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (35-40)

lung tissue near the suture line. This adhesion may be due to the hemorrhage that is associated with this technique and the damage of the parenchyma of the lung associated with penetration of the suturing needle and suture material that may cause postoperative air leaks that need prolonged chest tube drainage time then increasing of the plural infection (4,7). Histopathologically, there was severe infiltration of inflammatory cells which was decreased after one month; this finding resemble that found by (2) where the severe infiltration of inflammatory cells are commonly associated with the presence of suture materials or due to pneumonia that commonly follow open chest surgery. This infection can be subsided with systemic antibiotic therapy. Edema and hemorrhage was seen at the site of biopsy in lung tissue in this group. Edema formation may be due to the effect of tissue excision or in association with generalized edema of the lung that developed as a result of tracheal intubations and anesthesia (16-18). Hemorrhage was developed as a result of bleeding associated with incision of the lung tissue or due to damage to the pulmonary capillaries or disruption to the bronchial vessels as a result of tracheal intubations (18).

Figure 8: Photomicrograph of lung tissue in a dog on postoperative day 30 in group one showed interstitial emphysema (A), atelectasis (B), and infiltration of mononuclear inflammatory cells (C) (H & E 90X).

Figure 9: Photomicrograph of lung tissue in a dog on postoperative day 15 in group two showed newly granulation tissue (A), thickening in the wall of congested capillaries (B) and infiltration of mononuclear inflammatory cells (C) with atelectasis (D) (H&E 90X).

Figure 11: Photomicrograph of lung tissue in a dog on postoperative day 30 in group two showed granulation tissue (A), infiltration of little of mononuclear inflammatory cells (B) thickening and proliferation in the septa between lobules (C) and area of atelectasis (D) (H&E 90X).

In group two, the site of biopsy collection was free from adhesion with the pleura, this may be due to the excellent control of hemorrhage by the using of the thermo cautery device (15,19) when compared with group one. Also the site of biopsy collection had normal consistency resembling to normal lung tissue because this was free from suture material which act as foreign body causing hardening of the site of the incision and enhancing the development of adhesion formation with the pleura as in group one. The infiltration of inflammatory cells was low when compared with group one and this feature may be due to absence of the suture material and the effect of heating that was produced from the thermo cautery which had aseptic action.

Figure 10: Photomicrograph of lung tissue in a dog on postoperative day 15 in group two showed congestion of the blood vessels (A), hyperplasia and metaplasia of the bronchial epithelial mucosa (B) associated with serous exudates in the lumen of it (C) (H&E 90X).

Discussion In this study cutting and suturing method for biopsy collection were associated with severe adhesion between the site of biopsy collection and pleura with hardness of

39

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (35-40)

8. Pramatwinai CH, Brahmasa A, Chuthatep S, borkawan P, komin K. Thoracoscopic – guided lung biopsy in dogs. TJVM.2003;36(4):3340.

9. Bauer TG. Lung biopsy.Vet Clin North Am Small Anima Pract. 2000; 30(60):1207–25.

10. Hider E, Murat S, Okan S and Onder S. Importance of lung biopsy in patients suspected interstitial lung disease. Eur J Med.2007;4(1):1618.

11. Soh LH, Chian CF, Yan HC, Perng WC. Role of lung biopsy in patients with diffuse lung infiltrates and acute respiratory failure. J Formos Med Assoc. 2005;104(1):17-21.

12. Faunt KK, Jones BD, Turk JR, Cohnl A, Dodam JP. Evaluation of biopsy specimens obtained during thorocoscopy from lungs of clinical normal dogs. Am J Vet Res. 1998;59:1499-1502.

13. Aziz DM, Al Badrany MS, Taha MB.Laproscopic ovarioectomy in standing donkeys by using a new instrument.Anim Reprod Scien.

2008 ;107:107-114.

14. Al heani WA. Laproscopic partial splenectomy in dogs. MSc. Thesis, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq.2007.

15. Alanaz MTH. Comparative study of different methods of laparoscopic ovariectomy in equidea.MSc. Thesis, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq. 2007.

16. Takrouri M, Baaj J. Bilateral negative airway pressure pulmonary edema: case report. Middle East J Anaesthesiol. 2005;18(3):631-638.

17. Koop KH. Post obstructive pulmonary edema as a complication of endotracheal tube obstruction. Anaesthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther. 2000;35(1):721-4.

18. Sownam Y, Gareral D. Pulmonary hemorrhage in association with negative edema in an intubated patient.Acta Anaesthes Scand.

2001;45(7):911-913.

19. Hendrickson DA. Electrocautery as an ovadjunct to minimally invasive procedures. www. ivis.org.2006.

20. Palmer SE. Used lasers in laparoscopic surgery.In:Fischer AJ, equine diagnostic and surgical laparoscopy. W.B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia, USA.2002 ; PP:83- 90.

21. Hendrickson DA. Laparoscopic ovarioectomy in horses. www. dvmenews magazine com. 2005.

22. Cuschieri A. Technology of minimal access surgery.www. bmj. com.1999.

23. Chung YH, Ilu H, Lin AS, Lin MC.Bronchoscopy electrocautery for palliation of post – anastomosis tracheal stricture in a patient with complete tracheal transaction following blunt chest trauma.Chang Gung Med J. 2005;28(10):742-749.

24. Fischer AT. Electro surgery in laproscopy. In: fischer A.T. Equine surgical and diagnostic laproscopy.

W.B.Saunders Company,Philadelphia, USA. 2002; pp:79-82.

25. Bashir MS, Gomen PN. Mucus metaplasia of pleura.J Clin Pathol.1992; 45:1030–1031.

26. Askam FB, McCann BG, Knhn C. Reactive esinophlic pleuritis: a lesion to be distinguished from pulmonary grnuloma. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1977;101:187-191.

The lung tissue at the site of biopsy collection in this group was free from edema and hemorrhage, this effect is an agreement with those found by (15,19-22) who reported that heat produced from lasers, ultrasounds coagulating device, radiofrequency radio energy, electrocautery device and thermocautery device cause coagulation of the blood vessels that prevent bleeding, Additionally the heat produced by the thermo cautery causes vaporization of the tissue fluid and rupture of cells as well as the appearance the vaculation in tissue which may lead to the disappearance of edema (13,23,24).

In both groups, atelectasis was formed and this could be due to pnemothorax that is associated with the thoracotomy (2,25). The atelectasis can be also developed due to obstruction of air passage (bronchus or bronchioles) or by pressure on the outside of the lung (26). In group one, the hole that was made by the biopsy needle may cause lung collapse due to the air leaks (12), where as in group two the atelectasis was more severe at the site of biopsy than in group one and this is may be due to the effect of heating and the pressure produced by heating wire on the tissue during biopsy collection.

References 1. Lee JA. Incision for lung biopsy. www. Veri Med Health Care Network. 2006.

2. Maria G, Essig MS. Lung biopsy. www.GIGNA. 2007.

3. Porte HL, Jany T, Akkad R, Conti M, Gillet PA, Gurdat A, Wurtz AJ. Randomized common alveolar air leaks after lobectomy.Ann Thorc Surg. 2001;71:1618-1622.

4. Macchiarini P, Wain J, Almy S, Dartevelle P. Expermintal and clinical evaluation of air leaks in thoracic operation. J Thorac Cardio Vasc Surg.1999;17:751-758.

5. Anegg U, Rychlik R, Juttner FS. Do the benefits of shorter hospital stay associated with the fleece –bound sealing outweigh the cost of the materials. Euro Asso of Cardio- Thorsic Sur. 2007;7:292-296.

6. Westerdahl E, Lindmark B, Eriksson T, Friberg O, Hedenstierna G, Tenling A. Deep-breathing exercises reduce atelectasis and improve pulmonary function after coronary artery bypass surgery. Chest.

2005;128:3482-3488.

7. Ayed AK, Raghunathan R. Thoracoscopy versus open lung biopsy in the diagnosis of interstitial lung disease, a randomized controlled trial.

JR Coll Surg Edinb.2000;45(3):159-163.

40

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2011 (41)

Uterine prolapse in a jenny: a case report O. I. Azawi Department of Surgery and Theriogenology, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq (Received July 26; Accepted April 2010) Keywords: Uterine prolapsed; Jenny.

Available online at http://www.vetmedmosul.org/ijvs

:

." ) ( ) ( " $

! " " #

$ %& ' Uterine prolapse occurs when the previously gravid horn invaginate after delivery of the fetus and protrudes from the vulva. The case in a Jenny is unknown and not yet recorded, but the condition is frequently associated in ruminants with dystocia and hypocalcaemia (1, 2). Most cases occur within a few hours after delivery and the condition is more common in dairy cows than other species (3). Uterine prolapse is a rare condition that is difficult to manage in equines (2). This report describes the first case of uterine prolapse in a jenny and how to handle it.

The jenny was 5 years old brought by the owner to the clinic of the College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul and he claimed that his animal had aborted, since 24 h, more than 7 months fetus, and had a large mass pushed out of the vulva and had signs of colic. On the animal examination, I expected to find the Jenny with a retained placenta, but she had a prolapsed uterus. The animal was in lateral recumbency, frequently rolling and kicking.

Examination of the Jenny revealed a rapid shallow abdominal respiration, highly congested mucus membrane of the vagina with signs of dehydration. The body of the uterus, entirely prolapsed, was approximately 30 cm in diameter and reached below the animal hocks when she stood. The edematous uterus was not damaged. The animal remained recumbent during the examination and was in obvious colic pain.

Epidural anesthesia was done with 10 ml of 2% lidocaine HCl between Cy1 and Cy2. The uterus was cleaned with warm water, followed by sterile physiological saline solution. It was gently replaced in much the same fashion as in a cow. She was in sternal recumbency to facilitate replacement of the uterus. After pushing as far as possible to replace the organ in its proper position, a uterine lavage of 3 L was performed using sterile physiological saline solution containing 3x 106 IU procaine penicillin G and 3 g dihydrostreptomycin/l. A retaining suture of strong gauze saturated with lugolsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; iodine was placed around the vulva using horizontal mattress suture technique and leaving adequate space for passage of urine and uterine fluids. The jenny was treated with 40 IU of oxytocin, 5 x 106 IU procaine penicillin G and 5 g dihydrostreptomycin im daily for 5 days. The owner removed the retaining suture one week later and reported she was doing well.

References 1. Noakes DE, Parkinson TJ, England GCW, Arthur GH. Arthur's veterinary reproduction and obstetrics. 8th Ed., Elsevier Sci. Ltd.,2002; pp: 490-495.

2. Roberts SJ. Veterinary obstetrics and genital diseases. 3rd Ed., SJ. Roberts-Woodstock, NY, 1986, 481-359.

3. Odegaard SA. Uterine prolapse in dairy cows. Acta Vet Scand.

1977;(Suppl) 63:1.