• Login
    View Item 
    •   T-Stór
    • Other
    • Teagasc publications in Biomed Central
    • View Item
    •   T-Stór
    • Other
    • Teagasc publications in Biomed Central
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of T-StórCommunitiesPublication DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsFunderThis CollectionPublication DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsFunderProfilesView

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Information

    Deposit AgreementLicense

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    Analysing biomarkers in oral fluid from pigs: influence of collection strategy and age of the pig

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Name:
    40813_2023_Article_333.pdf
    Size:
    1.004Mb
    Format:
    PDF
    Download
    Author
    Ornelas, Mario A. S.
    López‑Martínez, María J.
    Franco-Martínez, Lorena
    Cerón, José J.
    Ortín-Bustillo, Alba
    Rubio, Camila P.
    Garcia Manzanilla, Edgar cc
    Keyword
    Analyte
    health and welfare
    Saliva
    Sample collection
    Swine
    Date
    2023-08-30
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Statistics
    Display Item Statistics
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/11019/3222
    Citation
    Ornelas, M.A.S., López‑Martínez, M.J., Franco-Martínez, L. et al. Analysing biomarkers in oral fluid from pigs: influence of collection strategy and age of the pig. Porc Health Manag 9, 39 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40813-023-00333-x
    Abstract
    Background and objectives Oral fluid (OF) is an easy-to-collect, inexpensive, fast and non-invasive sample to characterize health and welfare status of the pig. However, further standardisation of the collection methods is needed in order to use it regularly in veterinary practice. Cotton ropes are routinely used to collect OF for pathogen detection but they may not be optimal for biomarker analysis due to sample contamination. This study compared two methods (cotton ropes and sponges) to collect porcine OF for biomarker analysis. A panel of 11 biomarkers of stress, inflammation, sepsis, immunity, redox status and general homeostasis was studied. Materials and methods Eighteen farrow-to-finish pig farms were included in the study. In each farm, three (for sponges) or four pens of pigs (for ropes) were sampled at four age categories: the week after weaning (5 weeks), before (11–12 weeks) and after (12–13 weeks) moving to finisher facility and the week before slaughter (22–25 weeks). In total, 288 OF samples were collected with cotton ropes and 216 with sponges and analysed for the biomarkers: cortisol, alpha-amylase, oxytocin (stress), haptoglobin (inflammation), procalcitonin (sepsis), adenosine deaminase, immunoglobulin G (immune system), ferric reducing antioxidant power (redox status), and creatine kinase, lactate dehydrogenase and total protein (general homeostasis). Samples were also scored visually for dirtiness using a score from 1 (clean) to 5 (very dirty). Results Rope-collected OF had higher levels of dirtiness (3.7 ± 0.04) compared to sponge-collected OF (2.7 ± 0.15) and had higher values than sponges for cortisol, procalcitonin, oxytocin, haptoglobin, total protein, lactate dehydrogenase and ferric reducing antioxidant power. All biomarkers decreased in value with age. Immunoglobulin G did not perform well for any of the two collection methods. Discussion and conclusion The results showed a clear effect of age on the biomarkers in OF collected with both, sponges or ropes. Sponges provided a cleaner sample than cotton ropes for biomarker analysis. Both methods are easy to apply under the commercial conditions in pig farms although sponges may take more time in early weaner stages. From a practical point of view, sampling with sponges achieved the best combination of reduced sampling time and low contamination.
    Funder
    Department of Agriculture Food and the Marine; Teagasc Walsh Scholarship Programme; Fundación Séneca, Región de Murcia (Spain); European Union – NextGenerationEU
    Grant Number
    2020EN510; 21293/FPI/19
    ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
    https://doi.org/10.1186/s40813-023-00333-x
    Scopus Count
    Collections
    Teagasc publications in Biomed Central

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2017  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.