Search

Zoonotic infections were investigated in a cross-sectional study on asymptomatic livestock slaughtered in abattoirs in the Eastern Cape. Antibodies against Brucella spp., Coxiella burnetii, Toxoplasma gondii, and the coexposure were investigated in sera using serological tests. A total of 565 animals comprising of 280 cattle, 200 sheep, and 85 pigs were screened using RBT, iELISA, CFT, and AMOS-PCR. The Mast® Toxoreagent test and iELISA were used for the detection of T. gondii and C. burnetii, respectively. The Brucella positivity based on at least two tests was 4.3% (12/280), 1.0% (2/200), and 0.0% (0/85) in cattle, sheep, and pigs, respectively. Toxoplasma gondii seropositivity of 37.90% (106/280), 1.50% (3/200), and 7.10% (6/85) was observed in cattle, sheep, and pigs, respectively. Coxiella burnetii seropositivity of 26.40% (74/280), 15.00% (30/200), and 2.40% (2/85) was observed in cattle, sheep, and pigs, respectively. Coexposure was detected in cattle for positivity against C. burnetii and T. gondii 40.54%, Brucella spp. and T. gondii 1.35%, and Brucella spp. and C. burnetii 4.05%. Coexposure for Brucella spp., C. burnetii, and T. gondii 4.05% was detected in cattle. Coexposure of Brucella spp. and C. burnetii 6.67% was detected in sheep. The AMOS-PCR identified B. abortus in cattle and a mixed infection of B. abortus and B. melitensis in sheep in 64.71% seropositive samples. To our knowledge, the coexposure of Brucella spp., T. gondii, and C. burnetii in cattle has not been reported. Coexposure of Brucella spp. and C. burnetii in cattle and sheep is significant as it results in reproductive losses and constitutes an infectious risk to humans. The detection of antibodies against multiple zoonotic infections in livestock from abattoirs has implications for public health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

South Africa has two types of animal farming systems, being the commercial industry and subsistence farming in more rural areas, with commercial farmers having more access to veterinary services. To cater for the absence of sufficient veterinary service, the country allows farmers to access certain over the counter medications (stock remedies), as a way to assist them to farm sustainably and profitably. However, with any drug use, their true benefits are only realized following correct use. The aim of this study was to describe and assess the adequacy of the current use of veterinary drugs by rural-based farmers. A scheduled structured questionnaire with close-ended questions and direct observation was employed. The most important finding was the absence of proper training in the area, with 82.9% not receiving any training related to livestock production or use/handling of stock remedies, highlighting the urgent need for proper training. Of interest, a large proportion of the farmers (57.5%) left the care of their animals to herders. Concerns were also noted in the application of withholding periods, transport of medication, disposal of medication, calculation of drug doses, correct route of administration and carcass disposal with no difference in response between farmers receiving training and those who didn't. These finding not only indicates the importance of farmer training, but shows that for such training to be effective, information should not only cover farming activities but must include primary animal health care and an understanding of information contained in package leaflets. It would also be important to ensure that herdsmen are also included in such training initiatives as they are the primary careers of the animals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]