Seroprevalence of bovine brucellosis and associated risk factors in Nakasongola district, Uganda
A cross-sectional study was carried out between November 2015 and January 2016 to determine the seroprevalence of Brucella antibodies in cattle raised under communal, fenced farms and tethering systems and the associated factors. Seven hundred twenty-eight bovine sera were collected and tested with rose Bengal test as a screening test and the indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay as a confirmatory test. Animal- and herd-level data were collected and binary logistic regression was used to assess the potential risk factors. True animal- and herd-level prevalence was highest in the fenced farms (4.5% (95%CI, 2.3–6.9) and 19.5% (95%CI, 8.2–32.7) respectively). The risks for natural brucellosis infection were sharing water with wild animals (OR = 0.21, 95%CI, 0.104–0.83), herd size (medium: OR = 0.089, 95%CI 0.017–0.449; large: OR = 0.024, 95%CI 0.003–0.203), fenced farms (OR = 3.7, 95% CI, 1.7–7.9), sex (OR = 0.03, 95%CI, 0.01–0.079), and lactation (OR = 0.013, 95%CI, 0.004–0.049). Changes in rangeland tenure and the shift towards intensive cattle production have influenced brucellosis epidemiology. Future studies should aim at identifying the infecting Brucellae and examining the role of wildlife in brucellosis epidemiology.
KeywordsBrucellosis Production systems Rangeland tenure Uganda
Indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
Rose Bengal test
Mr. Bahati Milton of the National Animal Diseases Diagnostics and Epidemiology Centre is acknowledged for his support.
Compliance with ethical standards
Statement of animal rights
All applicable guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Ducrotoy, M. J., Bertu, W. J., Ocholi, R. A., Gusi, A. M., Bryssinckx, W., Welburn, S., & Moriyon, I. (2014). Brucellosis as an emerging threat in developing economies: lessons from Nigeria. PLoS neglected Tropical Diseases, 8(7), e3008.Google Scholar
- Ducrotoy, M., Bertu, W. J., Matope, G., Cadmus, S., Conde-Álvarez, R., Gusi, A. M., ... & Moriyón, I. (2017). Brucellosis in Sub-Saharan Africa: Current challenges for management, diagnosis and control. Acta Tropica, 165, 179–193.Google Scholar
- Marín, C., Moreno, E., Moriyon, I., Diaz, R., & Blasco, J. (1999). Performance of competitive and indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays, gel immunoprecipitation with native hapten polysaccharide, and standard serological tests in diagnosis of sheep brucellosis. Clinical and diagnostic laboratory immunology, 6(2), 269–272.Google Scholar
- Maurice, N. A., Wungak, S. Y., Gana, B. A., Nanven, M. B., Ngbede, E. O., Ibrahim, A., Aworh, M. K., Konzing, L., Hambolu, S. E., & Gugong, V. T. (2013). Seroprevalence of bovine brucellosis in northern Plateau State, North Central Nigeria. Asian Pacific journal of tropical disease, 3(5), 337–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Muhereza, F. E. (2001). Ranchers and pastoralists: restructuring of government ranching, Uganda. African Pastoralism: Conflict, Institutions and Government, Pluto Press, London, 100–133.Google Scholar
- Naing, L., Winn, T., & Rusli, B. N. (2006). Practical issues in calculating the sample size for prevalence studies. Archives of Orofacial Sciences, 1(1), 9–14.Google Scholar