Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar este ítem:
http://hdl.handle.net/10532/5895
Registro completo de metadatos
Campo DC | Valor | Idioma |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Moreno, Edgardo | es_ES |
dc.contributor.author | Blasco Martínez, José María | es_ES |
dc.contributor.author | Moriyón Uria, Ignacio | es_ES |
dc.coverage.spatial | Ciencia animal | es_ES |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-05-19T07:05:26Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2022-05-19T07:05:26Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2022 | es_ES |
dc.identifier.citation | Microorganisms, vol. 10, num. 5, (2022) | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10532/5895 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Brucellosis is a major zoonotic disease caused by Brucella species. Historically, the disease received over fifty names until it was recognized as a single entity, illustrating its protean manifestations and intricacies, traits that generated conundrums that have remained or re-emerged since they were first described. Here, we examine confusions concerning the clinical picture, serological diagnosis, and incidence of human brucellosis. We also discuss knowledge gaps and prevalent confusions about animal brucellosis, including brucellosis control strategies, the so-called confirmatory tests, and assumptions about the primary-binding assays and DNA detection methods. We describe how doubtfully characterized vaccines have failed to control brucellosis and emphasize how the requisites of controlled safety and protection experiments are generally overlooked. Finally, we briefly discuss the experience demonstrating that S19 remains the best cattle vaccine, while RB51 fails to validate its claimed properties (protection, differentiating infected and vaccinated animals (DIVA), and safety), offering a strong argument against its current widespread use. These conundrums show that knowledge dealing with brucellosis is lost, and previous experience is overlooked or misinterpreted, as illustrated in a significant number of misguided meta-analyses. In a global context of intensifying livestock breeding, such recurrent oversights threaten to increase the impact of brucellosis. | en |
dc.language.iso | en | es_ES |
dc.relation.uri | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2607/10/5/942 | es_ES |
dc.rights | Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España | * |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/es/ | * |
dc.title | Facing the Human and Animal Brucellosis Conundrums: The Forgotten Lessons | en |
dc.type | Journal Contribution | * |
dc.bibliographicCitation.volume | 10(5) | es_ES |
dc.subject.agrovoc | Brucella | es |
dc.subject.agrovoc | Brucelosis | es |
dc.subject.agrovoc | Diagnóstico | es |
dc.subject.agrovoc | Vacuna | es |
dc.description.status | Published | es_ES |
dc.type.refereed | Refereed | es_ES |
dc.type.specified | Article | es_ES |
dc.bibliographicCitation.title | Microorganisms | en |
dc.relation.doi | 10.3390/microorganisms10050942 | es_ES |
Aparece en las colecciones: | [DOCIART] Artículos científicos, técnicos y divulgativos |
Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero | Descripción | Tamaño | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|---|
2022_204.pdf | 2,02 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizar/Abrir |
Este ítem está sujeto a una licencia Creative Commons Licencia Creative Commons