Download
Share
NOT PEER-REVIEWED
"PeerJ Preprints" is a venue for early communication or feedback before peer review. Data may be preliminary.

A peer-reviewed article of this Preprint also exists.

View peer-reviewed version

Lactoferrin quantification in cattle faeces by ELISA

, , , ,
1 Sustainable Agriculture Sciences, Rothamsted Research, North Wyke, United Kingdom
2 School of Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
3 Institute of Evolutionary Biology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
4 Institute of Global Food Security, The Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom
5 College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom
DOI
10.7287/peerj.preprints.27864v1
Published
Accepted
Subject Areas
Agricultural Science, Ecology, Veterinary Medicine, Zoology
Keywords
one-health, livestock, veterinary science, animals, immunology, ecology, agriculture, veterinary medicine, zoology
Copyright
© 2019 Cooke et al.
Licence
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ Preprints) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.
Cite this article
Cooke AS, Watt K, Albery GF, Morgan ER, Dungait JAJ. 2019. Lactoferrin quantification in cattle faeces by ELISA. PeerJ Preprints 7:e27864v1

Abstract

Background: Promoting and maintaining health is critical to ruminant welfare and productivity. Within human medicine, faecal lactoferrin is quantified for routine assessment of various gastrointestinal illnesses avoiding the need for blood sampling. This approach might also be adapted and applied for non-invasive health assessments in animals.

Methods: In this proof-of-concept study a bovine lactoferrin enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA), designed for serum and milk, was applied to a faecal supernatant to assess its potential for quantifying lactoferrin in the faeces of cattle. Faecal lactoferrin concentrations were compared to background levels to assess the viability of the technique. A comparison was then made against serum lactoferrin levels to determine if they were or were not reflective of one another.

Results: The optical densities of faecal samples were significantly greater than background readings, supporting the hypothesis that the assay was effective in quantifying faecal lactoferrin (T13, 115 = 11.99, p < 0.0005, n = 115). Lactoferrin concentrations of faecal and serum samples, taken from the same animals on the same day, were significantly different (T21 = 2.49, p = 0.022) and did not correlate (r = 0.069, p = 0.767).

Author Comment

This is a submission to PeerJ for review.

Supplemental Information

Supplement of sheep and deer samples

A supplement containing information for the sheep and deer samples (faecal and blood) that were analysed in addition to the core cattle work.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27864v1/supp-1

Dataset

Raw data that was collected and used within the analyses in the main manuscript.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27864v1/supp-2

Additional Information

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author Contributions

Andrew S. Cooke conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Kathryn Watt conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Greg F. Albery conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Eric R. Morgan conceived and designed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft, advice and guidance throughout.

Jennifer A. J. Dungait conceived and designed the experiments, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft, acquisition of funding. Advice and guidance throughout.

Animal Ethics

The following information was supplied relating to ethical approvals (i.e., approving body and any reference numbers):

All cattle blood samples were taken by a trained and qualified veterinary surgeon who was conducting routine analysis in support of animal health under the UK Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966. Samples were analysed on request of the veterinary surgeon using excess samples and did not require excess blood being drawn in addition to what was required under routine practice.

Sheep blood samples were taken under the Animal Scientific Procedures Act (1986). Samples used in this study were remnant samples taken under project license no: PPL 60/4211, personal license no: PIL 60/623.

Field Study Permissions

The following information was supplied relating to field study approvals (i.e., approving body and any reference numbers):

Permission for the cattle field sites was obtained by A. Cooke (Rothamsted Research) from the land owner and/or manager. No specific field permit was required.

Permission for sheep and deer samples was obtained by the University of Edinburgh from the land owner and/or manager. No specific field permit was required.

Data Deposition

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

Raw data is available as a supplement to this manuscript.

The data includes all of that which was obtained and used within the study. This includes the optical densities of all analysed samples and blanks and the calculated lactoferrin concentrations from those optical densities, based on standard curves.

Funding

This work was supported by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) (No. BB/J014400/1). E. Morgan was supported by by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) (No. BB/R010250/1). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Add your feedback

Before adding feedback, consider if it can be asked as a question instead, and if so then use the Question tab. Pointing out typos is fine, but authors are encouraged to accept only substantially helpful feedback.

Some Markdown syntax is allowed: _italic_ **bold** ^superscript^ ~subscript~ %%blockquote%% [link text](link URL)
 
By posting this you agree to PeerJ's commenting policies
Download
Content
Alert
Just enter your email

Download article

Lactoferrin quantification in cattle faeces by ELISA
PDF Save to Mendeley RIS XML BibTeX
  Visitors   Views   Downloads