Nontuberculous mycobacterium occurrence in biological material and environmental samples covered by epidemiological surveillance in the Republic of Dagestan

An investigation for causes of tuberculosis occurrence and persistence on farms, as well as of continuous presence of tuberculin reactor animals on tuberculosis-free farms impeding allergy diagnosis revealed that the major cause is the persistence of pathogenic and nontuberculous acid-fast mycobacteria in the environment. To determine the occurrence of typical and atypical mycobacteria in samples covered by epidemiological surveillance, 222 biological material samples from cattle, 248 environmental samples (manure, soil, water from different sources, feedstuffs), 44 milk samples from tuberculosis-affected farms, 20 vaginal discharge samples from endometritis-affected cows and 405 sputum samples from tuberculosis-affected humans were tested. Isolation and identification were performed in accordance with the guidelines. Thirty-nine cultures were isolated from the pathological material; of these, 7 (17.9%) were identified as Mycobacterium bovis and 32 (82.1%) were identified as atypical mycobacteria. Among nontuberculous mycobacterium cultures, 16 (50.0%) were classified as belonging to group II, 2 (6.2%) – as belonging to group III and 14 (43.8%) – as belonging to group IV according to the Runyon classification. The following species were found to be predominant: group II – Mycobacterium scrofulaceum and Mycobacterium gordonae (scotochromogenous), group IV – Mycobacterium smegmatis and Mycobacterium fortuitum (rapidly growing). No mycobacteria were detected in milk samples and vaginal discharge samples from tuberculin reactor cows. From 405 sputum samples from tuberculosis-affected humans, 64 (15.8%) cultures were isolated, of which 55 (85.9%) were classified as Mycobacterium tuberculosis, 9 (14.1%) – as Mycobacterium bovis. Out of 248 environmental samples tested, mycobacteria were detected in 65 (26.2%) samples, of which 58 (89.2%) were atypical mycobacteria of groups II, III and IV; Mycobacterium bovis was isolated from 7 (10.8%) samples (soil and manure). The attempts to isolate Mycobacterium tuberculosis failed. The tests demonstrated the wide spread of nontuberculous acid-fast mycobacteria in the environment irrespective of the altitudinal zone. These findings constitute a basis for further monitoring of mycobacterium circulation in the environment in the Republic of Dagestan with a view of optimizing preventive measures.

1. Baratov M. O. Problems and prospects of bovine tuberculosis serological diagnosis. Veterinary Science Today. 2021; (1): 33–37. DOI: 10.29326/2304-196X-2021-1-36-33-37.

2. Vodolazsky D. K., Gribalkin A. S. Epizootologicheskie osobennosti techeniya tuberkuleza krupnogo rogatogo skota v khozyaistvakh razlichnykh pochvenno-klimaticheskikh zon Stavropol’skogo kraya = Epidemiological pattern of bovine tuberculosis on farms in different edaphoclimatic zones of the Stavropol Krai. Diagnostika, lechenie, profilaktika zabolevanii sel’skokhozyaistvennykh zhivotnykh: sbornik nauchnykh trudov = Diagnosis, treatment, prevention of livestock diseases: collection of papers. Stavropol: Stavropol Agriculture Institute. 1978; 41 (5): 51–53. (in Russ.)

3. Naimanov A. Kh. Problemy diagnostiki i profilaktiki tuberkuleza krupnogo rogatogo skota v sovremennykh usloviyakh = Problems of bovine tuberculosis diagnosis and prevention under present day conditions. Veterinarnaya patologiya. 2004; 1–2: 18–23. eLIBRARY ID: 9165613. (in Russ.)

4. Donchenko A. S., Ovdienko N. P., Donchenko N. A. Diagnosis of bovine tuberculosis. Responsible ed. A. S. Donchenko. Novosibirsk: Siberian Branch of RAАS; 2004. 308 p. (in Russ.)

5. Gcebe N., Hlokwe T. M. Non-tuberculous mycobacteria in South African Wildlife: Neglected pathogens and potential impediments for bovine tuberculosis diagnosis. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 2017; 7:15. DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2017.00015.

6. Prokop’eva N. I. Izuchenie prirody allergicheskikh reaktsii u krupnogo rogatogo skota blagopoluchnykh po tuberkulezu stad = Studies of nature of allergic reactions in cattle of tuberculosis-free herds. Veterinarnaya patologiya. 2004; 1–2: 134–136. eLIBRARY ID: 9165659. (in Russ.)

7. Nuratinov  R.  A. Nutrient medium for mycobacterium culturing. Patent No.  2121000 Russian Federation, Int.  Cl.  C12Q  1/04(2006.01), C12N 1/20(2006.01), C12R 1/32(2006.01). Prikaspijskij zonal’nyj nauchno-issledovatel’skij veterinarnyj institut. Application: 95111841/13. Application published: 11.07.1995. Date of publication: 27.10.1998. Available at: https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/9c/9a/14/3d7cf8ce31e172/RU2121000C1.pdf. (in Russ.)

8. Baratov  M.  O., Ahmedov  M.  M., Sakidibirov  O.  P. On causes of non-specific reaction to tuberculin. The Veterinarny Vrach. 2014; 2: 24–28. eLIBRARY ID: 21422421. (in Russ.)

9. Kassich Yu. Ya., Kochmarskii V. A., Tikhonov P. M., Zavgorodnii A. I. Izuchenie sensibiliziruyushchikh i patogennykh svoistv atipichnykh mikobakterii = Studies of sensitizing and pathogenic properties of atypical mycobacteria. Veterinariya. 1989; 4: 13–15. (in Russ.)

10. Mukovnin A. A., Naimanov A. H., Gulukin A. M. Bovine tuberculosis in the Russian Federation. Veterinariya. 2020; 7: 19–24. DOI: 10.30896/0042-4846.2020.23.7.19-24. (in Russ.)

11. Pavlik I., Ulmann V., Falkinham J. O. 3rd. Nontuberculous mycobacteria: ecology and impact on animal and human health. Microorganisms. 2022; 10 (8):1516. DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms10081516.

12. Wolinsky E., Rynearson T. K. Mycobacteria in soil and their relation to disease-associated strains. Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 1968; 97 (6): 1032–1037. DOI: 10.1164/arrd.1968.97.6P1.1032.

13. Jenkins  A.  O., Gormley  E., Gcebe  N., Fosgate  G.  T., Conan  A., Aagaard C., et al. Cross-reactive immune responses in cattle arising from exposure to Mycobacterium bovis and non-tuberculous mycobacteria. Prev. Vet. Med. 2018; 152: 16–22. DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2018.02.003.

14. Baratov M. O., Huseynova P. S. More on search for causes of sensitization to tuberculin PPD for mammals in cattle. Veterinary Science Today. 2021; 10 (4): 271–276. DOI: 10.29326/2304-196X-2021-10-4-271-276.

15. Alekseev  A.  Yu., Durymanov  A.  G., Rassadkin  Yu.  N., Shestopalov A. M., Repin V. E. Metod kul’tivirovaniya dlya izucheniya fiziologii mikobakterii = A culture technique to study the physiology of mycobacteria. Materialy VIII S’’ezda Vserossiiskogo obshchestva epidemiologov, mikrobiologov i parazitologov (26–28 marta 2002 g.) = Proceedings of the VIII Congress of All-Russian Society of Epidemiologists, Microbiologists and Parasitologists (26–28 March 2002). Moscow: ROSINKES; 2002; 3: 186–187. (in Russ.)

16. Mingaleev  D.  N. Novel tools and methods of bovine tuberculosis prevention in young animals: Author’s Abstract of Thesis for degree of Doctor of Science (Veterinary Medicine). Kazan; 2018. 42 р. Available at: https://viewer.rsl.ru/ru/rsl01008706808?page=1&rotate=0&theme=white. (in Russ.)

17. Tolstenko N. G. Pathogenicity of certain mycobacterium species isolated from animals and the environment: Author’s Abstract of Thesis for degree of Candidate of Science (Veterinary Medicine). Moscow; 2006. 27 p. Available at: https://new-disser.ru/_avtoreferats/01002977938.pdf. (in Russ.)

18. Michel A. L. Mycobacterium fortuitum infection interference with Mycobacterium bovis diagnostics: natural infection cases and a pilot experimental infection. J. Vet. Diagn. Invest. 2008; 20 (4): 501–503. DOI: 10.1177/104063870802000415.

19. Bercovier H., Vincent V. Mycobacterial infections in domestic and wild animals due to Mycobacterium marinum, M. fortuitum, M. chelonae, M. porcinum, M. farcinogenes, M. smegmatis, M. scrofulaceum, M. xenopi, M. kansasii, M. simiae and M. genavense. Rev. Sci. Tech. 2001; 20 (1): 265–290. DOI: 10.20506/rst.20.1.1269.

20. Ovdienko N. P., Naimanov A. Kh., Solodova I. V. Epizooticheskaya obstanovka po tuberkulezu krupnogo rogatogo skota v zarubezhnykh stranakh v nachale XXI veka = Bovine tuberculosis epidemic situation in foreign countries in early XXI century. Veterinarnaya patologiya. 2004; 1–2: 51–54. eLIBRARY ID: 9165626. (in Russ.)

21. Naimanov  A.  Kh., Ovdienko  N.  P., Pomykanov  N.  P. Diagnostika tuberkuleza krupnogo rogatogo skota v individual’nykh khozyaistvakh = Bovine tuberculosis diagnosis on individual farms. Aktual’nye problemy infektsionnoi patologii i immunologii zhivotnykh: materialy konferentsii (16–17 maya 2006 g.) = Topical issues of animal infectious pathology and immunology: proceedings ofthe conference (16–17 May 2006). Moscow: Izograf; 2006; 297–302. eLIBRARY ID: 26057721. (in Russ.)

22. Pavlik  I., Ulmann V., Hubelova  D., Weston  R. T. Nontuberculous mycobacteria as sapronoses: a review. Microorganisms. 2022; 10 (7):1345. DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms10071345.

23. Baratov M. O. Non-specific reactions – the problem of diagnosing of animal tuberculosis. Veterinaria i kormlenie. 2020; 4: 16–18. DOI: 10.30917/ATT-VK-1814-9588-2020-4-5. (in Russ.)

24. Smirnov  A.  M. Sovremennye problemy diagnostiki i profilaktiki tuberkuleza u zhivotnykh = Current issues of tuberculosis diagnosis and prevention in animals. Veterinarnaya patologiya. 2004; 1–2: 10–13. eLIBRARY ID: 9165611. (in Russ.)

25. Topical issues of tuberculosis and brucellosis prevention and control in animals: Bulletin of the All-Union Order of Lenin Research Institute of Experimental Veterinary Medicine named after Ya. R. Kovalenko. Moscow: VIEV; 1987; Iss. 64. 79 p. (in Russ.)

26. Kanetsuna F., Bartoli A. A simple chemical method to differentiate Mycobacterium from Nocardia. J.  Gen. Microbiol. 1972; 70  (2): 209–212. DOI: 10.1099/00221287-70-2-209.

27. Vlasenko V. S., Kosobokov E. A., Dengis N. A., Novikova N. N. The functional state of neutrophils for mycobacteria-infected guinea pigs under the action immunomodulator KIM-M2. Perm Agrarian Journal. 2022; 3 (39): 63–69. DOI: 10.47737/2307-2873_2022_39_62. (in Russ.)

28. Lechevalier M. P., Horan A. C., Lechevalier H. Lipid composition in the classification of Nocardiae and Mycobacteria. J. Bacteriol. 1971; 105 (1): 313–318. DOI: 10.1128/jb.105.1.313-318.1971.

29. Uchida K., Aida K. Taxonomic significance of cell-wall acyl type in Corynebacterium-Mycobacterium-Nocardia group by a glycolate test. J. Gen. Appl. Microbiol. 1979; 25: 169–183. DOI: 10.2323/jgam.25.169.

30. Guseynova P. S., Baratov M. O. Comparative study of methods of the diagnosis of cattle tuberculosis. Veterinaria i kormlenie. 2020; 4: 24–26. DOI: 10.30917/ATT-VK-1814-9588-2020-4-8. (in Russ.)

31. Dzhupina S. I. Fundamental’nye znaniya epizooticheskogo protsessa – osnova kontrolya tuberkuleza krupnogo rogatogo skota = Fundamental knowledge of the epidemic process – the basis of bovine tuberculosis control. Veterinarnaya patologiya. 2004; 1–2: 45–47. eLIBRARY ID: 9165623. (in Russ.)

32. Ridell M. Immunodiffusion studies of Mycobacterium, Nocardia and Rhodococcus for taxonomical purposes. Zentralblatt für Bakteriologie, Parasitenkunde, Infektionskrankheiten und Hygiene. 1981; Suppl. 11: 235–241.

33. Laboratory diagnosis of tuberculosis. Methodical materials for advanced focused training cycle for medical practitioners. Ed. by V. V. Erohin. Moscow: R. Valent; 2012. 701 p. (in Russ.)

34. Liskova E., Slinina K. Isolation of mycobacteria from pathological material from tuberculine positive animals. Veterinariya sel’skokhozyaistvennykh zhivotnykh. 2016; 2: 47–49. eLIBRARY ID: 36977044. (in Russ.)

35. Stackebrandt E., Goebel B. M. Taxonomic note: A place for DNA-DNA reassociation and 16S rRNA sequence analysis in the present species definition in bacteriology. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol. 1994; 44 (4): 846–849. DOI: 10.1099/00207713-44-4-846.