1
|
Juge AE, Hall NJ, Richeson JT, Cooke RF, Daigle CL. Dogs' ability to detect an inflammatory immune response in cattle via olfaction. Front Vet Sci 2024; 11:1393289. [PMID: 38655536 PMCID: PMC11036545 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2024.1393289] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2024] [Accepted: 03/26/2024] [Indexed: 04/26/2024] Open
Abstract
Introduction Canine olfaction is a potential means for detection of respiratory disease in beef cattle. In a prior study, two dogs were trained to discriminate between nasal swabs from healthy cattle and cattle that developed Bovine Respiratory Disease. Dogs had some ability to identify samples from BRD-affected cattle, but results were ambiguous. The purpose of this study was to evaluate more dogs using better-controlled training and testing procedures. Methods Nasal and saliva swabs were collected from 96 cattle before and after administering a vaccine to induce an inflammatory immune response. Samples were stored at -80°C for up to 11 months before use, and samples from animals with an elevated body temperature at baseline were omitted. An automated olfactometer apparatus was constructed to improve blinding procedures and reduce opportunities for odor contamination. Four dogs were trained to distinguish between swabs from healthy and sickness-model cattle, including the two dogs from the previous study ("Runnels" and "Cheaps") and two inexperienced dogs ("Molokai" and "Amy"). During a seven-month training period, dogs were exposed to samples from 28 animals. Dogs were tested on 59 sets of unfamiliar samples. Results Performance varied among dogs (χ2 = 10.48, p = 0.02). Molokai's performance was above chance (0.73 ± 0.06, p = 0.0006), while Amy (0.44 ± 0.06, p = 0.43), Cheaps (0.53 ± 0.07, p = 0.79), and Runnels (0.56 ± 0.06, p = 0.43) did not respond correctly at a rate different from chance. Accuracy did not differ between nasal swabs (0.63 ± 0.08) and saliva swabs (0.53 ± 0.08, χ2 = 0.81, p = 0.37). Discussion The results of this study indicate that canine olfaction may be an effective means of detecting illness in beef cattle. However, individual dogs' aptitude for this detection task varies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aiden E. Juge
- Department of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States
| | - Nathaniel J. Hall
- Department of Animal Science, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, United States
| | - John T. Richeson
- Department of Agricultural Sciences, West Texas A&M University, Canyon, TX, United States
| | - Reinaldo F. Cooke
- Department of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States
| | - Courtney L. Daigle
- Department of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
McKeague B, Finlay C, Rooney N. Conservation detection dogs: A critical review of efficacy and methodology. Ecol Evol 2024; 14:e10866. [PMID: 38371867 PMCID: PMC10869951 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.10866] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/24/2023] [Revised: 11/09/2023] [Accepted: 12/02/2023] [Indexed: 02/20/2024] Open
Abstract
Conservation detection dogs (CDD) use their exceptional olfactory abilities to assist a wide range of conservation projects through the detection of target specimens or species. CDD are generally quicker, can cover wider areas and find more samples than humans and other analytical tools. However, their efficacy varies between studies; methodological and procedural standardisation in the field is lacking. Considering the cost of deploying a CDD team and the limited financial resources within conservation, it is vital that their performance is quantified and reliable. This review aims to summarise what is currently known about the use of scent detection dogs in conservation and elucidate which factors affect efficacy. We describe the efficacy of CDD across species and situational contexts like training and fieldwork. Reported sensitivities (i.e. the proportion of target samples found out of total available) ranged from 23.8% to 100% and precision rates (i.e. proportion of alerts that are true positives) from 27% to 100%. CDD are consistently shown to be better than other techniques, but performance varies substantially across the literature. There is no consistent difference in efficacy between training, testing and fieldwork, hence we need to understand the factors affecting this. We highlight the key variables that can alter CDD performance. External effects include target odour, training methods, sample management, search methodology, environment and the CDD handler. Internal effects include dog breed, personality, diet, age and health. Unfortunately, much of the research fails to provide adequate information on the dogs, handlers, training, experience and samples. This results in an inability to determine precisely why an individual study has high or low efficacy. It is clear that CDDs can be effective and applied to possibly limitless conservation scenarios, but moving forward researchers must provide more consistent and detailed methodologies so that comparisons can be conducted, results are more easily replicated and progress can be made in standardising CDD work.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Beth McKeague
- School of Biological SciencesQueen's University BelfastBelfastUK
| | | | - Nicola Rooney
- Bristol Veterinary SchoolUniversity of BristolBristolUK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Recognition of an Odour Pattern from Paenibacillus larvae Spore Samples by Trained Detection Dogs. Animals (Basel) 2022; 13:ani13010154. [PMID: 36611761 PMCID: PMC9817694 DOI: 10.3390/ani13010154] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2022] [Revised: 12/14/2022] [Accepted: 12/23/2022] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Spores of the bacteria Paenibacillus larvae play a central role in the transmission of American Foulbrood (AFB), a major disease of honey bee (Apis mellifera) colonies. This study investigated whether trained detection dogs could recognise an odour pattern from P. larvae spore samples. Although dogs have previously been used to detect diseased larvae in colonies with AFB, this is the first time they have been investigated for detecting P. larvae spore samples. Given that spores are metabolically inactive, it was unknown whether the spore samples would produce enough volatile organic compounds to form an odour pattern that could be detected by dogs. Three dogs were trained to identify laboratory-produced P. larvae spore samples and were systematically desensitized to non-target odours with a series of control samples. Two of the dogs successfully completed training and were then tested by having each dog perform six searches in an odour-detection carousel with the trainer blinded to the location of the spore samples. In this high-stakes forced-choice test, each dog was asked to identify one new spore sample, containing approximately 93-265 million P. larvae spores, from seven control samples. Both dogs correctly identified the spore sample every time (100% success rate); the probability of this result occurring by chance was p = 0.0000038. Therefore, this study demonstrates that dogs can recognise an odour pattern from bacterial spore samples, in this case, P. larvae, and provides proof of concept for further investigation into the use of detection dogs to reduce the spread of AFB in beekeeping businesses.
Collapse
|
4
|
Meller S, Al Khatri MSA, Alhammadi HK, Álvarez G, Alvergnat G, Alves LC, Callewaert C, Caraguel CGB, Carancci P, Chaber AL, Charalambous M, Desquilbet L, Ebbers H, Ebbers J, Grandjean D, Guest C, Guyot H, Hielm-Björkman A, Hopkins A, Kreienbrock L, Logan JG, Lorenzo H, Maia RDCC, Mancilla-Tapia JM, Mardones FO, Mutesa L, Nsanzimana S, Otto CM, Salgado-Caxito M, de los Santos F, da Silva JES, Schalke E, Schoneberg C, Soares AF, Twele F, Vidal-Martínez VM, Zapata A, Zimin-Veselkoff N, Volk HA. Expert considerations and consensus for using dogs to detect human SARS-CoV-2-infections. Front Med (Lausanne) 2022; 9:1015620. [PMID: 36569156 PMCID: PMC9773891 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.1015620] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2022] [Accepted: 11/17/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Sebastian Meller
- Department of Small Animal Medicine & Surgery, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hanover, Germany
| | | | - Hamad Khatir Alhammadi
- International Operations Department, Ministry of Interior of the United Arab Emirates, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
| | - Guadalupe Álvarez
- Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Guillaume Alvergnat
- International Operations Department, Ministry of Interior of the United Arab Emirates, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
| | - Lêucio Câmara Alves
- Department of Veterinary Medicine, Federal Rural University of Pernambuco, Recife, Brazil
| | - Chris Callewaert
- Center for Microbial Ecology and Technology, Department of Biotechnology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Charles G. B. Caraguel
- School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Roseworthy, SA, Australia
| | - Paula Carancci
- Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Anne-Lise Chaber
- School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Roseworthy, SA, Australia
| | - Marios Charalambous
- Department of Small Animal Medicine & Surgery, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hanover, Germany
| | - Loïc Desquilbet
- École Nationale Vétérinaire d’Alfort, IMRB, Université Paris Est, Maisons-Alfort, France
| | | | | | - Dominique Grandjean
- École Nationale Vétérinaire d’Alfort, Université Paris-Est, Maisons-Alfort, France
| | - Claire Guest
- Medical Detection Dogs, Milton Keynes, United Kingdom
| | - Hugues Guyot
- Clinical Department of Production Animals, Fundamental and Applied Research for Animals & Health Research Unit, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium
| | - Anna Hielm-Björkman
- Department of Equine and Small Animal Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Amy Hopkins
- Medical Detection Dogs, Milton Keynes, United Kingdom
| | - Lothar Kreienbrock
- Department of Biometry, Epidemiology and Information Processing, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hanover, Germany
| | - James G. Logan
- Department of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
- Arctech Innovation, The Cube, Dagenham, United Kingdom
| | - Hector Lorenzo
- Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | | | | | - Fernando O. Mardones
- Escuela de Medicina Veterinaria, Facultad de Agronomía e Ingeniería Forestal and Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas y Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Leon Mutesa
- Center for Human Genetics, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda
- Rwanda National Joint Task Force COVID-19, Kigali, Rwanda
| | | | - Cynthia M. Otto
- Penn Vet Working Dog Center, Department of Clinical Sciences and Advanced Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States
| | - Marília Salgado-Caxito
- Escuela de Medicina Veterinaria, Facultad de Agronomía e Ingeniería Forestal and Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas y Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | | | | | - Esther Schalke
- Bundeswehr Medical Service Headquarters, Koblenz, Germany
| | - Clara Schoneberg
- Department of Biometry, Epidemiology and Information Processing, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hanover, Germany
| | - Anísio Francisco Soares
- Department of Animal Morphology and Physiology, Federal Rural University of Pernambuco, Recife, Brazil
| | - Friederike Twele
- Department of Small Animal Medicine & Surgery, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hanover, Germany
| | - Victor Manuel Vidal-Martínez
- Laboratorio de Parasitología y Patología Acuática, Departamento de Recursos del Mar, Centro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados del IPN Unidad Mérida, Mérida, Yucatán, Mexico
| | - Ariel Zapata
- Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Natalia Zimin-Veselkoff
- Escuela de Medicina Veterinaria, Facultad de Agronomía e Ingeniería Forestal and Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas y Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Holger A. Volk
- Department of Small Animal Medicine & Surgery, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hanover, Germany
- Center for Systems Neuroscience Hannover, Hanover, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Juge AE, Hall NJ, Richeson JT, Daigle CL. Using Canine Olfaction to Detect Bovine Respiratory Disease: A Pilot Study. Front Vet Sci 2022; 9:902151. [PMID: 35847637 PMCID: PMC9284318 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2022.902151] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2022] [Accepted: 05/23/2022] [Indexed: 12/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Bovine respiratory disease (BRD) is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in feedlot cattle and is a major welfare and economic concern. Identification of BRD-affected cattle using clinical illness scores is problematic, and speed and cost constraints limit the feasibility of many diagnostic approaches. Dogs can rapidly identify humans and animals affected by a variety of diseases based on scent. Canines' olfactory systems can distinguish between patterns of volatile organic compounds produced by diseased and healthy tissue. In this pilot study, two dogs (“Runnels” and “Cheaps”) were trained for 7 months to discriminate between nasal swabs from cattle that developed signs of BRD within 20 days of feedlot arrival and swabs from cattle that did not develop BRD signs within 3 months at the feedlot. Nasal swabs were collected during cattle processing upon arrival to the feedlot and were stored at −80°C. Dogs were presented with sets of one positive and two negative samples and were trained using positive reinforcement to hold their noses over the positive sample. The dogs performed moderately well in the final stage of training, with accuracy for Runnels of 0.817 and Cheaps of 0.647, both greater than the 0.333 expected by chance. During a double-blind detection test, dogs evaluated 123 unique and unfamiliar samples that were presented as 41 sets (3 samples per set), with both the dog handler and data recorder blinded to the positive sample location. Each dog was tested twice on each set of samples. Detection test accuracy was slightly better than chance for Cheaps at 0.451 (95% CI: 0.344–0.559) and was no better than chance for Runnels at 0.390 (95% CI: 0.285–0.496. Overall accuracy was 0.421 (95% CI: 0.345–0.496). When dogs' consensus response on each sample set was considered, accuracy was 0.537 (95% CI: 0.384–0.689). Detection accuracy also varied by sample lot. While dogs showed some ability to discriminate between BRD-affected and healthy cattle using nasal swabs, the complexity of this task suggests that more testing is needed before determining whether dogs could be effective as a screening method for BRD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aiden E. Juge
- Department of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States
| | - Nathaniel J. Hall
- Department of Animal Science, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, United States
| | - John T. Richeson
- Department of Agricultural Sciences, West Texas A&M University, Canyon, TX, United States
| | - Courtney L. Daigle
- Department of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States
- *Correspondence: Courtney L. Daigle
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
|
7
|
Singletary M, Krichbaum S, Passler T, Lazarowski L, Fischer T, Silvis S, Waggoner LP, Walz P, Angle C. A Novel Method for Training the Interdiction of Restricted and Hazardous Biological Materials by Detection Dogs. Front Med (Lausanne) 2022; 9:847620. [PMID: 35492309 PMCID: PMC9042221 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.847620] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2022] [Accepted: 03/21/2022] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
The interdiction of restricted and hazardous biological agents presents challenges for any detection method due to the inherent complexity of sample type and accessibility. Detection capabilities for this category of agents are limited and restricted in their mobility, adaptability and efficiency. The potential for identifying biological agents through a volatile organic compound (VOC) signature presents an opportunity to use detection dogs in a real-time mobile capacity for surveillance and screening strategies. However, the safe handling and access to the materials needed for training detection dogs on restricted or hazardous biological agents prevents its broader application in this field. This study evaluated the use of a polymer-based training aid in a viral detection model using bovine viral diarrhea virus mimicking biosafety level 3+ agent conditions. After the biological agent-based odor was absorbed into the polymer, the aid was rendered safe for handling through a rigorous sterilization process. The viral culture-based training aid was then used to train a cohort of detection dogs (n = 6) to discriminate agent-based target odor in culture from relevant distractor odors including non-target biological agent-based odors. Following culture-based training, dogs were tested for generalization to aids with infected animal sample-based odors across five sample types (fecal, blood, nasal, saliva, and urine). Within the context of the polymer-based training aid system, dogs were successfully trained to detect and discriminate a representative biological viral agent-based odor from distractor odors with a 97.22% (±2.78) sensitivity and 97.11% (±1.94) specificity. Generalization from the agent-based odor to sample-based odors ranged from 65.40% (±8.98) to 91.90 % (±6.15) sensitivity and 88.61% (±1.46) to 96.00% (±0.89) specificity across the sample types. The restrictive nature for mimicking the access and handling of a BSL 3+ agent presented challenges that required a strict study design uncommon to standard detection dog training and odor presentation. This study demonstrates the need to further evaluate the utility and challenges of training detection dogs to alert to biological samples using safe and manageable training aids.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Melissa Singletary
- Canine Performance Sciences Program, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.,Department of Anatomy, Physiology, and Pharmacology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States
| | - Sarah Krichbaum
- Canine Performance Sciences Program, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States
| | - Thomas Passler
- Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States
| | - Lucia Lazarowski
- Canine Performance Sciences Program, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States.,Department of Anatomy, Physiology, and Pharmacology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States
| | - Terrence Fischer
- Canine Performance Sciences Program, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States
| | - Scott Silvis
- Department of Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States
| | - L Paul Waggoner
- Canine Performance Sciences Program, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States
| | - Paul Walz
- Department of Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States
| | - Craig Angle
- Canine Performance Sciences Program, College of Veterinary Medicine, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Maughan MN, Best EM, Gadberry JD, Sharpes CE, Evans KL, Chue CC, Nolan PL, Buckley PE. The Use and Potential of Biomedical Detection Dogs During a Disease Outbreak. Front Med (Lausanne) 2022; 9:848090. [PMID: 35445042 PMCID: PMC9014822 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.848090] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2022] [Accepted: 02/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Biomedical detection dogs offer incredible advantages during disease outbreaks that are presently unmatched by current technologies, however, dogs still face hurdles of implementation due to lack of inter-governmental cooperation and acceptance by the public health community. Here, we refine the definition of a biomedical detection dog, discuss the potential applications, capabilities, and limitations of biomedical detection dogs in disease outbreak scenarios, and the safety measures that must be considered before and during deployment. Finally, we provide recommendations on how to address and overcome the barriers to acceptance of biomedical detection dogs through a dedicated research and development investment in olfactory sciences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Eric M. Best
- Penn State Harrisburg, Harrisburg, PA, United States
| | | | | | - Kelley L. Evans
- Biochemistry Branch, U.S. Army DEVCOM Chemical Biological Center, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, United States
| | - Calvin C. Chue
- Biochemistry Branch, U.S. Army DEVCOM Chemical Biological Center, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, United States
| | | | - Patricia E. Buckley
- Biochemistry Branch, U.S. Army DEVCOM Chemical Biological Center, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, United States
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
The Promise of Disease Detection Dogs in Pandemic Response: Lessons Learned From COVID-19. Disaster Med Public Health Prep 2021; 17:e20. [PMID: 34099088 PMCID: PMC8460421 DOI: 10.1017/dmp.2021.183] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/02/2023]
Abstract
One of the lessons learned from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is the utility of an early, flexible, and rapidly deployable disease screening and detection response. The largely uncontrolled spread of the pandemic in the United States exposed a range of planning and implementation shortcomings, which, if they had been in place before the pandemic emerged, may have changed the trajectory. Disease screening by detection dogs show great promise as a noninvasive, efficient, and cost-effective screening method for COVID-19 infection. We explore evidence of their use in infectious and chronic diseases; the training, oversight, and resources required for implementation; and potential uses in various settings. Disease detection dogs may contribute to the current and future public health pandemics; however, further research is needed to extend our knowledge and measurement of their effectiveness and feasibility as a public health intervention tool, and efforts are needed to ensure public and political support.
Collapse
|