Evaluation of PCR electrospray-ionization mass spectrometry for rapid molecular diagnosis of bovine mastitis

Bovine mastitis, an inflammatory disease of the mammary gland, is one of the most costly diseases affecting the dairy industry. The treatment and prevention of this disease is linked heavily to the use of antibiotics in agriculture and early detection of the primary pathogen is essential to control the disease. Milk samples (n=67) from cows suffering from mastitis were analyzed for the presence of pathogens using PCR electrospray-ionization mass spectrometry (PCR/ESI-MS) and were compared with standard culture diagnostic methods. Concurrent identification of the primary mastitis pathogens was obtained for 64% of the tested milk samples, whereas divergent results were obtained for 27% of the samples. The PCR/ESI-MS failed to identify some of the primary pathogens in 18% of the samples, but identified other pathogens as well as microorganisms in samples that were negative by culture. The PCR/ESI-MS identified bacteria to the species level as well as yeasts and molds in samples that contained a mixed bacterial culture (9%). The sensitivity of the PCR/ESI-MS for the most common pathogens ranged from 57.1 to 100% and the specificity ranged from 69.8 to 100% using culture as gold standard. The PCR/ESI-MS also revealed the presence of the methicillin-resistant gene mecA in 16.2% of the milk samples, which correlated with the simultaneous detection of staphylococci including Staphylococcus aureus. We demonstrated that PCR/ESI-MS, a more rapid diagnostic platform compared with bacterial culture, has the significant potential to serve as an important screening method in the diagnosis of bovine clinical mastitis and has the capacity to be used in infection control programs for both subclinical and clinical disease.

The WTO and Food Security: What’s Wrong with the Rules?

The WTO Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) is the predominant multilateral legal framework governing agricultural trade. The objective of the AoA is to liberalise trade in agriculture through reductions in tariffs, domestic support and export subsidies. The AoA has not, however, ‘levelled the playing field’ and has not resulted in the equitable distribution of food, particularly for the poorer developing countries. On the other hand, support for small farmers does not ensure food security for the poor. While food security has no simple solutions such as “free trade is good for you”, reform proposals for trade rules which only address agricultural policy instruments fail to account for consumer and other interests: neither tariff reductions and subsidy disciplines, nor safeguards and other measures of producer protection can automatically increase food security. Rather, what is needed is the full and proper implementation of a number of commitments which the international community has already entered into in various human rights treaties, but which even the envisaged results of the now failed Doha Round negotiations could not ensure without revisiting relevant multilateral trade and investment rules.

An Enabling Regulatory Environment for Sustainable Investment: The Example of Trade Law

There is broad international agreement that investment flows to the agricultural sector in developing countries need to be increased. But there is also agreement that such investments need to be sustainable. For being sustainable, they must not only be beneficial to the public economy, but also to rural households and to the environment in the short and the long run. Whether sustainable investments take place, not least depends on the legal framework within which these investments are situated. This is true for the domestic legal frameworks of both the home country and of the host country of the investment. But also the international legal frameworks in which home and host states are embedded set either positive or negative incentives for investments to be sustainable. The paper presents an overview on regulatory frameworks which come to focus in this regard. It then elaborates on international agricultural trade regulation, by assuming that sustainable investments in agriculture presume a ‘sustainable trade regime’. By doing so, the paper presents parts of the debate about a sustainable agricultural trade regime, as it has been resumed and further developed by the author in recent years. Key words. Agricultural sector, sustainable investment, regulatory environment, sustainable trade regime.