Skip to main content
NCBI home page
BMC Veterinary Research logoLink to BMC Veterinary Research
. 2022 Aug 3;18:297. doi: 10.1186/s12917-022-03403-4

Clinicopathological and molecular studies on cattle naturally infected with lumpy skin diseases in selected districts of Wolaita Zone, Southern Ethiopia

Mesfin Mathewos 1,✉, Fistum Dulo 1, Zewdneh Tanga 1, Melaku Sombo 2
PMCID: PMC9347132  PMID: 35922813

Abstract

Background

Lumpy skin disease is a contagious viral disease of cattle caused by LSDV that results in huge economic losses in the cattle industry. This study characterizes LSDV in cattle through clinicopathological and molecular techniques in selected districts of Wolaita Zone, Southern Ethiopia.

Methods

A crossectional study was conducted from November 2020 to June 2021 using Real-time polymerase chain reaction and Histopathological techniques to confirm LSDV.

Result

This study revealed that the percentage of positivity of cattle for LSDV was 36.2%. Clinically, cattle infected with LSDV revealed fever (39–41 °C), nodular lesions on the skin and mucous membranes, and lymphadenopathy. Histopathologically, affected tissue revealed ballooning degenerations of the epidermis, infiltration of mononuclear inflammatory cells, vasculitis, and intracytoplasmic eosinophilic inclusion bodies. RT-PCR confirmed that DNA extracts from skin biopsies of virus isolates were positive for LSDV.

Conclusion

The present study confirms that LSDV is widely circulating in cattle of selected districts of the Wolaita zone. Thus, effective control measures through regular vaccination and further confirmation of circulating strains of LSDV through detailed molecular analysis should be recommended.

Keywords: Cattle, Histopathology, “Lumpy skin disease virus (LSDV)”, Real-time polymerase chain reaction, Wolaita zone

Introduction

Poxviruses are complex, linear, enveloped, double-stranded DNA viruses with large genomes [48], which are responsible for several economically significant zoonotic diseases affecting humans, wildlife, farm animals, and domestic animals [23]. They belong to the Poxviridae family, which is divided into two subfamilies: Entomopoxvirinae, which infect invertebrates, and Chordopoxvirinae, which infect vertebrates [30, 42, 45]. Among the Chord poxvirus subfamily, Capripoxvirus is capable of infecting the cattle, sheep, and goats, which is comprised of goat pox virus (GTPV), sheep pox virus (SPPV), and LSDV and Parapoxvirus [5, 16, 21, 48, 72].

Lumpy skin disease (LSD) is a highly contagious, fatal skin disease of cattle and water buffalos caused by LSDV, a member of the Poxviridae family [53], and results in important socioeconomic transboundary infection [42, 72]. The disease is designated as "LSD," "Pseudo-urticaria," "Neethling viral sickness," "exanthema nodularis bovis," and "knopvelsiekte" [8, 27, 40, 70, 71]. Historically, LSDV was first documented as an epidemic in Zambia in 1929 [51, 63] and since then has spread out of Africa into the Middle East region, southern Russian Federation, Central Asia, Western Europe, and Central-Eastern Europe [50, 70, 71].

Lumpy skin disease causes significant economic losses due to persistent debility, slowed development, decreased milk and meat output, hide damage, and sterility in bulls, infertility, abortion, and different ranges of mortality and morbidity [29, 42, 43]. The infection rate has been 1 to 2% but in some areas, it may reach 80 to 90%. The mortality rate has been reported about 10–40%, and even higher in special cases, but the usual rate was 1 to 5% [25, 64, 65].

To date, the most likely vectors for LSDV transmission are blood-sucking arthropods such as stable flies (Stomoxys calcitrans), mosquitoes (Aedes aegypti), and hard ticks (Rhipicephalus and Amblyomma species). New evidence suggests that the Musca domestica, may also play a role in LSDV transmission, but this has not yet been tested in a clinical setting [64, 73]. Fever, nodular development, the fast eruption of skin nodules, enlarged superficial lymph nodes, generalized lymphadenitis, and edema are all symptoms of LSDV [4, 57, 62].

The tentative diagnosis of LSD is mainly depending on the typical clinical signs and postmortem examination. Although a combination of histopathological techniques with electron microscopy, serology, molecular assays, and viral isolation can provide a definitive detection for LSDV [44, 70, 71, 79]. The molecular detection of LSDV using Capri poxvirus-specific primers for the attachment protein and fusion protein gene using conventional and Rt-PCR techniques have been documented to be used on blood, tissue, and semen specimens [2–4].

Lumpy skin disease was first observed in the southwest of Lake Tana in 1983 [46], but now it has been spread to almost all the regions and agro-ecological zones of the country. LSD has become one of the most economically important livestock diseases in Ethiopia that results in hide damage, prolonged loss of productivity of dairy and beef cattle, weight loss, abortion, infertility, and sometimes permanent sterility, and denied access to both local and international markets. Consequently, information regarding Clinico-pathological and Molecular studies was limited and no studies were done on cattle naturally infected with LSDV in selected districts of the Wolaita zone. Therefore, the objective of this study was to characterize LSDV in cattle through clinicopathological and molecular techniques in selected districts of Wolaita Zone, Southern Ethiopia.

Material and methods

Study area

The study was conducted in a selected district of the Wolaita zone namely Humbo and Sodo town, southern Ethiopia. Wolaita Sodo is located about 390 km south of Addis Ababa. The area is located at the latitude of 8°50°N and a longitude of 37°45°E. Topographically, the area is marked by hilly, flat, steep slopes and gorges and several streams and mountains. The highest mountain is Damota, 2500 m.a.s.l, which is located near Sodo town. The altitude varies from 1100–2950 m.a.s.l. The area experiences a mean annual temperature of about 20 °C. The mean maximum temperature is 26.2 °C and the average monthly minimum temperature is 11.4 °C. The rainfall regimes over much of the area are typically bimodal with the small rainy season occurring from February to April and a big rainy season extending from June to September. The mean annual rainfall of the area ranges from 450–1446 mm with the lowest being on low land and the highest on high land (WZFSD. Report on Food Security Activities Presented to Zonal Council; 2013). The livestock population in the study area is estimated to be 2,982,513 cattle, 1,285,161 sheep, 1,599,081 goats, 23,412 horses, 20,283 mules, 330,214 donkeys, and 3,116,356 chickens [76].

Study population

Those cattle infected with LSDV irrespective of their age, sex, breed, body condition, and farming system were included in this study.

Study design and sampling technique

A cross-sectional study was conducted on cattle suspected for LSDV from November 2020 to June 2021 to characterize LSDV in cattle through clinicopathological and molecular techniques in selected districts of Wolaita Zone, Southern Ethiopia. The animal that showed high fever between 39 to 41 °C, visible skin nodules, enlarged lymph nodes, and lacrimation were selected and investigated through different diagnostic approaches for identification and characterization of circulating LSDV in the study area.

Sample collection and anesthetic procedures

The representative samples for molecular characterization were collected from clinically sick animals according to the procedures [52]. Before sampling the animal was restrained and then a detailed physical examination was done on sick animals. Once these procedures were accomplished, the sampling area was disinfected with alcohol, and the hairs were removed with the help of a sterile scalpel [24].

Anesthetic procedures and the anesthetic agent used

An 18-gauge 3.8-cm needle was directed perpendicular to the skin surface. Once the skin was penetrated, place a drop of local anesthetic solution in the hub of the needle. The needle should then be advanced slowly until the anesthetic solution was drawn into the subcutis. The anesthesia agent that was used is Lidocaine. Approximately 2% Lidocaine HCl (0.2 mg/kg body weight) was infiltrated into the subcutis before sampling as previously described by [12].

Then after, the incision of the nodule was done using a sterile surgical scalpel blade by holding the tissue with tissue forceps. A total of 20 biopsy samples were taken aseptically (Table 1) and then placed immediately into the universal bottle containing 10% neutral buffered formalin until the tissue sample was processed at Hawassa University faculty of veterinary pathology. Moreover, for molecular diagnosis samples were collected using normal saline water and which was transported by icebox to NAHDIC molecular laboratory and kept at + 4 °C until genomic DNA extraction as described by [6, 51]. Following incision, wound spray was used to prevent the contamination of the wound by flies.

Table 1.

List of collected samples from the study areas

Sample No Origin Sample type Fixative used Type of Dx used
10% neutral buffered formalin NaCL Histopathology Molecular
LSDH1 Humbo Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
LSDH2 Humbo Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
LSDH3 Humbo Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
LSDH4 Humbo Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
LSDH5 Humbo Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
LSDH6 Humbo Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
LSDH7 Humbo Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
LSDH8 Sodo town Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
LSDH9 Sodo town Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
LSDH10 Sodo town Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
LSDH11 Sodo town Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
LSDH12 Sodo town Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
LSDH13 Sodo town Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
LSDP21 Sodo town Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
LSDP22 Sodo town Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
LSDP23 Sodo town Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
LSDP24 Sodo town Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
LSDP25 Sodo town Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
LSDP26 Sodo town Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
LSDP27 Sodo town Skin nodule(Tissue) √ √
Open in a new tab

Clinical and laboratory diagnosis

Clinical examinations

During the study period, all suspected cases from Humbo district and Sodo town were clinically examined for the presence of skin nodules on the head and neck region, perineum, genitalia, udder, limbs, and as well as for other clinical signs using appropriate restraining techniques as previously described by [17, 38].

Histopathological examination

A biopsied skin tissue sample was fixed in buffered formalin and then processed in an automatic tissue processor and embedded in paraffin blocks and sectioned at 5 μm thickness. Sections were then stained with Haematoxylin and Eosin (H&E) according to previous methods described by [66], and the images were acquired with Olympus digital microscope to examine the histopathological changes.

DNA extraction

DNA was extracted by Qiagen kit, according to the manufacturer’s instructions as described by [55].

Polymerase chain reaction

The test was carried out according to the protocol followed by [74]. LSDV DNA amplification was done using by Qiagen kit, according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT- PCR) assay was used to detect the LSDV using Eva Green supermix 10 µl with following primers 2 µl each, forward primer:-CP-HRMSb-Fow-5 pm/µl 5’GGTGTAGTACGTATAAGATTATCGTATAGAAACAAGCCTTTA-3’ and reverse primer CP-HRM l1REV-5 pm/ µl 5’-AATTTCTTTCTCTGTTCCATTTG-3’and DNA template 3 µl was used for amplification of PCR. After amplification of the DNA template, the positive samples were noted by amplification fluorescence curves, melting curves, and cycle threshold (Ct) values from the assay which were used to describe the positive samples: Ct values with no or higher than 37 were indicated as negatives suggesting the absence of the virus from the tissue specimens. The optimized cycle program for RT-PCR consisted of the following thermal cycles conditions were used: an initial denaturation step at 95 °C for 3 min, followed by 40cycles in three steps: denaturation at 95 °C for 15 s, annealing at 58 °C for 1.20 s, and elongation at 72 °C for the 30 s with the fluorescence recording at the end of the combined annealing elongation step.

Statistical analysis

The collected data were recorded on Microsoft Excel spreadsheets. Descriptive statistics like percentage was used to calculate positivity by dividing the number of LSD positive animals by the total number of animals tested. Finally, all data were analyzed by using Stata software version 13.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was carried out in compliance with the ARRIVE guidelines. This research project was approved by the School of Veterinary Medicine-Animal Care and Ethics committee of Wolaita sodo university (Protocol No. WSU 41/25/1292). Tissue samples were collected during routine veterinary practice in adherence to a high standard of veterinary care, and after the permission of the dairy farms’ owners. During the study, all methods were performed following the relevant guidelines and regulations.

Results

Clinical and gross lesion characterization

Clinical examination of cattle suspected for LSDV (384) revealed the percentage of positivity of cattle for LSD was (139/384) 36.2%. Clinically, LSD was characterized by fever (39–41 °C), nodular lesions on the skin and mucous membranes, and lymphadenopathy. Although, other clinical signs such as lameness, dyspnea, nasal discharge, rough hair coat, mastitis, corneal opacity, severe debilitation, anorexia, depression, lacrimation, and salivation have been noted during the outbreak investigation (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Open in a new tab

Clinical signs and gross lesions of cattle affected by LSD. Distribution of skin nodules through the body surface of a calf (A), swelling of udder accompanied by mastitis (B), enlargement of prefemoral (C), and prescapular lymph node (D), corneal opacity or keratitis (E), and sit fast lesion (F)

Histopathology

Histopathologically, this study revealed a hydropic (ballooning) degeneration of keratinocytes, eosinophilic intracytoplasmic inclusion bodies on epidermal cells and follicular cells, and disrupted blood vessel wall by infiltration of mononuclear inflammatory cells and fibrin deposits (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Open in a new tab

Histopathology of LSD: H&E.Ballooning degeneration (arrow) and  intracytoplasmic eosinophilic inclusion bodies (arrowhead) 100 X (a). Hydropic degeneration on the epidermis (arrow) and edema on the dermis (arrowhead) 10 X (b). Inset indicates higher magnification of a and b (40X) (c); Eosinophilic intracytoplasmic inclusion bodies on epidermal cells (arrowhead) (d). Characteristic eosinophilic intracytoplasmic inclusion bodies in follicular cells (arrowhead) (e); Fibrin necrotic vasculitis (f)

Molecular detection

As indicated in Table 2, all samples that have a Ct value lying between (14.82 and 23.25) were positive. No or higher values were indicated as negatives in which lower or no loads of the virus are present.

Table 2.

Real-time PCR Ct values of LSD suspected tissue samples

S/r No sample code Ct value Result
1 LSDP21 16.06 Positive
2 LSDP22 17.13 Positive
3 LSDP23 20.77 Positive
4 LSDP24 22.85 Positive
5 LSDP25 23.25 Positive
6 LSDP26 18.49 Positive
7 LSDP27 14.82 Positive
8 SPPv + ve control 32.67 Positive
9 GTPV + ve control 32.30 Positive
10 LSDV + ve control 26.52 Positive
11 Negative control Undetected Negative
Open in a new tab

PCR proved to be the best choice for prompt detection of LSDV outbreaks. All the 7 extracted DNA samples from skin nodules amplified by real-time PCR were positive for LSDV. None of the negative controls produced any amplicons. Below are indicated amplification curves of the real-time PCR (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Open in a new tab

Amplification fluorescence curves

Discussion

Lumpy skin disease was restricted to Africa wherein it led to several devastating pandemics in several countries including Ethiopia, thereby threatening food security and consequently increasing poverty [34, 58, 64]. In the present study, LSD was investigated in two selected districts of Wolaita Zone (Humbo and Sodo town), southern Ethiopia. The percentage of positivity of cattle for LSDV was 36.2%.This percentage of positivity was higher than the previous report described by [10, 15, 19, 35, 41, 47, 49] and [69] who recorded 21.2%, 18%, 15.71%, 13.61%, 8.77%, 7.4%, 6.1%, and 5.69% from Ethiopia, Bale zone, South Wollo zone, central Ethiopia, central Ethiopia (Asela, Bishoftu, Akaki, and Holeta Genet towns), north-eastern Ethiopia, Borena Zone, and East Hararghe and East Shewa zone, respectively. Other authors reported a wide range of percentage of positivity ranging from 0.65 up to 85% [9, 18, 26, 36, 68, 72] from Iraq, Great Britain, Africa, the Near East, Turkey, Greece, and the Middle East and Asian countries, respectively. The genetic difference, immunity status, geographic location, climate, and virulence of virus strain were raised for percentage of positivity variation [4, 26].

Clinically, LSD was characterized by fever (39–41 °C), nodular lesions on the skin and mucous membranes, and lymphadenopathy. This finding was in agreement with the previous report described by [56, 69]. Although, other clinical signs such as lameness, dyspnea, nasal discharge, rough hair coat, mastitis, corneal opacity, severe debilitation, anorexia, depression, lacrimation, and salivation have been noted during the outbreak investigation. Similarly, [7, 14, 19, 20, 25, 28, 31–33, 39, 59, 77, 78] have recorded the same symptoms in natural and experimental infections. Grossly, all affected cattle have resembled circumscribed nodules with different sizes on the skin covering all over the body surface such as the head, neck, trunk, perineum, udder, and teats. The surface of the nodule was reddish-gray and edematous in the sub-cutis layer upon incision of the nodules. In many infected animals, the necrotic nodules were ulcerated and formed deep scabs (sit fast). Similar reports were previously described by [6, 16, 59, 75].

Histopathologically, this study revealed there was a hydropic (ballooning) degeneration of keratinocytes, disorientation of striated muscle striations, edematous dermis, eosinophilic intracytoplasmic inclusion bodies on epidermal cells and follicular cells, and disrupted blood vessel wall by infiltration of mononuclear inflammatory cells and fibrin (fibrin necrotic vasculitis) deposits. These histopathological findings were previously reported by [1, 11, 22, 25, 54, 61, 67, 73].

Molecular detection of samples suspected of LSDV has shown Ct values between (14.82 and 23.25). This was in agreement with another finding which reported Ct values less than 37 as positives [60]. PCR proved to be the best choice for prompt detection of LSDV outbreaks, especially other methods that are believed to be time-consuming [28]. A range of real-time PCR assays [13] was used in diagnostic laboratories. All the 7 extracted DNA samples from skin nodules amplified by real-time PCR were positive for LSDV. This was in agreement with several studies [28, 37] in which the virus in skin lesions was reported with a level of success of 100%.

Conclusion and recommendations

This was the first study reporting on the Clinicopathological and molecular studies of LSDV in naturally infected cattle in humbo districts and Sodo town. The presence of characteristic LSD clinical features, RT-PCR results, and the presence of characteristic tissue effects on histopathological examination indicated that the lumpy skin disease virus is widely circulating in cattle in the study area. Thus, a detailed molecular analysis of an isolate within the study district needs to be carried out to produce a strain-specific vaccine to maintain the well-being of the animal and enhance its production and productivity.

Acknowledgements

The author acknowledges Wolaita sodo university, Sodo regional laboratory, and the National animal health investigation and diagnostic center.

Abbreviations

CaPV

Capri pox virus

Ct

Cycle threshold

dsDNA

Double-stranded deoxyribonucleic acid

EDTA

Ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid

GTP

Goat pox

GTPV

Goat poxvirus

LSD

Lumpy skin disease

LSDV

Lumpy skin disease virus

NAHDIC

National animal health diagnostic and investigation center

OIE

Office International des Epizooties

PCR

Polymerase Chain Reaction,

RT-PCR

Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction

WZFSD

Wolaitta Zone Food Security Department

Authors’ contributions

All authors made substantial contributions to conception and design, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; took part in drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; agreed to submit it to the current journal; gave final approval of the version to be published; and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Authors’ information

Not applicable.

Funding

This work was not supported by any funding source or institution.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was carried out in compliance with the ARRIVE guidelines. This research project was approved by the School of Veterinary Medicine-Animal Care and Use Committee of Wolaita sodo university (Protocol No. WSU 41/25/1292). Tissue samples were collected during routine veterinary practice in adherence to a high standard of veterinary care, and after the permission of the dairy farms’ owners and informed consent was obtained from dairy farms’ owners for animal use. During the study, all methods were performed following the relevant guidelines and regulations.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

There are no competing interests to declare.

Footnotes

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  • 1.Abdallah FM, El Damaty HM, Kotb GF. Sporadic cases of lumpy skin disease among cattle in Sharkia province, Egypt: genetic characterization of lumpy skin disease virus isolates and pathological findings. Vet World. 2018;11:1150. doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2018.1150-1158. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Abdulqa H, Rahman H, Dyary H, Othman H. Lumpy skin disease. Reprod Immunol. 2016;1:2476–1974. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Abera Z, Degefu H, Gari G. Assessment of distribution and associated risk factors of lumpy skin disease in selected districts of West Wollega Zone, Western Ethiopia. Acad J Anim Dis. 2015;4:130–140. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Abera Z, Degefu H, Gari G, Ayana Z. Review on epidemiology and economic importance of lumpy skin disease. Int J Basic Appl Virology. 2015;4:8–21. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Abutarbush S, Ababneh M, Al Zoubi I, Al Sheyab O, Al Zoubi M, Alekish M, Al Gharabat R. Lumpy skin disease in j ordan: disease emergence, clinical signs, complications and preliminary-associated economic losses. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2015;62:549–554. doi: 10.1111/tbed.12177. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Abutarbush SM. Hematological and serum biochemical findings in clinical cases of cattle naturally infected with lumpy skin disease. Jf Infect Dev Countries. 2015;9:283–288. doi: 10.3855/jidc.5038. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Agag B, Mousa S, Hassan H, Saber M, El-Deghidy NS, El-Aziz AMA. Clinical, serological and biochemical studies on lumpy skin disease. J Appl Anim Res. 1992;1:13–23. doi: 10.1080/09712119.1992.9705904. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Al-Salihi K. Lumpy skin disease: review of literature. Mirror Res Vet Sci Anim. 2014;3:6–23. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Al-Salihi K, Hassan I. Lumpy skin disease in Iraq: study of the disease emergence. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2015;62:457–462. doi: 10.1111/tbed.12386. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Alemayehu G, Zewde G, Admassu B. Risk assessments of lumpy skin diseases in Borena bull market chain and its implication for livelihoods and international trade. Trop Anim Health Prod. 2013;45:1153–1159. doi: 10.1007/s11250-012-0340-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Ali A, Esmat M, Attia H, Selim A, Abdel-Hamid Y. Clinical and pathological studies of lumpy skin disease in Egypt. Vet Record. 1990;127:549–550. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Anderson DE, Edmondson MA. Prevention and management of surgical pain in cattle. Vet Clin: Food Anim Pract. 2013;29:157–184. doi: 10.1016/j.cvfa.2012.11.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Armson B, Fowler V, Tuppurainen E, Howson E, Madi M, Sallu R, Kasanga C, Pearson C, Wood J, Martin P. Detection of capripoxvirus DNA using a field-ready nucleic acid extraction and Real-time PCR platform. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2017;64:994–997. doi: 10.1111/tbed.12447. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Ayelet G, Abate Y, Sisay T, Nigussie H, Gelaye E, Jemberie S, Asmare K. Lumpy skin disease: preliminary vaccine efficacy assessment and overview on outbreak impact in dairy cattle at Debre Zeit, central Ethiopia. Antiviral Res. 2013;98:261–265. doi: 10.1016/j.antiviral.2013.02.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Ayelet G, Haftu R, Jemberie S, Belay A, Gelaye E, Sibhat B, Skjerve E, Asmare K. Lumpy skin disease in cattle in central Ethiopia: outbreak investigation and isolation and molecular detection of the virus. Rev Sci Tech. 2014;33:877–887. doi: 10.20506/rst.33.3.2325. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Babiuk S, Bowden T, Parkyn G, Dalman B, Manning L, Neufeld J, Embury-Hyatt C, Copps J, Boyle D. Quantification of lumpy skin disease virus following experimental infection in cattle. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2008;55:299–307. doi: 10.1111/j.1865-1682.2008.01024.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Ballard B, Rockett J. “Restraint & Handling for Veterinary Technicians & Assistants,” Cengage Learning. 2009. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Bennett R, IJpelaar J. Updated estimates of the costs associated with thirty four endemic livestock diseases in Great Britain: a note. J Agric Economics. 2005;56:135–144. doi: 10.1111/j.1477-9552.2005.tb00126.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Bethlehem T. An outbreak investigation of lumpy skin disease; isolation and molecular characterization of the virus in South Wollo zone, northern Ethiopia, MSc thesis, submitted to the College of Veterinary Medicine and Agriculture of Addis Ababa University, Bishoftu, Ethiopia. 2018. 1–53.
  • 20.Body M, Singh KP, Hussain MH, Al-Rawahi A, Al-Maawali M, Al-Lamki K, Al-Habsy S. Clinico-histopathological findings and PCR based diagnosis of lumpy skin disease in the Sultanate of Oman. Pak Vet J. 2012;32:206–210. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Bowden TR, Babiuk SL, Parkyn GR, Copps JS, Boyle DB. Capripoxvirus tissue tropism and shedding: a quantitative study in experimentally infected sheep and goats. Virology. 2008;371:380–393. doi: 10.1016/j.virol.2007.10.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Brenner J, Haimovitz M, Oren E, Stram Y, Fridgut O, Bumbarov V, Kuznetzova L, Oved Z, Waserman A, Garazzi S. Lumpy skin disease (LSD) in a large dairy herd in Israel, June 2006. Israel J Vet Med. 2006;61:73. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Brettschneider H, Voster JH, Dalton DL, Kotze A, Van Wilpe E. Molecular detection of Yaba monkey tumour virus from a vervet monkey. J S Afr Vet Assoc. 2013;84:1–5. doi: 10.4102/jsava.v84i1.978. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Charles MM, Eddy G. 2003. Restraint of domestic, laboratory and wild animals: A Manual for Veterinary Students, Practitioners and Animal Handlers. University of Nairobi Press.
  • 25.Coetzer, J. 2004. Lumpy skin disease in Infectious disease of livestock. (J. Cloetzer and R. Tustin, eds.), pp. 1268- 1276. Oxford University Press.
  • 26.Davies FG. Lumpy skin disease of cattle: a growing problem in Africa and the Near East. World Anim Rev. 1991;68:37–42. [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Douglass N, Van Der Walt A, Omar R, Munyanduki H, Williamson A-L. The complete genome sequence of the lumpy skin disease virus vaccine Herbivac LS reveals a mutation in the superoxide dismutase gene homolog. Adv Virol. 2019;164:3107–3109. doi: 10.1007/s00705-019-04405-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.El-Kholy AA, Soliman HM, Abdelrahman KA. Polymerase chain reaction for rapid diagnosis of a recent lumpy skin disease virus incursion to Egypt, Arab. J Biotechnol. 2008;11:293–302. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.FAO . The future of food and agriculture–Trends and challenges, Annual Report. Vol. 296. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2017. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Fleming SB, Wise LM, Mercer AA. Molecular genetic analysis of orf virus: a poxvirus that has adapted to skin. Viruses. 2015;7:1505–1539. doi: 10.3390/v7031505. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Gari G, Waret-Szkuta A, Grosbois V, Jacquiet P, Roger F. Risk factors associated with observed clinical lumpy skin disease in Ethiopia. Epidemiol Infect. 2010;138:1657–1666. doi: 10.1017/S0950268810000506. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Gelaye E, Belay A, Ayelet G, Jenberie S, Yami M, Loitsch A, Tuppurainen E, Grabherr R, Diallo A, Lamien CE. Capripox disease in Ethiopia: Genetic differences between field isolates and vaccine strain, and implications for vaccination failure. Antiviral Res. 2015;119:28–35. doi: 10.1016/j.antiviral.2015.04.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Grooms D. Raising awareness about Lumpy skin disease (LSD) department of large animal clinical sciences. Michigan Dairy Rev. 2005;48:824–1225. [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Gumbe A. Review on lumpy skin disease and its economic impacts in Ethiopia. J Dairy Vet Anim Res. 2018;7:39–46. [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Hailu B, Tolosa T, Gari G, Teklue T, Beyene B. Estimated prevalence and risk factors associated with clinical Lumpy skin disease in north-eastern Ethiopia. Prev Vet Med. 2014;115:64–68. doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2014.03.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Ince OB, Çakir S, Dereli MA. Risk analysis of lumpy skin disease in Turkey. Indian J Anim Res. 2016;50:1013–1017. [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Ireland D, Binepal Y. Improved detection of capripoxvirus in biopsy samples by PCR. J Virol Methods. 1998;74:1–7. doi: 10.1016/S0166-0934(98)00035-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Jackson P, Cockcroft P. "Clinical examination of farm animals," John Wiley & Sons. 2008. [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Jalali S, Rasooli A, Seifi Abad Shapuri M, Daneshi M. Clinical, hematologic, and biochemical findings in cattle infected with lumpy skin disease during an outbreak in southwest Iran. Arch Razi Institute. 2017;72:255–265. doi: 10.22092/ari.2017.113301. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.King AM, Lefkowitz E, Adams MJ, Carstens EB. "Virus taxonomy: ninth report of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses," Elsevier. 2011. [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Leliso SA, Dawo F, Chibsa TR. 2021. Molecular Characterization of Lumpy Skin Disease Virus Isolates from Outbreak Cases in Cattle from Sawena District of Bale Zone, Oromia, Ethiopia. Veterinary Medicine International 2021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 42.Limon G, Gamawa AA, Ahmed AI, Lyons NA, Beard PM. Epidemiological characteristics and economic impact of lumpy skin disease, sheeppox and goatpox among subsistence farmers in northeast Nigeria. Front Vet Sci. 2020;7:8. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2020.00008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Magori-Cohen R, Louzoun Y, Herziger Y, Oron E, Arazi A, Tuppurainen E, Shpigel NY, Klement E. Mathematical modelling and evaluation of the different routes of transmission of lumpy skin disease virus. Vet Res. 2012;43:1–13. doi: 10.1186/1297-9716-43-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Mansour KA, Naser HH. 2015. Molecular and Clinical investigation of lumpy skin disease in cattle in AL. Qadissiyia province. مجلة الكوفة للعلوم الطبية البيطرية| Kufa Journal For Veterinary Medical Sciences 6.
  • 45.Mazur C, Ferreira I, Rangel Filho F, Galler R. Molecular characterization of Brazilian isolates of orf virus. Vet Microbiol. 2000;73:253–259. doi: 10.1016/S0378-1135(99)00151-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Mebratu G, Kassa B, Fikre Y, Berhanu B. Observation on the outbreak of lumpy skin disease in Ethiopia. Revue d’élevage et de médecine vétérinaire des pays tropicaux. 1984;37:395–399. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Mesay T. 2018. Isolation and molecular characterization of lumpy skin disease from central Ethiopian, , submitted to , department of Microbiology, Immunology and Veterianry public health, Bishoftu, Ethiopia. MSc thesis, Addis Ababa University College of veterinary Medicine and Agriculture.
  • 48.Modise BM, Settypalli TBK, Kgotlele T, Xue D, Ntesang K, Kumile K, Naletoski I, Nyange JF, Thanda C, Macheng KN. First Molecular Characterization of Poxviruses in Cattle, Sheep, and Goats in Botswana. 2021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Molla W, de Jong MC, Gari G, Frankena K. Economic impact of lumpy skin disease and cost effectiveness of vaccination for the control of outbreaks in Ethiopia. Prev Vet Med. 2017;147:100–107. doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2017.09.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Mulatu E, Feyisa A. Review: Lumpy skin disease. J Vet Sci Technol. 2018;9:1–8. doi: 10.4172/2157-7579.1000535. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Neamat-Allah AN. Immunological, hematological, biochemical, and histopathological studies on cows naturally infected with lumpy skin disease. Vet World. 2015;8:1131. doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2015.1131-1136. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.OIE. 2017. World Organization for Animal Health. Lumpy Skin Disease. Terrestrial Animal Health Code.
  • 53.Onyejekwe OO, Alemu A, Ambachew B, Tigabie A. Epidemiological study and optimal control for Lumpy Skin Disease (LSD) in Ethiopia. Adv Infect Dis. 2019;9:8. doi: 10.4236/aid.2019.91002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Prozesky L, Barnard B. A study of the pathology of lumpy skin disease in cattle. Onderstepoort J Vet Res. 1982;49:167–175. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.QIAamp D. 2012. Mini and blood mini handbook. Access mode: www.qiagen.com/resources.
  • 56.Rashid P, Sheikh MB, Raheem Z, Marouf A. Molecular characterization of lumpy skin disease virus and sheep pox virus based on P32 gene. Bulgarian J Vet Med. 2017;20:131–140. doi: 10.15547/bjvm.984. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Rouby SR, Bazid A-H, Wasfy M, El-Sayed M. Capripoxviruses: Exploring the genetic relatedness between field and vaccine strains from Egypt. Vet World. 2019;12:1924. doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2019.1924-1930. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Saegerman C, Bertagnoli S, Meyer G, Ganière JP, Caufour P, De Clercq K, Jacquiet P, Hautefeuille C, Etore F, Casal J. Risk of introduction of Lumpy Skin Disease into France through imports of cattle. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2019;66:957–967. doi: 10.1111/tbed.13111. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Salib FA, Osman AH. 2011. Incidence of lumpy skin disease among Egyptian cattle in Giza Governorate, Egypt. Veterinary world 4.
  • 60.Salnikov N, Usadov T, Kolcov A, Zhivoderov S, Morgunov Y, Gerasimov V, Gogin A, Titov I, Yurkov S, Malogolovkin A. Identification and characterization of lumpy skin disease virus isolated from cattle in the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania in 2015. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2018;65:916–920. doi: 10.1111/tbed.12818. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Sanz-Bernardo B, Haga IR, Wijesiriwardana N, Hawes PC, Simpson J, Morrison LR, MacIntyre N, Brocchi E, Atkinson J, Haegeman A. Lumpy skin disease is characterized by severe multifocal dermatitis with necrotizing fibrinoid vasculitis following experimental infection. Vet Pathol. 2020;57:388–396. doi: 10.1177/0300985820913268. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Şevik M, Avci O, Doğan M, İnce ÖB. Serum biochemistry of lumpy skin disease virus-infected cattle. BioMed Res Int. 2016;2016(Article ID 6257984):1–6. 10.1155/2016/6257984. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 63.Sprygin A, Babin Y, Pestova Y, Kononova S, Wallace DB, Van Schalkwyk A, Byadovskaya O, Diev V, Lozovoy D, Kononov A. Analysis and insights into recombination signals in lumpy skin disease virus recovered in the field. PLoS One. 2018;13:e0207480. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0207480. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Sprygin A, Pestova Y, Wallace D, Tuppurainen E, Kononov A. Transmission of lumpy skin disease virus: a short review. Virus Res. 2019;269:197637. doi: 10.1016/j.virusres.2019.05.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Sudhakar SB, Mishra N, Kalaiyarasu S, Jhade SK, Hemadri D, Sood R, Bal GC, Nayak MK, Pradhan SK, Singh VP. Lumpy skin disease (LSD) outbreaks in cattle in Odisha state, India in August 2019: epidemiological features and molecular studies. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2020;67:2408–2422. doi: 10.1111/tbed.13579. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Suvarna S. K. L. C. B. J. D. 2013. "Bancroft's theory and practice of histological techniques," Churchill Livingstone Elsevier, [Oxford].
  • 67.Tageldin MH, Wallace DB, Gerdes GH, Putterill JF, Greyling RR, Phosiwa MN, Al Busaidy RM, Al Ismaaily SI. Lumpy skin disease of cattle: an emerging problem in the Sultanate of Oman. Trop Anim Health Prod. 2014;46:241–246. doi: 10.1007/s11250-013-0483-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Tasioudi K, Antoniou S, Iliadou P, Sachpatzidis A, Plevraki E, Agianniotaki E, Fouki C, Mangana-Vougiouka O, Chondrokouki E, Dile C. Emergence of lumpy skin disease in Greece, 2015. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2016;63:260–265. doi: 10.1111/tbed.12497. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Tassew A, Assefa A, Gelaye E, Bayisa B, Ftiwi M. Identification and molecular characterization of lumpy skin disease virus in East Hararghe and East Shewa Zone, Oromia Regional State. ARC J Anim Vet Med. 2018;4:1–16. [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Tuppurainen E. Diagnostic assays for the detection of lumpy skin disease virus and antibodies. EMPRES. 2017;47:7–9. [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Tuppurainen E, Alexandrov T, Beltrán-Alcrudo D. 2017. Lumpy skin disease-a manual for veterinarians. FAO Animal Production and Health Manual.
  • 72.Tuppurainen E, Oura C. lumpy skin disease: an emerging threat to Europe, the Middle East and Asia. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2012;59:40–48. doi: 10.1111/j.1865-1682.2011.01242.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Tuppurainen ES, Stoltsz WH, Troskie M, Wallace DB, Oura C, Mellor PS, Coetzer JA, Venter EH. A potential role for ixodid (hard) tick vectors in the transmission of lumpy skin disease virus in cattle. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2011;58:93–104. doi: 10.1111/j.1865-1682.2010.01184.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Vidanović D, Šekler M, Petrović T, Debeljak Z, Vasković N, Matović K, Hoffmann B. Real-time PCR assays for the specific detection of field Balkan strains of lumpy skin disease virus. Acta Vet. 2016;66:444–454. doi: 10.1515/acve-2016-0038. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Weiss, K. 1968. Lumpy skin disease virus. In "Cytomegaloviruses. Rinderpest Virus. Lumpy Skin Disease Virus". Springer. 111–131.
  • 76.Wolaita zone livestock and fishery resource development office . Livestock statistical data of Wolaita zone livestock and fishery resource development office, annual report. 2021. [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Woods J. Lumpy skin disease—a review. Trop Anim Health Prod. 1988;20:11–17. doi: 10.1007/BF02239636. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Xavier M, Sreejith S, Aruna T, Annie M. Lumpy skin disease in a cow: a case study. Pharma Innovation J. 2020;9(8):61–63.
  • 79.Zeynalova S, Asadov K, Guliyev F, Vatani M, Aliyev V. Epizootology and molecular diagnosis of lumpy skin disease among livestock in Azerbaijan. Front Microbiol. 2016;7:1022. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2016.01022. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets used and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Articles from BMC Veterinary Research are provided here courtesy of BMC

RESOURCES