{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.034597471723220224, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01330671989354624, 'mean_word_length': 4.529411764705882, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evaluation of different sampling methods and results of real-time PCR for detection of feline herpes virus-1, Chlamydophila felis and Mycoplasma felis in cats.

OBJECTIVE
To investigate how different sampling techniques affect detection of DNA from feline herpes virus Type 1 (FHV-1), Chlamydophila felis and Mycoplasma felis and to study the correlation between positive test results and clinical signs in cats.


ANIMALS
Fifty-one cats; 24 with ocular signs and 27 healthy control cats.


PROCEDURES
Samples were collected from all cats using cotton swabs, conjunctival and corneal biopsies, and corneal scrapings. Samples were analyzed for presence of FHV-1, C. felis, M. felis, and feline DNA, defined by 28S rDNA, by using real-time PCR.


RESULTS
In affected cats, FHV-1 was detected in only one cat; C. felis and M. felis were not detected in any affected cats. None of the three organisms was detected in any control cats. Feline DNA was demonstrated in all conjunctival samples, in 82% of corneal swabs, 92% of corneal scrapings, and 100% of keratectomy samples.


CONCLUSIONS
Because of the generally low detection rate for FHV-1, C. felis, and M. felis DNA in this study, differences regarding sampling technique could not be determined and correlation between positive test results and degree of clinical signs could not be made. Detection of feline DNA in most samples irrespective of sampling technique, suggests a low prevalence of FHV-1, C. felis and M. felis in this population of cats.