# Comparative Diagnostic Efficacy of Microscopy, LAMP and PCR for Detection of Bovine Babesiosis in New Valley Governorate, Egypt

## TL;DR

This study compares three methods for detecting bovine babesiosis in Egypt and finds that molecular techniques like LAMP and PCR are more effective than microscopy.

## Contribution

The study demonstrates LAMP as a highly sensitive and practical field diagnostic tool for bovine babesiosis.

## Key findings

- LAMP detected 40.7% of Babesia infections, outperforming microscopy (31.9%).
- LAMP showed 97.18% sensitivity and 100% specificity compared to PCR.
- Infection rates peaked in summer (37.8%) and were lowest in winter (20%).

## Abstract

Bovine babesiosis poses a serious threat to cattle in tropical and subtropical regions. This study compared 3 methods to detect babesiosis in naturally infected cattle; microscopy, loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP), and conventional PCR (cPCR), in Egypt’s New Valley Governorate.

A total of 339 tick-infested cattle were examined for Babesia infection. Microscopic examination was done. Genomic DNA extraction for the LAMP and PCR assays was carried out. LAMP was performed and compared with cPCR.

Molecular methods revealed higher infection rates than microscopic examination: LAMP detected Babesia DNA in 40.7% (138/339) of samples, cPCR in 41.9% (142/339), while microscopy identified 31.9% (108/339). Clinically infected cattle exhibited fever, hemoglobinuria, pallor, and weight loss. Seasonal variation showed peak prevalence in summer (37.8%) and the lowest in winter (20%). Based on comparative analysis, LAMP showed 97.18% sensitivity, 100% specificity, and almost perfect agreement with cPCR (κ = 0.98, P = 0.13).

These findings demonstrate high Babesia prevalence in tick-infested cattle and underscore LAMP’s value as a rapid, sensitive, and field-friendly tool for surveillance.