Cross-Canada Disease Report 
Rapport des maladies diagnostiquées
au Canada
An update on bovine anaplasmosis (Anaplasma marginale) in Canada
Krista J. Howden, Dorothy W. Geale, Julie Paré, Elizabeth J. Golsteyn-Thomas, Alvin A. Gajadhar
A naplasmosis in cattle, caused by Anaplasma marginale,
is a federally reportable disease and has been since
December 17, 1969 after Canada’s first outbreak in Manitoba
the previous year. It is widespread globally and is an endemic
non-regulated disease in the United States. Anaplasma mar­
ginale poses no direct human health or food safety risk. It is
a disease of ruminants, although only clinically apparent in
cattle. Transmission is either biologically by competent ticks or
mechanically (by transferring of blood from an infected animal
via biting flies or use of hypodermic needles on multiple ani-
mals). In Canada, Dermacentor andersoni and Dermacentor vari­
abilis ticks have been shown to be competent biological vectors
for A. marginale (1). Cattle surviving infection remain carriers
for life, undergoing cycles of parasitemia whereby the organism
uses antigenic modulation to escape the host’s immune system.
Anaplasma marginale is an obligate intraerythrocytic rick-
ettsial gram-negative bacterium which can cause fever, anemia,
jaundice, weakness, and/or respiratory distress in infected
animals. Clinically affected dairy cattle may also have a rapid
decline in milk production. The severity of clinical signs varies
considerably, depending on the species and age of the infected
animal. Cattle infected as adults are usually the most severely
affected. Carrier animals do not display clinical signs of infec-
tion (2). No antibiotics are approved by Health Canada for the
treatment or prevention of bovine anaplasmosis in Canada.
Only 5 occurrences of anaplasmosis have been recorded
previously in Canada: Manitoba in 1968, Quebec in 1979,
Saskatchewan in 1983, Ontario in 1996, and Saskatchewan
in 2000. All cases, with the exception of the 2000 outbreak
that occurred in bison, involved beef cow-calf operations. In
1968 and 1983, spread of anaplasmosis occurred in Canada,
whereas in 1979, 1996, and 2000, transmission did not occur
beyond the index premises where infection was associated with
imported cattle. Anaplasmosis was eradicated in each of these
earlier outbreaks by applying the federal policy of testing and
slaughtering positive animals as well as tracing of animal move-
ment and conducting surveillance in surrounding herds. These
Use of this article is limited to a single copy for personal study.
Anyone interested in obtaining reprints should contact the
CVMA office (hbroughton@cvma-acmv.org) for additional
copies or permission to use this material elsewhere.
CVJ / VOL 51 / AUGUST 2010
actions resulted in Canada being able to regain its anaplasmosis-
free status. Stakeholder consultations were held in January 2007
regarding the maintenance of anaplasmosis as a reportable
disease under the Health of Animals Act (3). Most respondents
favored retention of the current federal anaplasmosis domestic
disease control program (4).
Surveillance for anaplasmosis in Canadian cattle is conducted
every 3 to 5 years via the national bovine serological survey
(BSS). Surveys undertaken in 1998–1999 and 2002–2003
of approximately 15 000 cattle each confirmed that Canada
was free from A. marginale infection (at 0.02% design preva-
lence with 95% confidence). Follow-up investigations of sero-
reactors from the most recent survey in 2007–2008 identified
3 outbreaks of anaplasmosis in cow-calf operations, which
were reported to the World Organisation for Animal Health
(OIE): Saskatchewan in October 2008, investigation concluded
December 2008; Manitoba in January 2009, ongoing; and
British Columbia in July 2009, investigation terminated in
March 2010 (Figure 1).
Internationally recognized standard tests and methodology
are used for the detection of A. marginale in Canada (5). The
screening test for A. marginale in cattle is a commercially avail-
able competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (cELISA)
that detects serum antibodies that recognize an epitope of the
major surface protein 5 (MSP5). Estimated test sensitivity and
specificity using a 42% inhibition cut-off are 95.6% and 98.6%,
respectively (6). The confirmatory test is a polymerase chain
reaction (PCR) test on whole blood. The sensitivity and specific-
ity of the PCR are unknown but the detection limit of the assay
is estimated to be . 30 infected erythrocytes/mL of blood (7).
The case definition for a confirmed case of anaplasmosis requires
either that the animal be positive on both cELISA and PCR
testing, or have clinical signs compatible with anaplasmosis and
be positive on a direct diagnostic method (either identification
of organisms in a blood smear or PCR).
One cow meeting the case definition for a confirmed positive
was identified in Saskatchewan (positive on cELISA and PCR)
in September 2008 as a result of follow-up herd investigation
and testing due to a reactor identified from the BSS. This cow
originated from a herd located in the same geographic area
as the 1983 outbreak, near St. Victor, Saskatchewan. Over
3600 neighboring and other epidemiologically linked animals
837
 R A P P O R T D E S M A L A D I E S D I AG N O S T I Q U É E S
AU CA N A DA

838
Figure 1.  Anaplasmosis in Canada 2008–2010.
Positive Premises
Quarantines removed due to
insufficient evidence to confirm
the presence of Anaplasma marginale

CVJ / VOL 51 / AUGUST 2010

were tested with no additional positive animals being identified.
The quarantine was terminated on December 5, 2008 and the
investigation concluded. It has not been possible to confirm the
source of infection for this case.
Two geographically separate outbreaks, each with multiple
infected herds identified, have been reported in Manitoba. The
first confirmed positive animal (positive on cELISA and PCR)
was identified in January 2009 as a result of a follow-up inves-
tigation to the BSS. Subsequent investigations revealed a total
of 8 positive herds associated with the rural municipalities of
Lac du Bonnet and Alexander. A second outbreak in Manitoba
was identified in October 2009 as a result of enhanced passive
surveillance and reporting to the CFIA of clinical signs sug-
gestive of anaplasmosis by a private veterinarian. Animals were
found to be positive for anaplasmosis by cELISA, PCR, and a
few also on blood smear. Only this 1 herd in Manitoba of all the
herds tested in western Canada presented animals with clinical
signs of anaplasmosis. However, due to the extensive manage-
ment of most herds during the vector season it is possible that
clinical animals would not have been observed. This outbreak
was located in southeastern Manitoba where 15 infected farms
were identified from October 2009 to April 2010. No epide-
miological link between these 2 outbreaks in Manitoba has been
identified to date. During the course of these investigations,
over 13 000 animals were tested in Manitoba, with 590 animals
identified as meeting the case definition for a confirmed case of
anaplasmosis. Within herd apparent prevalence for A. marginale
identified to date ranged between 0.04% and 65.96%. Genetic
sequencing data from Manitoba has confirmed the presence
of A. marginale. Investigations related to the 2 outbreaks in
Manitoba are on-going.
British Columbia exhibited a significantly higher sero-­
prevalence for anaplasmosis than elsewhere in Canada during
the 2007–2008 BSS. Follow-up investigation of 36 premises and
over 10 000 animals resulted in the quarantine of 9 premises,
with 18 animals meeting the case definition for a confirmed
case (positive on cELISA and PCR). During the course of the
investigation, it became apparent from epidemiological analyses
that the observed pattern of test results in British Columbia was
dissimilar from the results observed in Manitoba.
Specifically, a large proportion of animals positive on the
cELISA test in British Columbia were negative on the confir-
matory PCR. This was in contrast to the situation in Manitoba
where the vast majority of animals positive on the cELISA test
were confirmed positive on PCR, which is what was anticipated
based on the assumed specificity of the cELISA.
Laboratory research was initiated in January 2010 at
the Centre for Food-borne and Animal Parasitology, CFIA
Laboratory, Saskatoon to clarify the disease status of the cattle
population in British Columbia and to determine potential
causes of the unusual pattern of test results. Disease control
activities in British Columbia were suspended while the research
was conducted. Samples obtained from a subset of animals
identified in British Columbia meeting the case definition
(positive on cELISA and PCR) were used in molecular and
serological analyses, and in bioassay transmission studies. By
March 2010, there was no evidence of A. marginale, and there
CVJ / VOL 51 / AUGUST 2010
was DNA evidence of a closely related but previously unrecog-
nized rickettsial hemoparasite of the genus Ehrlichia (8). At the
time of writing, studies are on-going to further characterize this
C R O S S - CA N A DA D I S E A S E R E P O R T
organism and determine the possibility that this organism was
responsible for the atypical observations in British Columbia.
Due to the lack of sufficient scientific evidence to support the
presence of A. marginale, a decision was made to remove the
remaining quarantines in British Columbia.
The situation in British Columbia and the large numbers of
cases identified in Manitoba resulted in a further examination
of the status of anaplasmosis as a federally reportable disease
in Canada. An Anaplasmosis Steering Committee made up
of representatives of the federal and provincial governments,
industry, academia and non-government organizations was
formed in September 2009. Two working groups reporting
to the Anaplasmosis Steering Committee were established to
examine the science related to anaplasmosis and review the
potential economic impacts of a change in reportable status.
As per the CFIA’s mandate, potential impacts on public health
(such as, consequences of off-label antimicrobial use) and ani-
mal welfare are also being examined. The results of the working
groups’ reports are expected in late 2010. A broader stakeholder
consultation is anticipated to be undertaken at that time. The
current objective is to minimize disruptions to the industry
while respecting the CFIA’s mandate to protect animal health
and public health in Canada.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Drs. Brian Evans, Francine Lord, Jim
Clark, Connie Argue, Jag Dhanda, Lynn Bates, Primal Silva,
Shane Renwick, and Cyril Lutze-Wallace for their review of
the manuscript. The authors acknowledge the diagnostic and
research work completed at the CFIA Centre for Food-borne
and Animal Parasitology, Saskatoon, the CFIA Lethbridge
Laboratory and the Western College of Veterinary Medicine.
The CFIA Operations, Programs and Science Branch staff
involved in the disease outbreak investigations and response
are acknowledged for their hard work and dedication to work-
ing towards a greater understanding of this disease in Canada.
References
1. Lankester MW, Scandrett WB, Golsteyn-Thomas EJ, Chilton NC,
Gajadhar AA. Experimental transmission of bovine anaplasmosis
(caused by Anaplasma marginale) by means of Dermacentor variabilis
and D. andersoni (Ixodidae) collected in western Canada. Can J Vet Res
2007;71:271–277.
2. Radostits OM, Gay CC, Hinchcliff KW, Constable PD. Veterinary
Medicine. A Textbook of the Diseases of Cattle, Horses, Sheep, Pigs and
Goats. 10th ed. London: WB Saunders, 2007:1455–1459.
3. Health of Animals Act (1990, c. 21). Department of Justice Canada
Web site [updated 2010 May 3]. Available from http://laws.justice.gc.ca/
en/H-3.3/index.html Last accessed June 23, 2010.
4. Consultation Paper: An Overview of Anaplasmosis and Assessing the
Risks for Canada, December 2006. Anaplasmosis-Consultations and
Discussions. Canadian Food Inspection Agency Web site [updated 2007
June 7]. Available from http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/anima/
heasan/disemala/anaplasmos/consulte.shtml Last accessed June 23, 2010.
5. OIE (Office international des epizooties) Terrestrial Manual,
Chapter 2.4.1 Bovine Anaplasmosis. 2008 Pp 599–610. Available from
http://www.oie.int/eng/normes/mmanual/2008/pdf/2.04.01_BOVINE_
ANAPLASMOSIS.pdf Last accessed June 23, 2010.
839
 6. Power C. An Assessment of the VMRD Inc c-ELISA for the Detection Howden, Geale, Terrestrial Animal Health Division, Canadian
of A. marginale Antibodies in Bovine Sera. Canadian Food Inspection
R A P P O R T D E S M A L A D I E S D I AG N O S T I Q U É E S

Food Inspection Agency, 1400 Merivale Road, Ottawa, Ontario

Agency, Animal Disease Surveillance Unit, Science Division, Nepean,
Ontario. Unpublished. K1A 0Y9; Paré, Epidemiology and Surveillance Section,
7. Torioni de Echaide S, Knowles DP, McGuire T, Palmer GH, Suarez CE, Canadian Food Inspection Agency, 3200 Sicotte Street, P.O.
McElwain TF. Detection of Cattle Naturally Infected with Anaplasma
Box 5000, Saint-Hyacinthe, Quebec J2S 7C6; Golsteyn-Thomas,
marginale in a Region of Endemicity by Nested PCR and a Competitive
Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay Using Recombinant Major Surface Lethbridge Laboratory, Canadian Food Inspection Agency,
Protein 5. J Clin Microbiol 1998;36:777–782. Township Road 9-1, PO Box 640, Lethbridge, Alberta T1J 3Z4;
AU CA N A DA

8. Gajadhar AA, Lobanov V, Scandrett WB, Campbell J, Al-Adhami B. A

Gajadhar, Saskatoon Laboratory — Centre for Food-Borne
novel Ehrlichia genotype detected in naturally infected cattle in North
America. Vet Parasitol 2010. (In press). DOI: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2010.06. & Animal Parasitology, Canadian Food Inspection Agency,
034. 116 Veterinary Road, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 2R3.

840 CVJ / VOL 51 / AUGUST 2010