Brucella melitensis in Small Ruminants: Malta Fever, Zoonosis, and Diagnostic Approach

Introduction

Brucellosis caused by Brucella melitensis represents one of the most economically important bacterial diseases of small ruminants globally and is the primary etiological agent of Malta fever in a comparative zoonotic context. The pathogen is a Gram-negative, facultative intracellular coccobacillus that primarily infects sheep and goats, causing reproductive failure characterized by abortion, stillbirth, and reduced milk yield [1, 33]. The disease has been recognized for millennia, with genomic evidence tracing the Neolithic origin of B. melitensis to approximately 8000 years before present [2]. Despite long-standing awareness, brucellosis remains endemic in many regions of Africa, the Middle East, Central Asia, and the Mediterranean basin, with significant spillover risk to cattle and humans [29, 42, 72]. This article provides a detailed veterinary and diagnostic reference on B. melitensis infection in small ruminants, focusing on the biological mechanisms of infection, transmission dynamics, and the diagnostic toolkit available for veterinary practitioners and laboratories.

Etiology and Taxonomic Considerations

Brucella melitensis belongs to the genus Brucella within the family Brucellaceae (order Rhizobiales). The species is subdivided into three biovars (1, 2, and 3) based on phage lysis patterns, oxidative metabolic profiles, and agglutination with monospecific sera [33, 78]. Biovar 3 is frequently isolated from small ruminants in the Mediterranean and Middle Eastern regions [3, 78]. Whole-genome sequencing has revealed a high degree of genetic conservation among B. melitensis strains, yet sufficient single nucleotide polymorphism diversity exists to enable genotyping and epidemiological tracing [3, 4, 28, 35]. Comparative genomics of field isolates and vaccine strains (notably Rev.1) has identified key genetic determinants of virulence, including genes involved in lipopolysaccharide (LPS) biosynthesis, type IV secretion systems (VirB), and two-component regulatory systems such as BvrR/BvrS [28, 48, 68, 73]. The smooth LPS phenotype, characterized by a complete O-polysaccharide chain, is a major virulence factor that facilitates intracellular survival and evasion of host immune responses [5, 61]. Rough mutants lacking O-polysaccharide (e.g., Rev.1Δwzm) show attenuated virulence and have been evaluated as vaccine candidates [6, 7, 31].

Epidemiology and Transmission in Sheep and Goats

Brucella melitensis is primarily adapted to small ruminants, though it can spill over into cattle and other livestock species [29, 42]. Epidemiological studies from multiple continents report seroprevalence rates ranging from less than 1% in some managed flocks to over 20% in high-risk endemic settings [1, 8, 9, 38, 49, 51, 52, 54]. Risk factors for flock-level infection include large herd size, introduction of untested replacement animals, shared grazing or watering points, and lack of vaccination [10, 59, 67]. In Pakistan, a sero-molecular study revealed that 13.5% of sheep and goats were positive by both Rose Bengal plate test (RBPT) and PCR, with higher odds of infection in older animals and those with a history of abortion [11]. Similarly, in Rwanda, goat-level seroprevalence reached 18.7% in Nyagatare District, with significant associations with flock size and contact with exotic breeds [10]. Spatial analyses in India and Ethiopia have shown clustering of seropositive flocks in specific agro-ecological zones, indicating environmental and management drivers [36, 52].

Transmission occurs primarily via ingestion or mucosal contact with infected vaginal discharges, aborted fetuses, placental membranes, and milk [33, 62]. Venereal transmission through infected semen is possible but less significant in small ruminants compared to cattle. The incubation period ranges from two weeks to several months, after which bacteremia ensues with localization in the reticuloendothelial system and reproductive tract [33, 71]. Excretion of the organism in milk and vaginal fluids can persist for months to years, perpetuating within-flock transmission. Ticks have been implicated as mechanical vectors in some settings; in western Iran, Brucella DNA was detected in tick species collected from ruminants, although the epidemiological significance of this route remains uncertain [12]. The identification of Brucella microti in sheep and goats in France further complicates the epidemiological picture, as this emerging species may share ecological niches with B. melitensis [13].

Pathogenesis and Host-Pathogen Interactions

Following mucosal entry, B. melitensis is phagocytosed by macrophages and dendritic cells. The bacterium subverts intracellular trafficking to create a replicative niche within the endoplasmic reticulum, mediated by the VirB type IV secretion system [30, 71]. The smooth LPS prevents complement-mediated killing and dampens the host inflammatory response, facilitating chronic infection [5, 61]. In pregnant ewes and does, the organism shows a marked tropism for the chorioallantoic trophoblasts, where it replicates extensively, causing placentitis, necrosis, and fetal expulsion [33, 62]. Experimental challenge studies in goats using virulent strain 16M have demonstrated that bacterial shedding in milk and vaginal secretions begins approximately two weeks post-inoculation and can persist for over 100 days [74]. Transcriptomic analyses of the Rev.1 vaccine strain under acidic conditions (mimicking the phagolysosome) have revealed downregulation of key virulence operons, providing insights into attenuation mechanisms [63]. The cell-mediated immune response, particularly the Th1-driven interferon-gamma production, is critical for control of infection, as shown in goat challenge models [69]. Coincidence cloning techniques have enabled recovery of B. melitensis RNA from goat tissues, allowing in vivo analysis of pathogen gene expression during infection [70].

Zoonotic Significance: Comparative Host-Range Parallels

Brucella melitensis is the most frequently isolated Brucella species from human brucellosis cases globally, accounting for the majority of zoonotic infections in endemic regions [14, 29]. The pathogen is transmissible to humans through direct contact with infected animal tissues, consumption of unpasteurized dairy products, or inhalation of aerosols in occupational settings (e.g., shepherds, abattoir workers, laboratory personnel) [56, 77]. The host-range expansion into dairy cattle is particularly concerning, as it creates a bridge for human exposure via milk [29, 37]. Genotyping studies have shown that human and animal B. melitensis strains in the same geographic area share identical or highly similar molecular profiles, confirming the direct spillover link [15, 16, 4, 57, 81]. Pan-genome analytics predict a surge of B. melitensis transmission driven by China- and India-specific strains, underscoring the need for enhanced veterinary surveillance [14]. The One Health approach, integrating veterinary, environmental, and public health data, is essential for effective brucellosis control [72].

Clinical Signs in Small Ruminants

The hallmark of B. melitensis infection in sheep and goats is reproductive failure. Abortions typically occur in the last trimester of gestation and may be accompanied by retention of fetal membranes, metritis, and reduced fertility [33, 44]. A so-called abortion storm can occur when the organism is first introduced into a naïve flock, with abortion rates exceeding 30% [33, 78]. Male animals may develop epididymitis, orchitis, and decreased semen quality, contributing to reduced flock fertility [33]. In non-pregnant animals, infection is often subclinical, though occasional cases of arthritis or mastitis are reported [33, 74]. Clinical diagnosis based on signs alone is unreliable, as many other pathogens (e.g., Chlamydia abortus, Coxiella burnetii, Salmonella spp.) cause similar reproductive syndromes. Therefore, laboratory confirmation is essential.

Diagnostic Approach

The diagnosis of B. melitensis infection in small ruminants relies on a combination of serological, bacteriological, and molecular methods. The choice of test depends on the context (individual vs. herd screening, acute vs. chronic infection, and available laboratory capacity). The World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) prescribes the Rose Bengal plate test (RBPT) and complement fixation test (CFT) as primary serological methods, with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) as alternative or confirmatory tests [17, 18]. A comparative evaluation of RBPT, indirect ELISA (I-ELISA), and CFT in Ethiopian sheep, goats, and cattle showed high diagnostic sensitivity and specificity for I-ELISA, making it suitable for large-scale surveillance [18]. Lateral flow immunochromatographic assays (LFIA) have been evaluated for field use in wildlife (e.g., Alpine ibex) and show promise for rapid point-of-care testing in small ruminants [19].

Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods, including conventional and real-time PCR, offer superior sensitivity and specificity for direct detection of Brucella DNA in clinical samples such as blood, milk, vaginal swabs, aborted fetal tissues, and semen [20, 12, 21, 22, 18, 34, 44, 62]. Novel real-time PCR assays designed using whole-genome sequencing data can distinguish B. melitensis at the species level and even differentiate vaccine strains from field isolates [20]. Multiplex approaches allow simultaneous detection of multiple abortifacient pathogens, such as B. melitensis, Coxiella burnetii, and Chlamydia abortus, in a single reaction [27]. Molecular typing methods, including multi-locus variable number tandem repeat analysis (MLVA) and multi-locus sequence typing (MLST), are invaluable for epidemiological investigations and source tracing [16, 35, 81]. Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) has been applied to identify protein biomarkers that discriminate B. melitensis field strains from the Rev.1 vaccine strain, a critical capability for outbreak investigations [39].

Bacteriological culture remains the gold standard for definitive diagnosis, though it is time-consuming and requires Biosafety Level 3 facilities. Isolation from abortion materials (placenta, fetal stomach contents) or milk yields the highest success rates [17, 23, 62, 78]. Selective media (e.g., Farrell's medium) suppress contaminants. Once isolated, identification is confirmed by Gram stain, oxidase and urease positivity, phage lysis, and agglutination with monospecific sera [17, 23]. Proteomic approaches, such as immunoreactive protein identification in brucellin, are being explored to enhance skin test-based diagnosis [24].

Table 1 summarizes the main diagnostic methods for B. melitensis in small ruminants.

The following Mermaid diagram illustrates a diagnostic decision algorithm for B. melitensis in small ruminants.

flowchart TD
    A["Clinical suspicion: Abortion, retained placenta in sheep/goats"] --> B{Is the flock/herd status known?}
    B -->|Unknown| C["Sample serum from ≥10 animals (RBPT + I-ELISA")]
    B -->|Known positive| D[Collect vaginal swab, milk, and fetal tissues for PCR]
    C --> E{Serology positive?}
    E -->|No| F["No further action; monitor"]
    E -->|Yes| G[Confirm with CFT or molecular testing]
    G --> H[Isolate bacteria from abortion materials]
    H --> I[Species confirmation by PCR or MALDI-TOF MS]
    I --> J[Genotype by MLVA/MLST for epidemiological tracing]
    D --> K[Real-time PCR detection]
    K --> L{Positive for B. melitensis?}
    L -->|Yes| M[Implement quarantine, cull, or vaccinate per policy]
    L -->|No| N[Consider other abortifacient pathogens]

The algorithm emphasizes a tiered approach: initial serological screening followed by confirmatory molecular/bacteriological testing. In known positive flocks, direct detection on samples from aborting animals is prioritized [17, 20].

Vaccination and Control Strategies

Vaccination is a cornerstone of B. melitensis control in endemic areas. The live attenuated Rev.1 vaccine (a smooth, streptomycin-dependent strain) is the most widely used and effective vaccine for sheep and goats, offering protection against abortion and reducing shedding [6, 33, 74]. However, Rev.1 induces antibodies that interfere with serological surveillance, and it retains residual virulence in humans (its use is prohibited in many countries for human safety reasons) [56, 78]. Safer alternative vaccines have been developed, including the rough Rev.1Δwzm mutant, which lacks the O-polysaccharide and shows attenuation in pregnant ewes and rams while providing protection against B. melitensis and B. ovis [6, 7, 31]. Another mutant, B. melitensis 16MΔvjbR, is safe in pregnant sheep and goats and confers protection [47, 55]. A promising approach uses an influenza viral vector expressing Brucella abortus antigens, which induced robust B- and T-cell responses in sheep and goats and protected against B. melitensis challenge [75, 76]. GFP-tagging of Rev.1 allows differentiation of vaccinated from infected animals, a DIVA (Differentiating Infected from Vaccinated Animals) strategy [65]. Proteomic and transcriptomic studies continue to inform the rational design of next-generation vaccines that retain immunogenicity while enabling serological discrimination [5, 24, 61, 63].

Control programs must combine vaccination with biosecurity measures: test-and-slash of seropositive animals, movement restrictions, and education of farmers [43, 50, 66]. In the Nile Delta of Egypt, simulation modeling showed that mass vaccination combined with reduced contact rates could achieve significant reductions in prevalence over a 10-year horizon [50]. In Azerbaijan, a sustainable control program integrating vaccination, farmer training, and compensation has been piloted [43]. Without sustained intervention, brucellosis rapidly reappears due to residual infection in the environment or reintroduction [67].

Conclusion

Brucella melitensis remains a formidable pathogen of small ruminants with far-reaching consequences for animal health, livestock productivity, and zoonotic risk. Advances in molecular diagnostics, including species-specific real-time PCR and high-resolution genotyping, have greatly improved the ability to detect and trace infections. Novel vaccine candidates with DIVA capabilities offer hope for more effective control without compromising surveillance. A One Health framework that coordinates veterinary and public health efforts is essential to reduce the burden of brucellosis in endemic regions. Continued research into host-pathogen interactions, virulence mechanisms, and diagnostic biomarker discovery will further strengthen the armamentarium against this ancient zoonosis.

References

[1] Dadar M, Alamian S, Bahreinipour A et al. Epidemiology of brucellosis in sheep and goats across different production systems in regions with high human brucellosis prevalence. Res Vet Sci. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42085969/

[2] L'Hôte L, Light I, Mattiangeli V et al. An 8000 years old genome reveals the Neolithic origin of the zoonosis Brucella melitensis. Nat Commun. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39033187/

[3] Ben Abdallah I, Kopprio G, Béjaoui A et al. Hybrid Whole Genomes of Brucella melitensis from Tunisian Animal Isolates: Virulence Factors, Antimicrobial Susceptibility, and Phylogeny. Microorganisms. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40732160/

[4] Brangsch H, Sandalakis V, Babetsa M et al. Genotype diversity of brucellosis agents isolated from humans and animals in Greece based on whole-genome sequencing. BMC Infect Dis. 2023. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37580676/

[5] Naseer A, Olsen SC, Mo S et al. Immunogenicity of a Lipopolysaccharide Brucella melitensis Vaccine in Goats: An Exploratory Study. Vaccines (Basel). 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41441675/

[6] Mena-Bueno S, Garrido V, Romero F et al. Rev1Δwzm vaccine candidate is safe in young and adult sheep and protects against Brucella ovis infection in rams. Vaccine. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38806353/

[7] Poveda-Urkixo I, Mena-Bueno S, Ramírez GA et al. Brucella melitensis Rev1Δwzm: Placental pathogenesis studies and safety in pregnant ewes. Vaccine. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38755066/

[8] Ameni G, Zewude A, Bayissa B et al. Epidemiology of Brucella Infection in Small Ruminants in the United Arab Emirates. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40529620/

[9] Awais MM, Khadim B, Akhtar M et al. Epidemiology of Brucellosis in Small Ruminants of Rural and Peri-Urban Areas of Multan, Pakistan. Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38384430/

[10] Habimana JP, Ntivuguruzwa JB, Uwimana AL et al. Seroprevalence and Risk Factors Associated With Brucellosis in Goats in Nyagatare District, Rwanda. Vet Med Int. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40900838/

[11] Ul Hassan S, Khan FA, Shuaib M et al. Investigation into the sero-molecular prevalence of Brucella melitensis in small ruminants in districts Mohmand and Charsadda Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pakistan. PLoS One. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39919134/

[12] Moravedji M, Beig M, Baseri N et al. Molecular detection of Brucella abortus and Brucella melitensis in domestic ruminants and their ticks in selected areas of western Iran. Iran J Vet Res. 2023. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38269017/

[13] Freddi L, Djokic V, Dremeau A et al. First isolation and identification of Brucella microti in sheep and goats: new insights and implications for veterinary medicine. Front Microbiol. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40919195/

[14] Mallappa A, Kuralayanapalya Puttahonnappa S, Shome R et al. Systematic review, Meta-analysis, and Pan-genome analytics predict the surging of Brucella melitensis by China and India-specific strains, elucidating the demand for enhanced preparedness. J Infect Public Health. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39970851/

[15] Liu Z, Li B, Xue C et al. The continuous expansion and spread of human brucellosis in the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region: evidence from epidemiological and strains' genotyping-based analysis. BMC Microbiol. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40165051/

[16] Yanmaz B, Özgen EK, Sayı O et al. Phylogenetic Analysis of Brucella melitensis Strains Isolated from Humans Using 16S rRNA Sequencing and Multiple Locus Variable Number of Tandem Repeats Analysis-16. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38608219/

[17] Rebollada-Merino A, Domínguez L, Rodríguez-Bertos A. Pathology and diagnosis of brucellosis (Brucella spp.) in veterinary species. Vet Pathol. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41956526/

[18] Legesse A, Mekuriaw A, Gelaye E et

[19] Freddi L, Vicente AF, Petit E et al. Evaluation of a Lateral Flow Immunochromatography Assay (LFIA) for Diagnosis and Surveillance of Brucellosis in French Alpine Ibex (Capra ibex). Microorganisms. 2023. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37630536/

[20] Hoover E, Chmara J, Duceppe M-O et al. Two novel real-time PCR assays for Brucella detection: a species-specific multiplex and a genus-level singleplex developed via large-scale whole genome sequencing data analysis. Microbiol Spectr. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41885434/

[21] Rostami S, Rashidian E, Jaydari A et al. Investigation of the Proportion of Brucella abortus and Brucella melitensis in Sheep and Goat Milk. Vet Med Int. 2023. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38044961/

[22] Alirezaei A, Khalili M, Baseri N et al. Molecular detection of Brucella species among aborted small ruminants in southeast Iran. Braz J Microbiol. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37999910/

[23] Nabi I, Achek R, Karim A et al. Serological, phenotypic and molecular characterization of brucellosis in small ruminants in northern Algeria. Front Microbiol. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39872817/

[24] Krasteva I, Luciani M, D'Onofrio F et al. Identifying immunoreactive proteins in brucellin for enhanced brucellosis diagnosis: a proteomic approach. Front Microbiol. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40809042/

[25] Ardiyanto D, Wuryastuty H, Yanuartono Y et al. Molecular identification of Brucella abortus in secondary hosts of goats and sheep in Magelang, Central Java, Indonesia. Open Vet J. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41631211/

[26] Novoa MB, Aguirre N, Ormaechea N et al. Evaluation of frequency of antibodies against Neospora caninum, Toxoplasma gondii and Brucella melitensis, risk factors and spatial distribution of infection in goat and sheep flocks from Argentina. Vet Parasitol Reg Stud Reports. 2023. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37935540/

Disclaimer: This article is for educational and informational purposes only. It is not intended to substitute for professional veterinary advice, diagnosis, treatment, or regulatory guidance. Always consult a licensed veterinarian or qualified specialist regarding animal health, disease diagnosis, and therapeutic decisions.