TY  - JOUR
T1  - Comparison Between Manual and Electronic Haematological Analysis in Some Animals
AU - R. Abd Ellah, Mahmoud AU - Lamlom Abd Elghani, Maha AU - Ali Sayed, Maani AU - Kamel Hassan, Moshira AU - Ahmed Mahmoud, Maram 
JO  - Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances
VL  - 10
IS  - 21
SP  - 2765
EP  - 2767
PY  - 2011
DA  - 2001/08/19
SN  - 1680-5593
DO  - javaa.2011.2765.2767
UR  - https://makhillpublications.co/view-article.php?doi=javaa.2011.2765.2767
KW  - Camel
KW  -donkey
KW  -sheep
KW  -cow
KW  -medonic
KW  -blood
KW  -Egypt
AB  - The present study was carried out to compare hematological results of manual methods with the standard Medonic Vet analyzer. The study include animal species that already had their programs installed on the Medonic Vet like horse and cows and also include other animal species that their programs newly installed on the Medonic Vet, like sheep and camels. A total number of 12 animals (donkeys, cows, sheep and camels) belong to the Veterinary Teaching hospital, Assiut University, Egypt were subjected to study. Haematological analysis was performed using manual and electronic method (Medonic CA 620, Sweden) directly after collection. The results of this study indicate that manual methods for total erythrocytes count (T. RBCs), haematocrit and total leucocytes count (T. WBCs) have no significant variation with electronic blood cells counting for donkeys and cows blood. On the other hand, there were significant variations in T. RBCs and T. WBCs counts between manual and electronic methods for sheep and camel blood. In conclusion, Medonic CA620 is suitable for hematological analysis of blood from donkeys and cows and not suitable for blood from sheep and camels. Manual differential leucocytic count must associate electronic blood cells counting.
ER  -