| Literature DB >> 24455106 |
Sofie Wallerström1, Nina Lagerqvist1, Nigel J Temperton2, Michaela Cassmer3, Ana Moreno4, Malin Karlsson3, Mikael Leijon5, Ake Lundkvist6, Kerstin I Falk1.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Avian influenza viruses circulate in bird populations, and it is important to maintain and uphold our knowledge of the viral strains that are currently of interest in this context. Here, we describe the use of hemagglutinin-pseudotype retroviruses based on highly pathogenic influenza viruses for the screening of avian sera for influenza A antibodies. Our aim was also to determine whether the pseudovirus neutralization tests that we assessed were sensitive and simple to use compared to the traditional methods, including hemagglutination inhibition assays and microneutralization tests.Entities:
Keywords: antibodies; avian; influenza A; neutralization; pseudovirus
Year: 2014 PMID: 24455106 PMCID: PMC3895261 DOI: 10.3402/iee.v4.23011
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Infect Ecol Epidemiol ISSN: 2000-8686
Geometric mean titer of influenza antibodies in avian sera determined by pseudovirus particle neutralization testing
| Serum | pp-NT(H5) | pp-NT(H7) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||||||||
| Strain | Species | Description | HI | Anhui | Hong Kong | Indonesia | Mongolia | Turkey | Vietnam | Italy |
| H4N6 | SPF chicken | Exp. infection | 2048 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| H5N1 | Turkey | Exp. infection | 32 | 170 | 200 | 110 | 100 | 80 | 80 | – |
| H5N1 | Turkey | Exp. infection | 64 | 40 | 80 | 80 | 60 | 290 | 100 | – |
| H5N2 | Pheasant | Field sera | 64 | 90 | 150 | 70 | 200 | 40 | 90 | – |
| H5N2 | Pheasant | Field sera | 64 | 120 | 350 | 60 | 90 | 230 | 150 | – |
| H5N2 | Turkey | Field sera | 64 | 2060 | 90 | – | 70 | 50 | 60 | – |
| H5N9 | SPF chicken | Exp. infection | 128 | 150 | 110 | 60 | 50 | 40 | 130 | – |
| H6N2 | SPF chicken | Exp. infection | 32 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| H7N1 | Duck | Exp. infection | 2048 | – | – | – | – | – | – | 100 |
| H7N1 | Duck | Exp. infection | 1024 | – | – | – | – | – | – | 130 |
| H7N3 | Turkey | Field sera | 16 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| H7N3 | Turkey | Field sera | 16 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| H7N7 | SPF chicken | Exp. infection | 256 | – | – | – | – | – | – | 40 |
| H9N2 | Duck | Exp. infection | 32 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Neg | Turkey | Field sera | <2 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Neg | Turkey | Field sera | <2 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Neg | Turkey | Field sera | <2 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Neg | Partridge | Field sera | <2 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Neg | SPF chicken | Field sera | <2 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Neg | Chicken | Field sera | <2 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
HI titer using homologous avian influenza A antigen.
corresponds to a geometric mean titer of <1:40.
HI, hemagglutination inhibition; SPF, specific pathogen free; pp-NT, pseudovirus particle neutralization test; Exp, experimental.
Fig. 1Comparison of different antibody detection assays using serum from rabbits infected with H5 and H7 influenza strains. Serological methods detecting antibodies against H5 (A) and H7 (B) viruses were evaluated using serum from rabbits infected with LPAI H5N2 or H7N7 virus. The pp-NTs were performed using six different HPAI H5 subtypes (pp-NT(H5)) and one H7 subtype (pp-NT(H7)). The results of virus neutralization tests (VNT) were determined by either CPE (MN-CPE) or colorimetric (MN-Col1 and MN-Col2) assays. Bars represent the reciprocal of the geometric mean antibody titer from two or more independent experiments that inhibited virus or pseudovirus infectivity by 80%.