Literature DB >> 26185122

European interlaboratory comparison of Schmallenberg virus (SBV) real-time RT-PCR detection in experimental and field samples: The method of extraction is critical for SBV RNA detection in semen.

Claudia Schulz1, Wim H M van der Poel1, Claire Ponsart1, Ann Brigitte Cay1, Falko Steinbach1, Stéphan Zientara1, Martin Beer1, Bernd Hoffmann2.   

Abstract

Molecular methods for the detection of Schmallenberg virus (SBV) RNA were rapidly developed after the emergence of this novel orthobunyavirus in Europe. The SBV epizootic wave has declined, but infectious SBV in SBV RNA-positive semen remains a possible risk for the distribution of SBV. However, the abilities of SBV molecular detection methods used at European laboratories have not yet been assessed, to our knowledge. The performances of extraction and real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) methods used at 27 German and 17 other European laboratories for SBV RNA detection in the matrices of whole blood, serum, tissue homogenate, RNA eluates, and bovine semen were evaluated in 2 interlaboratory trials with special emphasis on semen extraction methods. For reliable detection of viral genome in bovine semen samples, highly effective extraction methods are essential to cope with the potential inhibitory effects of semen components on PCR results. All methods used by the 44 laboratories were sufficiently robust to detect SBV RNA with high diagnostic sensitivity (100%) and specificity (95.8%) in all matrices, except semen. The trials demonstrated that the published recommended semen extraction methods (Hoffmann et al. 2013) and a combination of TRIzol LS with an alternative extraction kit have a considerably higher diagnostic sensitivity to detect SBV RNA in semen up to a detection limit of Cq ≤35 compared to other extraction methods used. A thorough validation of extraction methods with standardized semen batches is essential before their use for SBV RNA detection in bovine semen.
© 2015 The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Detection; Schmallenberg virus; extraction; polymerase chain reaction; ring test; semen

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26185122     DOI: 10.1177/1040638715593798

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vet Diagn Invest        ISSN: 1040-6387            Impact factor:   1.279


  6 in total

1.  Preliminary serological evidence for Schmallenberg virus infection in China.

Authors:  Shao-Lun Zhai; Dian-Hong Lv; Xiao-Hui Wen; Xue-Liang Zhu; Yan-Qiu Yang; Qin-Ling Chen; Wen-Kang Wei
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2017-09-29       Impact factor: 1.559

2.  Failure to detect Schmallenberg virus RNA in ram semen in the UK (2016-2018).

Authors:  Alice Curwen; Scott Jones; Ceri Stayley; Laura Eden; Heather McKay; Peers Davies; Fiona Lovatt; Stephen Dunham; Rachael Tarlinton
Journal:  Vet Rec Open       Date:  2022-06-20

3.  Impaired spermatogenesis in COVID-19 patients.

Authors:  Honggang Li; Xingyuan Xiao; Jie Zhang; Mohammad Ishraq Zafar; Chunlin Wu; Yuting Long; Wei Lu; Feng Pan; Tianqing Meng; Kai Zhao; Liquan Zhou; Shiliang Shen; Liang Liu; Qian Liu; Chengliang Xiong
Journal:  EClinicalMedicine       Date:  2020-10-23

4.  International proficiency trial demonstrates reliable Schmallenberg virus infection diagnosis in endemic and non-affected countries.

Authors:  Kerstin Wernike; Martin Beer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-06-27       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Isolation and Full-Length Sequence Analysis of a Pestivirus from Aborted Lamb Fetuses in Italy.

Authors:  Enrica Sozzi; Antonio Lavazza; Alessandra Gaffuri; Fabio Carlo Bencetti; Alice Prosperi; Davide Lelli; Chiara Chiapponi; Ana Moreno
Journal:  Viruses       Date:  2019-08-13       Impact factor: 5.048

6.  Examining bull semen for residues of Schmallenberg virus RNA.

Authors:  Akbar Dastjerdi; S Anna La Rocca; Siva Karuna; Christopher Finnegan; Julie Peake; Falko Steinbach
Journal:  Transbound Emerg Dis       Date:  2021-08-14       Impact factor: 4.521

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.