| Literature DB >> 28056961 |
Klaas Dietze1, Anna Tucakov2, Tatjana Engel2, Sabine Wirtz2, Klaus Depner2, Anja Globig2, Robert Kammerer2, Susan Mouchantat2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Non-invasive sampling techniques based on the analysis of oral fluid specimen have gained substantial importance in the field of swine herd management. Methodological advances have a focus on endemic viral diseases in commercial pig production. More recently, these approaches have been adapted to non-invasive sampling of wild boar for transboundary animal disease detection for which these effective population level sampling methods have not been available. In this study, a rope-in-a-bait based oral fluid sampling technique was tested to detect classical swine fever virus nucleic acid shedding from experimentally infected domestic pigs.Entities:
Keywords: Backyard pig production; Group level; Hog cholera; Non-invasive; Rope-in-a-bait; Surveillance
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28056961 PMCID: PMC5217651 DOI: 10.1186/s12917-016-0930-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Vet Res ISSN: 1746-6148 Impact factor: 2.741
Viral RNA detection in domestic swine infected with viral doses of 106 TCID50 CSFV Alfort/Tübingen
| Day post infection | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group | Animal/sample | Sample Type | −1 | 2 | 5 | 7 | 9 | 12 | 15 |
| 1 | 1 | EDTA blood | neg | neg |
|
|
|
|
|
| OP swab | neg | neg | neg | neg | neg | neg | 37,03 | ||
| 2 | EDTA blood | neg | neg | 36,26 |
|
|
|
| |
| OP swab | neg | neg | neg | 39,01 |
| neg |
| ||
| 3 | EDTA blood | neg | neg | 36,11 |
| - | - | - | |
| OP swab | neg | neg | neg | neg | - | - | - | ||
| 4 | EDTA blood | neg | neg |
|
|
|
|
| |
| OP swab | neg | neg | neg | neg | neg | 36,7 |
| ||
| pSWAB | saliva | neg | neg | neg | neg | 1(4) | 9(9) | 9(9) | |
| average Cq of positive |
|
|
| ||||||
| 2 | 5 | EDTA blood | neg | 39,1 |
|
|
|
|
|
| OP swab | neg | neg | neg | neg | 38 |
|
| ||
| 6 | EDTA blood | neg |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| OP swab | neg | neg | neg | neg |
|
|
| ||
| 7 | EDTA blood | neg | neg |
|
|
|
|
| |
| OP swab | neg | neg | neg | neg |
|
|
| ||
| 8 | EDTA blood | neg |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| OP swab | neg | neg | neg |
|
|
|
| ||
| pSWAB | saliva | neg | neg | neg | 4(8) | 4(4) | 4(4) | 4(4) | |
| average Cq of positive |
|
|
|
| |||||
Cq values for EDTA blood, oropharyngeal (OP) swabs, pSWAB. Cq values ≥40 were considered negative, values between 36 and 40 doubtful and values <36 (in bold) positive. Counts for pSWABs are number of positive (total collected). (−): animal euthanized for animal welfare reasons
Fig. 1Mean rectal temperatures (°C) of the animals by group
Fig. 2Comparison of CSFV nucleic acid detection in oral fluid collected at individual level (swab) or group level (pSWAB)