Literature DB >> 31524583

Half-Life of African Swine Fever Virus in Shipped Feed.

Ana M M Stoian, Jeff Zimmerman, Ju Ji, Trevor J Hefley, Scott Dee, Diego G Diel, Raymond R R Rowland, Megan C Niederwerder.   

Abstract

African swine fever virus is transmissible through animal consumption of contaminated feed. To determine virus survival during transoceanic shipping, we calculated the half-life of the virus in 9 feed ingredients exposed to 30-day shipment conditions. Half-lives ranged from 9.6 to 14.2 days, indicating that the feed matrix environment promotes virus stability.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ASFV; African swine fever virus; feed ingredients; half-life; trans-Atlantic shipping model; transoceanic shipping; virus persistence; virus stability; viruses

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31524583      PMCID: PMC6874236          DOI: 10.3201/eid2512.191002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis        ISSN: 1080-6040            Impact factor:   6.883


African swine fever virus (ASFV) is the most significant threat to pork production worldwide. Over the past year, the virus has emerged in new countries and continents, including Belgium (), and has rapidly disseminated throughout China and several other countries in Asia (,). Without effective vaccines or treatment, infection with ASFV results in severe disease in swine, high mortality rates, and preventive culling to halt virus spread. Since the 2013 introduction of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus in the United States, feed and feed ingredients have been recognized as potential routes for transboundary spread of swine diseases (). Recent work has demonstrated that the stability of ASFV strain Georgia 2007 across animal feed ingredients is broad and that the virus survives in ingredients subjected to environmental conditions mimicking trans-Atlantic shipment (). Furthermore, experimental infection with ASFV Georgia 2007 can occur through the natural consumption of contaminated plant-based feed; the likelihood of infection increases after repeated consumption of a batch of feed (). Field reports have also implicated contaminated feed as playing a role in the introduction and transmission of ASFV on farms in China and Latvia (–). We previously evaluated the stability of ASFV in various feed ingredients during a simulated 30-day trans-Atlantic voyage. We used those data to prepare rough estimates for the half-life of ASFV in each ingredient (,). However, half-life calculations were based on the limited data available at the time, including 2 time points representing inoculation dose and titers at the conclusion of the study and insufficient replicates from which to calculate SEs or 95% CIs around the half-life estimates. For this study, our objective was to improve the accuracy of ASFV half-life estimates by increasing the number of time points and replicates in the same trans-Atlantic model.

The Study

We used 9 feeds or feed ingredients for this study. We programmed an environmental chamber with the environmental conditions of humidity and temperature, which fluctuated every 6 hours, over a 30-day simulated trans-Atlantic shipment (). We added 5 g of each gamma-irradiated feed ingredient to 50-mL conical tubes before inoculating them with 100 µL of 105 50% tissue culture infective dose (TCID50) of ASFV. We used ASFV Georgia 2007/1 () because of its similarity to currently circulating isolates (). Negative controls consisted of complete feed samples in meal form with 100 µL of sterile phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) added. Positive controls consisted of 5 mL of RPMI 1640 medium (Gibco, https://www.thermofisher.com) lacking feed with 100 µL of 105 TCID50 ASFV. After addition of virus or PBS, we vortexed samples for 10 s and covered each tube with a vented cap for incubation. After removing the samples from the environmental chamber, we added 15 mL of sterile PBS and replaced the vented caps with solid caps. We organized samples in duplicate into 4 replicate batches representing 4 time points and simulated the trans-Atlantic shipping model over 2 separate 30-day periods. We used 144 titrations for the half-life calculations in feed (4 time points × 4 replicates = 16 titers/feed ingredient) and duplicate titers over 4 time points to calculate half-life in RPMI medium. We tested samples for ASFV on days 1, 8, 17, and 30 after contamination. The first sample was collected at 1 day after contamination to allow the virus to stabilize within each matrix. ASFV was quantified by virus titration as described previously (). We vortexed samples for 10 s and then centrifuged at 10,000 × g for 5 min at 4°C. Supernatant from each sample was stored at −80°C. We collected porcine alveolar macrophages for virus isolation by lung lavage of 3–5-week-old pigs and cultured for 1 day in RPMI medium supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum and antibiotics in a 37°C 5% CO2 incubator. We prepared 2-fold serial dilutions in RPMI medium in triplicate, added dilutions to monolayers of porcine alveolar macrophages in 96-well plates, and incubated for 1 h at 37°C. Cells were washed again and RPMI medium replaced. After 4 days at 37°C, the cells were fixed with 80% acetone for 10 min and stained with mouse anti-p30 primary monoclonal antibody (1:6,000 dilution). We incubated plates at 37°C for 1 h and washed 3 times with PBS before addition of goat anti-mouse Alexa Fluor 488 secondary antibody (Invitrogen, https://www.thermofisher.com; 1:400 dilution), followed by 1-h incubation at 37°C. We viewed cells under a fluorescence microscope and calculated the log10 TCID50/mL according to the Spearman-Karber method (). For all sample types, we calculated the half-life and corresponding 95% CI. The half-life analysis was performed by fitting a linear regression model to the data by using R version 3.5.2 (https://www.r-project.org), with the natural log of the virus endpoint titers as the response variables and time as the explanatory variables. We estimated the slope and SE of the respective lines by using these regression models and half-lives calculated as −loge(2)/slope as previously described (). We calculated the SE for each half-life by multiplying the SE of the slope by log(2) divided by the square of the slope. We calculated the upper and lower bounds of the 95% CI as the estimated half-life plus/minus the product of the SE times the critical value of a t distribution with quantile as 0.025 and degrees of freedom as n – 2, where n is the sample size for that ingredient (). Environmental conditions during the course of the trans-Atlantic model (Figure, panel A) were a mean + SD temperature of 12.3 ± 4.7°C (range 0–26°C) and a mean + SD humidity of 74.1% ± 19.2% (range 20%–100%). Negative control samples remained negative. All ASFV-inoculated samples showed detectable quantities of infectious ASFV (Figure, panel B). The half-life estimate in the RPMI-positive control was shorter than that for all feed ingredients tested: 8.3 + 0.3 days (95% CI 7.7–9.0 days) (Table). The virus half-life was longest in complete feed: 14.2 + 0.8 days (95% CI 12.4–15.9 days). Of note, for conventional versus organic soybean meal, the half-life of ASFV differed by >3 days: 9.6 + 0.4 days (conventional soybean meal) and 12.9 + 0.6 days (organic soybean meal). The relative stability in feed may be the result of variable protein, fat, or moisture content among ingredients. Overall, the mean half-life for ASFV in all animal feed ingredients was 12.2 days.
Figure

Decay of African swine fever virus (ASFV) Georgia 2007 in feed ingredients exposed to temperature and humidity conditions simulating a 30-day trans-Atlantic shipment. A) Temperature and humidity conditions, which fluctuated every 6 hours during the course of the 30-day environmental model. Environmental conditions were based on the availability of historical data logged from April 5, 2011, through May 4, 2011 (,) to model trans-Atlantic shipment from Warsaw, Poland, to Des Moines, Iowa, USA. B) Mean TCID50 of ASFV Georgia 2007 quantified on porcine alveolar macrophages at 1, 8, 17, and 30 days after contamination for different types of feed and controls. Feed ingredients were inoculated with 105 TCID50 ASFV based on previous half-life calculations (,) and the infectious dose in feed (). TCID50, 50% tissue culture infective dose.

Table

Half-life of African swine fever virus Georgia 2007 in animal feed ingredients subjected to temperature and humidity conditions simulating a 30-d transoceanic shipment*

Feed or feed ingredientMean titer on day 30†Half-life ± SE95% CI for half-life estimatesPrevious titer on day 30 (5,10)†Previous half-life estimates (5,10)
Soybean meal (conventional)103.09.6 ± 0.48.7–10.4103.04.6
Soybean meal (organic)103.012.9 ± 0.611.5–14.3103.14.7
Soy oil cake103.112.4 ± 0.910.4–14.3103.25.0
Choline103.211.9 ± 0.510.9–12.9103.25.1
Moist cat food103.010.6 ± 0.59.5–11.7103.04.6
Moist dog food102.811.7 ± 0.410.8–12.6102.84.2
Dry dog food102.713.1 ± 0.412.3–14.0102.84.1
Pork sausage casings102.913.1 ± 0.711.6–14.6102.94.4
Complete feed102.714.2 ± 0.812.4–15.9102.94.3
RPMI mediumNot determined8.3 ± 0.37.7–9.0103.04.7

*Values listed in days unless otherwise indicated. Feed ingredient selection based on use in swine feed or volume of ingredient imported into the United States from China each year (). Samples subjected to temperature (mean 12.3°C) and relative humidity (mean 74.1%) conditions in an environmental chamber programed to simulate transoceanic shipment. Complete feed samples were in meal form.
†Mean titer of duplicate samples listed as 50% tissue culture infective dose.

Decay of African swine fever virus (ASFV) Georgia 2007 in feed ingredients exposed to temperature and humidity conditions simulating a 30-day trans-Atlantic shipment. A) Temperature and humidity conditions, which fluctuated every 6 hours during the course of the 30-day environmental model. Environmental conditions were based on the availability of historical data logged from April 5, 2011, through May 4, 2011 (,) to model trans-Atlantic shipment from Warsaw, Poland, to Des Moines, Iowa, USA. B) Mean TCID50 of ASFV Georgia 2007 quantified on porcine alveolar macrophages at 1, 8, 17, and 30 days after contamination for different types of feed and controls. Feed ingredients were inoculated with 105 TCID50 ASFV based on previous half-life calculations (,) and the infectious dose in feed (). TCID50, 50% tissue culture infective dose. *Values listed in days unless otherwise indicated. Feed ingredient selection based on use in swine feed or volume of ingredient imported into the United States from China each year (). Samples subjected to temperature (mean 12.3°C) and relative humidity (mean 74.1%) conditions in an environmental chamber programed to simulate transoceanic shipment. Complete feed samples were in meal form.
†Mean titer of duplicate samples listed as 50% tissue culture infective dose.

Conclusions

Although the high stability of ASFV in contaminated pork products and blood has been appreciated for decades (), the stability of ASFV in plant-based feed has been recognized only recently (). Our previous estimation of the half-life of ASFV in feed ingredients was based on the limited data we had available, including inoculation dose and 18 titers quantified at 1 time point during the 30-day model (,). In this study, we quantified viral decay at several time points over the 30-day model and increased sample size, which enabled us to calculate SEs and 95% CIs around the half-life estimates. In general, this updated modeling approach resulted in longer half-life estimates across all matrices. This study provides quantitative data on the half-life of ASFV Georgia 2007 in animal feed ingredients exposed to moderate temperature and humidity conditions simulating transoceanic shipment. The longer virus half-lives in feed compared with half-lives in media support the concept that the feed matrix provides an environment that increases ASFV stability. Furthermore, these data provide additional evidence supporting the ability of plant-based feed ingredients to promote survival of ASFV should these products become contaminated.
  14 in total

1.  The use of half-lives and associated confidence intervals in biological research.

Authors:  M Bryan; J J Zimmerman; W J Berry
Journal:  Vet Res Commun       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 2.459

2.  African swine fever spread in China.

Authors:  Shao-Lun Zhai; Wen-Kang Wei; Ming-Fei Sun; Dian-Hong Lv; Zhi-Hong Xu
Journal:  Vet Rec       Date:  2019-05-04       Impact factor: 2.695

3.  Emergence of African Swine Fever in China, 2018.

Authors:  Xintao Zhou; Nan Li; Yuzi Luo; Ye Liu; Faming Miao; Teng Chen; Shoufeng Zhang; Peili Cao; Xiangdong Li; Kegong Tian; Hua-Ji Qiu; Rongliang Hu
Journal:  Transbound Emerg Dis       Date:  2018-09-04       Impact factor: 5.005

Review 4.  Is There a Risk for Introducing Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus (PRRSV) Through the Legal Importation of Pork?

Authors:  Megan C Niederwerder; Raymond R R Rowland
Journal:  Food Environ Virol       Date:  2016-09-02       Impact factor: 2.778

5.  Correction: Survival of viral pathogens in animal feed ingredients under transboundary shipping models.

Authors:  Scott A Dee; Fernando V Bauermann; Megan C Niederwerder; Aaron Singrey; Travis Clement; Marcelo de Lima; Craig Long; Gilbert Patterson; Maureen A Sheahan; Ana M M Stoian; Vlad Petrovan; Cassandra K Jones; Jon De Jong; Ju Ji; Gordon D Spronk; Luke Minion; Jane Christopher-Hennings; Jeff J Zimmerman; Raymond R R Rowland; Eric Nelson; Paul Sundberg; Diego G Diel
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-11-30       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Genome sequences derived from pig and dried blood pig feed samples provide important insights into the transmission of African swine fever virus in China in 2018.

Authors:  Xuexia Wen; Xijun He; Xiang Zhang; Xianfeng Zhang; Liling Liu; Yuntao Guan; Ying Zhang; Zhigao Bu
Journal:  Emerg Microbes Infect       Date:  2019       Impact factor: 7.163

7.  Correction: Survival of viral pathogens in animal feed ingredients under transboundary shipping models.

Authors:  Scott A Dee; Fernando V Bauermann; Megan C Niederwerder; Aaron Singrey; Travis Clement; Marcelo de Lima; Craig Long; Gilbert Patterson; Maureen A Sheahan; Ana M M Stoian; Vlad Petrovan; Cassandra K Jones; Jon De Jong; Ju Ji; Gordon D Spronk; Luke Minion; Jane Christopher-Hennings; Jeff J Zimmerman; Raymond R R Rowland; Eric Nelson; Paul Sundberg; Diego G Diel
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-03-21       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Outbreak of African Swine Fever, Vietnam, 2019.

Authors:  Van Phan Le; Dae Gwin Jeong; Sun-Woo Yoon; Hye-Min Kwon; Thi Bich Ngoc Trinh; Thi Lan Nguyen; Thi To Nga Bui; Jinsik Oh; Joon Bae Kim; Kwang Myun Cheong; Nguyen Van Tuyen; Eunhye Bae; Thi Thu Hang Vu; Minjoo Yeom; Woonsung Na; Daesub Song
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2019-07-17       Impact factor: 6.883

9.  Comparative Analysis of Whole-Genome Sequence of African Swine Fever Virus Belgium 2018/1.

Authors:  Jan H Forth; Marylène Tignon; Ann Brigitte Cay; Leonie F Forth; Dirk Höper; Sandra Blome; Martin Beer
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2019-06-17       Impact factor: 6.883

10.  African swine fever virus isolate, Georgia, 2007.

Authors:  Rebecca J Rowlands; Vincent Michaud; Livio Heath; Geoff Hutchings; Chris Oura; Wilna Vosloo; Rahana Dwarka; Tinatin Onashvili; Emmanuel Albina; Linda K Dixon
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 6.883

View more
  13 in total

1.  Ability of different matrices to transmit African swine fever virus.

Authors:  Soren Saxmose Nielsen; Julio Alvarez; Dominique Joseph Bicout; Paolo Calistri; Elisabetta Canali; Julian Ashley Drewe; Bruno Garin-Bastuji; Jose Luis Gonzales Rojas; Christian Gortázar Schmidt; Mette Herskin; Miguel Ángel Miranda Chueca; Virginie Michel; Barbara Padalino; Paolo Pasquali; Liisa Helena Sihvonen; Hans Spoolder; Karl Stahl; Antonio Velarde; Arvo Viltrop; Christoph Winckler; Anette Boklund; Anette Botner; Andrea Gervelmeyer; Olaf Mosbach-Schulz; Helen Clare Roberts
Journal:  EFSA J       Date:  2021-04-27

Review 2.  Invited review: strategic adoption of antibiotic-free pork production: the importance of a holistic approach.

Authors:  John F Patience; Alejandro Ramirez
Journal:  Transl Anim Sci       Date:  2022-05-16

3.  SPR-Based Detection of ASF Virus in Cells.

Authors:  Alessandro Capo; Alessia Calabrese; Maciej Frant; Marek Walczak; Anna Szczotka-Bochniarz; Georgios Manessis; Ioannis Bossis; Maria Staiano; Sabato D'Auria; Antonio Varriale
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2022-07-05       Impact factor: 6.208

Review 4.  African Swine Fever Virus: An Emerging DNA Arbovirus.

Authors:  Natasha N Gaudreault; Daniel W Madden; William C Wilson; Jessie D Trujillo; Juergen A Richt
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2020-05-13

5.  Successful Infection of Domestic Pigs by Ingestion of the European Soft Tick O. Erraticus That Fed on African Swine Fever Virus Infected Pig.

Authors:  Rémi Pereira De Oliveira; Evelyne Hutet; Maxime Duhayon; Jean-Marie Guionnet; Frédéric Paboeuf; Laurence Vial; Marie-Frédérique Le Potier
Journal:  Viruses       Date:  2020-03-11       Impact factor: 5.048

Review 6.  The risk of viral transmission in feed: What do we know, what do we do?

Authors:  Scott A Dee; Megan C Niederwerder; Gil Patterson; Roger Cochrane; Cassie Jones; Diego Diel; Egan Brockhoff; Eric Nelson; Gordon Spronk; Paul Sundberg
Journal:  Transbound Emerg Dis       Date:  2020-07-10       Impact factor: 5.005

7.  The Addition of Nature Identical Flavorings Accelerated the Virucidal Effect of Pure Benzoic Acid against African Swine Fever Viral Contamination of Complete Feed.

Authors:  Hengxiao Zhai; Chihai Ji; Maria Carol Walsh; Jon Bergstrom; Sebastien Potot; Heng Wang
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-04-14       Impact factor: 2.752

8.  Research objectives to fill knowledge gaps in African swine fever virus survival in the environment and carcasses, which could improve the control of African swine fever virus in wild boar populations.

Authors:  Søren Saxmose Nielsen; Julio Alvarez; Dominique Joseph Bicout; Paolo Calistri; Klaus Depner; Julian Ashley Drewe; Bruno Garin-Bastuji; Jose Luis Gonzales Rojas; Christian Schmidt; Mette Herskin; Virginie Michel; Paolo Pasquali; Helen Claire Roberts; Liisa Helena Sihvonen; Hans Spoolder; Karl Stahl; Antonio Velarde; Christoph Winckler; Sandra Blome; Anette Boklund; Anette Bøtner; Sofie Dhollander; Cristina Rapagnà; Yves Van der Stede; Miguel Angel Miranda Chueca
Journal:  EFSA J       Date:  2021-06-21

Review 9.  Risk and Mitigation of African Swine Fever Virus in Feed.

Authors:  Megan C Niederwerder
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-03-18       Impact factor: 2.752

Review 10.  African Swine Fever Virus as a Difficult Opponent in the Fight for a Vaccine-Current Data.

Authors:  Hanna Turlewicz-Podbielska; Anna Kuriga; Rafał Niemyjski; Grzegorz Tarasiuk; Małgorzata Pomorska-Mól
Journal:  Viruses       Date:  2021-06-23       Impact factor: 5.048

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.