| Literature DB >> 31666067 |
Xiaoyu Zhou1, Lin Wang1,2, Anning Shen1, Xi Shen1, Moru Xu1, Kun Qian1,2,3, Hongxia Shao1,2,3, Yongxiu Yao4, Venugopal Nair4, Jianqiang Ye5,6,7, Aijian Qin8,9,10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Avian leukosis (AL), which is caused by avian leukosis virus (ALV), has led to substantial economic losses in the poultry industry. The kit used to detect all ALV-positive chickens in breeder flocks is very important for efficiently controlling AL. However, a new emerging ALV subtype is currently a severe challenge in the poultry industry.Entities:
Keywords: Avian leukosis virus; Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; Meconium; Novel subgroup K
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31666067 PMCID: PMC6822435 DOI: 10.1186/s12917-019-2150-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Vet Res ISSN: 1746-6148 Impact factor: 2.741
ELISA results for ALV p27 in cloacal swabs evaluated by the sELISA kit and virus isolation a S/P, OD650 values of a sample/OD650 value of the positive control
| Sample number | Cotton swab | Positive rate | Isolation of virus (tissue or blood) | Positive rate | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S/P | Result | S/P | Result | |||
| 1 | 0.198 | + | 100% | 0.063 | 40% | |
| 2 | 0.195 | + | 0.059 | |||
| 3 | 0.469 | + | 0.057 | |||
| 4 | 0.203 | + | 0.197 | + | ||
| 5 | 0.218 | + | 0.229 | + | ||
| 6 | 0.221 | + | 0.098 | |||
| 7 | 0.433 | + | 0.201 | + | ||
| 8 | 0.231 | + | 0.072 | |||
| 9 | 0.410 | + | 0.069 | |||
| 10 | 0.277 | + | 0.318 | + | ||
Fig. 1Results for different samples evaluated by an IFA and PCR. a IFA for identifying DF-1 cells infected with viral isolates using the monoclonal antibody 5D3; A, DF-1 cells infected with an isolate; B, noninfected DF-1 cells. b PCR results for the env genes of the isolates. Lane 1: 1-kb DNA marker; Lane 2: positive control; Lane 3: negative control; Lane 4–13: amplified env genes from samples 1–10, respectively
Fig. 2Comparison of env gene sequences of the positive samples (1–10) with those of other ALVs. Phylogenetic tree analysis using the neighbor-joining method (bootstrap method with 1000 replicates). ALV subgroups A-E and J are shown on the right. Bars, substitutions per nucleotide position
Sensitivity for ALV detection compared among different ELISA kits. A. Comparison of the sensitivity of ALV-A detection among different ELISA kits. B. Comparison of the sensitivity of ALV-J detection among different ELISA kits
| 1:21 | 1:22 | 1:23 | 1:24 | 1:25 | 1:26 | 1:27 | 1: 28 | 1:29 | 1:210 | 1:211 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A. ALV-A sample dilution | |||||||||||
| Commercial ELISA | 1.413 | 1.444 | 1.345 | 1.269 | 0.993 | 0.695 | 0.45 | 0.272 | 0.11 | 0.085 | 0.08 |
| sELISA | 1.188 | 1.207 | 1.208 | 1.161 | 1.148 | 0.989 | 0.759 | 0.511 | 0.348 | 0.234 | 0.17 |
| B. ALV-J sample dilution | |||||||||||
| Commercial ELISA | 1.563 | 1.497 | 1.442 | 1.354 | 1.164 | 0.86 | 0.607 | 0.322 | 0.138 | 0.098 | 0.084 |
| sELISA | 1.332 | 1.29 | 1.312 | 1.291 | 1.287 | 1.253 | 1.149 | 0.863 | 0.656 | 0.424 | 0.281 |