+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Single and combination diagnostic test efficiency and cost analysis for detection and isolation of avian influenza virus from wild bird cloacal swabs

Single and combination diagnostic test efficiency and cost analysis for detection and isolation of avian influenza virus from wild bird cloacal swabs

Avian Diseases 54(1 Suppl): 606-612

Effective laboratory methods for identifying avian influenza virus (AIV) in wild bird populations are crucial to understanding the ecology of this pathogen. The standard method has been AIV isolation in chorioallantoic sac (CAS) of specific-pathogen-free embryonating chicken eggs (ECE), but in one study, combined use of yolk-sac (YS) and chorioallantoic membrane inoculation routes increased the number of virus isolations. In addition, cell culture for AIV isolation has been used. Most recently, real-time reverse transcriptase (RRT)-PCR has been used to detect AIV genome in surveillance samples. The purpose of this study was to develop a diagnostic decision tree that would increase AIV isolations from wild bird surveillance samples when using combinations of detection and isolation methods under our laboratory conditions. Attempts to identify AIV for 50 wild bird surveillance samples were accomplished via isolation in ECE using CAS and YS routes of inoculation, and in Madin-Darby canine kidney (MDCK) cells, and by AIV matrix gene detection using RRT-PCR. AIV was isolated from 36% of samples by CAS inoculation and 46% samples by YS inoculation using ECE, isolated from 20% of samples in MDCK cells, and detected in 54% of the samples by RRT-PCR. The AIV was isolated in ECE in 13 samples by both inoculation routes, five additional samples by allantoic, and 10 additional samples by yolk-sac inoculation, increasing the positive isolation of AIV in ECE to 56%. Allantoic inoculation and RRT-PCR detected AIV in 14 samples, with four additional samples by allantoic route alone and 13 additional samples by RRT-PCR. Our data indicate that addition of YS inoculation of ECE will increase isolation of AIV from wild bird surveillance samples. If we exclude the confirmation RT-PCR test, cost analysis for our laboratory indicates that RRT-PCR is an economical choice for screening samples before doing virus isolation in ECE if the AIV frequency is low in the samples. In contrast, isolation in ECE via CAS and YS inoculation routes without prescreening by RRT-PCR was most efficient and cost-effective if the samples had an expected high frequency of AIV.

(PDF same-day service: $19.90)

Accession: 055793033

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 20521702

DOI: 10.1637/8838-040309-Reg.1

Related references

A comparative evaluation of feathers, oropharyngeal swabs, and cloacal swabs for the detection of H5N1 highly pathogenic avian influenza virus infection in experimentally infected chickens and ducks. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation 27(6): 704-715, 2016

Evaluation of different embryonating bird eggs and cell cultures for isolation efficiency of avian influenza A virus and avian paramyxovirus serotype 1 from real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction-positive wild bird surveillance samples. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation 24(3): 563-567, 2012

Comparison of the avian influenza virus detection by the method of viral re-isolation and by the DirectigenTM Flu A test applied to cloacal and oropharyngeal samples from experimentally infected chickens and turkey hens. 2008

Comparison of commercial influenza A virus assays in detecting avian influenza H7N9 among poultry cloacal swabs, China. Journal of Clinical Virology 59(4): 242-245, 2014

Comparison of cloacal and oropharyngeal samples for the detection of avian influenza virus in wild birds. Avian Diseases 54(1): 115-119, 2010

Molecular identification of an avian influenza virus (AIV) subtype H6 isolated from cloacal swabs of ducks. Animal health: a breakpoint in economic development? The 11th International Conference of the Association of Institutions for Tropical Veterinary Medicine and 16th Veterinary Association Malaysia Congress, 23-27 August 2004, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia: 255-257, 2004

Visualization and analysis of the Danish 2006 highly pathogenic avian influenza virus H5N1 wild bird surveillance data by a prototype avian influenza BioPortal. Avian Diseases 54(1 Suppl): 433-439, 2010

Detection of West Nile virus in oral and cloacal swabs collected from bird carcasses. Emerging Infectious Diseases 8(7): 741-742, 2002

An impedance immunosensor based on low-cost microelectrodes and specific monoclonal antibodies for rapid detection of avian influenza virus H5N1 in chicken swabs. Biosensors & Bioelectronics 67: 546-552, 2015

Selective isolation of Avian influenza virus (AIV) from cloacal samples containing AIV and Newcastle disease virus. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation 23(2): 330-332, 2011

Valuation of inactivated H5 avian influenza virus and fowlpox virus recombinant vaccines and diagnostic test reagents: implications in avian influenza control and prevention strategies. Proceedings of Western Poultry Disease Conference: 5th) 35-38, 1996

Chances and limitations of wild bird monitoring for the avian influenza virus H5N1--detection of pathogens highly mobile in time and space. Plos One 4(8): E6639-E6639, 2010

Chances and limitations of wild bird monitoring for the avian influenza virus H5N1 - detection of pathogens highly mobile in time and space. PLoS ONE 4(8): e6639, 2009

Sampling for low-pathogenic avian influenza A virus in wild Mallard ducks: oropharyngeal versus cloacal swabbing. Vaccine 26(35): 4414-4416, 2008

Hemagglutination-inhibition test for avian influenza virus subtype identification and the detection and quantitation of serum antibodies to the avian influenza virus. Methods in Molecular Biology 436: 53-66, 2008