JVDI Advertisement
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Long, B.
Right arrow Articles by Scherba, G
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Long, B.
Right arrow Articles by Scherba, G
Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation, Vol 16, Issue 4, 264-270
Copyright © 2004 by American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians


Evaluation Studies

Adaptation and limitations of established hemagglutination inhibition assays for the detection of porcine anti-swine influenza virus H1N2 antibodies

BC Long, TL Goldberg, SL Swenson, G Erickson, and G Scherba

Department of Veterinary Pathobiology College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61802, USA.

Hemagglutination inhibition (HI) has been a reliable method for determining porcine antibody levels to the well-characterized swine influenza virus (SIV) H1N1 and H3N2 subtypes. However, the recent emergence of the novel H1N2 serotype of SIV and the persistence of 2 other serotypes (H1N1 and H3N2) in the United States swine population represents a significant challenge to diagnostics. Both standardized and modified HI protocols were used in a blinded study to examine a collection of 50 control sera representing a total of 12 swine that were experimentally inoculated with one of the 3 SIV subtypes. Using these control sera data, a statistical basis for analysis was established in an attempt to classify 30 field sera with known case histories or seroprevalance into SIV serotype categories. By this approach 57% of the field sera could be classified into specific categories. The remaining samples that could not be classified reliably were most likely composed of heterogeneous anti-SIV antibody populations. These results indicate that although serological differentiation might be possible in a controlled environment, applications of these methods to field samples are currently problematic. Approaches other than HI will be required to fulfill the current need for SIV diagnostics and surveillance when specific serotype identification is required.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
jvdiHome page
B. Leuwerke, P. Kitikoon, R. Evans, and E. Thacker
Comparison of three serological assays to determine the cross-reactivity of antibodies from eight genetically diverse U.S. Swine influenza viruses
J Vet Diagn Invest, July 1, 2008; 20(4): 426 - 432.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2004 by the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc.