HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Hilbe, M. Articles by Ehrensperger, F. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Hilbe, M. Articles by Ehrensperger, F.

Comparison of five diagnostic methods for detecting bovine viral diarrhea virus infection in calves

Correspondence: ¹ Corresponding Author: Monika Hilbe, Institute of Veterinary Pathology, Winterthurerstrasse 268, 8057 Zurich, University of Zurich, Vetsuisse-Faculty, Switzerland, e-mail: hilbe{at}vetpath.unizh.ch

Five diagnostic techniques performed on skin biopsies (shoulder region) and/or serum were compared for detection of bovine viral diarrhea virus infection in 224 calves 0–3 months of age, 23 calves older than 3 months but younger than 7 months, and 11 cattle older than 7 months. The diagnostic methods used were immunohistochemistry (IHC), 2 commercial antigen ELISAs, 1 commercial antibody ELISA, and real-time RT-PCR. Results of 249 out of 258 skin and serum samples were identical and correlated within the 3 antigen detection methods and the real-time RT-PCR used. Twenty-six of these 249 samples were BVDV-positive with all antigen detection methods and the real-time RT-PCR. Nine out of 258 samples yielding discordant results were additionally examined by RT-PCR, RT-PCR Reamplification (ReA), and antigen ELISA I on serum and by immunohistochemistry on formalin fixed and paraffin-embedded skin biopsies. Virus isolation and genotyping was performed as well on these discordant samples. In 3 cases, transiently infected animals were identified. Two samples positive by real-time RT-PCR were interpreted as false positive and were ascribed to cross-contamination. The antigen ELISA II failed to detect 2 BVDV-positive calves due to the presence of maternal antibodies; the cause of 2 false-positive cases in this ELISA remained undetermined. Only persistently infected animals were identified in skin samples by IHC or antigen ELISA I. The 3 antigen detection methods and the real-time RT-PCR used in parallel had a high correlation rate (96.5%) and similar sensitivity and specificity values.

Key Words: Bovine viral diarrhea virus • ELISA • immunohistochemistry • real-time RT-PCR • serology

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. D. Nelson, M. J. Dark, D. S. Bradway, J. F. Ridpath, N. Call, J. Haruna, F. R. Rurangirwa, and J. F. Evermann Evidence for persistent Bovine viral diarrhea virus infection in a captive mountain goat (Oreamnos americanus) J Vet Diagn Invest, November 1, 2008; 20(6): 752 - 759. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]