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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Scherba, G
Right arrow Articles by Zuckermann, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Scherba, G
Right arrow Articles by Zuckermann, F.
Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation, Vol 3, Issue 4, 306-312
Copyright © 1991 by American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians


Articles

Sensitivity of the standardized pseudorabies virus neutralization test varies with the test strain used

G Scherba, RM Weigel, L Jin, W Hall, and FA Zuckermann

Department of Veterinary Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Illinois, Urbana 61801.

The effect of altering the strain of the test virus used in the standardized pseudorabies virus neutralization (VN) test on the sensitivity of the assay was evaluated. Comparative VN tests were performed using 4 different strains: the avirulent Bartha parental, the avirulent recombinant Bartha gIIIKa, the moderately virulent Shope (currently used for the VN test at the National Veterinary Services Laboratory, Ames, IA), and the highly virulent P2208 (Funkhauser). A radioimmunoassay and a Western immunoblotting technique were employed to verify the presence of anti-pseudorabies virus (PrV) antibodies in sera. Statistical analysis indicated that replacement of the Shope strain by the Bartha gIIIKa or the P2208 strain resulted in VN titers that were 4.23- and 2.00-fold higher, respectively. Despite these differences, specificity with regard to PrV diagnosis was unaltered. This apparent enhancement of the sensitivity of the PrV VN test would be beneficial for the serologic identification of PrV-infected animals during an eradication effort.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1991 by the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc.