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 Brockmeier, S.
Right arrow Articles by Mengeling, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Brockmeier, S.
Right arrow Articles by Mengeling, W.
Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation, Vol 5, Issue 4, 505-509
Copyright © 1993 by American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians


Articles

Comparison of in vivo reactivation, in vitro reactivation, and polymerase chain reaction for detection of latent pseudorabies virus infection in swine

SL Brockmeier, KM Lager, and WL Mengeling

USDA, Virology Swine Research Unit, Ames, IA 50010.

The following methods were compared for their ability to detect latent pseudorabies virus in 24 pigs that had been experimentally infected with virulent pseudorabies virus: 1) in vivo reactivation by dexamethasone administration, 2) in vitro reactivation by 5 different techniques of explant culture or cocultivation of trigeminal ganglia, and 3) detection of pseudorabies virus genome in tissue digests of tonsils or trigeminal ganglia using the polymerase chain reaction. Reactivation of pseudorabies virus by administration of dexamethasone was attempted in 12 of 24 pigs in an effort to determine if this procedure would affect the detection of latent pseudorabies virus by any of the subsequent in vitro methods. Detection of latent virus by the polymerase chain reaction with trigeminal ganglia was the most successful method (24/24 were positive). The next most successful method was in vivo reactivation through the administration of dexamethasone (10/12 [83%] were positive). Only 1 in vitro reactivation technique, cocultivation involving digestion of the trigeminal ganglia with trypsin and collagenase and the addition of a hypomethylating agent to the medium, yielded positive results (5/24 [21%] were positive). The polymerase chain reaction performed on tissue digests of tonsils was much less effective (2/24 [8%] were positive) than it was with trigeminal ganglia. Reactivation by dexamethasone did not appear to have any effect on the subsequent detection of latency by any of the methods tested.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev.Home page
L. E. Pomeranz, A. E. Reynolds, and C. J. Hengartner
Molecular Biology of Pseudorabies Virus: Impact on Neurovirology and Veterinary Medicine
Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev., September 1, 2005; 69(3): 462 - 500.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Virol.Home page
M. T. C. Winkler, A. Doster, and C. Jones
Persistence and Reactivation of Bovine Herpesvirus 1 in the Tonsils of Latently Infected Calves
J. Virol., June 1, 2000; 74(11): 5337 - 5346.
[Abstract] [Full Text]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1993 by the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc.