4.4 Article

The prevalence of Torque teno sus virus (TTSuV) is common and increases with the age of growing pigs in the United States

Journal

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGICAL METHODS
Volume 183, Issue 1, Pages 40-44

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2012.03.026

Keywords

Porcine; Torque teno sus virus; Prevalence; United States

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Infection with the Torque teno sus virus (TTSuV) is believed to be common yet limited information is available on the epidemiology of TTSuV. The objectives of this study were to develop novel and improve existing diagnostic methods for TTSuV infection and to investigate the prevalence of TTSuV species 1 (TTSuV1) and 2 (TTSuV2) in the USA. Three hundred and four blood or fetal thoracic fluid samples were collected from pigs on 40 US farms in 12 States. Samples were collected from fetuses and in pre-suckle neonates (n=73), suckling pigs (1-20 days of age; n=27), nursery pigs (21-55 days of age; n=60), finisher pigs (8-25 weeks of age; n=90) and adults (>25 weeks of age; n=54). Samples were tested by a new quantitative differential real-time PCR for TTSuV1 and TTSuV2 DNA and by ELISA for detection of anti-TTSuV2-antibodies. The prevalence of TTSuV1 DNA ranged from 8.2% (fetuses and neonates) to 81% (finisher pigs) and the prevalence of TTSuV2 DNA ranged from 3.7% (suckling pigs) to 67% (finisher pigs). Evidence of fetal TTSuV infection was minimal. Mixed infection of TTSuV1 and TTSuV2 was seen in 6.7% of the nursery pigs, 52.2% of the finisher pigs, and 22.2% of the mature pigs. The prevalence of TTSuV1 was higher than that of TTSuV2. Anti-TTSuV2 antibodies were not detected in the fetuses and neonates and the seroprevalence of TTSuV2 was between 3.8% and 100% in growing pigs. The results of this study indicate that vertical transmission may not be a main route of TTSuV transmission in pigs in the USA. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available