4.2 Article

Prevalence and phylogenetic analysis of the isolated type I porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus from 2007 to 2008 in Korea

期刊

VIRUS GENES
卷 40, 期 2, 页码 225-230

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11262-009-0433-3

关键词

European PRRSV; Type I PRRSV; Phylogenetic analysis

资金

  1. Technology Development Program for Agriculture and Forestry, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Republic of Korea

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The first Korean strain of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) was isolated in 1997, and it exhibited high similarity to strain VR-2332 (type II PRRSV; North American type). Recently, however, infection with type I PRRSV (European type) has also been reported in Korea. To date, preliminary data about type I PRRSV prevalence in Korea have not been reported. Here, using reverse transcriptase (RT)-PCR, we analyzed 383 archived field samples from 101 pig farms in Korea that were collected from 2007 to 2008. We identified 155 samples from 68 farms that were positive for PRRSV. Fifty-one samples (51/155; 32.9%) and 20 farms (20/68; 29.4%) were type I PRRSV-positive/type II PRRSV-negative. Furthermore, we tried to isolate the type I PRRSV from positive samples and seven type I PRRSV were isolated using PAM. The phylogenetic analysis using the type I PRRSV isolates (7 isolates) was performed based on open reading frame (ORF)5 (accession numbers GU325642 to GU325648) and ORF7 (accession numbers GU325635 to GU325641). In the phylogenetic study, seven type I PRRSV isolates were closely related with panEuropean based on ORF7, while they were genetically distinct from Lelystad virus and made a unique clade based on ORF5. The results of this study demonstrate that infection with type I PRRSV is not uncommon in Korean pig farms, which suggests that diagnosis and control of type I PRRSV should be considered in Korea. A new approach to vaccination against, and epidemiological analysis of, Korean PRRSV is urgently needed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据