4.6 Article

Rapid Selective Detection of Potentially Infectious Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Coronavirus Exposed to Heat Treatments Using Viability RT-qPCR

期刊

FRONTIERS IN MICROBIOLOGY
卷 11, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.01911

关键词

coronavirus; porcine epidemic diarrhea virus; viability RT-qPCR; infectivity; thermal inactivation

资金

  1. National Institute of Agricultural and Food Research and Technology (INIA) of Spanish Government [E-RTA2015-0003-C02-02]
  2. Spanish Government [FPU17/00466]
  3. Generalitat Valenciana [APOSTD/2018/150]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Coronaviruses (CoVs) cause severe respiratory, enteric, and systemic infections in a wide range of hosts, including humans and animals. Porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV), a member of theCoronaviridaefamily, is the etiological agent of porcine epidemic diarrhea (PED), a highly contagious intestinal disease affecting pigs of all ages. In this study, we optimized a viability real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) for the selective detection of infectious and heat-inactivated PEDV. PEMAX (TM), EMA (TM), and PMAxx (TM) photoactivable dyes along with PtCl(4)and CDDP platinum compounds were screened as viability markers using two RT-qPCR assays: firstly, on PEDV purified RNA, and secondly on infectious and thermally inactivated virus suspensions. Furthermore, PMAxx (TM) pretreatment matched the thermal inactivation pattern obtained by cell culture better than other viability markers. Finally, we further optimized the pretreatment by coupling viability markers with Triton X-100 in inoculated serum resulting in a better estimation of PEDV infectivity than RT-qPCR alone. Our study has provided a rapid analytical tool based on viability RT-qPCR to infer PEDV infectivity with potential application for feed and feed ingredients monitoring in swine industry. This development would allow for greater accuracy in epidemiological surveys and outbreak investigations.

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

4.6
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