4.5 Article

Detection of HEV RNA Using One-Step Real-Time RT-PCR in Farrow-to-Finish Pig Farms in Bulgaria

期刊

PATHOGENS
卷 12, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/pathogens12050673

关键词

hepatitis E virus; farrow-to-finish pig farms; finishers; dry sows; gilts; one-step real-time RT-PCR

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to evaluate the presence of HEV RNA in farrow-to-finish pig farms in different regions of Bulgaria. The results showed that out of 32 tested farms, HEV RNA was detected in 12 (37.5%) farms. The highest percentage of HEV-positive samples was found in pooled fecal samples from finisher pigs (20.6%), while the detection rate was lower in dry sows and gilts. The study confirms the circulation of HEV in pig farms in Bulgaria and indicates a potential risk to public health.
(1) Background: HEV is a zoonotic, foodborne pathogen. It is spread worldwide and represents a public health risk. The aim of this study was to evaluate the presence of HEV RNA in farrow-to-finish pig farms in different regions of Bulgaria; (2) Methods: Isolation of HEV RNA from pooled samples of feces was performed using a QIAamp((R)) Viral RNA Mini Kit followed by HEV RNA detection using a single-step real-time RT-PCR with primers and probes targeting the ORF 3 HEV genome; (3) Results: HEV RNA was detected in 12 out of 32 tested farms in Bulgaria (37.5%). The overall percentage of HEV-positive pooled fecal samples was 10.8% (68 of 630 samples). HEV was detected mostly in pooled fecal samples from finisher pigs (66/320, 20.6%) and sporadically from dry sows (1/62, 1.6%) and gilts (1/248, 0.4%); (4) Conclusions: Our results confirm that HEV circulates in farrow-to-finish pig farms in Bulgaria. In our study, we found HEV RNA in pooled fecal samples from fattening pigs (4-6-months age), shortly before their transport to the slaughterhouse indicating a potential risk to public health. The possible circulation of HEV throughout pork production requires monitoring and containment measures.

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

4.5
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