4.7 Article

Propagation and isolation of ranaviruses in cell culture

期刊

AQUACULTURE
卷 294, 期 3-4, 页码 159-164

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2009.05.019

关键词

Ranavirus; EHNV; Propagation; Isolation; Cell culture; Fish virus

资金

  1. European Union [SSPE-Cr-2005-006459 RANA]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The optimal in vitro propagation procedure for a panel of ranavirus isolates and the best method for isolation of Epizootic haematopoietic necrosis virus (EHNV) from organ material in cell-culture were investigated. The panel of ranavirus isolates included: Frog virus 3 (170), Bohle iridovirus (BIV), Pike-perch iridovirus (PPIV), European catfish virus (ECV), European sheatfish virus (ESV), EHNV, Doctor fish virus (DFV), Guppy virus 6 (GF6), short-finned eel virus (SERV) and Rana esculenta virus Italy 282/102 (REV 282/102). Each isolate was titrated in five cell lines: bluegill fry (BF-2), epithelioma papulosum cyprini (EPC), chinook salmon embryo (CHSE-214) rainbow trout gonad (RTG-2) and fathead minnow (FHM), and incubated at 10, 15, 20, 24 and 28 degrees C for two weeks. BF-2, EPC and CHSE-214 cells performed well and titers obtained in the three cell lines were similar, whereas FHM and RTG-2 cells consistently produced lower titers than the other cell lines at all temperatures. The optimal temperature for propagating the isolates collectively to high titers in vivo was 24 degrees C. Additionally, three established methods for re-isolation of virus from EHNV-infected organ material were compared. Challenged fish were sampled twice weekly and 7 organs were processed separately according to the three methods. Samples incubated on BF-2 cells at 22 degrees C for 2 weeks + 1 week sub-cultivation (method 1) provided more positive results than the other 2 methods and when using the EPC cell line. Virus was most frequently isolated from the kidney, followed by brain, muscle, heart, liver, gills and lastly spleen. (c) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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