The development of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV) antibody-based assays is important for detecting infected animals, confirming previous virus exposure, and monitoring sow herd immunity. However, the potential cross-reactivity among porcine coronaviruses is a major concern for the development of pathogen-specific assays. In this study, we used serum samples ( = 792) from pigs of precisely known infection status and a multiplex fluorescent microbead-based immunoassay and/or enzyme-linked immunoassay platform to characterize the antibody response to PEDV whole-virus (WV) particles and recombinant polypeptides derived from the four PEDV structural proteins, i.e., spike (S), nucleocapsid (N), membrane (M), and envelope (E). Antibody assay cutoff values were selected to provide 100% diagnostic specificity for each target. The earliest IgG antibody response, mainly directed against S1 polypeptides, was observed at days 7 to 10 postinfection. With the exception of nonreactive protein E, we observed similar antibody ontogenies and patterns of seroconversion for S1, N, M, and WV antigens. Recombinant S1 provided the best diagnostic sensitivity, regardless of the PEDV strain, with no cross-reactivity detected against transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV), porcine respiratory coronavirus (PRCV), or porcine deltacoronavirus (PDCoV) pig antisera. The WV particles showed some cross-reactivity to TGEV Miller and TGEV Purdue antisera, while N protein presented some cross-reactivity to TGEV Miller. The M protein was highly cross-reactive to TGEV and PRCV antisera. Differences in the antibody responses to specific PEDV structural proteins have important implications in the development and performance of antibody assays for the diagnosis of PEDV enteric disease.
The contribution of circulating antibody to the protection of naïve piglets against porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV) was evaluated using a passive antibody transfer model. Piglets (n = 62) derived from 6 sows were assigned to one of 6 different treatments using a randomized block design which provided for allocation of all treatments to all sows' litters. Each treatment was designed to achieve a different level of circulating anti-PEDV antibody via intraperitoneally administration of concentrated serum antibody. Piglets were orally inoculated with PEDV (USA/IN/2013/19338E, 1 x 103 TCID50 per piglet) 24 hours later and then monitored for 14 days. Piglets remained with their dam throughout the experiment. Sow milk samples, piglet fecal samples, and data on piglet clinical signs, body weight, and body temperature were collected daily. Fecal samples were tested by PEDV real-time reverse transcriptase PCR. Serum, colostrum, and milk were tested for PEDV IgG, IgA, and virus-neutralizing antibody. The data were evaluated for the effects of systemic PEDV antibody levels on growth, body temperature, fecal shedding, survival, and antibody response. The analysis showed that circulating antibody partially ameliorated the effect of PEDV infection. Specifically, antibody-positive groups returned to normal body temperature faster and demonstrated a higher rate of survivability than piglets without PEDV antibody. When combined with previous literature on PEDV, it can be concluded that both systemic antibodies and maternal secretory IgA in milk contribute to the protection of the neonatal pig against PEDV infections. Overall, the results of this experiment suggested that passively administered circulating antibodies contributed to the protection of neonatal piglets against PEDV infection.
Members of family Coronaviridae cause a variety of diseases in birds and mammals. Porcine hemagglutinating encephalomyelitis virus (PHEV), a lesserresearched coronavirus, can infect naive pigs of any age, but clinical disease is observed in pigs Յ4 weeks of age. No commercial PHEV vaccines are available, and neonatal protection from PHEV-associated disease is presumably dependent on lactogenic immunity. Although subclinical PHEV infections are thought to be common, PHEV ecology in commercial swine herds is unknown. To begin to address this gap in knowledge, a serum IgG antibody enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) based on the S1 protein was developed and evaluated on known-status samples and then used to estimate PHEV seroprevalence in U.S. sow herds. Assessment of the diagnostic performance of the PHEV S1 ELISA using serum samples (n ϭ 924) collected from 7-week-old pigs (n ϭ 84; 12 pigs per group) inoculated with PHEV, porcine epidemic diarrhea virus, transmissible gastroenteritis virus, porcine respiratory coronavirus, or porcine deltacoronavirus showed that a sample-to-positive cutoff value of Ն0.6 was both sensitive and specific, i.e., all PHEV-inoculated pigs were seropositive from days postinoculation 10 to 42, and no cross-reactivity was observed in samples from other groups. The PHEV S1 ELISA was then used to estimate PHEV seroprevalence in U.S. sow herds (19 states) using 2,756 serum samples from breeding females (Ͼ28 weeks old) on commercial farms (n ϭ 104) with no history of PHEV-associated disease. The overall seroprevalence was 53.35% (confidence interval [CI], Ϯ1.86%) and herd seroprevalence was 96.15% (CI, Ϯ3.70%). IMPORTANCEThere is a paucity of information concerning the ecology of porcine hemagglutinating encephalomyelitis virus (PHEV) in commercial swine herds. This study provided evidence that PHEV infection is endemic and highly prevalent in U.S. swine herds. These results raised questions for future studies regarding the impact of endemic PHEV on swine health and the mechanisms by which this virus circulates in endemically infected populations. Regardless, the availability of the validated PHEV S1 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) provides the means for swine producers to detect and monitor PHEV infections, confirm prior exposure to the virus, and to evaluate the immune status of breeding herds.
This study compared the performances of three commercial transmissible gastroenteritis virus/porcine respiratory coronavirus (TGEV/PRCV) blocking enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) using serum samples (n = 528) collected over a 49-day observation period from pigs inoculated with TGEV strain Purdue (n = 12), TGEV strain Miller (n = 12), PRCV (n= 12), or with virus-free culture medium (n = 12). ELISA results were evaluated both with “suspect” results interpreted as positive and then as negative. All commercial kits showed excellent diagnostic specificity (99 to 100%) when testing samples from pigs inoculated with virus-free culture medium. However, analyses revealed differences between the kits in diagnostic sensitivity (percent TGEV- or PRCV-seropositive pigs), and all kits showed significant (P < 0.05) cross-reactivity between TGEV and PRCV serum antibodies, particularly during early stages of the infections. Serologic cross-reactivity between TGEV and PRCV seemed to be TGEV strain dependent, with a higher percentage of PRCV-false-positive results for pigs inoculated with TGEV Purdue than for TGEV Miller. Moreover, the overall proportion of false positives was higher when suspect results were interpreted as positive, regardless of the ELISA kit evaluated.IMPORTANCECurrent measures to prevent TGEV from entering a naive herd include quarantine and testing for TGEV-seronegative animals. However, TGEV serology is complicated due to the cross-reactivity with PRCV, which circulates subclinically in most swine herds worldwide. Conventional serological tests cannot distinguish between TGEV and PRCV antibodies; however, blocking ELISAs using antigen containing a large deletion in the amino terminus of the PRCV S protein permit differentiation of PRCV and TGEV antibodies. Several commercial TGEV/PRCV blocking ELISAs are available, but performance comparisons have not been reported in recent research. This study demonstrates that the serologic cross-reactivity between TGEV and PRCV affects the accuracy of commercial blocking ELISAs. Individual test results must be interpreted with caution, particularly in the event of suspect results. Therefore, commercial TGEV/PRCV blocking ELISAs should only be applied on a herd basis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.