• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Infectivity of avian influenza virus-positive field samples for mallards: what do our diagnostic results mean?

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
J Wildl Dis. 2013 Jan;49(1):180-5. doi: 10.7589/2011-11-322.
Infectivity of avian influenza virus-positive field samples for mallards: what do our diagnostic results mean?
Brown JD, Poulson R, Carter DL, Lebarbenchon C, Stallknecht DE.
Source

Department of Population Health, College of Veterinary Medicine, The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602, USA.
Abstract

Most surveillance programs for avian influenza (AI) virus in wild birds utilize molecular tests such as real-time reverse transcription-PCR (RRT-PCR) or virus isolation (VI) in embryonating chicken eggs. To provide insight into the relationship between positive diagnostic test results and infectivity for an avian host, we challenged Mallards (Anas platyrhynchos) with Mallard-derived cloacal swab field samples found positive by VI or RRT-PCR. Six of 11 samples that were both RRT-PCR positive and VI positive infected Mallards. Sample infectivity for Mallards appeared to be dependent on concentration of infectious virus in the sample; five of the six samples that replicated in Mallards had a measurable virus titer, whereas four of the five samples that did not infect Mallards had titers below the limit of detection (10(0.9) median embryo infectious dose/0.2 mL). None of seven samples that were RRT-PCR positive and VI negative infected Mallards. These results indicate that embryonating chicken eggs are a sensitive diagnostic tool for detecting Mallards excreting infectious AI virus at a high enough concentration to infect another Mallard; however, not all cloacal swab field samples that are positive by VI or RRT-PCR are infective to another Mallard. Additionally, our results indicate that Mallards are susceptible to Mallard-origin AI viruses that have not been propagated in embryonating chicken eggs and that some of these virus strains can infect birds at titers that are lower than those typically used in experimental challenge studies. These data highlight a need to examine the effects of using egg-propagated AI viruses in experimental trials.

PMID:
23307386
[PubMed - in process]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23307386
 
Back
Top Bottom