首页> 外文学位 >Evaluation of porcine respiratory and reproductive syndrome virus (PRRSV) ante-mortem diagnostic techniques.
【24h】

Evaluation of porcine respiratory and reproductive syndrome virus (PRRSV) ante-mortem diagnostic techniques.

机译:评估猪呼吸系统和生殖综合症病毒(PRRSV)事前诊断技术。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Objective. The specific objective of this thesis was to address the U.S. pork industry's need for evaluation of alternative ante-mortem diagnostic samples for PRRSV. To accomplish this objective, three trials were untaken with the following goals: (1) Develop a sampling protocol for the blood swab method. (2) Analyze the diagnostic accuracies of the blood swab, the capillary tube and the jugular sampling methods on two standard PRRS diagnostic tests: quantitative real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) and ELISA in known positive and negative animals. (3) Analyze the diagnostic accuracy of the blood swab method for ELISA testing in commercial finishing swine.; Trial one. Trial 1 showed that under laboratory conditions, the Fisherbrand swabs absorbed a significantly higher volume of blood than the Puritan swabs. Trial 2 showed that when the 20g x 1/2&inches; needle was used, significantly more blood was absorbed than when the 25g x 5/8&inches; needle was used regardless of the swab type. Trial 3 confirmed that when the 20g x 1/2&inches; needle was used, the swab absorbed significantly more blood. Trial two. For qRT-PCR testing, the sensitivity and specificity for all sampling methods ranged from 93%--100% for weeks 1--3 PI. Results of ELISA testing depended on cut-off selection. Optimization of ELISA S/P cut-off points for swab sample data was substantially lower (S/P ratio of 0.08 +/- 0.05) than the industry standard (S/P ratio of 0.4). Trial three. The sensitivity and specificity of the swab sampling method was 22.3% (95% probability intervals = 16.0%, 29.2%) and 94.3% (80.1%, 99.8%) respectively when an S/P ratio cut-off of 0.4 was used. The sensitivity and specificity were 94% (89.8%, 97.2%) and 93.5% (77.8%, 99.8%) respectively when an S/P ratio cut-off of 0.08 was used.; Implications. (1) Fisherbrand swabs absorb a significantly greater blood volume (167mul) then Puritan swabs (142mul) under ideal sampling conditions. (2) Under field conditions, the Fisherbrand swabs absorbed numerically less blood (118mul) then under laboratory conditions (167mul). (3) A Fisherbrand swab and a 20g x 1/2&feet; needle combination would be the best diagnostic sample for sows and finisher pigs when collection time is less than 15 seconds. (4) The capillary tube method suffers from neither inadequate volume nor differences in sample type collected (as compared to the blood swab method). This study indicated that the capillary sampling method can be used with ELISA and real-time qRT-PCR testing with diagnostic accuracy equal to the jugular sampling method. The total expense for the capillary sampling method was {dollar}1.44/sample ({dollar}0.94/tube in product and {dollar}0.50/sample in labor cost (calculated for 3 minutes at {dollar}10/hr)). In comparison, the total cost of the jugular sample was {dollar}0.91/sample. (5) Early diagnosis (weeks 1--3 PI) of PRRSV infected nursery pigs using real-time qRT-PCR under study conditions can be equivalently accomplished using the capillary, swab, or jugular sampling methods. (6) No change in cut-off values for qRT-PCR data dichotomization is necessary for data obtained via any of the sampling methods. (7) The diagnostic accuracy of PRRSV ELISA was poor for the swab sampling method when an S/P ration cut-off of 0.4 was utilized (sensitivity ranged from 20%--55.6% over weeks 2--7 PI). (8) When optimal cut-off values are employed, as determined by AUC analysis, all sampling methods are capable of achieving very high diagnostic accuracy on PRRSV ELISA testing. These cut-off values may not be clinically useful. (9) Under commercial (field) conditions, the sensitivity of the swab sampling method was low (22.3%) for ELISA results dichotomized at an S/P ratio of 0.4. (10) The sensitivity of the swab method improved when a lower S/P cut-off was used (94%) indicating this method may have application in routine ELISA diagnostic monitoring programs. (11) In comparison to the jugular s
机译:目的。本文的特定目标是解决美国猪肉行业对PRRSV的其他事前诊断样本进行评估的需求。为了实现这一目标,未进行三项试验,其目标如下:(1)制定一种用于拭子方法的采样方案。 (2)在已知的阳性和阴性动物中,通过两种标准PRRS诊断测试分析血拭子,毛细管和颈静脉采样方法的诊断准确性:定量实时逆转录酶聚合酶链反应(qRT-PCR)和ELISA。 (3)分析了用于商业化肥育猪的ELISA法的拭子法的诊断准确性。试用一。试验1显示,在实验室条件下,Fisherbrand拭子吸收的血液量比清教徒拭子大得多。试验2表明,当20g×1/2英寸时;使用针头时,吸收的血液比25克x 5/8英寸时要多得多。无论棉签类型如何,均使用针头。试验3证实了20克x 1/2英寸;使用针头后,拭子吸收了更多的血液。试用二。对于qRT-PCR测试,所有采样方法的敏感性和特异性范围为PI 1-3周的93%-100%。 ELISA测试的结果取决于临界选择。拭子样品数据的ELISA S / P临界点优化比行业标准(S / P比率0.4)低得多(S / P比率为0.08 +/- 0.05)。试用三。当使用S / P截止值为0.4时,拭子取样方法的灵敏度和特异性分别为22.3%(95%概率区间= 16.0%,29.2%)和94.3%(80.1%,99.8%)。当使用0.08的S / P截止值时,敏感性和特异性分别为94%(89.8%,97.2%)和93.5%(77.8%,99.8%)。含义。 (1)在理想的采样条件下,Fisherbrand拭子吸收的血量(167mul)远大于清教徒拭子(142mul)。 (2)在田间条件下,Fisherbrand拭子吸收的血液数量(118 mul)要比实验室条件下(167 mul)少得多。 (3)Fisherbrand拭子和20g x 1/2&feet;当采集时间少于15秒时,针头组合将是母猪和育肥猪的最佳诊断样品。 (4)毛细管法既没有体积不足也没有样品类型差异的缺点(与血液拭子法相比)。这项研究表明,毛细管采样方法可与ELISA和实时qRT-PCR测试结合使用,其诊断准确性与颈静脉采样法相同。毛细管采样方法的总费用为{$ 1.44 /样品(产品中为$ 0.94 /管,人工成本为$ 0.50 /样品)(以$ 10 / hr计算3分钟)。相比之下,颈静脉样本的总成本为0.91美元/样本。 (5)在研究条件下使用实时qRT-PCR对PRRSV感染的保育猪进行早期诊断(第1--3周)可以等效地使用毛细管,拭子或颈静脉取样方法完成。 (6)对于通过任何采样方法获得的数据,qRT-PCR数据二分法的截止值均无变化。 (7)当使用0.4的S / P比率临界值时,拭子取样方法的PRRSV ELISA的诊断准确性较差(在PI的2--7周内灵敏度范围为20%-55.6%)。 (8)当采用通过AUC分析确定的最佳临界值时,所有采样方法均能够在PRRSV ELISA检测中实现非常高的诊断准确性。这些临界值可能在临床上无用。 (9)在商业(田间)条件下,拭子采样方法的灵敏度低(22.3%),对于以0.4的S / P比二等分的ELISA结果。 (10)当使用较低的S / P临界值(94%)时,拭子方法的灵敏度提高了,表明该方法可能已应用于常规ELISA诊断监测程序中。 (11)与颈静脉相比

著录项

  • 作者

    Patterson, Abby Rae.;

  • 作者单位

    Iowa State University.;

  • 授予单位 Iowa State University.;
  • 学科 Agriculture Animal Pathology.; Biology Virology.; Biology Veterinary Science.
  • 学位 M.S.
  • 年度 2007
  • 页码 69 p.
  • 总页数 69
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 动物医学(兽医学);动物学;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号