↓ Skip to main content

Development of an indirect ELISA, blocking ELISA, fluorescent microsphere immunoassay and fluorescent focus neutralization assay for serologic evaluation of exposure to North American strains of…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
70 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Development of an indirect ELISA, blocking ELISA, fluorescent microsphere immunoassay and fluorescent focus neutralization assay for serologic evaluation of exposure to North American strains of Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Virus
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12917-015-0500-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Faten Okda, Xiaodong Liu, Aaron Singrey, Travis Clement, Julie Nelson, Jane Christopher-Hennings, Eric A. Nelson, Steven Lawson

Abstract

Recent, severe outbreaks of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV) in Asia and North America highlight the need for well-validated diagnostic tests for the identification of PEDV infected animals and evaluation of their immune status to this virus. PEDV was first detected in the U.S. in May 2013 and spread rapidly across the country. Some serological assays for PEDV have been previously described, but few were readily available in the U.S. Several U.S. laboratories quickly developed indirect fluorescent antibody (IFA) assays for the detection of antibodies to PEDV in swine serum, indicating prior exposure. However, the IFA has several disadvantages, including low throughput and relatively subjective interpretation. Different serologic test formats have advantages and disadvantages, depending on the questions being asked, so a full repertoire of tests is useful. Therefore, the objective of this study was to develop and validate multiple improved serological assays for PEDV, including an indirect ELISA (iELISA); a highly specific monoclonal antibody-based blocking ELISA (bELISA); fluorescent microsphere immunoassays (FMIA) that can be multiplexed to monitor exposure to multiple antigens and pathogens simultaneously; and a fluorescent focus neutralization assay (FFN) to measure functional virus neutralizing antibodies. A recombinant North American nucleoprotein (NP) based iELISA was developed and validated along with a bELISA using newly developed PEDV-NP specific biotinylated monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and an FMIA using magnetic beads coupled with expressed NA PEDV-NP. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed using swine serum samples (iELISA n = 1486, bELISA n = 1186, FMIA n = 1420). The ROC analysis for the FMIA showed estimated sensitivity and specificity of 98.2 and 99.2 %, respectively. The iELISA and bELISA showed a sensitivity and specificity of 97.9 and 97.6 %; and 98.2 and 98.9 %, respectively. Inter-rater (kappa) agreement was calculated to be 0.941 between iELISA and IFA, 0.945 between bELISA and IFA and 0.932 between FMIA and IFA. Similar comparative kappa values were observed between the iELISA, bELISA and FMIA, which demonstrated a significant level of testing agreement among the three assays. No cross-reactivity with the closely related coronaviruses, transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV) or porcine respiratory coronavirus (PRCV) was noted with these assays. All three assays detected seroconversion of naïve animals within 6-9 days post exposure. The FFN assay allows relative quantitation of functional neutralizing antibodies in serum, milk or colostrum samples. Well-validated iELISA, bELISA and FMIA assays for the detection of PEDV antibodies were developed and showed good correlation with IFA and each other. Each assay format has advantages that dictate how they will be used in the field. Newly developed mAbs to the PEDV-NP were used in the bELISA and for expediting FFN testing in the detection and quantitation of neutralizing antibodies. In addition, these PEDV mAbs are useful for immunohistochemistry, fluorescent antibody staining and other antigen-based tests. Measurement of neutralizing antibody responses using the FFN assay may provide a valuable tool for assessment of vaccine candidates or protective immunity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 90 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 16%
Researcher 13 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 24 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 13%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 12 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 7%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 25 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 August 2015.
All research outputs
#18,420,033
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#1,922
of 3,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,940
of 264,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#45
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,050 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,249 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.