Senecavirus A (SV-A), formerly, Seneca Valley virus (SVV), has been detected in swine with vesicular lesions and is thought to be associated with swine idiopathic vesicular disease (SIVD), a vesicular disease syndrome that lacks a defined causative agent. The clinical presentation of SIVD resembles that of other more contagious and economically devastating vesicular diseases, such as foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), swine vesicular disease (SVD), and vesicular stomatitis (VS), that typically require immediate rule out diagnostics to lift restrictions on animal quarantine, movement, and trade. This study presents the development of a sensitive, SYBR Green RT-qPCR assay suitable for detection of SV-A in diagnostic swine specimens. After testing 50 pigs with clinical signs consistent with vesicular disease, 44 (88%) were found to be positive for SV-A by RT-qPCR as compared to none from a negative cohort of 35 animals without vesicular disease, indicating that the assay is able to successfully detect the virus in an endemic population. SV-A RNA was also detectable at a low level in sera from a subset of pigs that presented with (18%) or without (6%) vesicular signs. In 2015, there has been an increase in the occurrence of SV-A in the US, and over 200 specimens submitted to our laboratory for vesicular investigation have tested positive for the virus using this method. SV-A RNA was detectable in all common types of vesicular specimens including swabs and tissue from hoof lesions, oral and snout epithelium, oral swabs, scabs, and internal organ tissues such as liver and lymph node. Genome sequencing analysis from recent virus isolates was performed to confirm target amplicon specificity and was aligned to previous isolates.

Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) assays to detect Cryptosporidium oocysts in clinical samples are increasingly being used to diagnose human cryptosporidiosis, but a parallel approach for detecting and identifying Cryptosporidium oocyst contamination in surface water sources has yet to be established for current drinking water quality monitoring practices. It has been proposed that Cryptosporidium qPCR-based assays could be used as viable alternatives to current microscopic-based detection methods to quantify levels of oocysts in drinking water sources; however, data on specificity, analytical sensitivity, and the ability to accurately quantify low levels of oocysts are limited. The purpose of this study was to provide a comprehensive evaluation of TaqMan-based qPCR assays, which were developed for either clinical or environmental investigations, for detecting Cryptosporidium oocyst contamination in water. Ten different qPCR assays, six previously published and four developed in this study were analyzed for specificity and analytical sensitivity. Specificity varied between all ten assays, and in one particular assay, which targeted the Cryptosporidium 18S rRNA gene, successfully detected all Cryptosporidium spp. tested, but also cross-amplified T. gondii, fungi, algae, and dinoflagellates. When evaluating the analytical sensitivity of these qPCR assays, results showed that eight of the assays could reliably detect ten flow-sorted oocysts in reagent water or environmental matrix. This study revealed that while a qPCR-based detection assay can be useful for detecting and differentiating different Cryptosporidium species in environmental samples, it cannot accurately measure low levels of oocysts that are typically found in drinking water sources.

Purpose -The University of Saskatchewan (UofS) has indentified five areas of campus life critical to improving the university's sustainability performance: education, research, operations, governance, and community engagement. In recognition of the need to track and assess the university's performance in all of these areas, a study was conducted to identify an effective sustainability-benchmarking tool for the UofS. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach -In order to indentify an effective benchmarking tool for assessing sustainability for the context of the UofS, two academic-focused tools and two tools with a broader scope were reviewed. The academic tools are Sustainability Assessment Questionnaire (SAQ) and the Campus Sustainability Assessment Framework (CSAF), while the general tools are the College of Sustainability Report Card (CSRC) and the Sustainability Tracking Assessment and Rating System (STARS). Each tool was rated on the basis of 27 questions developed to directly relate to indicators of sustainability in the five areas of campus life. The highest rated tool was recommended as the most effective tool for assessing and tracking sustainability for the UofS. Findings -Each benchmarking tool was developed to address specific goals. Accordingly, one tool may have strength in one area but weakness in another area. The study has shown that CSRC is the best tool for addressing governance and operations, although overall CSRC earned the lowest score in terms of its potential application to the UofS as it is not an effective tool for addressing sustainability in the context of education and research. Both academic tools -SAQ and CSAF -do not adequately address issues of sustainability in campus operations. STARS obtained the highest scores in all areas of campus life. Hence, STARS was identified as the most effective tool for assessing and tracking sustainability in all areas of campus life at the UofS. Originality/value -Extrapolating from the UofS assessment, the STARS would appear to be the most effective benchmarking tool for assessing and tracking sustainability for higher educational institutions that want to assess and track sustainability across the breadth of campus life in education, research, operations, governance, and community engagement.

No abstract