Diagnostic Approaches for Detection of Bovine Viral Diarrhea Virus Persistent Infection

Abstract

Bovine viral diarrhea is one of the most important diseases of cattle which is causing continuous economic losses to the cattle industry primarily due to decreased reproductive performance. Without doubt, direct contact between BVDV persistently infected, and susceptible animals is the most important transmission route of virus. All control programs which are in use in many countries of the world, mainly depend upon the detection of PI animals, eliminating them and preventing their return into the herds. Various diagnostic tests using ear notch biopsies and serum samples are in use with certain advantages and disadvantages. In detecting the BVDV persistent infection, a complete agreement (P value = 1) was observed between Real time RT-PCR, AC-ELISA, VI and IHC. All four assays were found specific but real time RT-PCR was found to be more sensitive. Both, VI and IHC were found labour intensive, as diagnosis may take more than one week to be made. Further peroxidase based IHC interpretation was found to be difficult somewhat due to subjective reasoning. It is generally recognized, that real time RT-PCR is more sensitive for BVDV detection than the other methods employed in the study period. However, use of real time RT-PCR for screening of individual animal cases is cost prohibited. AC-ELISA while relatively less sensitive was shown to has sufficient sensitivity for cost effective identification of PI. The results appear to warrant the use of AC-ELISA on ear notch biopsies for routine diagnosis of PI animals followed by real time RT-PCR on suspicious samples.All copyrights reserved to Nexus® academic publishers

Comparative Analysis of the Prevalence of Bovine Viral Diarrhea Virus in Cattle Populations Based on Detection Methods: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…It is important to note that cattle with PI do not seroconvert in response to the virus, thus remaining undetectable in surveys that depend on antibody-based detection. However, the presence of these PI animals is detectable when using antigen- or nucleic acid-based detection methods [ 79 , 80 , 81 ]. As a result, antibody-based detection might not offer a comprehensive view of the BVDV epidemiological landscape within cattle populations.…”

“…Detecting PI cattle, a crucial element in understanding BVDV prevalence, can be achieved through antigen or nucleic acid detection methods. However, confirming PI status and differentiating from acute infection often necessitates retesting in two to four weeks [ 79 , 80 , 81 ], introducing an additional layer of complexity to the detection process. Both TI and PI animals could become initially positive for the virus via methods such as virus isolation, antigen detection, or nucleic acid detection.…”

“…Both TI and PI animals could become initially positive for the virus via methods such as virus isolation, antigen detection, or nucleic acid detection. However, upon repeating the same test, TI animals, having cleared the virus, will test negative, while PI animals remain positive [ 77 , 81 ]. Since TI animals produce antibodies during post-infection while PI cattle do not, serological tests that detect antibodies could also be used as a differentiating tool.…”

Determination of Sero-Prevalence and Associated Risk Factors of Bovine Viral Diarrhea Virus (Bvdv) in Bovine Population From Southern Punjab, Pakistan

“…The specific reaction is then detected by means of enzyme conjugated species-specific anti-antibodies. By reading the optical density (OD) of colour which developed after the addition of the substrate solution, a positive reaction was interpreted (Ahmad et al 2013). Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays designed to identify any immune reactive molecules and are inexpensive and fast investigative approaches.…”