Validation of a foot-and-mouth disease antibody screening solid-phase competition ELISA (SPCE)

Paiba, GA; Anderson, J.; Dj, Paton; Soldan, AW; Alexandersen, Søren; Corteyn, Mandy; Wilsden, Ginette; Hamblin, Pip; Mackay, D. K. J.; Donaldson, A.I.

doi:10.1016/j.jviromet.2003.09.016

Cited by 62 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(8,9) Recently, competitive ELISAs using monoclonal or polyclonal antibodies to replace theses LPB-ELISA have been developed and used effectively. (10)(11)(12) The essential components of these ELISAs are mono-or polyclonal antibodies specific to the FMD virus particle (structural protein) or non-structural proteins (3ABC, 2C, or 3D). (13,14) Thus, in this study, our goal was to generate polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies against VP1 to detect serotypes A and O of FMDVs for diagnostic use.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Specific for Foot and Mouth Disease Virus Type A and Type O VP1

Cho

Sung

et al. 2012

Hybridoma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The foot and mouth disease virus (FMDV) is an RNA virus composed of single stranded positive sense RNA. FMDV has been known to infect cloven-hoofed animals, including pigs, cattle, and sheep. FMDV is rapidly spreading outward to neighboring regions, often leading to a high mortality rate. Thus, early diagnosis of FMDV is critical to suppress propagation of FMDV and minimize economic losses. In this study, we report the generation and characterization of polyclonal and six monoclonal antibodies against VP1 through immunoblotting and immunofluorescence microscopy analyses. These VP1 antibodies will be useful as tools to detect serotypes A and O of FMDVs for diagnostic usage.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Specific for Foot and Mouth Disease Virus Type A and Type O VP1

Cho

Sung

et al. 2012

Hybridoma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mackay et al (2001) and Niedbalski (2004), Şevik and Öztürk 2013) also obtained similar results, and they reported that specificity of SPCE was considerably higher than that of LPBE. In another study, Paiba et al, (2004) reported that specificity of SPCE for serotype O at a cut-off point of 60 PI was 99.44% for cattle sera, 99.50% for sheep sera, and 100% for pig sera. The sensitivity of SPCE determined by testing of positive sera was slightly higher than that of LPBE.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…The SPCE was carried out according to the method recommended for the purposes of the FAO, which is a modified version of original method described by Mackay et al, OIE, 2000 with crude tissue culture antigen instead of the purified antigen and J HELLENIC VET MED SOC 2016, 67(1) ΠΕΚΕ 2016, 67 (1) positive cut-off percentage of inhibition (PI) value 60%. Sera giving PI values equal to or greater than 60% were considered positive (Paiba, 2004).…”

Section: Solid-phase Competition Elisamentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of two ELISA methods for detection of antibodies against Footand- Mouth Disease virus of cattle breeds in Turkey

İnce

Kalkan

Çakır

2018

J Hellenic Vet Med Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. The study was conducted using two ELISA methods -the liquid phase blocking ELISA (LPBE) and solid phase competition ELISA (SPCE) for the detection of foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV) serotype A-and O-specific antibodies of different cattle breeds in Turkey. These methods were compared in 426 cattle previously vaccinated with oil-adjuvanted bivalent vaccine as well as in sera from 40 cattle with no history of foot-and-mouth disease infection or vaccination. The results were found that SPCE had a better specificity (serotype A; 100% and serotype O; 97.50%) than LPBE (serotype A 95.00% and serotype O 92.50%). Sensitivity of SPCE had also better values (serotype A; 99.30% and serotype O; 98.59%) than LPBE (serotype A; 97.89% and serotype O; 96.48%). The results of the present study showed that the SPCE method is more reliable than LPBE.

show abstract

“…Mackay et al (13) and Niedbalski (24) also obtained similar results, and they reported that specificity of SPCE was considerably higher than that of LPBE. In another study, Paiba et al (15) reported that specificity of SPCE for serotype O at a cut-off point of 60 PI was 99.44% for cattle sera, 99.50% for sheep sera, and 100% for pig sera.…”

Section: Repeatability Of the Assaysmentioning

confidence: 97%

Comparative evaluation of liquid-phase blocking ELISA and solid-phase competition ELISA methods for the detection of antibodies to the structural proteins of foot-and-mouth disease types O and A viruses

Şevik¹,

Öztürk²

2013

Turk J Vet Anim Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Validation of a foot-and-mouth disease antibody screening solid-phase competition ELISA (SPCE)

Cited by 62 publications

References 20 publications

Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Specific for Foot and Mouth Disease Virus Type A and Type O VP1

Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Specific for Foot and Mouth Disease Virus Type A and Type O VP1

Comparison of two ELISA methods for detection of antibodies against Footand- Mouth Disease virus of cattle breeds in Turkey

Comparative evaluation of liquid-phase blocking ELISA and solid-phase competition ELISA methods for the detection of antibodies to the structural proteins of foot-and-mouth disease types O and A viruses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About