Analyze Diet

Detection of antibodies to equine arteritis virus by a monoclonal antibody-based blocking ELISA.

Abstract: A potent ELISA antigen was prepared from equine arteritis virus (EAV) by differential centrifugation of EAV-infected cell culture fluid, followed by solubilization of the preparation by Triton X-100 treatment. Using this antigen and a mouse monoclonal antibody against the G(L) protein of EAV, a reliable blocking ELISA (bELISA) was developed for the detection of EAV antibodies in equine sera. The bELISA was evaluated using a total of 837 test serum samples. The relative sensitivity (n = 320) of the bELISA compared to the serum neutralization (SN) test was 99.4%. The bELISA appears to be a highly specific test, the specificity of which did not appear to be adversely affected by previous exposure of horses to non-EAV-containing biologicals. Of 119 serum samples, 21 from horses without any history of exposure to EAV and 98 from racetrack Thoroughbreds, 118 were negative in the SN test and bELISA. One sample was SN-negative but suspicious with the bELISA. Based on testing 465 SN-negative field samples and 52 SN-negative samples from experimental horses, and excluding any sera giving a suspicious reaction, the relative specificity of the bELISA was 97.7%. Samples should be examined undiluted and diluted 1/10 in the bELISA because the testing of sera of high neutralizing antibody titer may be affected by a prozone-like phenomenon. The bELISA is a more rapid and cost-efficient test than the SN test for the detection of EAV antibodies in equine sera.
Publication Date: 2000-02-19 PubMed ID: 10680655PubMed Central: PMC1189579
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research article is about the development of an Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) to detect antibodies against the equine arteritis virus in horses, that provides accurate results in a shorter timeframe and at a lower cost than existing methods.

Study Methodology

  • The research began by preparing a potent ELISA antigen from the equine arteritis virus (EAV), a disease affecting horses. This was done by carrying out a process known as differential centrifugation of EAV-infected cell culture fluid. The resulting material was then treated with a compound called Triton X-100 for solubilization.
  • The team used this potent ELISA antigen and a mouse-generated monoclonal antibody that targets G(L), a protein of EAV, to develop a blocking ELISA (bELISA) – a laboratory method used for the detection of EAV antibodies in horse blood samples.

Testing and Results

  • The bELISA was evaluated using a total of 837 serum samples. The sensitivity (ability to correctly identify those with the disease) of the bELISA as compared to the traditional serum neutralization (SN) test was 99.4%, indicating a high level of reliability.
  • The study also found that bELISA is a highly specific (ability to correctly identify those without the disease) test, and its accuracy was not negatively affected by previous exposures of the horses to non-EAV-containing substances.
  • Out of 119 certain serum samples, 21 came from horses with no past exposure to EAV, and 98 originated from thoroughbred racehorses. All but one of these samples tested negative for EAV antibodies with both the SN test and bELISA. One sample was SN-negative but showed a suspicious reaction in the bELISA.
  • When considering a larger sample set of 517 SN-negative samples from both the field and experimental horses, excluding any suspicious results, the relative specificity of the bELISA was found to be 97.7%.

Conclusion

  • The study suggests that samples should be examined both in their undiluted form and in a 1/10 dilution while employing bELISA. This is crucial as the testing of sera with high neutralizing antibody titers may be influenced by a prozone-like phenomenon (a false negative result).
  • Lastly, the study concludes that bELISA represents a faster and more cost-efficient test than the SN test for the detection of EAV antibodies in equine serum samples. This could potentially lead to more widespread testing and early detection of the disease, improving the overall health and wellbeing of horses.

Cite This Article

APA
Cho HJ, Entz SC, Deregt D, Jordan LT, Timoney PJ, McCollum WH. (2000). Detection of antibodies to equine arteritis virus by a monoclonal antibody-based blocking ELISA. Can J Vet Res, 64(1), 38-43.

Publication

ISSN: 0830-9000
NlmUniqueID: 8607793
Country: Canada
Language: English
Volume: 64
Issue: 1
Pages: 38-43

Researcher Affiliations

Cho, H J
  • Animal Diseases Research Institute, Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Lethbridge, Alberta. choj@em.agr.ca
Entz, S C
    Deregt, D
      Jordan, L T
        Timoney, P J
          McCollum, W H

            MeSH Terms

            • Animals
            • Antibodies, Monoclonal
            • Antibodies, Viral / analysis
            • Arterivirus Infections / diagnosis
            • Arterivirus Infections / immunology
            • Arterivirus Infections / veterinary
            • Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay / methods
            • Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay / veterinary
            • Equartevirus / immunology
            • Horse Diseases / diagnosis
            • Horse Diseases / immunology
            • Horse Diseases / virology
            • Horses
            • Mice
            • Sensitivity and Specificity

            References

            This article includes 15 references
            1. Can J Microbiol. 1972 Apr;18(4):449-56
              pubmed: 4112241
            2. Arch Virol. 1997;142(3):629-33
              pubmed: 9349308
            3. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol. 1998 Nov;5(6):773-9
              pubmed: 9801333
            4. J Gen Virol. 1993 Nov;74 ( Pt 11):2525-9
              pubmed: 7504076
            5. Res Vet Sci. 1986 Sep;41(2):279-80
              pubmed: 3022363
            6. J Gen Virol. 1995 Aug;76 ( Pt 8):1989-98
              pubmed: 7636479
            7. Vet Microbiol. 1989 Jun;20(2):181-9
              pubmed: 2773278
            8. J Virol Methods. 1995 Jul;54(1):1-13
              pubmed: 7559853
            9. J Virol Methods. 1998 Dec;76(1-2):127-37
              pubmed: 9923747
            10. Can J Vet Res. 1991 Jan;55(1):56-9
              pubmed: 1653099
            11. J Gen Virol. 1994 Sep;75 ( Pt 9):2439-44
              pubmed: 8077945
            12. J Virol. 1992 Nov;66(11):6294-303
              pubmed: 1328669
            13. Cornell Vet. 1957 Jan;47(1):3-41
              pubmed: 13397177
            14. Can J Vet Res. 1996 Apr;60(2):89-93
              pubmed: 8785725
            15. Can Vet J. 1987 Nov;28(11):693-5
              pubmed: 17422919