Cargando…

The difference of detection rate of avian influenza virus in the wild bird surveillance using various methods

Korea is located within the East Asian-Australian flyway of wild migratory birds during the fall and winter seasons. Consequently, the likelihood of introduction of numerous subtypes and pathotypes of the Avian influenza (AI) virus to Korea has been thought to be very high. In the current study, we...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kim, Gang-San, Kim, Tae-Sik, Son, Joo-Sung, Lai, Van Dam, Park, Jung-Eun, Wang, Seung-Jun, Jheong, Weon-Hwa, Mo, In-Pil
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Society of Veterinary Science 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6769331/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31565899
http://dx.doi.org/10.4142/jvs.2019.20.e56
_version_ 1783455219341852672
author Kim, Gang-San
Kim, Tae-Sik
Son, Joo-Sung
Lai, Van Dam
Park, Jung-Eun
Wang, Seung-Jun
Jheong, Weon-Hwa
Mo, In-Pil
author_facet Kim, Gang-San
Kim, Tae-Sik
Son, Joo-Sung
Lai, Van Dam
Park, Jung-Eun
Wang, Seung-Jun
Jheong, Weon-Hwa
Mo, In-Pil
author_sort Kim, Gang-San
collection PubMed
description Korea is located within the East Asian-Australian flyway of wild migratory birds during the fall and winter seasons. Consequently, the likelihood of introduction of numerous subtypes and pathotypes of the Avian influenza (AI) virus to Korea has been thought to be very high. In the current study, we surveyed wild bird feces for the presence of AI virus that had been introduced to Korea between September 2017 and February 2018. To identify and characterize the AI virus, we employed commonly used methods, namely, virus isolation (VI) via egg inoculation, real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR), conventional RT-PCR (cRT-PCR) and a newly developed next generation sequencing (NGS) approach. In this study, 124 out of 11,145 fresh samples of wild migratory birds tested were rRT-PCR positive; only 52.0% of VI positive samples were determined as positive by rRT-PCR from fecal supernatant. Fifty AI virus specimens were isolated from fresh fecal samples and typed. The cRT-PCR subtyping results mostly coincided with the NGS results, although NGS detected the presence of 11 HA genes and four NA genes that were not detected by cRT-PCR. NGS analysis confirmed that 12% of the identified viruses were mixed-subtypes which were not detected by cRT-PCR. Prevention of the occurrence of AI virus requires a workflow for rapid and accurate virus detection and verification. However, conventional methods of detection have some limitations. Therefore, different methods should be combined for optimal surveillance, and further studies are needed in aspect of the introduction and application of new methods such as NGS.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6769331
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher The Korean Society of Veterinary Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67693312019-10-09 The difference of detection rate of avian influenza virus in the wild bird surveillance using various methods Kim, Gang-San Kim, Tae-Sik Son, Joo-Sung Lai, Van Dam Park, Jung-Eun Wang, Seung-Jun Jheong, Weon-Hwa Mo, In-Pil J Vet Sci Original Article Korea is located within the East Asian-Australian flyway of wild migratory birds during the fall and winter seasons. Consequently, the likelihood of introduction of numerous subtypes and pathotypes of the Avian influenza (AI) virus to Korea has been thought to be very high. In the current study, we surveyed wild bird feces for the presence of AI virus that had been introduced to Korea between September 2017 and February 2018. To identify and characterize the AI virus, we employed commonly used methods, namely, virus isolation (VI) via egg inoculation, real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR), conventional RT-PCR (cRT-PCR) and a newly developed next generation sequencing (NGS) approach. In this study, 124 out of 11,145 fresh samples of wild migratory birds tested were rRT-PCR positive; only 52.0% of VI positive samples were determined as positive by rRT-PCR from fecal supernatant. Fifty AI virus specimens were isolated from fresh fecal samples and typed. The cRT-PCR subtyping results mostly coincided with the NGS results, although NGS detected the presence of 11 HA genes and four NA genes that were not detected by cRT-PCR. NGS analysis confirmed that 12% of the identified viruses were mixed-subtypes which were not detected by cRT-PCR. Prevention of the occurrence of AI virus requires a workflow for rapid and accurate virus detection and verification. However, conventional methods of detection have some limitations. Therefore, different methods should be combined for optimal surveillance, and further studies are needed in aspect of the introduction and application of new methods such as NGS. The Korean Society of Veterinary Science 2019-09 2019-09-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6769331/ /pubmed/31565899 http://dx.doi.org/10.4142/jvs.2019.20.e56 Text en © 2019 The Korean Society of Veterinary Science https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Kim, Gang-San
Kim, Tae-Sik
Son, Joo-Sung
Lai, Van Dam
Park, Jung-Eun
Wang, Seung-Jun
Jheong, Weon-Hwa
Mo, In-Pil
The difference of detection rate of avian influenza virus in the wild bird surveillance using various methods
title The difference of detection rate of avian influenza virus in the wild bird surveillance using various methods
title_full The difference of detection rate of avian influenza virus in the wild bird surveillance using various methods
title_fullStr The difference of detection rate of avian influenza virus in the wild bird surveillance using various methods
title_full_unstemmed The difference of detection rate of avian influenza virus in the wild bird surveillance using various methods
title_short The difference of detection rate of avian influenza virus in the wild bird surveillance using various methods
title_sort difference of detection rate of avian influenza virus in the wild bird surveillance using various methods
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6769331/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31565899
http://dx.doi.org/10.4142/jvs.2019.20.e56
work_keys_str_mv AT kimgangsan thedifferenceofdetectionrateofavianinfluenzavirusinthewildbirdsurveillanceusingvariousmethods
AT kimtaesik thedifferenceofdetectionrateofavianinfluenzavirusinthewildbirdsurveillanceusingvariousmethods
AT sonjoosung thedifferenceofdetectionrateofavianinfluenzavirusinthewildbirdsurveillanceusingvariousmethods
AT laivandam thedifferenceofdetectionrateofavianinfluenzavirusinthewildbirdsurveillanceusingvariousmethods
AT parkjungeun thedifferenceofdetectionrateofavianinfluenzavirusinthewildbirdsurveillanceusingvariousmethods
AT wangseungjun thedifferenceofdetectionrateofavianinfluenzavirusinthewildbirdsurveillanceusingvariousmethods
AT jheongweonhwa thedifferenceofdetectionrateofavianinfluenzavirusinthewildbirdsurveillanceusingvariousmethods
AT moinpil thedifferenceofdetectionrateofavianinfluenzavirusinthewildbirdsurveillanceusingvariousmethods
AT kimgangsan differenceofdetectionrateofavianinfluenzavirusinthewildbirdsurveillanceusingvariousmethods
AT kimtaesik differenceofdetectionrateofavianinfluenzavirusinthewildbirdsurveillanceusingvariousmethods
AT sonjoosung differenceofdetectionrateofavianinfluenzavirusinthewildbirdsurveillanceusingvariousmethods
AT laivandam differenceofdetectionrateofavianinfluenzavirusinthewildbirdsurveillanceusingvariousmethods
AT parkjungeun differenceofdetectionrateofavianinfluenzavirusinthewildbirdsurveillanceusingvariousmethods
AT wangseungjun differenceofdetectionrateofavianinfluenzavirusinthewildbirdsurveillanceusingvariousmethods
AT jheongweonhwa differenceofdetectionrateofavianinfluenzavirusinthewildbirdsurveillanceusingvariousmethods
AT moinpil differenceofdetectionrateofavianinfluenzavirusinthewildbirdsurveillanceusingvariousmethods