Cargando…

Negative staining in the detection of viruses in clinical specimens

Viruses have unique morphology and are therefore good candidates for negative staining. Negative staining with phosphotungstic acid (PTA) or uranyl acetate has facilitated the detection of many viruses in clinical specimens. Enhancement procedures have included the use of centrifugation and agar dif...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mahony, James B., Chernesky, Max A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Published by Elsevier Ltd. 1991
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7148852/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0739-6260(91)90062-5
_version_ 1783520684245254144
author Mahony, James B.
Chernesky, Max A.
author_facet Mahony, James B.
Chernesky, Max A.
author_sort Mahony, James B.
collection PubMed
description Viruses have unique morphology and are therefore good candidates for negative staining. Negative staining with phosphotungstic acid (PTA) or uranyl acetate has facilitated the detection of many viruses in clinical specimens. Enhancement procedures have included the use of centrifugation and agar diffusion for concentrating virus particles, the use of solid phase capture reagents to trap virus particles and the use of secondary antibodies and electron dense markers to help visualize them. Techniques currently in use and employing negative staining include direct EM, immune electron microscopy (IEM), solid phase immune electron microscopy (SPIEM), colloidal gold-labeled protein A (PAG), solid phase IEM employing a second decorator antibody (SPIEMDAT), and solid phase IEM using colloided gold-labeled secondary antibodies (SPEIMDAGT). IEM methods assist with the detection of small viruses or viruses present in low numbers while PAG offers increased sensitivity over direct EM and IEM. In our experience the serum-in-agar (SIA) method is the most sensitive of the PAG IEM techniques for detection of rotavirus particles in clinical specimens. SPIEMDAT enhances the detection of small viruses which are often missed by other techniques due to background staining in specimens. SPEIMDAGT employing colloidal gold-labeled secondary antibody has increased sensitivity and offers the advantage of detecting viral antigen when whole virus particles are not visible. IEM techniques have recently been used for typing viruses using either monospecific antisera or monoclonal antibodies and colloidal gold-labeled secondary antibody.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7148852
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 1991
publisher Published by Elsevier Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71488522020-04-13 Negative staining in the detection of viruses in clinical specimens Mahony, James B. Chernesky, Max A. Micron and Microscopica Acta Article Viruses have unique morphology and are therefore good candidates for negative staining. Negative staining with phosphotungstic acid (PTA) or uranyl acetate has facilitated the detection of many viruses in clinical specimens. Enhancement procedures have included the use of centrifugation and agar diffusion for concentrating virus particles, the use of solid phase capture reagents to trap virus particles and the use of secondary antibodies and electron dense markers to help visualize them. Techniques currently in use and employing negative staining include direct EM, immune electron microscopy (IEM), solid phase immune electron microscopy (SPIEM), colloidal gold-labeled protein A (PAG), solid phase IEM employing a second decorator antibody (SPIEMDAT), and solid phase IEM using colloided gold-labeled secondary antibodies (SPEIMDAGT). IEM methods assist with the detection of small viruses or viruses present in low numbers while PAG offers increased sensitivity over direct EM and IEM. In our experience the serum-in-agar (SIA) method is the most sensitive of the PAG IEM techniques for detection of rotavirus particles in clinical specimens. SPIEMDAT enhances the detection of small viruses which are often missed by other techniques due to background staining in specimens. SPEIMDAGT employing colloidal gold-labeled secondary antibody has increased sensitivity and offers the advantage of detecting viral antigen when whole virus particles are not visible. IEM techniques have recently been used for typing viruses using either monospecific antisera or monoclonal antibodies and colloidal gold-labeled secondary antibody. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 1991 2002-10-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7148852/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0739-6260(91)90062-5 Text en Copyright © 1991 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
spellingShingle Article
Mahony, James B.
Chernesky, Max A.
Negative staining in the detection of viruses in clinical specimens
title Negative staining in the detection of viruses in clinical specimens
title_full Negative staining in the detection of viruses in clinical specimens
title_fullStr Negative staining in the detection of viruses in clinical specimens
title_full_unstemmed Negative staining in the detection of viruses in clinical specimens
title_short Negative staining in the detection of viruses in clinical specimens
title_sort negative staining in the detection of viruses in clinical specimens
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7148852/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0739-6260(91)90062-5
work_keys_str_mv AT mahonyjamesb negativestaininginthedetectionofvirusesinclinicalspecimens
AT cherneskymaxa negativestaininginthedetectionofvirusesinclinicalspecimens