ABSTRACT
In this study, a commercial Salmonella covalent mix-enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for serological detection of Salmonella infection in swine was evaluated by comparing it with the conventional fecal culture method and inter-laboratory proficiency testing, using a panel of sera tested in 5 laboratories from Europe and North America. Comparison with culture results showed that 88.5% of 26 culture-positive animals were ELISA positive, as were 55% of 60 animals from 2 culture-positive pig herds. Of 90 animals from 2 high health farms with no clinical symptoms of salmonellosis, 98.9% tested negative. The interlaboratory comparison study found a kappa value of 0.9 between our laboratory (using an automated system) and the manufacturer laboratory (using the manual method). Comparison of ELISA results from all 5 participating laboratories showed very good to excellent agreement, between 85% and 97.5%. We found this assay to be useful for the screening of antibodies against Salmonella present in swine serum. It agrees well with bacterial cultures, is reproducible, sensitive, specific, repeatable, and suitable for automation.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Bacterial/blood , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay/veterinary , Salmonella Infections, Animal/diagnosis , Salmonella/immunology , Swine Diseases/diagnosis , Animals , Colony Count, Microbial/veterinary , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay/methods , Feces/microbiology , Reproducibility of Results , Sensitivity and Specificity , Seroepidemiologic Studies , SwineABSTRACT
A commercially available blocking ELISA was analyzed for its ability to identify antibodies to porcine coronaviruses (transmissible gastroenteritis virus [TGEV] or porcine respiratory coronavirus [PRCV]), to differentiate antibodies to TGEV and PRCV, and to identify TGEV-infected herds. Nine sera from uninfected pigs, 34 sera from 16 pigs experimentally infected with TGEV, and sera from 10 pigs experimentally infected with PRCV were evaluated using both the TGEV/PRCV blocking ELISA and a virus neutralization (VN) assay. The ELISA was not consistently effective in identifying pigs experimentally infected with TGEV until 21 days postinfection. Sera from 100 commercial swine herds (1,783 sera; median 15 per herd) were similarly evaluated using both tests. Thirty of these commercial herds had a clinical history of TGEV infection and a positive TGEV fluorescent antibody test recorded at necropsy within the last 35 months, while 70 herds had no history of clinical TGEV infection. The blocking ELISA and the VN showed good agreement (kappa 0.84) for the detection of porcine coronavirus antibody (TGEV or PRCV). The sensitivity (0.933) of the ELISA to identify TGEV-infected herds was good when considered on a herd basis. The ELISA was also highly specific (0.943) for the detection of TGEV-infected herds when the test results were evaluated on a herd basis. When sera from specific age groups were compared, the ELISA identified a greater proportion (0.83) of pigs in herds with TGEV antibody when suckling piglets were used. In repeatability experiments, the ELISA gave consistent results when the same sera were evaluated on different days (kappa 0.889) and when sera were evaluated before and after heating (kappa 0.888). The blocking ELISA was determined to be useful for herd monitoring programs and could be used alone without parallel use of the VN assay for the assessment of large swine populations for the detection of TGEV-infected herds.
