Pen-Based Swine Oral Fluid Samples Contain Both Environmental and Pig-Derived Targets.

Laboratory methods for detecting specific pathogens in oral fluids are widely reported, but there is little research on the oral fluid sampling process itself. In this study, a fluorescent tracer (diluted red food coloring) was used to test the transfer of a target directly from pigs or indirectly from the environment to pen-based oral fluid samples. Pens of ~30, ~60, and ~125 14-week-old pigs (32 pens/size) on commercial swine farms received one of two treatments: (1) pig exposure, i.e., ~3.5 mL of tracer solution sprayed into the mouth of 10% of the pigs in the pen; (2) environmental exposure, i.e., 20 mL of tracer solution was poured on the floor in the center of the pen. Oral fluids collected one day prior to treatment (baseline fluorescence control) and immediately after treatment were tested for fluorescence. Data were evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, with Youden's J statistic used to set a threshold. Pretreatment oral fluid samples with fluorescence responses above the ROC threshold were removed from further analysis (7 of 96 samples). Based on the ROC analyses, oral fluid samples from 78 of 89 pens (87.6%), contained red food coloring, including 43 of 47 (91.5%) pens receiving pig exposure and 35 of 42 (83.3%) pens receiving environmental exposure. Thus, oral fluid samples contain both pig-derived and environmental targets. This methodology provides a safe and quantifiable method to evaluate oral fluid sampling vis-à-vis pen behavior, pen size, sampling protocol, and target distribution in the pen.

In Vivo and In Vitro Characterization of the Recently Emergent PRRSV 1-4-4 L1C Variant (L1C.5) in Comparison with Other PRRSV-2 Lineage 1 Isolates.

The recently emerged PRRSV 1-4-4 L1C variant (L1C.5) was in vivo and in vitro characterized in this study in comparison with three other contemporary 1-4-4 isolates (L1C.1, L1A, and L1H) and one 1-7-4 L1A isolate. Seventy-two 3-week-old PRRSV-naive pigs were divided into six groups with twelve pigs/group. Forty-eight pigs (eight/group) were for inoculation, and 24 pigs (four/group) served as contact pigs. Pigs in pen A of each room were inoculated with the corresponding virus or negative media. At two days post inoculation (DPI), contact pigs were added to pen B adjacent to pen A in each room. Pigs were necropsied at 10 and 28 DPI. Compared to other virus-inoculated groups, the L1C.5-inoculated pigs exhibited more severe anorexia and lethargy, higher mortality, a higher fraction of pigs with fever (>40 °C), higher average temperature at several DPIs, and higher viremia levels at 2 DPI. A higher percentage of the contact pigs in the L1C.5 group became viremic at two days post contact, implying the higher transmissibility of this virus strain. It was also found that some PRRSV isolates caused brain infection in inoculation pigs and/or contact pigs. The complete genome sequences and growth characteristics in ZMAC cells of five PRRSV-2 isolates were further compared. Collectively, this study confirms that the PRRSV 1-4-4 L1C variant (L1C.5) is highly virulent with potential higher transmissibility, but the genetic determinants of virulence remain to be elucidated.

African Swine Fever Virus as a Difficult Opponent in the Fight for a Vaccine-Current Data.

Prevention and control of African swine fever virus (ASFV) in Europe, Asia, and Africa seem to be extremely difficult in view of the ease with which it spreads, its high resistance to environmental conditions, and the many obstacles related to the introduction of effective specific immunoprophylaxis. Biological properties of ASFV indicate that the African swine fever (ASF) pandemic will continue to develop and that only the implementation of an effective and safe vaccine will ensure a reduction in the spread of ASFV. At present, vaccines against ASF are not available. The latest approaches to the ASFV vaccine's design concentrate on the development of either modified live vaccines by targeted gene deletion from different isolates or subunit vaccines. The construction of an effective vaccine is hindered by the complex structure of the virus, the lack of an effective continuous cell line for the isolation and propagation of ASFV, unpredictable and stain-specific phenotypes after the genetic modification of ASFV, a risk of reversion to virulence, and our current inability to differentiate infected animals from vaccinated ones. Moreover, the design of vaccines intended for wild boars and oral administration is desirable. Despite several obstacles, the design of a safe and effective vaccine against ASFV seems to be achievable.