The Veterinary Record
HOME CURRENT ISSUE TABLE OF CONTENTS ARCHIVE SEARCH SUBSCRIPTIONS JOBS FEEDBACK HELP
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Okinaga, T.
Right arrow Articles by Tsunemitsu, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Okinaga, T.
Right arrow Articles by Tsunemitsu, H.
The Veterinary Record 164:455-459 (2009)
© 2009 British Veterinary Association

Papers

Evaluation of unexpected positive results from a commercial ELISA for antibodies to PRRSV

T. Okinaga, PhD1,3, T. Yamagishi, BSc2, M. Yoshii, DVM1, T. Suzuki, PhD1, A. Miyazaki, DVM1, M. Takagi, DVM, PhD1 and H. Tsunemitsu, DVM, PhD1

1 Viral Diseases Research Team, National Institute of Animal Health, Kannondai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-0856, Japan
2 Nippon Zenyaki Kogyo Company, Koriyama, Fukushima 963-0196, Japan
3 R&D Group, ALVIS, Higashi-Ikebukuro, Toshima-ku, Tokyo 170-0013, Japan

Correspondence: Correspondence to Dr Tsunemitsu, e-mail: tsunemi{at}affrc.go.jp

Unexpected positive results from the widely used IDEXX ELISA for the detection of antibodies to porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) may confound investigations of the disease. Supplementing the ELISA with blocking agents and the use of IgG purified from serum samples had no effect on the unexpected positive results, suggesting that they were due to an antibody-antigen reaction. Simple competitive and blocking ELISAs were developed by modifying the IDEXX ELISA, and they and an indirect fluorescent antibody test (IFAT) were used to examine PRRSV antibodies in 33 antibody-negative, 88 antibody-positive and 73 unexpectedly positive sera. All the unexpectedly positive sera were negative by IFAT, and 89·0 per cent were negative by both the competitive and blocking ELISAs. The competitive ELISA (97·7 per cent) and the blocking ELISA (96·5 per cent) detected more positive sera than the IFAT (90·9 per cent). These results show that both ELISAs are capable of distinguishing positive and unexpectedly positive sera, and suggest that most of the unexpected positive signals are false-positives.






HOME CURRENT ISSUE TABLE OF CONTENTS ARCHIVE SEARCH SUBSCRIPTIONS JOBS FEEDBACK HELP
Copyright © 2009 British Veterinary Association