Molecular typing of classical swine fever viruses from field outbreaks in Southern India

S RATHNAPRABA; K KUMANAN; K VIJAYARANI; M PALANISAMMI; L GUNASEELAN

doi:10.56093/ijans.v84i7.42086

Authors

S RATHNAPRABA Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600 007 India
K KUMANAN Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600 007 India
K VIJAYARANI Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600 007 India
M PALANISAMMI Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600 007 India
L GUNASEELAN Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600 007 India

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v84i7.42086

Keywords:

Classical swine fever, RT-nPCR, 5â€™UTR, Phylogenetic analysis

Abstract

Classical swine fever (CSF) has serious economic implications and laboratory confirmation is important in early diagnosis. The present study evaluated the ability of the RT-PCR for the detection of CSFV in Southern India. So far the available information on molecular characterization of CSFV isolates from Southern states of India is limited. Hence the outbreaks occurred during 2009–2011 were studied. The outbreaks were confirmed by virus isolation and molecular detection methods employing reverse transcriptase nested PCR (RT-nPCR) targeting CSFV specific 5’UTR. Molecular detection of swine fever suspected samples (84) targeting 5’UTR resulted in 63% positivity. Virus isolation was done in PK15 cell line from 4 positive tissue samples, after 5 blind passages and the virus multiplication in cell culture system, it was checked on fifth day post infection by indirect immnunofluoroscent antibody technique (FAT). After confirming the isolates by PCR targeting CSFV specific 5’UTR the isolates were genotyped based on the 150 nt of 5’UTR inner nested region, which revealed that the 3 isolates belonged to group 1 including 1.1 and 1.2 subgroup and 1 isolate in 2.2 subgroup suggesting the circulation of group 1and 2 viruses in this region.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Barman N N, Nath A J, Hazarika M P, Barman B and Thakuria D. 2003. Outbreak of classical swine fever in regularly vaccinated pig herd. Indian Journal of Comparative Microbiology and Infectious Disease 24: 89–90.

Choi C and Chae C. 2003. Detection of classical swine fever virus in boar semen by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostics and Investigations 15: 35–41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/104063870301500108

Desai G S, Sharma A, Kataria R S, Barman N N and Tiwari A K. 2010. 5'-UTR-based phylogenetic analysis of classical swine fever virus isolates from India. Acta Virologica 54(1): 79–82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4149/av_2010_01_79

Dewulf J, Koenen F, Mintiens K, Denis P, Ribbens S and de Kruif A. 2004. Analytical performance of several classical swine fever laboratory diagnostic techniques on live animals for detection of infection. Journal of Virological Methods 119: 137–43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jviromet.2004.03.010

Govindarajan R, Vengadabady N, Albert A, and Purushothaman V. 2003. Detection of hog cholera in desi pigs. Cheiron 32: 47– 48.

Grieser-Wilke I, Zimmermann B, Fritzemeier J, Floegel G and Moenning V. 2000. Structure and presentation of a world wide web database of CSF virus isolates held at the EU Reference Laboratory. Veterinary Microbiology 73: 131–36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1135(00)00140-1

Grieser-Wilke J, Blome S and Moenning N. 2007. Diagnostic methods for detection of classical swine fever virus-status quo and new developments. Vaccine 25: 5524–30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2006.11.043

Handel K, Kehler H, Hils K and Pasick J. 2004. Comparison of reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction, virus isolation, and immunoperoxidase assays for detecting pigs infected with low, moderate, and high virulent strain of classical swine fever virus. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostics and Investigations 16: 132–38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/104063870401600207

Lowings P, Ibata G, Needham J and Paton D. 1996. Classical swine fever virus diversity and evolution. Journal of general Virology 77: 1311–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1099/0022-1317-77-6-1311

Moennig V, Floegel-Niesmann G and Gresier–Wilke I. 2003. Clinical signs and epidemiology of classical swine fever: a review of new knowledge. Veterinary Journal 165: 1–2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-0233(02)00112-0

Patil S S, Hemadri D, Shankar B P, Raghavendra A G, Veeresh H, Sindhoora B, Chandan S, Sreekala K, Gajendragad M R and Prabhudas K. 2010.Genetic typing of recent classical swine fever isolates from India. Veterinary Microbiology 141 (3–4): 367–73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetmic.2009.09.021

Paton D J, McGoldrick A and Belak S. 2000. Classical swine fever virus: a ring test to evaluate RT-PCR detection methods. Veterinary Microbiology 73: 159–74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1135(00)00142-5

Paton D J, McGoldricka, Greiser-Wilke I, Parchariyanon S, Song J Y, Lioue P P, Stadejekf, T, Lowings J P, BjoÈrkland H and BelaÂk I S. 2000. Genetic typing of classical swine fever virus. Veterinary Microbiology 73: 137–57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1135(00)00141-3

Sarma D K, Mishra N, Stefan Vilcek , Rajukumar K, Behera S P, Nema R K, Pooja D and Dubey S C. 2009. Phylogenetic analysis of recent classical swine fever virus (CSFV) isolates from Assam, India. Comparative Immunology Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. doi: 10.1016/j.cimid.2009.09.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cimid.2009.09.005

Sabogal Z Y, Mogollon J D, Rincon M A and Clavijo A. 2006. Phylogenetic analysis of recent isolates of classical swine fever virus from Colombia. Virus Research 115: 99–103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.virusres.2005.06.016

Van Oirschot J T. 1992. Hog cholera. (fide Shaw B E et al. (Eds) Diseases of Swine. 7th edn. Iowa State University press, Iowa, 159–72.)