Diagnosis of the Lelystad strain of Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus infection in individually housed pigs: comparison between serum and oral fluid samples for viral nucleic acid and antibody detection

Detection of PRRSV-1 in tongue fluids under experimental and field conditions and comparison of different sampling material for PRRSV sow herd monitoring

BACKGROUND

Infection with porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) leads to significant economic losses worldwide. One of the initial measures following an outbreak is to stabilise the herd and to prevent vertical transmission of PRRSV. The objective of this study was to detect PRRSV in different sampling material, both in an experimental model and on a commercial piglet producing farm, with a focus on evaluating the suitability of tongue fluid samples.

RESULTS

In the experimental model, PRRSV negative pregnant gilts were infected with PRRSV-1 AUT15-33 on gestation day 85 and necropsy of gilts and foetuses was performed three weeks later. 38.3% of individual foetal serum and 39.4% of individual foetal thymus samples were considered PRRSV RT-qPCR positive. Tongue fluids from individual foetuses showed a 33.0% positivity rate. PRRSV RNA was detected in all but one sample of litter-wise pooled processing fluids and tongue fluids. In the field study, the investigated farm remained PRRSV positive and unstable for five consecutive farrowing groups after the start of the sampling process. Tongue fluid samples pooled by litter in the first investigated farrowing group had a 54.5% positivity rate, with the overall highest viral load obtained in the field study. In this farrowing group, 33.3% of investigated litter-wise pooled processing fluid samples and all investigated serum samples (pools of 4-6 individuals, two piglets per litter) were considered positive. Across all investigated farrowing groups, tongue fluid samples consistently showed the highest viral load. Moreover, tongue fluid samples contained the virus in moderate amounts for the longest time compared to the other investigated sampling material.

CONCLUSION

It can be concluded that the viral load in individual foetuses is higher in serum or thymus compared to tongue fluid samples. However, litter-wise pooled tongue fluid samples are well-suited for detecting vertical transmission within the herd, even when the suspected prevalence of vertical transmission events is low.

Retrospective Analysis of the Detection of Pathogens Associated with the Porcine Respiratory Disease Complex in Routine Diagnostic Samples from Austrian Swine Stocks

The diagnostic workup of respiratory disease in pigs is complex due to coinfections and non-infectious causes. The detection of pathogens associated with respiratory disease is a pivotal part of the diagnostic workup for respiratory disease. We aimed to report how frequently certain viruses and bacteria were detected in samples from pigs with respiratory symptoms in the course of routine diagnostic procedures. Altogether, 1975 routine diagnostic samples from pigs in Austrian swine stocks between 2016 and 2021 were analysed. PCR was performed to detect various pathogens, including porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) (n = 921), influenza A virus (n = 479), porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV2) (n = 518), Mycoplasma (M.) hyopneumoniae (n = 713), Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae (n = 198), Glaesserella (G.) parasuis (n = 165) and M. hyorhinis (n = 180). M. hyorhinis (55.1%) had the highest detection rate, followed by PCV2 (38.0%) and Streptococcus (S.) suis (30.6%). PRRSV was detected most frequently in a pool of lung, tonsil and tracheobronchial lymph node (36.2%). G. parasuis was isolated more frequently from samples taken after euthanasia compared to field samples. PRRSV-positive samples were more likely to be positive for PCV2 (p = 0.001), M. hyopneumoniae (p = 0.032) and Pasteurella multocida (p < 0.001). M. hyopneumoniae-positive samples were more likely to be positive for P. multocida (p < 0.001) and S. suis (p = 0.046), but less likely for M. hyorhinis (p = 0.004). In conclusion, our data provide evidence that lung samples that were positive for a primary pathogenic agent were more likely to be positive for a secondary pathogenic agent.

Update on shedding and transmission routes of porcine haemotrophic mycoplasmas in naturally and experimentally infected pigs

Horizontal transmission of Mycoplasma suis via parenteral exposure during standard practices or through bites during fightings have been identified as key epidemiological routes. However, as knowledge gaps on other potential shedding and transmission routes exist, the present study combines both laboratory experiments and field surveys to gain new insights into the epidemiology of porcine haemotrophic mycoplasmas. Splenectomised pigs were orally inoculated with a M. suis field strain and investigated for clinical signs related to infectious anaemia of pigs (IAP) and the presence of M. suis in blood, urine and saliva samples by qPCR. All blood samples were negative for M. suis and animals did not show obvious clinical signs of IAP throughout the entire study period. Additionally, urine, nasal and saliva samples from sows of conventional piglet producing farms and semen samples from a boar stud revealed no detection of M. suis and ‘Candidatus Mycoplasma haemosuis’ by qPCR. Thus, the results indicate that blood-independent transmission routes might be of minor relevance under field conditions.

Guidelines for oral fluid-based surveillance of viral pathogens in swine

Recent decades have seen both rapid growth and extensive consolidation in swine production. As a collateral effect, these changes have exacerbated the circulation of viruses and challenged our ability to prevent, control, and/or eliminate impactful swine diseases. Recent pandemic events in human and animal health, e.g., SARS-CoV-2 and African swine fever virus, highlight the fact that clinical observations are too slow and inaccurate to form the basis for effective health management decisions: systematic processes that provide timely, reliable data are required. Oral fluid-based surveillance reflects the adaptation of conventional testing methods to an alternative diagnostic specimen. The routine use of oral fluids in commercial farms for PRRSV and PCV2 surveillance was first proposed in 2008 as an efficient and practical improvement on individual pig sampling. Subsequent research expanded on this initial report to include the detection of ≥23 swine viral pathogens and the implementation of oral fluid-based surveillance in large swine populations (> 12,000 pigs). Herein we compile the current information regarding oral fluid collection methods, testing, and surveillance applications in swine production.

Monitoring PRRSV-1 in suckling piglets in an endemic herd using reverse transcriptase quantitative real time polymerase chain reaction: comparison of the rate of detection in serum and oral fluid samples and evaluation of pooling

BACKGROUND

Defining shedding and exposure status for PRRSV is essential in herd stabilisation protocols and weaning-age pigs is a key subpopulation. Oral fluid (OF) sampling is a welfare-friendly and cost saving promising alternative to blood sampling. The first objective of our study was to compare the rate of detection of PRRSV-1 in individual serum sample, individual OF sample, litter-based OF sample, collected the day before weaning. The second objective was to evaluate the interest of pooling samples.

RESULTS

The study was performed on a 210-sows, PRRSV-1 exposed, with confirmed shedding, non-vaccinated against PRRSV, herd. 80 litters were sampled and 26 were viropositive and therefore included. The rate of detection of PRRSV-1 with RT-qrtPCR in blood samples, iOF and cOF was 67, 23 and 77%, respectively. The Ct values from RT-qrtPCR on collective OF were statistically lower if the serum of the piglet of the litter was positive. The lower the Cycle threshold (Ct) value of RT-qrtPCR on collective OF, the higher the probability that the serum sampled in the same litter was positive. Ability to detect PRRSV RNA after pooling was 67% for sera and 58% for cOF.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of detection of PRRSV-1 was about the same in cOF and blood samples. Virus sequencing, if required, should be performed on individual serum samples. The smaller the Ct of a cOF sample from a litter, the greater the likelihood that the serum sample from a piglet of that litter is positive.A cost-effective and representative sampling protocol to monitor sow herds stabilisation of a sow batch could be: to collect both cOF and one serum sample per litter; to perform firstly RT-qrtPCR on pooled cOF; in case of negative results to consider the batch negative; in case of positive results in a unvaccinated herd or a killed vaccine vaccinated one to consider the batch positive; in case of positive result in a herd vaccinated with a modified live vaccine serum samples of litters with positive cOF should be tested for sequencing (selecting the litters with the lowest Ct for cOF).

Oral fluid samples used for PRRSV acclimatization program and sow performance monitoring in endemic PRRS-positive farms

An effective gilt acclimatization program is one of the most important management strategies for controlling porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) infection. Recently, oral fluid samples have been used as alternative diagnostic samples for various swine diseases. This study utilized oral fluids for PRRSV monitoring during the gilt acclimatization period in PRRSV endemic farms. The study was performed in two selected commercial breeding herds (farm A and farm B). PRRSV RNA and PRRSV-specific antibodies were monitored using oral fluid and serum samples. Sow performance parameters related to PRRSV infection were recorded and assessed. After PRRSV exposure during acclimatization, viral RNA was demonstrated in oral fluids from 1 to 10 weeks post-exposure (WPE). PRRSV RNA was detected in serum at 1 and 4 WPE in farm A and at 1, 4, 8, and 12 WPE in farm B. Prolonged viremia of gilts from farm B was possibly due to re-infection (within the herd) and later, reproductive problems were found in the breeding herd. The correlation of PRRSV RNA concentration in oral fluids and serum was evident. The S/P ratio values of PRRSV antibodies in oral fluid samples were higher and had similar patterns of antibody responses to the serum samples. The results suggest that the use of oral fluid samples for PRRSV monitoring during gilt acclimatization in endemic farms is effective, convenient, practical, and economical and would be most beneficial when used with other parameters.

Oral fluid versus blood sampling in group-housed sows and finishing pigs: Feasibility and performance of antibody detection for porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV)

The feasibility of using individual and pen-based oral fluid samples to detect PRRSV antibodies in growing-finishing pigs and group-housed sows was investigated. The diagnostic performances of a commercial oral fluid ELISA (OF-ELISA) and a serum ELISA (SER-ELISA) performed on individual or pooled samples from 5 or 10 pigs and sows was evaluated. The performance of the OF-ELISA was also assessed for pen-based oral fluids. Eight hundred and thirty-four pigs and 1598 sows from 42 PRRSV-infected and 3 PRRSV-negative herds were oral fluid sampled and bled. PRRSV antibodies were detected by an OF-ELISA performed at individual, pool (5 or 10 samples) and pen levels. Serum samples were tested by a SER-ELISA at individual and pool levels. The sensitivity and specificity of ELISAs for individual samples were assessed by Bayesian analysis. The relative diagnostic performance for the pools was calculated by taking individual samples as the gold standard. SER-ELISA and individual OF-ELISA results were used as references for estimating OF-ELISA performance for pen-based samples. Individual oral fluid collection was feasible in all kinds of pigs, whereas pen-based samples were unsuccessful in 40% of the group-housed sow pens. High levels of sensitivity comparable to those of the SER-ELISA were found for the OF-ELISA when performed on individual, 5-sample pool or pen-based samples from pigs or sows. The OF-ELISA lacked specificity for individual samples from sows. Pooling 5 individual oral fluid samples or using pen-based samples increased test specificity.

Comparison of protocols for the analysis of type 1 porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus by RT-PCR using oral fluids

The detection of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) in oral fluids (OF) by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) is gaining increasing popularity. However, the different steps leading to a result have not been extensively evaluated. The aim of the present study was to examine the effect on the performance of qRT-PCR with different sampling materials, conditions of storage of the OF, the need for centrifuging OF, as well as to compare RNA extraction methods and PCR mixes. For the assays, pen-based oral fluids were used, which were pooled and spiked in a serial dilution (up to genotype 10⁰ TCID₅₀/mL) of type 1 PRRSV isolate 3267. Centrifugation at 15,000g for 15min resulted in an increase in sensitivity (1-2 PCR cycles) that was significant (P<0.05) at the lowest dilution tested. The TRIzol and MagMAX RNA extraction methods gave the maximum sensitivity, lowest threshold cycle (Ct), at equivalent virus concentrations. The AgPath-ID One-Step RT-PCR Kit PCR mix reagents were more sensitive for the detection of PRRSV using a purified plasmid as standard, but LSI VetMAX PRRSV EU/NA PRRSV reagents resulted in a slightly better sensitivity with OF (p<0.05). The present results may be useful to standardize protocols for optimizing detection of type 1 PRRSV in OF by qRT-PCR.

Comparison of PRRSV Nucleic Acid and Antibody Detection in Pen-Based Oral Fluid and Individual Serum Samples in Three Different Age Categories of Post-Weaning Pigs from Endemically Infected Farms

BACKGROUND

Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) is the causative agent of an economically important disease in swine. Since it has been shown that PRRSV and PRRSV specific antibodies can be detected in oral fluid, many different aspects have been studied to show that oral fluid could be a worthy alternative diagnostic sample to serum for monitoring and surveillance of this disease. Thorough field evaluations are however missing to convincingly show its usefulness under representative field conditions.

METHODOLOGY

Pen-based oral fluid samples and serum samples from all individual pigs in the corresponding pens were collected from post-weaning pigs of three different age categories in eight endemically PRRSV infected farms and one PRRSV free farm in Belgium. All samples were tested by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) and ELISA to detect PRRSV RNA and PRRSV specific antibodies, respectively.

RESULTS

While the relative specificity of PRRSV detection by qRT-PCR in pen-based oral fluid compared to serum collected from individual pigs was high in all age categories (>90%), the relative sensitivity decreased with the age of the pigs (89, 93 and 10% in 8-12w, 16-20w and 24-28w old pigs, respectively). The latter correlated with a lower percentage of PRRSV positive pigs in serum/pen in the different age categories (55, 29 and 6%, respectively). Irrespective of the age category, pen-based oral fluid samples were always found PCR positive when at least 30% of the individual pigs were positive in serum. PRRSV specific antibody detection in oral fluid by ELISA showed a 100% relative sensitivity to detection in serum since oral fluid samples were always positive as soon as one pig in the pen was positive in serum. On the other hand, two false positive oral fluid samples in 11 pens without serum positive pigs were found, resulting in a relative specificity of 82%. Indications are however present that the oral fluid result indicated the correct infection status but the absence of a golden standard test makes it difficult to define definitive test characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall it can be concluded that oral fluid seems to be a useful matrix for diagnosis of PRRSV under field conditions and that differences in kinetics of PRRSV and PRRSV specific antibody detection in oral fluid and serum of individual pigs can also be reflected in pen-based oral fluid results.

Detection and Isolation of Swine Influenza A Virus in Spiked Oral Fluid and Samples from Individually Housed, Experimentally Infected Pigs: Potential Role of Porcine Oral Fluid in Active Influenza A Virus Surveillance in Swine

Background

The lack of seasonality of swine influenza A virus (swIAV) in combination with the capacity of swine to harbor a large number of co-circulating IAV lineages, resulting in the risk for the emergence of influenza viruses with pandemic potential, stress the importance of swIAV surveillance. To date, active surveillance of swIAV worldwide is barely done because of the short detection period in nasal swab samples. Therefore, more sensitive diagnostic methods to monitor circulating virus strains are requisite.

Methods

qRT-PCR and virus isolations were performed on oral fluid and nasal swabs collected from individually housed pigs that were infected sequentially with H1N1 and H3N2 swIAV strains. The same methods were also applied to oral fluid samples spiked with H1N1 to study the influence of conservation time and temperature on swIAV infectivity and detectability in porcine oral fluid.

Results

All swIAV infected animals were found qRT-PCR positive in both nasal swabs and oral fluid. However, swIAV could be detected for a longer period in oral fluid than in nasal swabs. Despite the high detectability of swIAV in oral fluid, virus isolation from oral fluid collected from infected pigs was rare. These results are supported by laboratory studies showing that the PCR detectability of swIAV remains unaltered during a 24 h incubation period in oral fluid, while swIAV infectivity drops dramatically immediately upon contact with oral fluid (3 log titer reduction) and gets lost after 24 h conservation in oral fluid at ambient temperature.

Conclusions

Our data indicate that porcine oral fluid has the potential to replace nasal swabs for molecular diagnostic purposes. The difficulty to isolate swIAV from oral fluid could pose a drawback for its use in active surveillance programs.

Evaluation of the specificity of a commercial ELISA for detection of antibodies against porcine respiratory and reproductive syndrome virus in individual oral fluid of pigs collected in two different ways

Background

The monitoring of infectious diseases like the porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) using pen-wise oral fluid samples becomes more and more established. The collection of individual oral fluid, which would be useful in the monitoring of PRRSV negative boar studs, is rather difficult. The aim of the study was to test two methods for individual oral fluid collection from pigs and to evaluate the specificity of a commercial ELISA for detection of PRRSV antibodies in these sample matrices. For this reason, 334 serum samples from PRRSV negative pigs (group 1) and 71 serum samples from PRRSV positive pigs (group 2) were tested for PRRSV antibodies with a commercial ELISA. Individual oral fluid was collected with a cotton gauze swab from 311 pigs from group 1 and 39 pigs from group 2. Furthermore, 312 oral fluid samples from group 1 and 67 oral fluid samples from group 2 were taken with a self-drying foam swab (GenoTube). The recollected oral fluid was then analysed twice with a commercial ELISA for detection of PRRSV antibodies in oral fluid.

Results

All serum samples from group 1 tested negative for PRRSV antibodies. The collection of oral fluid was sufficient in all samples. Sampling with GenoTubes was less time consuming than sampling with cotton gauze swabs. False positive results were obtained in 7 (measure 1) respectively 9 (measure 2) oral fluid samples recollected from cotton gauze swabs and in 9 and 8 samples from GenoTubes. The specificity of the oral fluid ELISA was 97.4% for cotton gauze swabs and 97.3% for GenoTubes. 70 out of 71 serum samples and all oral fluid samples from group 2 tested positive for PRRSV antibodies. The sensitivity of the oral fluid ELISA was 100%. According to the kappa coefficient, the results showed an almost perfect agreement between serum and oral fluid collected in both ways (kappa > 0.8).

Conclusions

Both methods used for individual oral fluid collection proved to be practical and efficient and can be used for PRRSV antibody detection. It has to be considered, however, that false positive results may occur more often than in serum samples.