Skip to main content
Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research logoLink to Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research
. 1987 Jul;51(3):358–362.

Vesicular exanthema of swine virus: isolation and serotyping of field samples.

J F Edwards 1, R J Yedloutschnig 1, A H Dardiri 1, J J Callis 1
PMCID: PMC1255337  PMID: 3651889

Abstract

Virus isolation was attempted from 262 field samples of vesicular material collected during the outbreaks of vesicular exanthema of swine in the U.S.A. from 1952-54. Using primary swine kidney culture, viral cytopathogenic agents were isolated from 76.3% of the samples. However, an overall recovery rate of 82.1% was obtained after samples negative in tissue culture were inoculated intradermally in susceptible swine. All vesicular exanthema of swine virus isolates were identified as serotype B51 using complement fixation and serum neutralization tests. Two isolates did not react with antisera to known vesicular agents of swine and failed to produce vesicles or clinical signs of disease upon inoculation in swine. One vesicular exanthema of swine virus isolate from tissue of equine origin was pathogenic for swine but produced limited vesiculation at the site of intradermalingual inoculation in the tongue of a pony infected experimentally. Type B51 virus was reisolated from lesions produced in the pony and the pony became seropositive for virus type B51.

Full text

PDF
358

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. BANKOWSKI R. A., KUMMER M. B. Vesicular stomatitis and vesicular exanthema differentiation by complement fixation. Am J Vet Res. 1955 Jul;16(60):374–376. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. BANKOWSKI R. A., WICHMANN R., KUMMER M. A complement-fixation test for identification and differentiation of immunological types of the virus of vesicular exanthema of swine. Am J Vet Res. 1953 Apr;14(51):145–149. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. BROWN F., CRICK J. Application of agar gel precipitin tests to the study of the virus of foot-and-mouth disease. Virology. 1958 Feb;5(1):133–144. doi: 10.1016/0042-6822(58)90010-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. CASEY H. L. STANDARDIZED DIAGNOSTIC COMPLEMENT FIXATION METHOD AND ADAPTATION TO MICRO TEST. I. LABORATORY BRANCH COMPLEMENT FIXATION METHOD BY LABORATORY BRANCH TASK FORCE. II. ADAPTATION OF LBCF METHOD TO MICRO TECHNIQUE. Public Health Monogr. 1965;74:1–34. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Forman A. J. A study of foot-and-mouth disease virus strains by complement fixation. II. A comparison of tube and microplate tests for the differentiation of strains. J Hyg (Lond) 1974 Jun;72(3):407–413. doi: 10.1017/s0022172400023640. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Smith A. W., Skilling D. E., Ritchie A. E. Immunoelectron microscopic comparisons of caliciviruses. Am J Vet Res. 1978 Sep;39(9):1531–1533. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Swaney L. M. Susceptibility of a new fetal pig kidney cell line (MVPK-1) to foot-and-mouth disease virus. Am J Vet Res. 1976 Nov;37(11):1319–1322. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research are provided here courtesy of Canadian Veterinary Medical Association

RESOURCES