Abstract
A continuous African green monkey kidney cell line, designated BGM, was compared with primary cynomolgus monkey kidney cells and human embryonic lung cells for efficiency of enterovirus isolation. A selective enhanced sensitivity of BGM cells both in terms of isolation rate and speed of isolation was found for group B coxsackieviruses but could not be demonstrated for a number of other nonpolio enteroviruses.
Full text
PDF
Images in this article
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Assaad F., Cockburn W. C. Four-year study of WHO virus reports on enteroviruses other than poliovirus. Bull World Health Organ. 1972;46(3):329–336. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Barron A. L., Olshevsky C., Cohen M. M. Characteristics of the BGM line of cells from African green monkey kidney. Brief report. Arch Gesamte Virusforsch. 1970;32(4):389–392. doi: 10.1007/BF01250067. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Clark J., Schley C., Irvine K., McIntosh K. Comparison of cynomolgus and rhesus monkey kidney cells for recovery of viruses from clinical specimens. J Clin Microbiol. 1979 Apr;9(4):554–556. doi: 10.1128/jcm.9.4.554-556.1979. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dahling D. R., Berg G., Berman D. BGM, a continuous cell line more sensitive than primary rhesus and African green kidney cells for the recovery of viruses from water. Health Lab Sci. 1974 Oct;11(4):275–282. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- HSIUNG G. D., MELNICK J. L. Comparative susceptibility of kidney cells from different monkey species to enteric viruses (poliomyelitis, Coxsackie, and echo groups). J Immunol. 1957 Feb;78(2):137–146. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Herrmann E. C., Jr, Person D. A., Smith T. F. Experience in laboratory diagnosis of enterovirus infections in routine medical practice. Mayo Clin Proc. 1972 Aug;47(8):577–586. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hollick G. E., Reichrath L., Smith T. F. Comparison of primary rhesus and cynomolgus monkey kidney cell cultures for viral isolation from clinical specimens. Am J Clin Pathol. 1977 Aug;68(2):276–278. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/68.2.276. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Lee L. H., Phillips C. A., South M. A., Melnick J. L., Yow M. D. Enteric virus isolation in different cell cultures. Bull World Health Organ. 1965;32(5):657–663. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- McSwiggan D. A., George R. A comparison of two cell culture systems for the primary isolation of enteric viruses. Bull World Health Organ. 1970;43(2):295–300. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Melnick J. L., Rennick V., Hampil B., Schmidt N. J., Ho H. H. Lyophilized combination pools of enterovirus equine antisera: preparation and test procedures for the identification of field strains of 42 enteroviruses. Bull World Health Organ. 1973;48(3):263–268. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Nelson D., Hiemstra H., Minor T., D'Alessio D. Non-polio enterovirus activity in Wisconsin based on a 20-year experience in a diagnostic virology laboratory. Am J Epidemiol. 1979 Mar;109(3):352–361. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a112688. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Schmidt N. J., Ho H. H., Lennette E. H. Comparative sensitivity of the BGM cell line for isolation of enteric viruses. Health Lab Sci. 1976 Apr;13(2):115–117. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Schmidt N. J., Ho H. H., Riggs J. L., Lennette E. H. Comparative sensitivity of various cell culture systems for isolation of viruses from wastewater and fecal samples. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1978 Sep;36(3):480–486. doi: 10.1128/aem.36.3.480-486.1978. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]