Abstract
Variation has been observed in the structural polypeptides of swine vesicular disease viruses isolated from the United Kingdom and Hong Kong. Despite the limited number of isolates examined, several distinct polypeptide patterns were obtained when the virus structural proteins were examined by polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Isolates from outbreaks in the United Kingdom which were known to be connected gave the same polypeptide pattern, whereas viruses with different polypeptide patterns could not be traced to a common source. The different polypeptide patterns were obtained consistently and were not altered by passage of the virus in tissue culture. In general, isolates with identical polypeptide patterns could not be distinguished by neutralization or antibody blocking tests or by competition radioimmunoassays. However, isolates with different polypeptide patterns could be differentiated by antibody blocking tests or radioimmunoassay. The correlation between the serological tests and the polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis analyses illustrates the value of analyzing structural polypeptides in the epidemiological study of swine vesicular disease.
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.
- Brown F., Talbot P., Burrows R. Antigenic differences between isolates of swine vesicular disease virus and their relationship to Coxsackie B5 virus. Nature. 1973 Oct 12;245(5424):315–316. doi: 10.1038/245315a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Brown F., Wild T. F., Rowe L. W., Underwood B. O., Harris T. J. Comparison of swine vesicular disease virus and Coxsackie B5 virus by serological and RNA hybridization methods. J Gen Virol. 1976 May;31(2):231–237. doi: 10.1099/0022-1317-31-2-231. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Burrows R., Mann J. A., Goodridge D. Swine vesicular disease: virological studies of experimental infections produced by the England-72 virus. J Hyg (Lond) 1974 Feb;72(1):135–143. doi: 10.1017/s0022172400023305. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Crowther J. R. Examination of differences between foot-and-mouth disease virus strains using a radioimmunoassay techinque. Dev Biol Stand. 1976;35:185–193. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dawe P. S., Forman A. J., Smale C. J. A preliminary investigation of the swine vesicular disease epidemic in Britain. Nature. 1973 Feb 23;241(5391):540–542. doi: 10.1038/241540a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Graves J. H. Serological relationship of swine vesicular disease virus and Coxsackie B5 virus. Nature. 1973 Oct 12;245(5424):314–315. doi: 10.1038/245314a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Harris T. J., Brown F. Correlation of polypeptide composition with antigenic variation in the swine vesicular disease and coxsackie B5 viruses. Nature. 1975 Dec 25;258(5537):758–760. doi: 10.1038/258758a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Harris T. J., Doel T. R., Brown F. Moleculas aspects of the antigenic variation of swine vesicular disease and Coxsackie B5 viruses. J Gen Virol. 1977 May;35(2):299–315. doi: 10.1099/0022-1317-35-2-299. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Laemmli U. K. Cleavage of structural proteins during the assembly of the head of bacteriophage T4. Nature. 1970 Aug 15;227(5259):680–685. doi: 10.1038/227680a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mowat G. N., Darbyshire J. H., Huntley J. F. Differentiation of a vesicular disease of pigs in Hong Kong from foot-and-mouth disease. Vet Rec. 1972 May 27;90(22):618–621. doi: 10.1136/vr.90.22.618. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Nardelli L., Lodetti E., Gualandi G. L., Burrows R., Goodridge D., Brown F., Cartwright B. A foot and mouth disease syndrome in pigs caused by an enterovirus. Nature. 1968 Sep 21;219(5160):1275–1276. doi: 10.1038/2191275a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]