Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus whole-genome sequencing efficacy with field clinical samples using a poly(A)-tail viral genome purification method.


Journal

Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc
ISSN: 1943-4936
Titre abrégé: J Vet Diagn Invest
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9011490

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Mar 2021
Historique:
pubmed: 29 8 2020
medline: 1 5 2021
entrez: 29 8 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The genomic surveillance of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) is based on sequencing of the ORF5 gene of the virus, which covers only 4% of the entire viral genome. It is expected that PRRSV whole-genome sequencing (WGS) will improve PRRSV genomic data and allow better understanding of clinical discrepancies observed in the field when using ORF5 sequencing. Our main objective was to implement an efficient method for WGS of PRRSV from clinical samples. The viral genome was purified using a poly(A)-tail viral genome purification method and sequenced using Illumina technology. We tested 149 PRRSV-positive samples: 80 sera, 33 lungs, 33 pools of tissues, 2 oral fluids, and 1 processing fluid (i.e., castration liquid). Overall, WGS of 67.1% of PRRSV-positive cases was successful. The viral load, in particular for tissues, had a major impact on the PRRSV WGS success rate. Serum was the most efficient type of sample to conduct PRRSV WGS poly(A)-tail assays, with a success rate of 76.3%, and this result can be explained by improved sequencing reads dispersion matching throughout the entire viral genome. WGS was unsuccessful for all pools of tissue and lung samples with Cq values > 26.5, whereas it could still be successful with sera at Cq ≤ 34.1. Evaluation of results of highly qualified personnel confirmed that laboratory skills could affect PRRSV WGS efficiency. Oral fluid samples seem very promising and merit further investigation because, with only 2 samples of low viral load (Cq = 28.8, 32.8), PRRSV WGS was successful.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32856560
doi: 10.1177/1040638720952411
pmc: PMC7953089
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

216-226

Références

J Vet Diagn Invest. 1999 Jan;11(1):20-6
pubmed: 9925207
PLoS One. 2015 Dec 16;10(12):e0144265
pubmed: 26673898
J Gen Virol. 1998 May;79 ( Pt 5):989-99
pubmed: 9603313
Virol J. 2014 Mar 04;11:42
pubmed: 24588855
J Gen Virol. 2015 Oct;96(10):2994-2998
pubmed: 26219947
Virus Res. 2015 Mar 16;200:1-8
pubmed: 25616050
Infect Genet Evol. 2019 Oct;74:103999
pubmed: 31408766
J Virol. 2016 Dec 16;91(1):
pubmed: 27795441
Vet Pathol. 1996 Mar;33(2):159-70
pubmed: 8801709
Plant Dis. 2019 Sep;103(9):2199-2203
pubmed: 31322493
Arch Virol. 2000;145(4):659-88
pubmed: 10893147
J Virol Methods. 2013 Nov;193(2):697-705
pubmed: 23891870
Res Vet Sci. 2017 Dec;115:432-441
pubmed: 28759862
Porcine Health Manag. 2019 Mar 28;5:10
pubmed: 30976454
Anal Biochem. 2012 Dec 1;431(1):69-75
pubmed: 22982505
World J Virol. 2015 Aug 12;4(3):265-76
pubmed: 26279987
Anim Health Res Rev. 2010 Dec;11(2):135-63
pubmed: 20388230
J Virol Methods. 2016 Aug;234:87-9
pubmed: 27091099
J Gen Virol. 2011 May;92(Pt 5):1107-1116
pubmed: 21307222
J Vet Diagn Invest. 2020 Nov;32(6):758-766
pubmed: 31735123
PLoS One. 2011;6(12):e28486
pubmed: 22174818
Viruses. 2019 Dec 07;11(12):
pubmed: 31817886
Can J Vet Res. 1998 Jul;62(3):170-7
pubmed: 9684045
J Vet Diagn Invest. 1992 Apr;4(2):117-26
pubmed: 1616975
Prev Vet Med. 2017 Jul 1;142:16-29
pubmed: 28606362
Cell. 2019 May 16;177(5):1109-1123.e14
pubmed: 31031001
Front Microbiol. 2019 Feb 25;10:260
pubmed: 30858830
Arch Virol. 2015 Feb;160(2):417-22
pubmed: 25361819
J Vet Diagn Invest. 2017 Jan;29(1):41-50
pubmed: 28074712
Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 1992 Nov;8(3):623-39
pubmed: 1446274
PLoS One. 2014 Apr 03;9(4):e88807
pubmed: 24698958
Infect Genet Evol. 2019 Sep;73:295-305
pubmed: 31039449
J Gen Virol. 1998 May;79 ( Pt 5):961-79
pubmed: 9603311
Vet Q. 1991 Jul;13(3):137-43
pubmed: 1949540
Vet Rec. 1991 Aug 3;129(5):102-3
pubmed: 1926720
PLoS One. 2019 Jan 14;14(1):e0210368
pubmed: 30640944
Vet Res. 1997 Jul-Aug;28(4):305-52
pubmed: 9312328
Genome Res. 2014 Jul;24(7):1180-92
pubmed: 24899342
Annu Rev Anim Biosci. 2016;4:129-54
pubmed: 26646630
J Gen Virol. 2009 Mar;90(Pt 3):527-535
pubmed: 19218197

Auteurs

Carl A Gagnon (CA)

Swine and Poultry Infectious Diseases Research Center and Molecular Diagnostic Laboratory of the Service de diagnostic, Faculté de médecine vétérinaire, Université de Montréal, St-Hyacinthe, Québec, Canada.

Christian Lalonde (C)

Swine and Poultry Infectious Diseases Research Center, Faculté de médecine vétérinaire, Université de Montréal, St-Hyacinthe, Québec, Canada.

Chantale Provost (C)

Swine and Poultry Infectious Diseases Research Center and Molecular Diagnostic Laboratory of the Service de diagnostic, Faculté de médecine vétérinaire, Université de Montréal, St-Hyacinthe, Québec, Canada.

Articles similaires

Genome, Chloroplast Phylogeny Genetic Markers Base Composition High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing
Robotic Surgical Procedures Animals Humans Telemedicine Models, Animal

Odour generalisation and detection dog training.

Lyn Caldicott, Thomas W Pike, Helen E Zulch et al.
1.00
Animals Odorants Dogs Generalization, Psychological Smell
Animals TOR Serine-Threonine Kinases Colorectal Neoplasms Colitis Mice

Classifications MeSH