Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T10:11:25.788Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Recent trends in the molecular diagnosis of infectious bursal disease viruses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2007

Daral J. Jackwood
Daral J. Jackwood*
Affiliation:
Food Animal Health Research Program, Ohio State University/OARDC, Wooster, Ohio, 44691, USA
*
E-mail: Jackwood.2@osu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Infectious bursal disease virus (IBDV) causes an immunosuppressive disease in young chickens. Two serotypes of this double-stranded RNA virus exist but only serotype 1 viruses cause disease in chickens. Detection and strain identification of IBDV is important because antigenic subtypes found within serotype 1 make it necessary to tailor vaccination programs to the antigenic type found in the bird's environment. Because conventional virus isolation and characterization are not practical for routine diagnosis of IBDV, antigen-capture enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and molecular assays based on reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) technology were developed. Compared with antigen-capture ELISA, RT-PCR assays have greater versatility and are more sensitive and specific. Strain identification has been accomplished using a variety of post-RT-PCR assays, including restriction enzyme digestion of the RT-PCR products. The resulting restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLP) are used to differentiate viruses into molecular groups that correlate with antigenic and pathogenic types. Recently, two types of real-time RT-PCR have been used to identify and differentiate strains of IBDV. Both methods use distance-dependent interaction between two dye molecules, known as fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET). The dye molecules are attached to one or more nucleotide probes that detect specific nucleotide sequences of the virus. Our laboratory has used a two-probe assay to identify single-nucleotide mutations among IBDV strains. A mutation probe is used in this assay to detect substitution mutations in a region of the viral genome that encodes a neutralizing epitope of the virus. These assays are accurate, reliable and inexpensive compared with conventional RT-PCR because they do not require RFLP or other labor-intensive post-RT-PCR assays to distinguish viral strains.

Keywords

infectious bursal disease virusmolecular diagnosisRT-PCRreal-time PCR
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Health Research Reviews , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , December 2004 , pp. 313 - 316
Copyright
Copyright © CAB International 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bayliss, CD, Spies, U, Shaw, K, Peters, RW, Papageorgiou, A, Muller, H and Boursnell, MEG (1990). A comparison of the sequences of segment A of four infectious bursal disease virus strains and identification of a variable region in VP2. Journal of General Virology 71: 1303–1312.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bernard, PS, Reiser, A and Pritham, GH (2001). Mutation detection by fluorescent hybridization probe melting curves. In: Meuer, S, Wittwer, C and Nakagawara, K-I, editors. Rapid Cycle Real-Time PCR Methods And Applications Berlin: Springer-Verlag pp. 11–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dormitorio, TV, Giambrone, JJ and Duck, LW (1997). Sequence comparisons of the variable VP2 region of eight infectious bursal disease virus isolates. Avian Diseases 41: 36–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eterradossi, N, Arnauld, C, Toquin, D and Rivallian, G (1998). Critical amino acids changes in VP2 variable domain are associated with typical and atypical antigenicity in very virulent infectious bursal disease viruses. Archives of Virology 143: 1627–1636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eterradossi, N, Arnauld, C, Tekaia, F, Toquin, D, Le Coq, H, Rivallan, G, Guittet, M, Domenech, J, van den Berg, TP and Skinner, MA (1999). Antigenic and genetic relationships between European very virulent infectious bursal disease viruses and an early West African isolate. Avian Pathology 28: 36–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heine, H-G, Haritou, M, Failla, P, Fahey, K and Azad, A (1991). Sequence analysis and expression of the host-protective immunogen VP2 of a variant strain of infectious bursal disease virus which can circumvent vaccination with standard type 1 strains. Journal of General Virology 72: 1835–1843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ismail, NM and Saif, YM (1991). Immunogenicity of infectious bursal disease viruses in chickens. Avian Diseases 35: 460–469.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ismail, NM, Saif, YM and Moorhead, PD (1988). Lack of pathogenicity of five serotype 2 infectious bursal disease viruses in chickens. Avian Diseases 32: 757–759.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ismail, NM, Saif, YM, Wigle, WL, Havenstein, GB and Jackson, C (1990). Infectious bursal disease virus variant from commercial leghorn pullets. Avian Diseases 31: 141–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackwood, DH and Saif, YM (1987). Antigenic diversity of infectious bursal disease viruses. Avian Diseases 31: 766–770.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jackwood, DJ and Jackwood, RJ (1994). Infectious bursal disease viruses: molecular differentiation of antigenic subtypes among serotype 1 viruses. Avian Diseases 38: 531–537.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jackwood, DJ and Sommer, SE (1997). Restriction fragment length polymorphisms in the VP2 gene of infectious bursal disease viruses. Avian Diseases 41: 627–637.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jackwood, DJ and Sommer, SE (1998). Genetic heterogeneity in the VP2 gene of infectious bursal disease viruses detected in commercially reared chickens. Avian Diseases 42: 321–339.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jackwood, DJ and Sommer, SE (1999). Restriction fragment length polymorphisms in the VP2 gene of infectious bursal disease viruses from outside the United States. Avian Diseases 43: 310–314.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jackwood, DJ and Sommer, SE (2002). Identification of infectious bursal disease virus quasispecies in commercial vaccines and field isolates of this double-stranded RNA virus. Virology 304: 105–113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jackwood, DJ, Saif, YM and Moorhead, PD (1985). Immunogenicity and antigenicity of infectious bursal disease virus serotypes 1 and 2 in chickens. Avian Diseases 29: 1184–1194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackwood, DJ, Sommer, SE and Knoblich, HV (2001). Amino acid comparison of infectious bursal disease viruses placed in the same or different molecular groups using RT-PCR-RFLP. Avian Diseases 45: 330–339.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jackwood, DJ, Spalding, BD and Sommer, SE (2003). Real-time reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction detection and analysis of nucleotide sequences coding for a neutralizing epitope on infectious bursal disease viruses. Avian Diseases 47: 170–176.Google ScholarPubMed
Lin, Z, Kato, A, Otaki, Y, Nakamura, T, Sasmaz, E and Ueda, S (1993). Sequence comparison of a highly virulent infectious bursal disease virus prevalent in Japan. Avian Diseases 37: 315–323.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liu, H-J, Giambrone, JJ and Dormitorio, T (1994). Detection of genetic variations in serotype 1 isolates of infectious bursal disease virus using polymerase chain reaction and restriction and nuclease analysis. Journal of Virological Methods 48: 281–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moody, A, Sellers, S and Bumstead, N (2000). Measuring infectious bursal disease virus RNA in blood by multiplex real-time quantitative RT-PCR. Journal of Virological Methods 85: 55–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Proffitt, JM, Bastin, DA and Lehrbach, PR (1999). Sequence analysis of Australian infectious bursal disease viruses. Australian Veterinary Journal 77: 186–188.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raue, R and Mazaheri, A (2003). Eine real-time RT-PCR zum Nachweis des Virus der infektiosen Bursitis auf der Grundlage des Genomsegments B. Archiv für Geflügelkunde 67: 22–27.Google Scholar
Raue, R, Müller, H (2001). Detection and quantification of IBDV by real-time RT-PCR. In: Proceedings, II International Symposium on Infectious Bursal Disease and Chicken Infectious AnaemiaRauischholzhausen, Germany pp. 271–277Google Scholar
Rosenberger, JK and Cloud, SS (1986). Isolation and characterization of variant infectious bursal disease viruses [abstract]. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 189: 357.Google Scholar
Schnitzler, D, Bernstein, F, Müller, H and Becht, H (1993). The genetic basis for the antigenicity of the VP2 protein of the infectious bursal disease virus. Journal of General Virology 74: 1563–1571.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vakharia, VN, He, J, Ahamed, B and Snyder, DB (1994). Molecular basis of antigenic variation in infectious bursal disease virus. Virus Research 31: 265–273.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van den Berg, TP, Gonze, M and Meulemans, G (1991). Acute infectious bursal disease in poultry: isolation and characterization of a highly virulent strain. Avian Pathology 20: 133–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, CC, Lin, TL, Zhang, HG, Davis, VS and Boyle, JA (1992). Molecular detection of infectious bursal disease virus by polymerase chain reaction. Avian Diseases 36: 221–226.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zierenberg, K, Raue, R, Müller, H (2001). Rapid identification of very virulent strains of infectious bursal disease virus by reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction combined with restriction enzyme analysis. Avian Pathology 30: 55–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar