AEM
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Novoa, B.
Right arrow Articles by Figueras, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Novoa, B.
Right arrow Articles by Figueras, A.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Novoa, B.
Right arrow Articles by Figueras, A.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Appl. Environ. Microbiol., Aug 1995, 2925-2929, Vol 61, No. 8
Copyright © 1995, American Society for Microbiology

Comparison of different procedures for serotyping aquatic birnavirus

B Novoa, S Blake, BL Nicholson and A Figueras
Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas, Vigo, Spain.

The current classification of aquatic birnaviruses is based on seroneutralization assays with polyclonal antibodies. In this study a comparison of several procedures used for serotyping aquatic birnaviruses was made with 10 virus strains (4 reference strains from salmonids and 6 birnaviruses isolated from turbot [Scophthalmus maximus]). The relationships among the birnavirus strains were studied by seroneutralization assay with polyclonal antibodies and by immunodot assay with both polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies. The results were compared with a presumptive classification obtained from analysis of restriction enzyme patterns of cDNA products obtained by PCR amplification. No correlation was found among the results obtained by the different procedures. The seroneutralization and the immunodot assays with polyclonal antibodies were not useful in classifying these birnaviruses strains; however, patterns of reaction with monoclonal antibodies emphasized the individuality of the strains, particularly in the case of two strains (231 and 460) whose patterns did not correspond to established serotypes. The application of PCR and restriction enzyme analysis is a promising system for approaching the classification of this viral group on the basis of genomic differences and similarities. The variable results obtained in this comparison lead us to think that the current classification of aquatic birnavirus may not be the most accurate and there is a need for modification incorporating recent isolates, not only from salmonid species but also from marine fish.





Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
J. Bacteriol. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. Eukaryot. Cell All ASM Journals

Copyright © 1995 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.