1887

Abstract

SUMMARY

The relatedness of swine vesicular disease virus (SVDV) and Coxsackie B5 virus has been studied by virus neutralization and immunodiffusion tests and by hybridization of the virus RNAs. Clearly defined differences between the two viruses were found by the three methods. Isolates of SVDV from several countries were very closely related but could be differentiated. Recent isolates of Coxsackie B5 virus also appeared to be similar but clear differences could be detected between these and the prototype (Faulkner) strain of the virus. The SVDV isolates were more closely related to the Faulkner strain than to the recent isolates of Coxsackie B5 virus. Perhaps of more importance, the Faulkner strain was more closely related to SVDV than it was to the recent Coxsackie B5 isolates. The significance of these observations in relation to the recent emergence of swine vesicular disease is discussed.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/0022-1317-31-2-231
1976-05-01
2021-10-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jgv/31/2/JV0310020231.html?itemId=/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/0022-1317-31-2-231&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. BALTIMORE D. 1966; Purification and properties of poliovirus double-stranded ribonucleic acid. Journal of Molecular Biology 18:421–428
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BROOKSBY J. B. 1975; Swine vesicular disease: history of the disease. The Veterinary Record 95:108
    [Google Scholar]
  3. BROWN F., TALBOT P., BURROWS R. 1973; Antigenic differences between isolates of swine vesicular disease virus and their relationship to Coxsackie B5 virus. Nature, London 245:315–316
    [Google Scholar]
  4. BROWN F., WILD F. 1974; Variation in the Coxsackie virus type B5 and its possible role in the etiology of swine vesicular disease. Intervirology 3:125–128
    [Google Scholar]
  5. DE CASTRO M. P. 1964; Behaviour of the foot-and-mouth disease virus in cell cultures: susceptibility of the IBRS-2 line. Archivos do Institute Biologico Säo Paulo 31:63–78
    [Google Scholar]
  6. DIETZSCHOLD B., KAADEN O. R., TOKUI T., BOHM H. O. 1971; Polynucleotide sequence homologies among the RNAs of foot-and-mouth disease virus types A, C and O. Journal of General Virology 13:1–7
    [Google Scholar]
  7. GARLAND A. J. M., MANN J. A. 1974; Attempts to infect pigs with Coxsackie virus type B5. The Journal of Hygiene (Cambridge 73:85–96
    [Google Scholar]
  8. GRAVES J. H. 1973; Serological relationship of swine vesicular disease virus and Coxsackie B5 virus. Nature, London 245:314–315
    [Google Scholar]
  9. HARRIS T. J. R., BROWN F. 1975; Correlation of polypeptide composition with antigenic variation in the swine vesicular disease and Coxsackie B5 viruses. Nature, London 258:758–760
    [Google Scholar]
  10. KARBER G. 1931; Beitrag zur Kollektiven Behandlung pharmakologische Reihensuche. Archiv für experimentelle Pathologie und Pharmakologie 162:480–483
    [Google Scholar]
  11. MOWAT G. N., DARBYSHIRE J. H., HUNTLEY J. F. 1972; Differentiation of a vesicular disease of pigs in Hong Kong from foot-and-mouth disease. Veterinary Records618–621
    [Google Scholar]
  12. NARDELLI L., LODETTI E., GUALANDI G. L., BURROWS R., GOODRIDGE D., BROWN F., CARTWRIGHT B. 1968; A foot-and-mouth disease syndrome in pigs caused by an enterovirus. Nature, London 319:1275–1276
    [Google Scholar]
  13. OUCHTERLONY O. 1948; Antigen-antibody reactions in gels. Arkiv for kemi, mineralogi och geologi 26B:1–9
    [Google Scholar]
  14. YOUNG N. A. 1973; Polioviruses, Coxsackieviruses and Echoviruses: comparison of the genomes by RNA hybridisation. Journal of Virology 11:832–839
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/0022-1317-31-2-231
Loading
/content/journal/jgv/10.1099/0022-1317-31-2-231
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most cited this month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error