Characterization of African swine fever virus Caucasus isolate in European wild boars.
In 2007, ASF affecting domestic pigs and wild boars was reported in the Caucasus region. The virus strain involved was related to isolates of genotype II, which are circulating in Mozambique, Madagascar, and Zambia (4). Especially in Russia, ASF recurs and shows a clear tendency to move northward (5). This unresolved situation increases the risk of introducing the virus into virus-free areas, and the involvement of wild boars raises special concerns. As seen with classical swine fever, the growing population of wild boars is problematic for animal disease control, particularly if the infection reaches endemicity (6). Therefore, knowledge about disease dynamics is vital for risk assessment and strategy design, particularly because no vaccine against ASF is available.
Therefore, animal experiments were carried out at the Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut (Greifswald-Insel Riems, Germany), and the National Research Institute for Veterinary Virology and Microbiology (NRIVVaMR, Pokrov, Russia). The aim was to define clinical signs, disease dynamics, and postmortem lesions in wild boars after intramuscular and oral infection with ASFV Caucasus isolates.
The study comprised 2 experimental parts: 1) oral infection conducted at the Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut and 2) intramuscular infection at NRIVVaMR. For oral infection, we used a 2008 isolate from Armenia. The experiment was conducted by using 6 wild boar piglets 9 weeks of age. Three domestic pigs were used as contact controls and were handled in the same manner as the wild boar piglets. The animals were kept under high-containment conditions. After acclimatization, the wild boars were infected orally with 2 mL of a spleen suspension containing [10.sup.6] median tissue culture infectious dose ASFV/mL. Two days after infection, 3 domestic weaner pigs were added to the pen with the wild boar piglets. Starting from the day of infection, rectal temperature and clinical signs were recorded. Oral and fecal swabs were collected from the wild boars at 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7 days postinfection (dpi). In addition, blood samples were taken at 0, 2, 5, 6, and 7 dpi. Blood from the domestic pigs was sampled at 0, 6, 9, and 13 dpi. Necropsy was performed on all animals.
For real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR), viral DNA was extracted by using manual and automated extraction methods according to manufacturer instructions. Subsequently, qPCR was performed according to the protocol published by King et al. (7) with slight modifications by using an Mx3005P PCR Cycler (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA, USA).
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
For intramuscular infection, 4 wild boars 9 months of age were brought to the containment stables of the NRIVVaMR. One animal was inoculated intramuscularly with 1,000 hemadsorbing units 50% of a 2009 virus isolate from the Chechen Republic, which is identical to the isolate used in the oral trial in all genome fragments routinely sequenced. The remaining animals were housed together with the infected animal as contact controls.
Clinical signs of infection were recorded every day. Samples of visceral organs, skin, and hair were taken during necropsy and subjected to qPCR. Isolation of viral DNA was performed by using an in-house kit based on the modified method published by Boom et al. (8). The qPCR for ASFV detection was carried out according to the protocol published by King et al. (7) with a Rotorgene 6000 instrument (Corbett Research, Sydney, Queensland, Australia).
After oral infection, an acute fatal course of the disease developed in all wild boar piglets, and they died within 7 days. Apart from severe depression, slight diarrhea, and reduced feed intake, only high fever was observed starting 3-4 dpi. During postmortem examinations, enlarged and hemorrhagic lymph nodes (Figure 1) and hemorrhagic gastritis (Figure 2) were observed. Acute fatal ASF developed in 2 of the domestic pigs 11-12 dpi of the wild boars. These animals died 1 week later showing severe but unspecific symptoms. One domestic pig became infected later. It only showed fever at 20 dpi and was euthanized on day 25. Infection of this animal was clearly linked to contact with blood from a moribund pen mate.
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
During the clinical phase of the disease, qPCR was positive for all blood samples with first positive results 2 dpi. Oropharyngeal and fecal swabs were positive mainly on days 6 and 7. An overview of the qPCR results is presented in Table 1.
On the third day after intramuscular inoculation, the infected wild boar showed depression, inappetence, and increased respiratory frequency. It died at 5 dpi showing hemorrhagic nasal discharge. The 3 contact animals showed similar symptoms at 8 dpi of the intramuscularly infected wild boar and died 2 days later. Postmortem examinations showed hemorrhages in multiple edematously enlarged lymph nodes, most prominent pulmonary hyperemia and alveolar edema, hyperplasia of the mesenteric lymph nodes, and acute gastritis with hemorrhages. Skin lesions were not present.
ASF genome was detected in the samples of visceral organs and lymph nodes of all animals. In samples of skin and kidneys, viral DNA was detected only in the infected animal. Results of qPCR are presented in the Table 2.
Knowledge about disease dynamics in domestic pigs and wild boars is a prerequisite for risk assessment and prevention strategy design. Unfortunately, wild boar data are scarce. To contribute to this information, animal trials were conducted for an experimental characterization of recent Caucasian ASFV isolates in wild boars.
We concluded that the Caucasian isolates are highly virulent in wild boars. Both oral and intramuscular infection resulted in 100% lethality.
PCR results showed that the ASFV genome is easily detected in blood and organ samples of diseased animals. Swab samples were positive in the clinical phase of infection but showed much lower genome loads. Shedding of ASFV through nasal discharge or feces, and thus overall contagiousness, seems to be limited.
Transmission to domestic pigs was delayed in comparison to transmission to wild boars. The most likely reason for this difference seems to be contact with blood. Although this factor could be observed most certainly for the contact wild boars, domestic pigs had only limited contact with blood.
On the basis of these data, it seems unlikely the Caucasian isolates have the potential to become endemic in European wild boar populations without a distinct change in virulence. So far no indications exist that the virulence of ASFV is changing in affected regions in Russia.
A risk factor for disease control could be the involvement of tick vectors. Until now, no indications exist that ticks are involved in ASFV outbreaks in the Caucasus region and Russia. Moreover, it has to be kept in mind that the wild boar's way of life does not facilitate contact with soft ticks. Nevertheless, this possibility was not examined during this study and needs further investigation.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/ 10.3201/eid1712.110430
We thank all animal caretakers and technicians involved in these studies. Our special thanks go to Raquel Portugal for virus titration and Katharina Brehm for helping us with sampling and sample processing.
Ms Gabriel is a veterinarian at the Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Institute of Diagnostic Virology. Her research focuses on pathogenesis, molecular epidemiology, and control of classical and African swine fever.
(1.) Penrith ML, Vosloo W. Review of African swine fever: transmission, spread and control. J S Afr Vet Assoc. 2009;80:58-62.
(2.) Dixon LK, Escribano JM, Martins C, Rock DL, Salas ML, Wilkinson PJ. Asfarviridae. In: Fauquet CM, Mayo MA, Maniloff J, Desselberger U, Ball LA, editors. Virus taxonomy: eighth report of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses. London: Elsevier/Academic Press; 2005. p. 135-43.
(3.) McVicar JW, Mebus CA, Becker HN, Belden RC, Gibbs EP. Induced African swine fever in feral pigs. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1981;179:441-6.
(4.) Rowlands RJ, Michaud V, Heath L, Hutchings G, Oura C, Vosloo W, et al. African swine fever virus isolate, Georgia, 2007. Emerg Infect Dis. 2008;14:1870-4. doi:10.3201/eid1412.080591
(5.) World Organisation for Animal Health. WAHID interface. Disease information [cited 2011 Mar 21]. http://web.oie.int/wahis/public. php?page=disease&disease_type=Terrestrial&disease_id=12
(6.) European Commission Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare. Report: Classical swine fever in wild boar. Adopted 10th August 1999 XXIV/B3/R09/1999, 1-46 [cited 2011 Mar 21]. http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scah/out24_en.pdf
(7.) King DP, Reid SM, Hutchings GH, Grierson SS, Wilkinson PJ, Dixon LK, et al. Development of a TaqMan PCR assay with internal amplification control for the detection of African swine fever virus. J Virol Methods. 2003;107:53-61. doi:10.1016/S01660934(02)00189-1
(8.) Boom R, Sol CJ, Salimans MM, Jansen CL, Wertheim-van Dillen PM, van der Noordaa J. Rapid and simple method for purification of nucleic acids. J Clin Microbiol. 1990;28:495-503.
Claudia Gabriel, Sandra Blome, Alexander Malogolovkin, Stanislav Parilov, Denis Kolbasov, Jens P. Teifke, and Martin Beer
Author affiliations: Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Greifswald-Insel Riems, Germany (C. Gabriel, S. Blome, J.P. Teifke, M. Beer); and National Research Institute for Veterinary Virology and Microbiology, Pokrov, Russia (A. Malogolovkin, S. Parilov, D. Kolbasov)
Address for correspondence: Sandra Blome, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Institute of Diagnostic Virology, Suedufer 10, 17493 Greifswald-Insel Riems, Germany; email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Table 1. Real-time PCR results of blood and swab samples after oral infection in study of African swine fever virus in European wild boars * Animal, sample source Days postinfection of wild boar 0 1 2 Wild boar 1 Blood No [C.sub.t] ND No [C.sub.t] Oropharyngeal swab No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] Fecal swab No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] Wild boar 2 Blood No [C.sub.t] ND No [C.sub.t] Oropharyngeal swab No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] Fecal swab No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] Wild boar 3 Blood No [C.sub.t] ND No [C.sub.t] Oropharyngeal swab No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] Fecal swab No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] Wild boar 4 Blood No [C.sub.t] ND No [C.sub.t] Oropharyngeal swab No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] Fecal swab No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] Wild boar 5 Blood No [C.sub.t] ND 39 Oropharyngeal swab No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] Fecal swab No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] Wild boar 6 Blood No [C.sub.t] ND No [C.sub.t] Oropharyngeal swab No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] Fecal swab No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] Domestic pig 1, blood No [C.sub.t] ND ND Domestic pig 2, blood No [C.sub.t] ND ND Domestic pig 3, blood No [C.sub.t] ND ND Animal, sample source Days postinfection of wild boar 3 5 6 Wild boar 1 Blood ND 23 Oropharyngeal swab No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] Fecal swab No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] Wild boar 2 Blood ND 22 20 Oropharyngeal swab No [C.sub.t] 37 37 Fecal swab No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] 38 Wild boar 3 Blood ND 28 22 Oropharyngeal swab No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] 38 Fecal swab No [C.sub.t] 37 34 Wild boar 4 Blood ND 25 26 Oropharyngeal swab 37 No [C.sub.t] 34 Fecal swab No [C.sub.t] 30 29 Wild boar 5 Blood ND 25 23 Oropharyngeal swab No [C.sub.t] 39 35 Fecal swab No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] 29 Wild boar 6 Blood ND 23 24 Oropharyngeal swab 37 No [C.sub.t] 34 Fecal swab No [C.sub.t] 35 32 Domestic pig 1, blood ND ND 39 Domestic pig 2, blood ND ND No [C.sub.t] Domestic pig 3, blood ND ND No [C.sub.t] Animal, sample source Days postinfection of wild boar 7 9 13 Wild boar 1 Blood Oropharyngeal swab Fecal swab Wild boar 2 Blood 24 Oropharyngeal swab 37 Fecal swab No [C.sub.t] Wild boar 3 Blood 23 Oropharyngeal swab 34 Fecal swab 33 Wild boar 4 Blood 26 Oropharyngeal swab 37 Fecal swab 33 Wild boar 5 Blood Oropharyngeal swab Fecal swab Wild boar 6 Blood Oropharyngeal swab Fecal swab Domestic pig 1, blood ND No [C.sub.t] 21 Domestic pig 2, blood ND No [C.sub.t] 23 Domestic pig 3, blood ND No [C.sub.t] No [C.sub.t] Animal, sample source Days postinfection of wild boar 17 20 Wild boar 1 Blood Oropharyngeal swab Fecal swab Wild boar 2 Blood Oropharyngeal swab Fecal swab Wild boar 3 Blood Oropharyngeal swab Fecal swab Wild boar 4 Blood Oropharyngeal swab Fecal swab Wild boar 5 Blood Oropharyngeal swab Fecal swab Wild boar 6 Blood Oropharyngeal swab Fecal swab Domestic pig 1, blood 20 Domestic pig 2, blood ND Domestic pig 3, blood ND 29 ([dagger]) * [C.sub.t], cycle threshold; ND, not done because of missing samples. Numbers indicate [C.sub.t] values. ([dagger]) Serum sample instead of whole blood sample was used. Table 2. Real-time PCR results of organ samples taken after intramuscular infection in a study of African swine fever virus in European wild boars * Wild boar Lung Heart Spleen Lymph nodes 1 19 19 18 19 2 20 20 19 20 3 21 21 20 20 4 20 21 19 20 * Cycle threshold values indicated.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Author:||Gabriel, Claudia; Blome, Sandra; Malogolovkin, Alexander; Parilov, Stanislav; Kolbasov, Denis; Teifk|
|Publication:||Emerging Infectious Diseases|
|Date:||Dec 1, 2011|
|Previous Article:||Fatal outbreak of Mycoplasma capricolum pneumonia in endangered markhors.|
|Next Article:||Novel sylvatic rabies virus variant in endangered golden palm civet, Sri Lanka.|