These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Effect of collection material and sample processing on pig oral fluid testing results.
    Author: Olsen C, Karriker L, Wang C, Binjawadagi B, Renukaradhya G, Kittawornrat A, Lizano S, Coetzee J, Main R, Meiszberg A, Panyasing Y, Zimmerman J.
    Journal: Vet J; 2013 Oct; 198(1):158-63. PubMed ID: 24011474.
    Abstract:
    The effect of sampling material, sample processing, and collection order on the detection of analytes in pig oral fluid specimens was evaluated. Oral fluid samples were collected from 104 pens of commercial wean-to-finish pigs using ropes made of three different materials. Processed (centrifuged and filtered) and unprocessed oral fluid samples were tested using commercial ELISAs for porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) antibodies and total IgM, IgA, and IgG. Unprocessed samples were tested for PRRSV nucleic acid and processed samples were assayed for PRRSV neutralizing antibodies. Analysis of the data using repeated measures ANOVA and Tukey-Kramer adjusted t tests found statistically significant, non-uniform, and assay-dependent effects of all three factors. Therefore, when testing oral fluid specimens, swine health specialists, veterinarians, and diagnosticians should be aware of the potential impact of these factors on specific analytes. For monitoring health and welfare parameters, oral fluid samples should be collected using cotton-based materials and undergo minimal post-collection processing.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]