Jump to Main Content
Visual and equipment-free reverse transcription recombinase polymerase amplification method for rapid detection of foot-and-mouth disease virus
- Liu, Libing, Wang, Jinfeng, Zhang, Ruoxi, Lin, Mi, Shi, Ruihan, Han, Qingan, Wang, Jianchang, Yuan, Wanzhe
- BMC veterinary research 2018 v.14 no.1 pp. 263
- Classical swine fever virus, Encephalomyocarditis virus, Foot-and-mouth disease virus, Porcine circovirus-2, Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus, RNA, Suid herpesvirus 1, Vesiculovirus, animals, detection limit, foot-and-mouth disease, genes, heat, pathogens, quantitative polymerase chain reaction, rapid methods, reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction, reverse transcription, serotypes, veterinary medicine
- BACKGROUND: Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), which is caused by foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV), is a highly contagious tansboundary disease of cloven-hoofed animals and causes devastating economic damages. Accurate, rapid and simple detection of FMDV is critical to containing an FMD outbreak. Recombinase polymerase amplification (RPA) has been explored for detection of diverse pathogens because of its accuracy, rapidness and simplicity. A visible and equipment-free reverse-transcription recombinase polymerase amplification assay combined with lateral flow strip (LFS RT-RPA) was developed to detect the FMDV using primers and LF probe specific for the 3D gene. RESULTS: The FMDV LFS RT-RPA assay was performed successfully in a closed fist using body heat for 15 min, and the products were visible on the LFS inspected by the naked eyes within 2 min. The assay could detect FMDV serotypes O, A and Asia1, and there were no cross-reactions with vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), encephalomyocarditis virus (EMCV), classical swine fever virus (CSFV), porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV), porcine circovirus 2 (PCV2) and pseudorabies virus (PRV). The analytical sensitivity was 1.0 × 10² copies in vitro transcribed FMDV RNA per reaction, which was the same as a real-time RT-PCR. For the 55 samples, FMDV RNA positive rate was 45.5% (25/55) by LFS RT-RPA and 52.7% (29/55) by real-time RT-PCR. For the LFS RT-RPA assay, the positive and negative predicative values were 100% and 80%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of the LFS RT-RPA assay was comparable to real-time RT-PCR, while the LFS RT-RPA assay was much faster and easier to be performed. The developed FMDV LFS RT-RPA assay provides an attractive and promising tool for rapid and reliable detection of FMDV in under-equipped laboratory and at point-of-need facility, which is of great significance in FMD control in low resource settings.