title: How Does Sampling Methodology Influence Molecular Detection and Isolation Success in Influenza A Virus Field Studies?
abstract: Wild waterfowl are important reservoir hosts for influenza A virus (IAV) and a potential source of spillover infections in other hosts, including poultry and swine. The emergence of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) viruses, such as H5N1 and H5N8, and subsequent spread along migratory flyways prompted the initiation of several programs in Europe, North America, and Africa to monitor circulation of HPAI and low-pathogenicity precursor viruses (low-pathogenicity avian influenza [LPAI] viruses). Given the costs of maintaining such programs, it is essential to establish best practice for field methodologies to provide robust data for epidemiological interpretation. Here, we use long-term surveillance data from a single site to evaluate the influence of a number of parameters on virus detection and isolation of LPAI viruses. A total of 26,586 samples (oropharyngeal, fecal, and cloacal) collected from wild mallards were screened by real-time PCR, and positive samples were subjected to isolation in embryonated chicken eggs. The LPAI virus detection rate was influenced by the sample type: cloacal/fecal samples showed a consistently higher detection rate and lower cycle threshold (Ct) value than oropharyngeal samples. Molecular detection was more sensitive than isolation, and virus isolation success was proportional to the number of RNA copies in the sample. Interestingly, for a given Ct value, the isolation success was lower in samples from adult birds than in those from juveniles. Comparing the results of specific real-time reverse transcriptase (RRT)-PCRs and of isolation, it was clear that coinfections were common in the investigated birds. The effects of sample type and detection methods warrant some caution in interpretation of the surveillance data.
authors.affiliation: Centre for Ecology and Evolution in Microbial Model Systems (EEMiS), Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Linnaeus University, Kalmar, Sweden nlatorre@uga.edu.
authors.forename: Neus
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Latorre-Margalef
authors.affiliation: Centre for Ecology and Evolution in Microbial Model Systems (EEMiS), Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Linnaeus University, Kalmar, Sweden.
authors.forename: Alexis
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Avril
authors.affiliation: Centre for Ecology and Evolution in Microbial Model Systems (EEMiS), Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Linnaeus University, Kalmar, Sweden.
authors.forename: Conny
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Tolf
authors.affiliation: Section of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medical Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.|Zoonosis Science Center, IMBIM, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
authors.forename: Björn
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Olsen
authors.affiliation: Centre for Ecology and Evolution in Microbial Model Systems (EEMiS), Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Linnaeus University, Kalmar, Sweden.
authors.forename: Jonas
authors.identifier: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1152-4235
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Waldenström
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D002988:Cloaca / Q000821:virology; D004372:Ducks; D005243:Feces / Q000821:virology; D009980:Influenza A virus / Q000302:isolation & purification*; D005585:Influenza in Birds / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000453:epidemiology*; D025202:Molecular Diagnostic Techniques / Q000379:methods*; D009960:Oropharynx / Q000821:virology; D060888:Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D013048:Specimen Handling / Q000379:methods*; D013548:Sweden; D014776:Virus Cultivation / Q000379:methods*