Rapid West Nile Virus Antigen Detection

Nicholas A Panella,Kristen L Burkhalter,Roger S Nasci,Stanley A Langevin,Lynn M Schooley,Nicholas Komar,Aaron C Brault,Brad J Biggerstaff

doi:10.3201/eid1110.040394

Nicholas A Panella, Kristen L Burkhalter + Show 6 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1110.040394

Copy DOI

Abstract

We compared the VecTest WNV antigen assay with standard methods of West Nile virus (WNV) detection in swabs from American Crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos) and House Sparrows (Passer domesticus). The VecTest detected WNV more frequently than the plaque assay and was comparable to a TaqMan reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction.

Highlights

We compared the VecTest WNV antigen assay with standard methods of West Nile virus (WNV) detection in swabs from American Crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos) and House Sparrows (Passer domesticus)
Three field evaluations of an antigen detection assay applied to corvid carcasses collected shortly after death found that oral swabs were more sensitive than cloacal swabs for detecting WNV antigen, and that sensitivity of the VecTest WNV antigen assay (Medical Analysis Systems, Camarillo, CA, USA) applied to oral swabs was >80% for American Crows, lower for other corvids, and variable for a variety of other species [7,8,9]
One objective of our study was to determine whether oral or cloacal swabs were preferable for WNV testing of dead birds

Summary

Introduction

We compared the VecTest WNV antigen assay with standard methods of West Nile virus (WNV) detection in swabs from American Crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos) and House Sparrows (Passer domesticus). Cloacal and oral (nasopharyngeal) swabs from dead corvids (crows and jays) are reliable sources of WNV RNA and infectious virions [6]. All swab specimens collected from crow carcasses were positive by the TaqMan RT-PCR method, using 2 sets of WNV-specific primers [2].

Results

Conclusion