PaperAntigenic analysis of serotype O foot-and-mouth disease virus isolates from the Middle East, 1981 to 1988
References (18)
The virus of foot-and-mouth disease
Adv. Virus Res.
(1958)Antigenic variation in relation to epidemiology and control of foot-and-mouth disease
Br. Vet. J.
(1978)- et al.
Evaluation of the antigenic variation within type A foot-and-mouth disease virus isolates from Asia
J. Biol. Stand.
(1984) Antigenic variation in foot-and-mouth disease: studies based on the virus neutralization reaction
J. Biol. Stand.
(1984)- et al.
Rapid correlation between field isolates and vaccine strains of foot-and-mouth disease virus
Vaccine
(1988) - et al.
Sur la pluralité des virus aphteux
C.R. Hebd. Séances Acad. Sci. Paris
(1922) - et al.
Experimentelle untersuchungen über die pluralität des maul- und klauenseuche-virus
Berl. Tierärztl. Wochenschr.
(1926) - et al.
Methods used in typing the virus of foot-and-mouth disease at Pirbright, 1950–1955
The classification of subtype variants of the virus of foot-and-mouth disease
Bull. Off. Int. Epizoot.
(1962)
Cited by (43)
Genetic variation and evolution of foot–and–mouth disease virus serotype A in relation to vaccine matching
2021, VaccineCitation Excerpt :The antigenic relationship of viruses based on their neutralization by antibodies is given by the following ratio: ‘r1′ = neutralizing antibody titer against the heterologous virus/neutralizing antibody titer against the homologous virus. Serological relationships between the vaccine strain and field isolates were evaluated according to the criteria previously described [30,31]. The cut-off value of 0.3 was used by OIE/FAO Foot-and-Mouth Disease Reference Laboratory Network.
Evolution of antigenic and genetic characteristics of foot-and-mouth disease virus serotype A circulating in Thailand, 2007–2019
2020, Virus ResearchCitation Excerpt :The reference vaccine strains and field isolates (n = 133) were titrated using an indirect sandwich ELISA (Kitching et al., 1988) to determine the working dilution for the LP ELISA. The criteria for interpreting r-values are as follow (Samuel et al., 1990): r = 0–0.19: A highly significant serological difference between the isolate and the reference vaccine strain.
Genetic and antigenic relationship of foot–and–mouth disease virus serotype O isolates with the vaccine strain O1/BFS
2018, VaccineCitation Excerpt :The antigenic relationship of viruses based on their neutralization by antibodies is given by the following ratio: ‘r1’ = neutralizing antibody titer against the heterologous virus/neutralizing antibody titer against the homologous virus. Serological relationships between vaccine strain and field isolates were evaluated according to criteria previously described [24,25]. The r1 values ≥0.3 are indicative of cross protection, whereas values of <0.3 indicate dissimilar vaccine strains and test isolates.
Novel 6xHis tagged foot-and-mouth disease virus vaccine bound to nanolipoprotein adjuvant via metal ions provides antigenic distinction and effective protective immunity
2016, VirologyCitation Excerpt :Neutralizing titers were reported as the reciprocal of the last serum dilution to neutralize 100 TCID50 of homologous FMDV in 50% of the wells, as previously described (Rweyemamu et al., 1978). One-way antigenic relations (r1-values) of mutant viruses relative to A24 FMDV WT reference virus were calculated as the ratio between the heterologous and homologous serum titers and were interpreted as described by Samuel et al. (1990). In particular, r1-values between 0 and 0.19 indicate highly significant antigenic variation to the reference strain; values of 0.20–0.39 show antigenic relatedness to the reference strain; and values of 0.40–1.0 (and above) demonstrates that the reference and mutant viruses are antigenically similar.
Intra-serotype SAT2 chimeric foot-and-mouth disease vaccine protects cattle against FMDV challenge
2015, VaccineCitation Excerpt :Vaccines therefore need to be custom-made to be effective. One approach to address the problem of antigenic variation in the various epidemiological clusters [2,44] would be the development of cross-serotype and intra-serotype chimeric vaccines [25]. The proposed strategy entails the development of chimeric FMDV by substituting antigenic-coding regions such as the external capsid proteins (1B-1D/2A) in an infectious genome-length cDNA clone of a suitable strain [34].
Molecular characterization of serotype Asia-1 foot-and-mouth disease viruses in Pakistan and Afghanistan; emergence of a new genetic Group and evidence for a novel recombinant virus
2011, Infection, Genetics and EvolutionCitation Excerpt :Antigenic analysis recently reported by the WRL, Pirbright, UK shows that a virus (As/PAK/29/2009) of this Group was not efficiently neutralized by antisera generated against the Asia-1/Shamir vaccine (WRL-FMD, 2010). The r1 value has been used previously to ascertain antigenic relationships between the FMDV field isolates and the vaccine strains (Nayak et al., 2001; Parlak et al., 2007; Rweyemamu, 1984; Samuel et al., 1990). Using VNT, r1 values of ⩾0.3 have been shown to reflect a close antigenic relationship between the field isolates and vaccine strains, indicative of good protection by the vaccine, whereas values <0.3 reflect a distant antigenic relationship, indicating that the vaccine is unlikely to protect against the field isolates.
- ‡
Present address: Springfield Cottage, 14 Norton Bavant, Warminster, Wiltshire, UK