ArticlePloS one2024
Detection of lymphoproliferative disease virus in Iowa Wild Turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo): Comparison of two sections of the proviral genome.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An accurate diagnostic test is an essential aspect of successfully monitoring and managing wildlife diseases. Lymphoproliferative Disease Virus (LPDV) is an avian retrovirus that was first identified in domestic turkeys in Europe and was first reported in a Wild Turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) in the United States in 2009. It has since been found to be widely distributed throughout North America. The majority of studies have utilized bone marrow and PCR primers targeting a 413-nucleotide sequence of the gag gene of the provirus to detect infection. While prior studies have evaluated the viability of other tissues for LPDV detection (whole blood, spleen, liver, cloacal swabs) none to date have studied differences in detection rates when utilizing different genomic regions of the provirus. This study examined the effectiveness of another section of the provirus, a 335-nucleotide sequence starting in the U3 region of the LTR (Long Terminal Repeat) and extending into the Matrix of the gag region (henceforth LTR), for detecting LPDV. Bone marrow samples from hunter-harvested Wild Turkeys (n = 925) were tested for LPDV with the gag gene and a subset (n = 417) including both those testing positive and those where LPDV was not detected was re-tested with LTR. The positive percent agreement (PPA) was 97.1% (68 of 70 gag positive samples tested positive with LTR) while the negative percent agreement (NPA) was only 68.0% (236 of 347 gag negative samples tested negative with LTR). Cohen's Kappa (κ = 0.402, Z = 10.26, p<0.0001) and the McNemar test (OR = 55.5, p<0.0001) indicated weak agreement between the two gene regions. We found that in Iowa Wild Turkeys use of the LTR region identified LPDV in many samples in which we failed to detect LPDV using the gag region and that LTR may be more appropriate for LPDV surveillance and monitoring. However, neither region of the provirus resulted in perfect detection and additional work is necessary to determine if LTR is more reliable in other geographic regions where LPDV occurs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.