ArticlePorcine health management2024
Detection of PRRSV-1 in tongue fluids under experimental and field conditions and comparison of different sampling material for PRRSV sow herd monitoring.
Article in Porcine health management, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Longitudinal Molecular Epidemiology and Genomic Evolution of Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus in a Large-Scale Swine Production System in Northern China, 2023-2026.Transboundary and emerging diseases · 2026Article
- Evaluating postmortem tongue fluids as a tool for monitoring PRRSV and IAV in the post-wean phases of swine production.Porcine health management · 2025Article
- Effect of Time and Temperature on the Detection of PRRSV RNA and Endogenous Internal Sample Control in Porcine Tongue Fluids.Veterinary sciences · 2025Article
- Evaluating stillborn and litter size as indicators of PRRSV detection in live piglets and the use of stillborn tongue fluids as risk-based samples for PRRSV monitoring.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Postmortem Sampling in Piglet Populations: Unveiling Specimens Accuracy for Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Detection.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInfection with porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) leads to significant economic losses worldwide. One of the initial measures following an outbreak is to stabilise the herd and to prevent vertical transmission of PRRSV. The objective of this study was to detect PRRSV in different sampling material, both in an experimental model and on a commercial piglet producing farm, with a focus on evaluating the suitability of tongue fluid samples.
resultsIn the experimental model, PRRSV negative pregnant gilts were infected with PRRSV-1 AUT15-33 on gestation day 85 and necropsy of gilts and foetuses was performed three weeks later. 38.3% of individual foetal serum and 39.4% of individual foetal thymus samples were considered PRRSV RT-qPCR positive. Tongue fluids from individual foetuses showed a 33.0% positivity rate. PRRSV RNA was detected in all but one sample of litter-wise pooled processing fluids and tongue fluids. In the field study, the investigated farm remained PRRSV positive and unstable for five consecutive farrowing groups after the start of the sampling process. Tongue fluid samples pooled by litter in the first investigated farrowing group had a 54.5% positivity rate, with the overall highest viral load obtained in the field study. In this farrowing group, 33.3% of investigated litter-wise pooled processing fluid samples and all investigated serum samples (pools of 4-6 individuals, two piglets per litter) were considered positive. Across all investigated farrowing groups, tongue fluid samples consistently showed the highest viral load. Moreover, tongue fluid samples contained the virus in moderate amounts for the longest time compared to the other investigated sampling material.
conclusionIt can be concluded that the viral load in individual foetuses is higher in serum or thymus compared to tongue fluid samples. However, litter-wise pooled tongue fluid samples are well-suited for detecting vertical transmission within the herd, even when the suspected prevalence of vertical transmission events is low.
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.