ArticleVeterinary world2024
Evaluation of early African swine fever virus detection using CP204L gene encoding the p30 protein using quantitative polymerase chain reaction.
Article in Veterinary world, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the Flashtest multiplex qPCR system for rapid pre-laboratory screening for African swine fever infection.Journal of veterinary research · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aim: The African swine fever virus (ASFV), spanning 170-193 kb, contains over 200 proteins, including p72 and p30, which play crucial roles in the virus's entry and expression. This study investigated the capability of detecting ASFV early through the analysis of genes B646L and CP204L, encoding p72 and p30 antigen proteins, by employing ASFV, diagnosis, immunohistochemistry (IHC), quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR), and IHC techniques. Materials and Methods: Samples were taken from both experimentally and field-infected pigs to evaluate the effectiveness of qPCR and IHC in detecting ASFV. Twenty-two infected pigs were necropsied at 3-, 5-, 7-, and 9-day post-infection to obtain the first set of samples, collecting anticoagulated blood and tissues each time. The thymus, spleen, and lymph nodes were processed by fixing in 10% formalin, paraffin-blocking, and undergoing IHC staining. Forty anticoagulated blood samples were collected from clinically infected sows at a pig farm for the second batch of samples. Based on the lowest Ct values, three blood samples were diluted fivefold for qPCR DNA testing, and their tissues were used for both qPCR and IHC analyses. Results: At 1-day post-infection, p30-qPCR identified more ASFV-positive pigs and measured lower Ct values compared to p72-qPCR. At later time points, both methods showed similar levels of detection. ASFV was detected earlier and with lower Ct values in lymphoid tissues using p30-qPCR compared to p72-qPCR, particularly in the spleen and lymph nodes. In a field outbreak study, p30-qPCR demonstrated superior sensitivity and lower Ct values when detecting ASFV in blood samples compared to p72-qPCR. Conclusion: The early detection of the CP204L gene encoding p30 and its corresponding antigenic protein in ASFV diagnosis compared to the gene encoding p72 suggests that CP204L and p30 are promising candidates for the development of more effective antigen and antibody testing methods.
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.