Archives of Virology

, Volume 67, Issue 1, pp 31–43 | Cite as

The detection of influenza A virus antigens in cultured cells by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay

  • H. Watanabe
  • J. S. Mackenzie
Original Papers


An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was employed to investigate the expression of influenza A/Hong Kong/68 (H3N2) virus structural proteins on the surface of infected MDCK cells, and to detect viral antigens in culture media and cell extracts. Infected cells were fixed with 0.1 per cent glutaraldehyde before being examined for the presence of cell-surface antigens. Viral antigens were first observed on the surface of cells 4 hours after infection and reached a maximum 10–12 hours after infection, when measured by haemadsorption with chicken erythrocytes and by ELISA and immunofluorescence with hyperimmune antiserum to Hong Kong virus. A good correlation was found between the three assay systems. The presence of individual virion structural proteins on the cell surface was determined by ELISA using specific antibodies purified by differential affinity chromatography. Either or both of the internal matrix and nucleoprotein antigens were expressed from 2 to 6 hours after infection, with maximum expression after 2 hours, and the strain-specific and common antigenic determinants of haemagglutinin were observed on the cell surface from 4 hours after infection, and reached a maximum 8 to 10 hours after infection. Low levels of neuraminidase were detected between 4 and 8 hours after infection. Culture media and cell extracts were titrated by infectivity and haemagglutination assays, and by ELISA. Titres obtained from the culture media showed a close correlation between the three assay methods, with peak titres being attained 24 hours after infection. Viral antigens were first observed in cell extracts by ELISA 4 hours after infection, and infectious virions and haemagglutinin 2 hours later, but whereas maximum titres of infectious virus and haemagglutinin were found 10 hours after infection, the ELISA titre continued to rise until 24 hours after infection, which suggested that virus structural proteins were being accumulated in the cells after most of the progeny virions had been released. The results are discussed in terms of the potential use of ELISA in rapid virus diagnosis.

The results of comparative assays on cell extracts harvested at various times after infection indicated that virion structural proteins continue to be accumulated in the cell even after most progeny particles have matured. Moreover, the high correlation coefficients between infectivity, haemagglutination and ELISA of virus particles and antigens released into the culture media strongly suggest that only complete virus particles are released, and very little leakage of individual antigens occurred, even from dead cells.

ELISA has also been successfully employed to detect other cell-associated viral antigens, including rabies virus in brain tissue (3) and feline oncornavirus-associated cell membrane antigen in FL74 cells (22). In the latter study, the ELISA titres showed a close correlation in sensitivity with indirect fluorescence tests, but had the added advantage of being quantitative rather than qualitative. The results presented in this report, together with those using other viruses (3, 19, 22) suggest that ELISA is a potentially useful technique for the detection of specific virus infections in tissue culture, and as a tool for rapid virus diagnosis. Problems have been encountered using peroxidase rather than alkaline phosphatase as the enzyme in ELISA due to endogenous peroxidase in clinical material (13), but no evidence of non-specific staining was observed in this study, probably because the cells had been fixed initially with glutaraldehyde. We believe, therefore, that this study has demonstrated that ELISA can be employed as a rapid technique to detect and to distinguish subtype specificity of influenza A virus in tissue culture, and can potentially be applied to other viruses with cell surface-associated antigens. Moreover, the use of glutaraldehyde-fixation allows considerable flexibility in the timing of the assay and may prove suitable for viral diagnosis at a distance.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ada, G. L., Yap, K. L.: Matrix protein expressed at the surface of cells infected with influenza viruses. Immunochem.14, 643–651 (1977).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Askonas, B. A., Webster, R. G.: Monclonal antibodies to haemagglutinin and to H-2 inhibit the cross-reactive cytotoxic T cell populations induced by influenza. Europ. J. Immunol.10, 151–156 (1980).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Atanasiu, P.: Immunofluorescent and immunoperoxidase techniques for the rapid diagnosis of rabies. Ann. de Microbiol. (Institut Pasteur)126 B, 69–75 (1975).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Becht, H., Gruschkau, H., Rott, R.: The M protein of influenza viruses has no immunizing effect. Med. Microbiol. Immunol.167, 285–288 (1979).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Biddison, W. E., Doherty, P. C., Webster, R. G.: Antibody to influenza virus matrix protein detects a common antigen on the surface of cells infected with type A influenza viruses. J. exp. Med.146, 690–697 (1977).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Braciale, T. J.: Immunologic recognition of influenza virus-infected cells. II. Expression of influenza A matrix protein on the infected cell surface and its role in recognition by cross-reactive cytotoxic T cells. J. exp. Med.146, 673–689 (1977).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cambridge, G., Mackenzie, J. S., Keast, D.: Cell-mediated immune response to influenza virus infections in mice. Infect. Immun.13, 36–43 (1976).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Doherty, P. C., Effros, R. B., Bennink, J.: Heterogeneity of the cytotoxic response of thymus-derived lymphocytes after immunization with influenza viruses. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.74, 1209–1213 (1977).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Effros, R. B., Doherty, P. C., Gerhard, W., Bennink, J.: Generation of both cross-reactive and virus-specific T-cell populations after immunization with serologically distinct influenza A viruses. J. exp. Med.145, 557–568 (1977).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Engvall, E., Perlmann, P.: Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. III. Quantitation of specific antibodies by enzyme-labelled anti-immunoglobulin in antigen-coated tubes. J. Immunol.109, 129–135 (1972).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ennis, F. A., Martin, W. J., Verbonitz, M. W.: Haemagglutinin-specific cytotoxic T-cell response during influenza infection. J. exp. Med.146, 893–898 (1977).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fazekas de St. Groth, S., Webster, R. G.: Disquisitions on original antigenic sin. I. Evidence in man. J. exp. Med.124, 331–345 (1966).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gardner, P. S., Grandien, M., McQuillin, J.: Comparison of immunofluorescence and immunoperoxidase methods for viral diagnosis at a distance: a W.H.O. collaborative study. Bull. Wld. Hlth. Org.56, 105–110 (1978).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gaush, C. R., Smith, T. F.: Replication and plaque assay of influenza virus in an established line of canine kidney cells. Appl. Microbiol.16, 588–594 (1968).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gerhard, W., Webster, R. G.: Antigenic drift in influenza A viruses. I. Selection and characterization of antigenic variants of A/PR/8/34 (H0N1) influenza virus with monoclonal antibodies. J. exp. Med.148, 383–392 (1978).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hackett, C. J., Askonas, B. A., Webster, R. G., van Wyke, K.: Monoclonal antibodies to influenza matrix protein: detection of low levels of matrix protein on abortively infected cells. J. gen. Virol.47, 497–501 (1980).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hackett, C. J., Askonas, B. A., Webster, R. G., van Wyke, K.: Quantitation of influenza virus antigens on infected target cells and their recognition by cross-reactive cytotoxic T-cells. J. exp. Med.151, 1014–1025 (1980).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Koszinowski, U. H., Allen, A., Gething, M.-J., Waterfield, M. D., Klenk, H.-D.: Recognition of viral glycoproteins by influenza A-specific cross-reactive cytolytic T lymphocytes. J. exp. Med.151, 945–958 (1980).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kurstak, E., Kurstak, C.: Application of the immunoperoxidase technique in virology and cancer immunology. In:Kurstak, E., Morriset, R. (eds.), Viral Immunodiagnosis, 3–30. New York: Academic Press 1974.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lambre, C., Kasturi, K. N.: A microplate immunoenzyme assay for anti-influenza antibodies. J. immunol. Meth.26, 61–67 (1979).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Laver, W. G., Downie, J. C., Webster, R. G.: Studies on antigenic variation in influenza virus. Evidence for multiple antigenic determinants on the haemagglutinin subunits of A/Hong Kong/68 (H3N2) virus and the A/England/72 strain. Virology59, 230–244 (1974).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Log, T., Chang, K. S. S.: Enzyme immunoassay for feline oncornavirus-associated cell membrane antigen (FOCMA) and detection of FOCMA in cell extract by enzyme immunoassay inhibition test. J. immunol. Meth.26, 291–303 (1979).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mackenzie, J. S.: Studies with temperature-sensitive mutants of influenza virus. In:Barry, R. D., Mahy, B. W. J. (eds.), The biology of large RNA viruses, 507 to 534. New York: Academic Press 1970.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Morgan, C., Rifkind, R. A., Rose, H. M.: The use of ferritin-conjugated antibodies in electron microscopic studies of influenza and vaccinia viruses. Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol.27, 57–65 (1962).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Oxford, J. S., Schild, G. C.: Immunological and physicochemical studies of influenza matrix (M) polypeptides. Virology74, 394–402 (1976).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Potter, C. W., Oxford, J. S.: Determinants of immunity to influenza infection in man. Brit. med. Bull.35 (1), 69–75 (1979).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Reginster, M., Joassin, L., Fontaine-Delacombe, P.: Ligands for antibody to M protein are exposed on the surface of influenza virions: effect of proteolytic treatment on their activity. J. gen. Virol.45, 283–289 (1979).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Virelizier, J. L., Allison, A. C., Oxford, J. S., Schild, G. C.: Early presence of ribonucleoprotein antigen on the surface of influenza virus-infected cells. Nature266, 52–54 (1977).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Vogel, J., Shelekov, A.: Adsorption-haemagglutination test for influenza virus in monkey kidney tissue culture. Science (U.S.A.)126, 358–359 (1957).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Watanabe, H., Pollett, M., Mackenzie, J. S.: Purification of antibodies to influenza A virus structural proteins by affinity chromatography, and their participation in haemagglutination-inhibition, neutralization and enzyme-linked immunosorbant assay. Aust. J. exp. Biol. med. Sci.57, 303–312 (1979).Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Watanabe, H., Pollett, M., Mackenzie, J. S.: The use of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay to determine the appearance, specificity and immunoglobulin class of antibodies to the structural proteins of influenza A virus in mice. Aust. J. exp. Biol. med. Sci.58, 189–199 (1980).Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Webster, R. G., Hinshaw, V. S.: Matrix protein from influenza A virus and its role in cross-protection in mice. Infect. Immun.17, 561–566 (1977).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wrigley, N. G.: Electron microscopy of influenza virus. Brit. med. Bull.35 (1), 35–38 (1979).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Watanabe
    • 1
  • J. S. Mackenzie
    • 1
  1. 1.University Department of MicrobiologyQueen Elizabeth II Medical CentreNedlands

Personalised recommendations