Skip to main content

Field evaluation of CIEP and PCR detection/removal control methods of Aleutian mink disease (AD) in Canada

  • Conference paper
Book cover Proceedings of the Xth International Scientific Congress in fur animal production
  • 743 Accesses

Abstract

Detection/removal control method of Aleutian disease by CIEP detection of ADV-antibody and farm or barn depopulation/repopulation, have been the recommended approaches of AD control since mid 1970s. The detection/removal was, at least under common N. American husbandry conditions, unsuccessful in controlling AD in a sustainable manner. Recently, attention was turned towards virus detection by PCR, and its use for AD eradication by removal of positive individual animals. In view of the common failures of CIEP to facilitate AD eradication, we were skeptical about premature acceptance of PCR-detection/removal, as the recommended control method. The frequent failures of CIEP test/removal were often blamed on breaches of bio-security. However, we believed that this method has been based on fundamentally wrong premise that the virus is primarily harbored by the infected animals. In reality, this sturdy parvovirus is harbored primarily in the contaminated environment through feces, saliva, urine, whelping, as well as through blood during bleeding for testing. While the use of both CIEP and PCR for monitoring of farms free of the virus remains certainly a valid approach, the data obtained in this study indicate that detection/removal by neither of the methods could facilitate real and lasting freedom from the virus, under the conditions of the study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bloom M.E., Kanno H., Mori S. and Wolfinbarger J.B., 1994. Aleutian mink disease: puzzles and paradigms. Infectious Agents and Disease 3: 279–301.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cho H.J. and Ingram D.G., 1972. Antigen and antibody in Aleutian disease in mink. I. Precipitation reaction by agar-gel electrophoresis. Journal of Immunology 108: 555–7.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cho H.J, and Greenfield J., 1978. Eradication of Aleutian disease of mink by eliminating positive counterimmunoelectrophoresis test reactors. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 7: 18–22.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • García M.E., Blanco J.L., Caballero J. and Gargallo-Viola D.J., 2002. Anticoagulants interfere with PCR used to diagnose invasive aspergillosis. Clinical Microbiology 40: 1567–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregersen J.P. and Roth B., 2012. Inactivation of stable viruses in cell culture facilities by peracetic acid fogging. Biologicals. Mar 15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorham J.R., Leader R.W., Padgett G.A., Burger D. and Henson J.B,. 1965. Some Observations of the Natural Occurrence of Aleutian Disease. In: Slow, latent, and temperate virus infections. Gajdousek D., Carleton G., Gibbs C.J.Jr., and Alpers M. (eds.) NINDB Monograph No. 2. U.S.P.H.S. Publ. No. 1378, pp. 279–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadlow W.J., Race R.E. and Kennedy R.C., 1983. Comparative pathogenicity of four strains of Aleutian disease virus for pastel and sapphire mink. Infection and Immunity 41: 1016–23.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Henson J.B., Gorham J.R., and Leader R.W., 1962. A field test for Aleutian disease. Preliminary Report. National Fur News 34: 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter D.D., Larsen A.E. and Porter H.G., 1973. The pathogenesis of Aleutian disease of mink. 3. Immune complex arteritis. American Journal of Pathology 71: 331–44.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sauerbrei A and Wutzler P. 2009. Testing thermal resistance of viruses. Archives of Virology 154: 115–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl M., Stahl J., and Stahl R., 2010 Patent application. Available at: http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20110086339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uttenthal A, Larsen S, Lund E, Bloom ME, Storgård T and Alexandersen S., 1990. Analysis of experimental mink enteritis virus infection in mink: in situ hybridization, serology, and histopathology. Journal of Virology 64: 2768–79.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Cepica .

Editor information

P. F. Larsen S. H. Møller T. Clausen A. S. Hammer T. M. Lássen V. H. Nielsen A. H. Tauson L. L. Jeppesen S. W. Hansen J. Elnif J. Malmkvist

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Wageningen Academic Publishers The Netherlands

About this paper

Cite this paper

Cepica, A., Iwamoto, T. (2012). Field evaluation of CIEP and PCR detection/removal control methods of Aleutian mink disease (AD) in Canada. In: Larsen, P.F., et al. Proceedings of the Xth International Scientific Congress in fur animal production. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen. https://doi.org/10.3920/978-90-8686-760-8_30

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics