Feline calicivirus strain differentiation using monoclonal antibody analysis in an enzyme-linked immuno-flow-assay

• Published in: Veterinary microbiology Vol. 51; no. 3; pp. 197 - 206
• Main Authors: McArdle, F., Dawson, S., Carter, M.J., Milton, I.D., Turner, P.C., Meanger, J., Bennett, M., Gaskell, R.M.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Amsterdam Elsevier B.V 01.08.1996; Elsevier Science; Published by Elsevier B.V
• Subjects: Animals; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antibodies, Viral; Biological and medical sciences; Caliciviridae Infections - diagnosis; Caliciviridae Infections - prevention & control; Caliciviridae Infections - veterinary; Calicivirus, Feline - classification; Calicivirus, Feline - immunology; Calicivirus, Feline - isolation & purification; Cat; Cat Diseases; Cats; Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay - methods; Feline calicivirus; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Microbiology; Monoclonal antibodies; Respiratory disease; Respiratory Tract Infections - diagnosis; Respiratory Tract Infections - prevention & control; Respiratory Tract Infections - veterinary; Serology; Techniques used in virology; Typing; Viral Vaccines; Virology; Monoclonal antibodies; Serology; Typing; Respiratory disease; Feline calicivirus; Cat; Virus; Calicivirus; Caliciviridae; Identification; Monoclonal antibody; Strain specificity; ELISA assay; Immunological method
• ISSN: 0378-1135; 1873-2542
• DOI: 10.1016/0378-1135(96)00017-X

Six monoclonal antibodies raised against feline calicivirus (FCV) strain F9 were used in an enzyme-linked immuno-flow-assay (ELIFA) to analyse 55 isolates of FCV. Forty seven field isolates were obtained from cats with acute oral/respiratory disease, chronic oral lesions, and from cats showing vaccine reactions, i.e. clinical signs of FCV infection shortly after vaccination. Eight reference strains including F9 and three vaccine strains based on F9 were also examined. All of the strains of F9, derived from various sources, reacted with all six of the monoclonal antibodies, whereas some of the field isolates did not react with any. In general, the field isolates showed a spectrum of reactivities and selected isolates could be distinguished. However, there were no clear cut differences between the clinical groups. Overall, the oral/respiratory group showed less reactivity with the monoclonals, suggesting they were less related to F9. Although the other groups appeared to be more closely related to F9, none of the isolates reacted with all six monoclonal antibodies.