2020, Cilt 36, Sayı 3, Sayfa(lar) 159-165
Comparison of reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and rapid test for the detection of bovine rotavirus and bovine coronavirus in anatolian water
Oya Bulut1, Gülşah Uyunmaz Saklı2, Mustafa Hasöksüz3, Irmak Dik1,Hasan Hüseyin Hadimli4,Mustafa Hitit5
1Selcuk University, Veterinary Faculty, Department of Virology, Konya, Turkey
2Veterinary Control Central Research Institute, Ankara, Turkey
3Istanbul University Cerrahpasa, Veterinary Faculty, Department of Virology, Istanbul, Turkey
4Selcuk University, Veterinary Faculty, Department of Microbiology, Konya, Turkey
5Kastamonu University, Veterinary Faculty, Department of Genetics, Kastamonu, Turkey
Keywords: Anatolian water buffaloes, bovine coronavirus, bovine rotavirus, BRV, BCoV rapid test, RT-PCR
Downloaded:651 - Viewed: 1726

Aim: Coronaviruses and Rotaviruses are important virologic factors for both animal and human health in Turkey and the world. Bovine Rotavirus (BRV) and Bovine Coronavirus (BCoV) in cattle cause significant economic losses. The aim of this study was to determine the presence of BRV and BCoV in Anatolian buffaloes which were on the same farms with cattle. For this purpose, presence of these two viruses were investigated by Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) and BRV-BCoV Rapid tests and sensitivity and specificity ratios of these two tests were compared.

Materials and Methods: In this study, 230 Anatolian buffaloes were clinically evaluated in cattle farms in Afyonkarahisar region. Fecal samples were collected from 27 buffaloes which had clinical signs (weakness, dehydration, vomiting, watery consistency and yellow stool). The fecal samples were evaluated by Rapid Test and RT-PCR for Bovine Rotavirus and Bovine Coronavirus. The analyzes were performed according to the procedure of the commercial RT-PCR and rapid kits.

Results: The RT-PCR results were positive as 22.2% (6/27) for BRV and 3.7% (1/27 27/1) for BcoV while Rota-Corona Rapid test results were negative in all samples. When compared with RT-PCR results for both viruses, the rapid test sensitivity and specificity was determined as 0% and 100%, respectively. In addition, positive rates of BRV was statistically important as BCoV rate in analyzed samples (p<0,05).

Conclusion: In conclusion, low sensitivity of rapid test may be due to the change in the amount of virus scattered throughout the course of enteric infections.