In vivo tropisms and kinetics of rat theilovirus infection in immunocompetent and immunodeficient rats

Viral Disease

This chapter discusses infections of rats with viruses in the following 14 virus families: Adenoviridae, Arenaviridae, Coronaviridae, Flaviviridae, Hantaviridae, Hepeviridae, Herpesviridae, Paramyxoviridae, Parvoviridae, Picornaviridae, Pneumoviridae, Polyomaviridae, Poxviridae, and Reoviridae . Serological surveys indicate that parvoviruses, coronaviruses, cardioviruses, and pneumoviruses are the most prevalent in laboratory rats. A new polyomavirus and a new cardiovirus that cause disease in laboratory rats are described. Metagenomic analyses of feces or intestinal contents from wild rats have detected viruses from an additional nine virus families that could potentially cause infections in laboratory rats.

Development of a duplex real-time RT-PCR for the simultaneous detection and differentiation of Theiler's murine encephalomyelitis virus and rat theilovirus

•

A duplex real-time RT-PCR was developed and evaluated for detection of TMEV and RTV.

•

The duplex assay could differentiate between TMEV and RTV.

•

The duplex assay was specific, sensitive and reproducible.

•

The duplex assay was more sensitive and effective than conventional RT-PCR.

•

It is a useful tool for routine health monitoring of laboratory rodents.

Theiler’s murine encephalomyelitis virus (TMEV) and rat theilovirus (RTV), the member of the genus Cardiovirus, are widespread in laboratory mice and rats, and are potential contaminants of biological materials. Cardioviruses infection may cause serious complications in biomedical research. To improve the efficiency of routine screening for Cardioviruses infection, a duplex real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay was developed for simultaneous detection and differentiation of TMEV and RTV. The duplex assay was specific for reference strains of TMEV and RTV, and no cross-reaction was found with seven other rodent viruses. The limits of detection of both TMEV and RTV were 4 × 10¹ copies RNA/reaction. Reproducibility was estimated using standard dilutions, with coefficients of variation <3.1%. 439 clinical samples were evaluated by both duplex real-time RT-PCR and conventional RT-PCR. For 439 clinical samples，95 samples were positive for TMEV and 72 samples were positive for RTV using duplex real-time RT-PCR approach, whereas only 77 samples were positive for TMEV and 66 samples were positive for RTV when conventional RT-PCR was applied. Mixed infections were found in 20 samples when analyzed by conventional RT-PCR whereas 30 samples were found to be mixed infection when duplex real-time RT-PCR was applied. This duplex assay provides a useful tool for routine health monitoring and screening of contaminated biological materials of these two viruses.