Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Vet. Sci.
Sec. Veterinary Infectious Diseases
Volume 12 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fvets.2025.1495128

Development of SYBR green I-based real-time qPCR differential diagnosis assays for Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome virus typing in Guangdong province

Provisionally accepted
Zhaowen Ren Zhaowen Ren 1,2Pu Kang Pu Kang 1,3*Pian Zhang Pian Zhang 1Chenglong Sun Chenglong Sun 4Jing Chen Jing Chen 1*Hua Xiang Hua Xiang 1*Shengjun Luo Shengjun Luo 1*Rujian Cai Rujian Cai 1*Yuan Huang Yuan Huang 1*Yuzhu Jin Yuzhu Jin 5*Gang Wang Gang Wang 1*Xiaohu Wang Xiaohu Wang 1*
  • 1 Institute of Animal Health, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guangzhou, China
  • 2 College of Veterinary Medicine, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China
  • 3 School of Life Science and Engineering, Foshan University, Foshan, Guangdong Province, China
  • 4 Department of Molecular Biology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, United States
  • 5 Jiaozuo City Product Quality Inspection and Testing Center, Henan Jiaozuo 454000, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome (PRRS) is a highly contagious disease that causes reproductive disorders in sows and respiratory problems in pigs of different ages. It first appeared in the late 20th century in the United States and Europe before spreading globally, leading to significant economic losses in the swine industry. Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome virus (PRRSV) has a high rate of genetic recombination, resulting in considerable genetic diversity within the virus. The lack of cross-protection between different lineages often leads to unsuccessful vaccination attempts. To accurately distinguish PRRSV lineages and develop effective vaccination strategies for pigs, we have developed a fluorescence quantitative PCR (qPCR) method. This method allows for the simultaneous identification of different PRRSV genotypes. Our experimental results show that these methods have good specificity and do not react with other common viral pathogens in pigs. This method also demonstrates good sensitivity, with the ability to detect low levels of the virus. The detection limits of these assay were 10 2 copies/µL for PRRSV-1 (European-type PRRS) and 10 1 copies/µL for PRRSV-2 (American-type PRRSV), HP-PRRSV (Highly Pathogenic PRRSV), and NL-PRRSV (NADC30-like PRRSV), respectively. Furthermore, the reproducibility of this method is commendable, with intra-and inter-assay coefficients of variation remaining below 3%. In the subsequent study, a total of 316 clinical samples of porcine with respiratory and reproductive failure symptoms were collected from 14 cities in Guangdong. The results showed that among these samples, 22.78% (72 out of 316) tested positive for PRRSV-2, 15.51% (49 out of 316) tested positive for HP-PRRSV, and 0.95% (3 out of 316) tested positive for NL-PRRSV. However, PRRSV-1 was not detected in any of the samples. Our method provides a quick way to identify PRRSV genotypes in pig herds in Guangdong, which has certain significance for developing effective vaccination strategies against PRRS.

    Keywords: PRRSV, Duplex real-time PCR, Prevalence, phylogenetic analysis, differential diagnosis

    Received: 12 Sep 2024; Accepted: 05 Feb 2025.

    Copyright: © 2025 Ren, Kang, Zhang, Sun, Chen, Xiang, Luo, Cai, Huang, Jin, Wang and Wang. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence:
    Pu Kang, Institute of Animal Health, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guangzhou, China
    Jing Chen, Institute of Animal Health, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guangzhou, China
    Hua Xiang, Institute of Animal Health, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guangzhou, China
    Shengjun Luo, Institute of Animal Health, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guangzhou, China
    Rujian Cai, Institute of Animal Health, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guangzhou, China
    Yuan Huang, Institute of Animal Health, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guangzhou, China
    Yuzhu Jin, Jiaozuo City Product Quality Inspection and Testing Center, Henan Jiaozuo 454000, China
    Gang Wang, Institute of Animal Health, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guangzhou, China
    Xiaohu Wang, Institute of Animal Health, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guangzhou, China

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.