Search

Background: ELISA is a widely used method for aflatoxin M 1 (AFM 1 ) quantification in dairy products. This study was conducted to compare ELISA kits from different manufacturers for AFM 1 quantification in milk. Methods: High sensitivity ELISA kits (for up to 250 ng AFM 1 /L), including AgraQuant (Romer Labs), Bioshield M1ES (Prognosis Biotech), Helica 96 (Helica Biosystems), Veratox (Neogen, Inc.), and the medium sensitivity kit Immunolab AM1E01 (Immunolab GmbH; for 10-1000 ng AFM 1 /L) were tested against a certified reference AFM 1 whole milk having 44 ng AFM 1 /L and its 10-fold dilution, and a 50 ng AFM 1 /L standard. In another experiment, Prognosis Bioshield M1UF (70-1000 ng AFM 1 /L), Romer's AgraquantPlus (10-2000 ng AFM 1 /L), and Immunulab's AM1E01 kits were compared to test a 500 ng AFM 1 /L solution. Results: In both of the experiments, the quantification of the tested AFM 1 levels did not differ ( P ≥ 0.310) between the kits from various manufacturers. In the case of 4.4 ng AFM 1 /L, recovery of the toxin was close to the assigned value under the kit by Neogen, Inc. In case the of 44 ng level, better recoveries were seen under the kits by Immunolab and Prognosis Biotech. In both the cases, low relative standard deviation (RSD) values were obtained only for the kit by Prognosis Biotech. In the case of the 50 and 500 ng AFM 1 /L solutions, the kits by Prognosis Biotech and Romer Labs provided recoveries close to the assigned values as well as low RSD. Conclusions: These data indicate that all the studied ELISA kit brands had comparable efficacy for AFM 1 quantification. Recovery of the toxin and RSD may, however, differ between kits from various manufacturers.

This study was designed to characterize N gene sequences of peste des petits ruminants virus (PPRV) isolates circulating in Pakistan and to evaluate the efficacy of available diagnostic assays on local isolates. During the study period, a total of sixty PPR outbreaks were investigated. A total of 20 selected samples from these outbreaks were sequenced for N gene. The result analysis and the phylogenetic trees indicated two different viral groups in N gene: one was closer to China and Tajikistan, while other group was similar to isolates from Iran and Saudi Arabia. Efficacy of three commercially available tests for the antigen detection of PPR, that is, peste test, enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and reverse transcriptase‐polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) was compared. Keeping PCR as gold standard, sensitivity was calculated as 85% and 57% and specificity was calculated as 83% and 79% for ELISA and peste test, respectively. Value of K for ELISA was 0.67 which indicates good agreement between ELISA and RT‐PCR. Value of K for peste test was 0.33 which indicates fair agreement between peste test and RT‐PCR. In conclusion, study provides premier information about the use of different diagnostic tests and molecular situation of PPRV in Pakistan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: ELISA is a widely used method for aflatoxin M1 (AFM1) quantification in dairy products. This study was conducted to compare ELISA kits from different manufacturers for AFM1 quantification in milk. Methods: High sensitivity ELISA kits (for up to 250 ng AFM1/L), including AgraQuant (Romer Labs), Bioshield M1ES (Prognosis Biotech), Helica 96 (Helica Biosystems), Veratox (Neogen, Inc.), and the medium sensitivity kit Immunolab AM1E01 (Immunolab GmbH; for 10–1000 ng AFM1/L) were tested against a certified reference AFM1 whole milk having 44 ng AFM1/L and its 10-fold dilution, and a 50 ng AFM1/L standard. In another experiment, Prognosis Bioshield M1UF (70–1000 ng AFM1/L), Romer’s AgraquantPlus (10–2000 ng AFM1/L), and Immunulab’s AM1E01 kits were compared to test a 500 ng AFM1/L solution. Results: In both of the experiments, the quantification of the tested AFM1 levels did not differ (P ≥ 0.310) between the kits from various manufacturers. In the case of 4.4 ng AFM1/L, recovery of the toxin was close to the assigned value under the kit by Neogen, Inc. In case the of 44 ng level, better recoveries were seen under the kits by Immunolab and Prognosis Biotech. In both the cases, low relative standard deviation (RSD) values were obtained only for the kit by Prognosis Biotech. In the case of the 50 and 500 ng AFM1/L solutions, the kits by Prognosis Biotech and Romer Labs provided recoveries close to the assigned values as well as low RSD. Conclusions: These data indicate that all the studied ELISA kit brands had comparable efficacy for AFM1 quantification. Recovery of the toxin and RSD may, however, differ between kits from various manufacturers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]