Skip to main content
Download PDF

Development of a multiplex reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (qPCR) method for detecting common causative agents of swine viral diarrhea in China

Porcine Health Management volume 10, Article number: 12 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Diarrheal diseases caused by viral agents have led to a great morbidity, mortality, and economic loss in global pig industry. Porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV), transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV), porcine deltacoronavirus (PDCoV), and group A porcine rotavirus (RVA) are main causative agents of swine viral diarrhea with similar clinical signs on Chinese farms and their co-infection is also common. However, it is still lack of a convenient method to detect these four agents.

Methods

A TaqMan multiplex qPCR method was developed to detect PEDV, TGEV, PDCoV, and RVA, simultaneously. This method was then applied to investigate 7,342 swine fecal samples or rectal swabs, as well as 1,246 swine intestinal samples collected from 2075 farms in China in 2022.

Results

Minimum detection limits of this method were 3 copies/µL for PEDV, 4 copies/µL for TGEV, 8 copies/µL for RVA, and 8 copies/µL for PDCoV, suggesting a good sensitivity. No signals were observed by using this method detecting other viral agents commonly prevalent in pigs, which is suggestive of a good specificity. Application of this method on investigating clinical samples demonstrated a relatively high positive rate for PEDV (22.21%, 1907/8588) and RVA (44.00%, 3779/8588). In addition, co-infection between PEDV and RVA was observed on 360 investigated farms, accounting for 17.35% (360/2075) of the farms where co-infection events were screened.

Conclusions

A TaqMan multiplex qPCR method targeting PEDV, TGEV, PDCoV, and RVA was developed in this study. This method demonstrated a good specificity and sensitivity on investigating these four common viruses responsible for viral diarrhea on Chinese pig farms, which represents a convenient method for the monitoring and differential diagnosis of swine viral diarrhea.

Background

Porcine epidemic diarrhea (PED) is an acute diarrheal disease caused by porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV) and has caused big economic losses to global pig industry [1]. In China, a new variant of PEDV with higher mortalities emerged in 2010, which makes the disease prevention and control more complex, and PED remains one of the threats to the pig industry in this largest pig rearing country in the world [2]. Transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV) is also a porcine enteropathogenic coronavirus that can cause severe diarrhea and death in piglets [3]. In general, piglets under two weeks of age are most susceptible to TGEV, but this virus can still cause diarrhea and loss of appetite in old pigs [4]. TGEV can be also detected in pigs that have recovered from the infection [5].

In addition to PEDV and TGEV, porcine deltacoronavirus (PDCoV) is a newly emerged pig enteropathogenic coronavirus that can replicate in small intestinal cells and cause vomiting and watery diarrhea in piglets [6]. Pathological changes similar to those observed after PEDV and TGEV infection can also be seen in the intestines of pigs infected with PDCoV [7]. Porcine rotavirus (RV) can cause acute gastroenteritis in suckling and weaned piglets and suppress the immune system, leading to growth retardation and increased mortality in piglets [8]. Rotaviruses are classified into 10 groups or species (RVA-RVJ), based on the amino acid sequence of the structural protein, VP6. RVA is currently the most common pathogen causing clinical diarrhea in piglets.

It should be noted that clinical symptoms caused by above-mentioned four viruses are similar and those four agents are frequently associated with mixed infections on pig farms. Therefore, rapid diagnosis plays a crucial role in controlling porcine viral diarrhea. Currently, molecular diagnostic techniques such as Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR), Reverse Transcription-Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR), and Reverse Transcription Loop-Mediated Isothermal (RT-LAMP), are commonly used for pathogen detection [9,10,11]. However, it is still lack of a convenient method to detect the above-mentioned four agents. In this study, a multiplex TaqMan RT-qPCR detection method was developed to simultaneously identify and diagnose PEDV, TGEV, PDCoV, and RVA. This method meets the need for rapid diagnosis of porcine viral diarrhea in farms and laboratories and has been applied to the detection of clinical samples.

Methods

Primers, probes, and plasmids

Primers and probes used in this study are listed in Table 1. Standard plasmids were prepared as follows: plasmids containing the full-length of M gene from PEDV-AJ1102 (GenBank accession no. JX188454.1; 215.995 ng/µl), the full-length of M gene from TGEV-TH-98 (GenBank accession no. KU729220; 165.405 ng/µl), the full-length of NSP5 gene from RVA-HB-7 (GenBank accession no. MZ165432; 202.076 ng/µl), and the full-length of N gene from PDCoV-TS12019 (GenBank accession no. MT663769 233.108 ng/µl) were synthesized. PCR amplification was performed using pUC57 vector universal sequencing primers (M13R: 5’-CAGGAAACAGCTATGACC-3’; M13F: 5’-TGTAAAACGACGGCCAGT-3’) to verify the correctness of the synthesized sequence. Plasmid concentration was measured using Microvolume UV-Vis Spectrophotometers (Nano Drop One, Thermo Scientific).

Table 1 The primer used in this study
Full size table

Optimization of reaction system

Optimization of the reaction system was conducted using the chessboard titration method, as described previously [12]. A 20.0 µL reaction system (2 × One Step RT-PCR buffer, 10.0 µL; enzyme premix, 1.0 µL; standard plasmid, 1.0 µL; gradient increase of primer and probe amount from 0.15 µM to 0.3 µM with increments of 0.025 µM, and DEPC water) was prepared and the reaction was performed in a Bio-Rad CFX96 Real-Time PCR System (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA). The reaction conditions were: reverse transcription at 55 °C for 30 min; pre-denaturation at 95 °C for 30 s; denaturation at 95 °C for 5 s, annealing at 60 °C for 30 s, for 40 cycles, with fluorescence signal collection at 60 °C.

Establishment of standard curve

Standard plasmids were serially diluted (10-folds, from 108 to 100 copies/µL), and amplification was performed using the optimized reaction system for standard samples of different dilutions. DNA copies were calculated using the following formula: copies/µL = [plasmid concentration (ng/µL) × 10− 9 × 6.02 × 1023 (copies/mol)]/(DNA length × 660) [13]. Standard curves were drawn based on the results.

Specificity test

Nucleic acids from porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV), classical swine fever virus (CSFV), porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV2), swine acute diarrhea syndrome coronavirus (SADS-CoV), Bocavirus, Escherichia coli (E. coli), Lawsonia intracellularis (LI), and/or Clostridium perfringens were extracted and used for testing the specificity of the detection method with the optimized reaction scheme.

Sensitivity test

The standard plasmids with concentrations ranging from 108 to 100 copies/µL were amplified using the optimal reaction scheme, and the lowest detection limit copy number of the detection method was determined.

Comparison with commercial kit

To verify the accuracy and reproductivity, the detection efficacy of the method developed in this study was compared with a commercial PEDV/TGEV/PRVA/PDCoV nucleic acid-detection kit (Vipotion Biotechnology, Guangzhou, China). Samples used for the evaluation included known positive samples which were diluted ten times and/or randomly-selected clinical samples (n = 80). Different samples were detected using the method developed in this study and the purchased commercial kit respectively.

Sample detection using the multiplex qRT-PCR method

From January 2022 to December 2022, a total of 7,342 swine fecal samples or rectal swabs, 1,246 intestinal tissues were collected from various pig farms in China. Samples were treated as follows: (1) fecal samples were mixed thoroughly with an equal volume of physiological saline, followed by centrifugation at 8,000 rpm for 2 min to collect the supernatants; (2) swabs were maintained in tubes containing 500 µL of physiological saline and shaken vigorously, followed by centrifugation at 8,000 rpm for 2 min to collect the supernatants; (3) intestinal samples (50 \(\sim\) 100 mg) were homogenized in 1 mL of physiological saline, followed by centrifugation at 8,000 rpm for 2 min to collect the supernatants. Afterwards, viral RNAs were extracted using a commercial nucleic acid extraction kit (Zhongkebio, Nanjing, China) according to the manufacturer’s instructions, which were then reverse to cDNAs and used as the templates for investigating the above-mentioned for viral agents by the method developed in this study.

Evolutionary analysis

We selected PEDV and RVA positive samples and amplified the partial S1 gene of PEDV as well as the VP7 gene of RVA using primers PEDV-F1/PEDV-R1, RVA-F1/RVA-R1 by PCR, respectively. Reactions were performed in a 25 µL mixture containing 12.5 µL of 2×One Step Buffer, 1 µL of Primer Script One Step Enzyme Mix, 1 µL of each forward and reverse primers (10 µM), and 7.5 µL of nucleic acid-free H2O, and 2 µL of RNA template. Reaction conditions were as follows: 42 °C for 30 min; 94 °C for 5 min; followed by 30 cycles of 94 °C for 30 s, 53 °C for 30 s, 72 °C for 2 min; and extension at 72 °C for 7 min. PCR products were sent to Shanghai Bioengineering Company for Sanger sequencing, and the sequencing results were subjected to genetic evolution analysis using MEGA6 software [14].

Results

Optimization of multiplex qPCR reaction system and establishment of standard curves

The optimal primer and probe concentrations for qRT-PCR reactions were determined using 106 copies/µL of standard plasmid as a template, along with the comprehensive consideration of the amplification Ct value, fluorescence intensity, and amplification curve (Tables S1–S4 and Fig. S1 in supplementary information). The optimal final concentrations of primers and probes were 0.225 µM (primers) and 0.15 µM (probe) for detecting PEDV, 0.225 µM (primers) and 0.2 µM (probe) for detecting TGEV, 0.25 µM (primers) and 0.25 µM (probe) for detecting RVA, and 0.2 µM (primers) and 0.25 µM (probe) for detecting PDCoV, respectively. The correlation coefficients (R2) of PEDV (FAM), TGEV (HEX), RVA (ROX), and PDCoV (Cy5) were 1.000, 0.995, 0.995, and 0.998, respectively (Fig. 1A). This indicates that the detection method established in this study has a good linear relationship, and the amplification efficiency is between 90.3% and 97.9%.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Assessment of linear relationship and specificity of the TaqMan multiplex qPCR method developed in this study. (A) Linear relationship between the Ct values and the copy numbers of standard plasmids; (B) Amplification curves given by the multiplex method on detecting different agents; 1–4: Nucleic acids of PEDV, TGEV, RVA, PDCoV; 5–12: Nucleic acids of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV), classical swine fever virus (CSFV), porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV2), swine acute diarrhea syndrome coronavirus (SADS-CoV), bocavirus, Escherichia coli, Lawsonia intracellularis, and/or Clostridium perfringens

Full size image

Assessment of specificity and sensitivity

Specificity was assessed by applying the established multiplex qRT-PCR method to detect the nucleic acids of PRRSV, CSFV, PCV2, SADS-CoV, E. coli, LI, C. perfringens, PEDV, TGEV, RVA, or PDCoV. The results showed that the method only produced typical amplification curves in PEDV, TGEV, RVA, and PDCoV, and there was no cross-reaction between the four pathogens (with duplicate wells set up) (Fig. 1B). The lowest detectable copy numbers of the method developed in this study were 3 copies/µL for PEDV, 4 copies/µL for TGEV, 8 copies/µL for RVA, and 8 copies/µL for PDCoV, respectively. Evaluation using standard plasmids indicated a good repeatability for the method developed in this study, with coefficients of variation between 0.20 \(\sim\) 1.09 (Table 2). The agreement rates between the method developed in this study and the commercial kit on detecting clinical samples (n = 80) were 97.5% (PEDV), 95.0% (TGEV), 86.3% (RVA), and 98.8% (PDCoV), respectively (Table 3).

Table 2 Sensitivity and repeatability of multiplex qRT-PCR
Full size table
Table 3 Agreement rates between detecting clinical samples using the commercial kit and the method developed in this study
Full size table

Clinical sample investigation

From January to December 2022, a total of 8588 samples of intestinal contents and feces from dead pigs and rectal swabs from diarrheal pigs from 29 provinces of China were collected for PEDV, RVA, PDCoV, and/or TGEV investigation by the multiplex qPCR method generated in this study. The results revealed that 30.22% (627/2075) of the detected farms were positive for PEDV, 67.42% (1399/2075) of the detected farms were positive for RVA, 5.01% (104/2075) of the detected farms were positive for PDCoV, and 1.01% (21/2075) of the detected farms were positive for TGEV, with an overall detection rate of 22.21% (1907/8588; PEDV), 44.00% (3957/8588; RVA), 3.85% (331/8588; PDCoV), and 0.41% (35/8588; TGEV) for the four agents, respectively (Fig. 2A and B). Monthly, the positive detection rate of PEDV on farm-level was relatively low in June, July, and August, indicating that summer is the trough period for PEDV prevalence in China (Fig. 2C). However, the detection of RVA demonstrated low-level of season-preference in our investigation (Fig. 2D). The farm-level positive detection rate of RVA was higher than 49% in every month. The lowest rate is 49.50% (50/101) in March, while the highest rate reaches 74.15% (109/147) in June. This epidemic trend shows no seasonality, indicating that RVA has a high prevalence rate throughout the year and should draw the attention of pig farm breeders.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Investigation of clinical samples from pig farms in China using the TaqMan multiplex qPCR method. (A) Farm positivity of PEDV, TGEV, RVA, and PDCoV investigated using the TaqMan multiplex qPCR method; (B) Sample positivity of PEDV, TGEV, RVA, and PDCoV investigated using the TaqMan multiplex qPCR method; (C) Positive detection rate of PEDV in different months on different pig farms; (D) Positive detection rate of RVA in different months on different pig farms; PEDV: porcine epidemic diarrhea virus, TGEV: transmissible gastroenteritis virus, PDCoV: porcine deltacoronavirus, RVA: group A porcine rotavirus

Full size image

Next, we applied the developed multiplex qPCR method to investigate the profile of PEDV, RVA, TGEV, and PDCoV in samples from 2,075 Chinese pig farms. The results demonstrated that samples from 959, 214, 24, and 6 farms were only positive for RVA, PEDV, PDCoV, and TGEV, respectively (Fig. 3A). In addition, samples from 360 farms were positive for RVA and PEDV simultaneously, accounting for 17.35% (360/2075) of the total farms (Fig. 3A). These 360 farms were distributed in 28 Chinese provinces (Fig. 3B). Samples from 36, 11, 6, and 4 farms were simultaneously positive for RVA plus PDCoV, PEDV plus PDCoV, RVA plus TGEV, and PEDV plus TGEV, respectively (Fig. 3A). Notably, samples from 33 to 5 farms were simultaneously positive for PEDV plus RVA plus PDCoV, and PEDV plus RVA plus TGEV, respectively (Fig. 3A).

Fig. 3
figure 3

Prevalent profile of PEDV, TGEV, RVA, and PDCoV on pig farms in China. (A) A Venn diagram showing the prevalence of the four swine diarrhea viruses on farms in China; (B) A column chart displaying the provinces where pig farms with different profile of the four agents located; (C) Phylogenetic analysis of 460 PEDV characterized in this study based on the S1 gene; (D) Phylogenetic analysis of 861 RVA characterized in this study based on the VP7 gene; PEDV: porcine epidemic diarrhea virus, TGEV: transmissible gastroenteritis virus, PDCoV: porcine deltacoronavirus, RVA: group A porcine rotavirus

Full size image

Genotypes of diarrheal viruses on Chinese pig farms

To understand the genotypes of PEDV and RVA prevalent in China, Sanger sequencing was performed on PEDV-S1 genes from 1907 positive samples and RVA-VP7 genes from 3779 positive samples. This approach led to the collection of 460 PEDV-S1 sequences and 861 RVA-VP7 sequences. Phylogenetic analysis showed that there were four (sub-)genotypes characterized for PEDVs, including GI, GIIa, GIIb, and S-Indel (Fig. 3C; Table 4). The predominant PEDV (sub-)genotype was GIIa (74.78%, 344/460), followed by GIIb (15.22%, 70/460), S-Indel (8.48%, 39/460), and GI (1.52%, 7/460) (Fig. 3C; Table 3). There were ten (sub-)genotypes determined for RVAs, and G9 (45.18%, 389/861), G5 (21.84%, 188/861), and G4 (16.26%, 140/861) were the predominate types (Fig. 3D; Table 4). Additionally, G3 (8.59%, 74/861), G26 (4.30%, 37/861), G11 (1.28%, 11/861), and other types were also detected (Fig. 3D; Table 4).

Table 4 Analysis of sequencing results of PEDV and RVA
Full size table

Discussion

As leading causes of swine diarrhea, PEDV, RVA, PDCoV and/or TGEV are frequently characterized on worldwide pig farms [15, 16]. It is of clinical significance to develop rapid and accurate multiplex methods to differentiate these four agents from diarrheal causes as the symptoms induced by them are similar [11]. However, documented methods for investigation of these four agents simultaneously are still rare, and we therefore developed a multiplex qPCR method to investigate PEDV, TGEV, RVA, and PDCoV in this study. The envelope protein (M protein) and the nucleocapsid protein (N protein) are conserved proteins encoded by coronaviruses and both of them are widely used for the diagnosis of coronaviruses, including PEDV, TGEV, and PDCoV [17,18,19]. The nonstructural protein NSP5 is required for viroplasm formation and virus replication of Rotaviruses (RVs) [20, 21]. This protein is also a conserved RV protein [22, 23], and has been recognized a promising target for RV diagnosis in several studies [24, 25]. In agreement with these studies, we selected the M gene as the target gene used for detecting PEDV and TGEV, the N gene as the target for detecting PDCoV, and NSP5 as the target for detecting RVA in this study. The lowest detectable copy numbers of the method assessed using synthesized plasmids were lower than 10 copies/µL (3 copies/µL for PEDV, 4 copies/µL for TGEV, 8 copies/µL for RVA, and 8 copies/µL for PDCoV). These detection limits were similar to those (2.95 × 100 copies/µL) in a documented multiplex qPCR which was developed to detect PEDV, TGEV, and PDCoV simultaneously [26]. These detection limits were much lower than those reported in another multiplex qPCR which was developed for detecting different types of PEDV (20 copies/µL for GI and 100 copies/µL for GII, 50 copies/µL for both RVA and RVC) [27]. These findings suggest the multiplex developed in this study possess a good sensitivity. In addition, our developed multiplex method did not provide any amplification curves during detecting other swine or swine diarrhea associated pathogens including PRRSV, CSFV, PCV2, SADS-CoV, E. coli, LI, and C. perfringens, suggesting a good specificity.

Application of the developed multiplex qPCR method on investigating clinical samples indicated a common condition of mixed infection associated with swine diarrhea on farms, which agrees well with the other studies [19, 28]. This common phenomenon highlights the clinical necessary and significance of developing a multiplex qPCR for the rapid diagnosis. The results of this study demonstrated that RVA, followed by PEDV, were the predominant agents responsible for swine diarrhea on Chinese pig farms. These findings agree well with those from the other published articles [8, 29]. Of particularly note is RVA, which displays an increasing trend of detection in pigs in China in recent years [8, 15]. While rotaviruses could be divided into ten different serogroups (A \(\sim\) J), RVA has been recognized as the most important rotavirus in swine enteric diseases, with a significant economic impact on pig production [30]. This is also why the current study selected this agent as a target for the method development. However, a high detection rate of RVA presented in this study and the other studies highlights the important role of this agent in the occurrence of swine diarrhea on pig farms and its management and control should receive more attention. Our investigation revealed that the detection of TGEV was relatively low on Chinese pig farms, which agrees well with those from the other studies [15, 31]. It is notable that the detection rate of TGEV on pig farms in the US displayed a continuous decrease trend from 2008 to 2016 (as low as 0.1%) [32], and it also has a low detection rate on pig farms in the other countries [33]. These findings suggest that the prevalence of TGEV on worldwide pig farms is low, and this might be because the rapid spread of porcine respiratory coronavirus which is closely related to TGEV in the 1980s provides immunological cross-protection [34]. The results of this study indicated a role of PDCoV in the occurrence of swine diarrhea on farms, even though the detection rate of this agent is relatively low. As a newly emerged swine diarrhea associated coronavirus, PDCoV generally do not possess a detection rate as high as the other main diarrhea-causing viral agents on pig farms in many studies [28, 31, 35]. However, the impact of PDCoV should not be ignored due to the potential zoonosis of the virus [36].

Like the findings from the other reports [15, 37], our results presented in this study showed that PEDV type GII particularly GIIa was still the predominant genotypes on pig farms in China. However, our phylogenetic analysis revealed that the GIIa branches clearly comprised of a heterogeneous of distinct clades, and these clades have been assigned as novel genotypes such as GIIc or GIId in several studies [38, 39]. It remains to be clarified whether those “novel genotypes” should be acknowledged as more solid evidence is still necessary. In addition to GII strains, our investigation showed that approximately 8.48% (39/460) of the strains were characterized as S-INDEL. This value is similar to that (9.7%) characterized in the North America, and the emergence of the S-INDEL strain is believed to have possibility to make the PEDV epidemic more complex [40]. Our results presented in this study demonstrated a complex condition on the prevalence of RVA on Chinese pig farms, as evidenced by the characterization of 10 RVA genotypes. Among these genotypes, G9, G5, and G4 were the predominantly characterized genotypes, which agrees well with the other reports from both China and other countries [41, 42], indicating an active role these genotypes in promoting swine diarrhea.

In conclusion, we developed a TaqMan multiplex qPCR method to detect PEDV, TGEV, PDCoV, and RVA in this study. This method demonstrated a good specificity and sensitivity, and could be used as a convenient method for the monitoring and differential diagnosis of swine viral diarrhea. Applying this method, we investigated the profile of these four diarrhea-associated viruses on Chinese pig farms, and our results indicate a complex condition on the prevalence of swine diarrheal viruses.

Data availability

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Abbreviations

CSFV:

classical swine fever virus

LI:

Lawsonia intracellularis

PCV2:

porcine circovirus type 2

PDCoV:

porcine deltacoronavirus

PEDV:

porcine epidemic diarrhea virus

PRRSV:

porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus

qPCR:

reverse transcription-quantitative PCR

RVA:

porcine rotavirus A

SADS-CoV:

swine acute diarrhea syndrome coronavirus

TGEV:

transmissible gastroenteritis virus

References

  1. Li Z, Ma Z, Li Y, Gao S, Xiao S. Porcine epidemic diarrhea virus: molecular mechanisms of attenuation and vaccines. Microb Pathog. 2020;149:104553.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Li W, Li H, Liu Y, Pan Y, Deng F, Song Y, Tang X, He Q. New variants of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus, China, 2011. Emerg Infect Dis. 2012;18:1350–3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Xia L, Yang Y, Wang J, Jing Y, Yang Q. Impact of TGEV infection on the pig small intestine. Virol J. 2018;15:102.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Ding Z, An K, Xie L, Wu W, Zhang R, Wang D, Fang Y, Chen H, Xiao S, Fang L. Transmissible gastroenteritis virus infection induces NF-κB activation through RLR-mediated signaling. Virology. 2017;507:170–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Underdahl NR, Mebus CA, Torres-Medina A. Recovery of transmissible gastroenteritis virus from chronically infected experimental pigs. Am J Vet Res. 1975;36:1473–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Song D, Zhou X, Peng Q, Chen Y, Zhang F, Huang T, Zhang T, Li A, Huang D, Wu Q, et al. Newly emerged Porcine Deltacoronavirus Associated with Diarrhoea in Swine in China: identification, prevalence and full-length genome sequence analysis. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2015;62:575–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Yen L, Mora-Díaz JC, Rauh R, Nelson W, Castillo G, Ye F, Zhang J, Baum D, Zimmerman J, Nelli R, Giménez-Lirola L. Characterization of the subclinical infection of Porcine Deltacoronavirus in Grower pigs under experimental conditions. Viruses 2022, 14.

  8. Xue R, Tian Y, Zhang Y, Zhang M, Li Z, Chen S, Liu Q. Diversity of group a rotavirus of porcine rotavirus in Shandong province China. Acta Virol. 2018;62:229–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wang Y, Nie M, Deng H, Lai S, Zhou Y, Sun X, Zhu L, Xu Z. Establishment of a reverse transcription recombinase-aided amplification detection method for porcine group a rotavirus. Front Vet Sci. 2022;9:954657.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Liu Y, Han X, Zhang X, Liu J, Yao L. Development of a droplet digital PCR assay for detection of group a porcine rotavirus. Front Vet Sci. 2023;10:1113537.

    Article  ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Ma P, Fang P, Ren T, Fang L, Xiao S. Porcine intestinal organoids: overview of the state of the art. Viruses 2022, 14.

  12. Gunson R, Gillespie G. Optimisation of PCR reactions using primer chessboarding. J Clin Virol. 2003;26:369–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Yang H, Peng Z, Song W, Zhang C, Fan J, Chen H, Hua L, Pei J, Tang X, Chen H, Wu B. A triplex real-time PCR method to detect African swine fever virus gene-deleted and wild type strains. Front Vet Sci. 2022;9:943099.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Tamura K, Stecher G, Peterson D, Filipski A, Kumar S. MEGA6: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis version 6.0. Mol Biol Evol. 2013;30:2725–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Li C, Lu H, Geng C, Yang K, Liu W, Liu Z, Yuan F, Gao T, Wang S, Wen P et al. Epidemic and Evolutionary Characteristics of Swine Enteric Viruses in South-Central China from 2018 to 2021. Viruses 2022, 14.

  16. Puente H, Arguello H, Cortey M, Gómez-García M, Mencía-Ares O, Pérez-Perez L, Díaz I, Carvajal A. Detection and genetic characterization of enteric viruses in diarrhoea outbreaks from swine farms in Spain. Porcine Health Manag. 2023;9:29.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Chen J, Liu R, Liu H, Chen J, Li X, Zhang J, Zhou B. Development of a Multiplex quantitative PCR for detecting Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Virus, Transmissible Gastroenteritis Virus, and Porcine Deltacoronavirus simultaneously in China. Vet Sci 2023, 10.

  18. Niu JW, Li JH, Guan JL, Deng KH, Wang XW, Li G, Zhou X, Xu MS, Chen RA, Zhai SL, He DS. Development of a multiplex RT-PCR method for the detection of four porcine enteric coronaviruses. Front Vet Sci. 2022;9:1033864.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Ding G, Fu Y, Li B, Chen J, Wang J, Yin B, Sha W, Liu G. Development of a multiplex RT-PCR for the detection of major diarrhoeal viruses in pig herds in China. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2020;67:678–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. López T, Rojas M, Ayala-Bretón C, López S, Arias CF. Reduced expression of the rotavirus NSP5 gene has a pleiotropic effect on virus replication. J Gen Virol. 2005;86:1609–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Campagna M, Eichwald C, Vascotto F, Burrone OR. RNA interference of rotavirus segment 11 mRNA reveals the essential role of NSP5 in the virus replicative cycle. J Gen Virol. 2005;86:1481–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Buttafuoco A, Michaelsen K, Tobler K, Ackermann M, Fraefel C, Eichwald C. Conserved Rotavirus NSP5 and VP2 domains interact and affect viroplasm. J Virol 2020, 94.

  23. Barbosa BR, Bernardes NT, Beserra LA, Gregori F. Molecular characterization of the porcine group A rotavirus NSP2 and NSP5/6 genes from São Paulo State, Brazil, in 2011/12. ScientificWorldJournal 2013, 2013:241686.

  24. Theuns S, Desmarets LM, Heylen E, Zeller M, Dedeurwaerder A, Roukaerts ID, Van Ranst M, Matthijnssens J, Nauwynck HJ. Porcine group a rotaviruses with heterogeneous VP7 and VP4 genotype combinations can be found together with enteric bacteria on Belgian swine farms. Vet Microbiol. 2014;172:23–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Zeng Y, Li T, Yan X, Xu H, Yang H, Jia L, Li Y, Luo G, Ge S, Xia N. Construction of a real-time fluorescent quantitative RT-PCR for detection of Group A Rotavirus. Chin J Virol. 2017;33:258–64.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Li Y, Niu JW, Zhou X, Chu PP, Zhang KL, Gou HC, Yang DX, Zhang JF, Li CL, Liao M, Zhai SL. Development of a multiplex qRT-PCR assay for the detection of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus, porcine transmissible gastroenteritis virus and porcine Deltacoronavirus. Front Vet Sci. 2023;10:1158585.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Zhang L, Jiang Z, Zhou Z, Sun J, Yan S, Gao W, Shao Y, Bai Y, Wu Y, Yan Z et al. A TaqMan Probe-Based Multiplex Real-Time PCR for Simultaneous Detection of Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Virus Subtypes G1 and G2, and Porcine Rotavirus Groups A and C. Viruses 2022, 14.

  28. Hsu TH, Liu HP, Chin CY, Wang C, Zhu WZ, Wu BL, Chang YC. Detection, sequence analysis, and antibody prevalence of porcine deltacoronavirus in Taiwan. Arch Virol. 2018;163:3113–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Tian Y, Yang X, Li H, Ma B, Guan R, Yang J, Chen D, Han X, Zhou L, Song Z, et al. Molecular characterization of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus associated with outbreaks in southwest China during 2014–2018. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2021;68:3482–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Flores PS, Costa FB, Amorim AR, Mendes GS, Rojas M, Santos N. Rotavirus A, C, and H in Brazilian pigs: potential for zoonotic transmission of RVA. J Vet Diagn Invest. 2021;33:129–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Zhai SL, Wei WK, Li XP, Wen XH, Zhou X, Zhang H, Lv DH, Li F, Wang D. Occurrence and sequence analysis of porcine deltacoronaviruses in southern China. Virol J. 2016;13:136.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Chen F, Knutson TP, Rossow S, Saif LJ, Marthaler DG. Decline of transmissible gastroenteritis virus and its complex evolutionary relationship with porcine respiratory coronavirus in the United States. Sci Rep. 2019;9:3953.

    Article  ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Salamunova S, Jackova A, Mandelik R, Novotny J, Vlasakova M, Vilcek S. Molecular detection of enteric viruses and the genetic characterization of porcine astroviruses and sapoviruses in domestic pigs from Slovakian farms. BMC Vet Res. 2018;14:313.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Monteagudo LV, Benito AA, Lázaro-Gaspar S, Arnal JL, Martin-Jurado D, Menjon R, Quílez J. Occurrence of Rotavirus a genotypes and other enteric pathogens in Diarrheic Suckling piglets from Spanish Swine farms. Anim (Basel) 2022, 12.

  35. Puente H, Argüello H, Mencía-Ares Ó, Gómez-García M, Rubio P, Carvajal A. Detection and genetic diversity of Porcine Coronavirus involved in Diarrhea outbreaks in Spain. Front Vet Sci. 2021;8:651999.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Lednicky JA, Tagliamonte MS, White SK, Elbadry MA, Alam MM, Stephenson CJ, Bonny TS, Loeb JC, Telisma T, Chavannes S, et al. Independent infections of porcine deltacoronavirus among Haitian children. Nature. 2021;600:133–7.

    Article  CAS  ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Liang W, Zhou D, Geng C, Yang K, Duan Z, Guo R, Liu W, Yuan F, Liu Z, Gao T, et al. Isolation and evolutionary analyses of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus in Asia. PeerJ. 2020;8:e10114.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Li X, Li Y, Huang J, Yao Y, Zhao W, Zhang Y, Qing J, Ren J, Yan Z, Wang Z, et al. Isolation and oral immunogenicity assessment of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus NH-TA2020 strain: one of the predominant strains circulating in China from 2017 to 2021. Virol Sin. 2022;37:646–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. CHEN J, TIAN L, LI Z, WANG L, GUO Y, SHANG Y, SUN Y, HUANG X, MENG Q, CAI X et al. Molecular characterization and phylogenetic analysis of a Novel Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Virus circulating in large-scale Pig farms in Xinjiang, China. Kafkas Univ Vet Fak Derg 2023, 29.

  40. Vlasova AN, Marthaler D, Wang Q, Culhane MR, Rossow KD, Rovira A, Collins J, Saif LJ. Distinct characteristics and complex evolution of PEDV strains, North America, May 2013-February 2014. Emerg Infect Dis. 2014;20:1620–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Brnić D, Čolić D, Kunić V, Maltar-Strmečki N, Krešić N, Konjević D, Bujanić M, Bačani I, Hižman D, Jemeršić L. Rotavirus A in Domestic pigs and Wild boars: high genetic diversity and Interspecies Transmission. Viruses 2022, 14.

  42. Tao R, Chang X, Zhou J, Zhu X, Yang S, Li K, Gu L, Zhang X, Li B. Molecular epidemiological investigation of group a porcine rotavirus in East China. Front Vet Sci. 2023;10:1138419.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

This work was supported in part by National Center of Technology Innovation for Pigs (No. NCTIP-XD/B11), Yingzi Tech & Huazhong Agricultural University Intelligent Research Institute of Food Health (No. IRIFH202209), and Hubei Provincial Key Research and Development Program of China (No. 2021BBA085). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Key Laboratory of Agricultural Microbiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Huazhong Agricultural University, 430070, Wuhan, China

    Wenbo Song, Jie Fan, Mengfei Zhao, Lin Hua, Shaobo Xiao, Zhong Peng & Bin Wu

  2. Hubei Hongshan Laboratory, 430070, Wuhan, China

    Wenbo Song, Jie Fan, Mengfei Zhao, Lin Hua, Shaobo Xiao & Zhong Peng

  3. Frontiers Science Center for Animal Breeding and Sustainable Production, The Cooperative Innovation Center for Sustainable Pig Production, 430070, Wuhan, China

    Wenbo Song, Jie Fan, Mengfei Zhao, Lin Hua, Shaobo Xiao, Zhong Peng & Bin Wu

  4. Animal Disease Diagnosis Center of Wuhan Keqian Biology Co., Ltd, 430070, Wuhan, China

    Yixue Feng, Jiali Zhang, Danni Kong & Xibiao Tang

  5. Hubei Vocational College of Bio-Technology, 430070, Wuhan, China

    Jinmei Xiang & Xibiao Tang

Authors
  1. Wenbo Song
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yixue Feng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jiali Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Danni Kong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jie Fan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Mengfei Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Lin Hua
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Jinmei Xiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Xibiao Tang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Shaobo Xiao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Zhong Peng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Bin Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

WS designed and developed the multiplex method; YF, JZ, and DK helped to optimize the method; YF, JZ, DK, JF, MZ, LH, JX, and XT contributed to the sample collection, method application, and data analysis; WS drafted the first version of the manuscript; ZP, SX and BW participated in the revision of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Zhong Peng or Bin Wu.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

YF, JZ, DK, and XT are also employees of Wuhan Keqian Biology Co., Ltd. The remaining authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Song, W., Feng, Y., Zhang, J. et al. Development of a multiplex reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (qPCR) method for detecting common causative agents of swine viral diarrhea in China. Porc Health Manag 10, 12 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40813-024-00364-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40813-024-00364-y

Keywords

Porcine Health Management

ISSN: 2055-5660

Contact us