----- Forwarded Message -----
From: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Friday, 14 February 2014, 11:29
Subject: RE: From Dr Pam Luka, Vom, NIgeria on seromonitoring and on random diagnosis: plus moderator's request
Dear ModeratorI have a question regarding Pam Luka’s observation that all of the buffy coats were positive for PPR (RNA).Question: were any of the oculo-nasal swabs positive for PPR RNA which would seem to be a more important result (if confirmed) as it would suggest the ability to transmit the virus between animals ?Thank youDr William DUNDON | Consultant Molecular Microbiologist APHL|Joint FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture |Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications |International Atomic Energy Agency | IAEA Laboratories Seibersdorf |Vienna International Centre, PO Box 100, 1400 Vienna, Austria |Follow us on www.iaea.orgInformation on Nuclear Sciences and Applications, visit www-naweb.iaea.orgyou,From: Establishment of a PPR Global Research and Expertise Network (PPR-GREN) [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of [log in to unmask]
Sent: Thursday, 13 February 2014 17:38
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: From Dr Pam Luka, Vom, NIgeria on seromonitoring and on random diagnosis: plus moderator's requestDear Paul,
My name is Pam Luka from the National Veterinary Research Institute,
Vom Nigeria. I agreed with other colleagues on the need for post
vaccination seromonitoring as an indicator of whether we are getting
it right or not. The cost of that maybe much but the benefits are also
going to be a kind of "post vaccination positive/negative control".
After the reported PPR outbreak and in the Karamoja region, Uganda in
2006 even thought Wanwayi et al.,1995 reported the the presence of
antibodies from repository samples collected in the 1980s. Where did
the virus go then? Perhaps it vanished into thin air or eventually
found a niche for itself and compounded with poor disease surveillance
and disease reporting it remained unreported.
Vaccination was carried out after the outbreak and we went back and
carried out post-vaccination seromonitoring in 2008-2009 and discovered
seropositivity of 55.3 % for both sheep and goats. This was not so
good for achieving "herd immunity" but it informed us of the need to
conduct a second round of vaccination.
During the same survey, we also randomly collected oculo-nasal
swabs and buffy coat from apparently healthy animals and all the buffy
coats turned out positive by reverse transcriptase PCR.I assume you mean positive for PPR virus.Are there some participants who could comment on this result please - Moderator .So if we are to go after the virus, we should consider collecting what kind of
samples to collected in other not to miss it.
Best regards
Luka D. Pam
Applied Mol. Biol. Div.
NVRI, Vom.
Plateau State,
NigeriaTo unsubscribe from the FAO-AnimalHealth-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.fao.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=FAO-AnimalHealth-L&A=1This email message is intended only for the use of the named recipient. Information contained in this email message and its attachments may be privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication to others. Also please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system.
To unsubscribe from the FAO-AnimalHealth-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.fao.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=FAO-AnimalHealth-L&A=1