+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The Development and Validation of a Novel Nanobody-Based Competitive ELISA for the Detection of Foot and Mouth Disease 3ABC Antibodies in Cattle

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          Effective management of foot and mouth disease (FMD) requires diagnostic tests to distinguish between infected and vaccinated animals (DIVA). To address this need, several enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) platforms have been developed, however, these tests vary in their sensitivity and specificity and are very expensive for developing countries. Camelid-derived single-domain antibodies fragments so-called Nanobodies, have demonstrated great efficacy for the development of serological diagnostics. This study describes the development of a novel Nanobody-based FMD 3ABC competitive ELISA, for the serological detection of antibodies against FMD Non-Structural Proteins (NSP) in Uganda cattle herds. This in-house ELISA was validated using more than 600 sera from different Uganda districts, and virus serotype specificities. The evaluation of the performance of the assay demonstrated high diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of 94 % (95 % CI: 88.9–97.2), and 97.67 % (95 % CI: 94.15–99.36) respectively, as well as the capability to detect NSP-specific antibodies against multiple FMD serotype infections. In comparison with the commercial PrioCHECK FMDV NSP-FMD test, there was a strong concordance and high correlation and agreement in the performance of the two tests. This new developed Nanobody based FMD 3ABC competitive ELISA could clearly benefit routine disease diagnosis, the establishment of disease-free zones, and the improvement of FMD management and control in endemically complex environments, such as those found in Africa.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 56

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The economic impacts of foot and mouth disease – What are they, how big are they and where do they occur?

          Although a disease of low mortality, the global impact of foot and mouth disease (FMD) is colossal due to the huge numbers of animals affected. This impact can be separated into two components: (1) direct losses due to reduced production and changes in herd structure; and (2) indirect losses caused by costs of FMD control, poor access to markets and limited use of improved production technologies. This paper estimates that annual impact of FMD in terms of visible production losses and vaccination in endemic regions alone amount to between US$6.5 and 21 billion. In addition, outbreaks in FMD free countries and zones cause losses of >US$1.5 billion a year. FMD impacts are not the same throughout the world: 1. FMD production losses have a big impact on the world's poorest where more people are directly dependent on livestock. FMD reduces herd fertility leading to less efficient herd structures and discourages the use of FMD susceptible, high productivity breeds. Overall the direct losses limit livestock productivity affecting food security. 2. In countries with ongoing control programmes, FMD control and management creates large costs. These control programmes are often difficult to discontinue due to risks of new FMD incursion. 3. The presence, or even threat, of FMD prevents access to lucrative international markets. 4. In FMD free countries outbreaks occur periodically and the costs involved in regaining free status have been enormous. FMD is highly contagious and the actions of one farmer affect the risk of FMD occurring on other holdings; thus sizeable externalities are generated. Control therefore requires coordination within and between countries. These externalities imply that FMD control produces a significant amount of public goods, justifying the need for national and international public investment. Equipping poor countries with the tools needed to control FMD will involve the long term development of state veterinary services that in turn will deliver wider benefits to a nation including the control of other livestock diseases.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Economic costs of the foot and mouth disease outbreak in the United Kingdom in 2001.

            The authors present estimates of the economic costs to agriculture and industries affected by tourism of the outbreak of foot and mouth disease (FMD) in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2001. The losses to agriculture and the food chain amount to about Pound Sterling3.1 billion. The majority of the costs to agriculture have been met by the Government through compensation for slaughter and disposal as well as clean-up costs. Nonetheless, agricultural producers will have suffered losses, estimated at Pound Sterling355 million, which represents about 20% of the estimated total income from farming in 2001. Based on data from surveys of tourism, businesses directly affected by tourist expenditure are estimated to have lost a similar total amount (between Pound Sterling2.7 and Pound Sterling3.2 billion) as a result of reduced numbers of people visiting the countryside. The industries which supply agriculture, the food industries and tourist-related businesses will also have suffered losses. However, the overall costs to the UK economy are substantially less than the sum of these components, as much of the expenditure by tourists was not lost, but merely displaced to other sectors of the economy. Overall, the net effect of FMD is estimated to have reduced the gross domestic product in the UK by less than 0.2% in 2001.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Foot-and-mouth disease: past, present and future

              Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) is a highly contagious disease of cloven-hoofed animals including cattle, pigs, sheep and many wildlife species. It can cause enormous economic losses when incursions occur into countries which are normally disease free. In addition, it has long-term effects within countries where the disease is endemic due to reduced animal productivity and the restrictions on international trade in animal products. The disease is caused by infection with foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV), a picornavirus. Seven different serotypes (and numerous variants) of FMDV have been identified. Some serotypes have a restricted geographical distribution, e.g. Asia-1, whereas others, notably serotype O, occur in many different regions. There is no cross-protection between serotypes and sometimes protection conferred by vaccines even of the same serotype can be limited. Thus it is important to characterize the viruses that are circulating if vaccination is being used for disease control. This review describes current methods for the detection and characterization of FMDVs. Sequence information is increasingly being used for identifying the source of outbreaks. In addition such information can be used to understand antigenic change within virus strains. The challenges and opportunities for improving the control of the disease within endemic settings, with a focus on Eurasia, are discussed, including the role of the FAO/EuFMD/OIE Progressive Control Pathway. Better control of the disease in endemic areas reduces the risk of incursions into disease-free regions.

                Author and article information

                Front Vet Sci
                Front Vet Sci
                Front. Vet. Sci.
                Frontiers in Veterinary Science
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                12 October 2018
                : 5
                1The Shraga Segal Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Genetics, Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev , BeerSheba, Israel
                2London Centre for Nanotechnology and Div. of Medicine, University College London , London, United Kingdom
                3Laboratory of Cellular and Molecular Immunology, Vrije Universiteit Brussel , Brussels, Belgium
                4Virology Division, Kimron Veterinary Institute , Beit Dagan, Israel
                5Department of Arbovirology, Emerging and Re-emerging Infection Uganda Virus Research Institute , Entebbe, Uganda
                6College of Veterinary Medicine, Animal Resources and Biosecurity (COVAB), Makerere University , Kampala, Uganda
                7Foreign Animal Disease Research Unit, United States Department of Agriculture Plum Island Animal Disease Center, Agricultural Research Service (USDA) , New York, NY, United States
                Author notes

                Edited by: Zhenhai Chen, Yangzhou University, China

                Reviewed by: Sivareddy Kotla, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, United States; Faten Abdelaal Okda, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, United States

                This article was submitted to Veterinary Infectious Diseases, a section of the journal Frontiers in Veterinary Science

                †These authors have contributed equally to this work

                Copyright © 2018 Gelkop, Sobarzo, Brangel, Vincke, Romão, Fedida-Metula, Strom, Ataliba, Mwiine, Ochwo, Velazquez-Salinas, McKendry, Muyldermans, Lutwama, Rieder, Yavelsky and Lobel.

                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) and the copyright owner(s) 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.

                Page count
                Figures: 7, Tables: 3, Equations: 0, References: 59, Pages: 13, Words: 10008
                Veterinary Science
                Original Research


                Comment on this article