{"title":"Functional Affinity of Eleven Commercial Conjugates for Use in Serological Assays for Wild Rodents and Shrews.","authors":"Miriam Maas, Ankje de Vries, Hein Sprong","doi":"10.7589/JWD-D-24-00119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Serological assays are important tools for detecting the presence of antibodies that are indicative of past and ongoing infections. For wildlife, species-specific conjugates, which are used as detection antibodies in primary binding assays, are not available for most species. In these cases, conjugates for closely related species or immunoglobulin-binding proteins are frequently used. These are often not validated and their low functional affinity may result in false-negative results. We tested 11 commercial conjugates, including protein G and species- or family-specific secondary conjugated antibodies, on eight rodent and two insectivore species (shrews). Using direct ELISAs, between-species and within-species differences in the functional affinity of the conjugates were assessed. Large differences in antibody binding of the conjugates were observed. Some conjugates were species-specific, binding only to antibodies from one species, whereas others were able to bind across a broad range of species. The strength of the antibody-conjugate interaction varied between species and sometimes within species. In general, stronger antibody-conjugate interactions were observed for rodent species than for shrews. Our study underlines the importance of confirming species-specific functional affinity of a conjugate, even if the conjugate is known to bind to antibodies of a closely related species.</p>","PeriodicalId":17602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Wildlife Diseases","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Wildlife Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7589/JWD-D-24-00119","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Serological assays are important tools for detecting the presence of antibodies that are indicative of past and ongoing infections. For wildlife, species-specific conjugates, which are used as detection antibodies in primary binding assays, are not available for most species. In these cases, conjugates for closely related species or immunoglobulin-binding proteins are frequently used. These are often not validated and their low functional affinity may result in false-negative results. We tested 11 commercial conjugates, including protein G and species- or family-specific secondary conjugated antibodies, on eight rodent and two insectivore species (shrews). Using direct ELISAs, between-species and within-species differences in the functional affinity of the conjugates were assessed. Large differences in antibody binding of the conjugates were observed. Some conjugates were species-specific, binding only to antibodies from one species, whereas others were able to bind across a broad range of species. The strength of the antibody-conjugate interaction varied between species and sometimes within species. In general, stronger antibody-conjugate interactions were observed for rodent species than for shrews. Our study underlines the importance of confirming species-specific functional affinity of a conjugate, even if the conjugate is known to bind to antibodies of a closely related species.
期刊介绍:
The JWD publishes reports of wildlife disease investigations, research papers, brief research notes, case and epizootic reports, review articles, and book reviews. The JWD publishes the results of original research and observations dealing with all aspects of infectious, parasitic, toxic, nutritional, physiologic, developmental and neoplastic diseases, environmental contamination, and other factors impinging on the health and survival of free-living or occasionally captive populations of wild animals, including fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. Papers on zoonoses involving wildlife and on chemical immobilization of wild animals are also published. Manuscripts dealing with surveys and case reports may be published in the Journal provided that they contain significant new information or have significance for better understanding health and disease in wild populations. Authors are encouraged to address the wildlife management implications of their studies, where appropriate.