J Gen Virol Tips for Better Browsing
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Gen Virol 61 (1982), 33-41; DOI 10.1099/0022-1317-61-1-33
© 1982 Society for General Microbiology

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tratschin, J.-D.
Right arrow Articles by Siegl, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Tratschin, J.-D.
Right arrow Articles by Siegl, G.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Tratschin, J.-D.
Right arrow Articles by Siegl, G.

Canine Parvovirus: Relationship to Wild-type and Vaccine Strains of Feline Panleukopenia Virus and Mink Enteritis Virus

Jon-Duri Tratschin1, Gary K. McMaster2, Gertrud Kronauer1 and Günter Siegl1

1 Institute for Hygiene and Medical Microbiology, University of Bern, Friedbühlstrasse 51, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland
and2 Department of Virology, Swiss Institute for Experimental Cancer Research, CH-1066 Epalinges s/Lausanne, Switzerland

Canine parvovirus (CPV), feline panleukopenia virus (FPLV) and mink enteritis virus (MEV) were compared serologically, by determination of their host range in cell cultures, as well as by restriction enzyme analysis. Maps of the virus genomes were established using seven different restriction enzymes cutting at a total of 56 sites. MEV and FPLV gave maps which were identical except for one restriction site. The map of CPV is closely related to those of FPLV/MEV since their DNAs share about 80% of the restriction sites tested. However, CPV is clearly distinct from FPLV/MEV since either eight (German isolate) or nine (Belgian, Swiss and American isolates) restriction sites are different. The DNAs of six vaccine strains of FPLV and MEV were also analysed. They gave maps which closely resembled those of the respective wild-type strains. CPV and FPLV/MEV also differed with respect to antigenicity, as well as to host range in cell cultures.

Keywords: canine parvovirus, epidemiology, restriction endonuclease mapping

Received 1 October 1981; accepted 26 February 1982.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
ScienceHome page
C. Parrish, P. O'Connell, J. Evermann, and L. Carmichael
Natural variation of canine parvovirus
Science, November 29, 1985; 230(4729): 1046 - 1048.
[Abstract] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
INT J SYST EVOL MICROBIOL MICROBIOLOGY J GEN VIROL
J MED MICROBIOL ALL SGM JOURNALS
Copyright © 1982 by the Society for General Microbiology.