PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 1, 2026Pathogens0 citationsOpen Access

Sensitivity and Specificity Assessment of Various African Swine Fever ELISA Kits for Accurate Detection of Seropositive Wild Boar

View Full Paper
VFVirginia FriedrichsASAlexander SchäferPDPaul Deutschmann

Key Points

  • To evaluate the performance of different ELISA kits for detecting African swine fever in wild boar and domestic pigs.
  • Compared sensitivity and specificity of four licensed and three unlicensed ELISA kits.
  • Analyzed wild boar samples submitted to the National Reference Laboratory in 2021 and 2022.
  • Used domestic pig samples as a control cohort for optimal sample quality.
  • Wild boar samples showed challenges for all ELISA kits due to hemolysis and decay.
  • Domestic pig samples were largely interpreted correctly by ELISA kits.
  • High comparability of results was observed across regional laboratories.

Abstract

The continuous and rapid spread of African swine fever (ASF) still poses a significant threat to Eurasian wild boar and domestic pigs, leading to substantial economic losses in all associated sectors annually. In Europe, including Germany, affected wild boar populations have become an important driver and host of ASF virus (ASFV), and monitoring and surveillance is key to tailor control measures that impede viral spread. While molecular methods are used to confirm the disease and to monitor viral evolution, serology gains importance in endemically affected regions as it provides insights into disease dynamics and possible attenuation of ASFV strains. Frontline serological diagnosis is done using ELISA assays, of which several are commercialized. However, accurate performance of ELISA assays is key for correct interpretation of wild boar samples. Due to the various stages of hemolysis and decay, field samples from wild boar can be challenging for ELISA assays. To assess which indirect or competitive ELISA kit performs best when dealing with such samples, we compared the sensitivity and specificity of four commercially available ELISA kits that are licensed in Germany, as well as three unlicensed but commercially available kits. For this comparison, we used all wild boar samples submitted to the National Reference Laboratory (NRL) for ASF in years 2021 and 2022, as well as samples from domestic pigs to have a control cohort where sample quality is optimal. We observed that wild boar samples, varying in stage of hemolysis and decay, were challenging for all kits included in this study. However, samples of domestic pigs were largely interpreted correctly by ELISA, using immunoperoxidase test as verification method. Additionally, the comparability of results obtained by regional laboratories was high. Our study provides data that highlights the importance of careful kit selection, assessment of sample quality, and data interpretation for effective ASFV surveillance and control.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Friedrichs et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69ccb66716edfba7beb88101https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens15040360
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper