JWD Subscribe to eTOC alerts
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Journal of Wildlife Diseases, 20(1), 1984, pp. 1-5
© Wildlife Disease Association  1984
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 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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gulka, C.
Right arrow Articles by Bagshaw, C
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gulka, C.
Right arrow Articles by Bagshaw, C

Evidence of exposure of waterfowl and other aquatic birds to the hemagglutinating duck adenovirus identical to EDS-76 virus

CM Gulka, TH Piela, VJ Yates, and C Bagshaw


ABSTRACT

Serum and fecal samples from 12 species of aquatic birds were studied for evidence of exposure to a hemagglutinating duck adenovirus (DAV). DAV is serologically indistinguishable from egg-drop syndrome-76 virus. A total of 285 serum samples were tested by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) test. Forty-two percent of the birds had HI antibodies, with titers ranging from 8 to 256. Wild ducks showed the highest frequency of antibodies (56%) while in coots and grebes, antibody was less frequent, 33% and 26%, respectively. Attempted virus isolations from 79 fecal samples were unsuccessful. The data support the hypothesis that DAV is indigenous in wild duck populations and suggest that infection and viremia are limited in time and occur at a very early age.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1984 by the Wildlife Disease Association.