Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 19, Number 2—February 2013
Dispatch

Influenza A(H5N1) Virus Surveillance at Live Poultry Markets, Cambodia, 2011

Srey Viseth Horm, San Sorn, Lotfi Allal, and Philippe BuchyComments to Author 
Author affiliations: Author affiliations: Institut Pasteur, Phnom Penh, Cambodia (S.V. Horm, S. Sorn, P. Buchy); Ministry of Agriculture, Phnom Penh (S. Sorn); Food and Agriculture Organization, Phnom Penh (L. Allal)

Main Article

Table

Results of laboratory testing for influenza A(H5N1) virus in environmental samples from live poultry markets, Cambodia, 2011*

Sample type, market Samples tested by qRT-PCR
 Samples tested by virus isolation†
No. positive/no. tested (%) Total no. positive/total no. tested (%) No. positive/no. tested (%) Total no. positive/total no. tested (%)
Water 30/145 (21)‡ 8/145 (6)§
M1 7/46 (15) 2/46 (4)
M2 9/37 (24) 3/37 (8)
M3 11/21 (52) 3/21 (14)
M4
 3/41 (7)
0/41 (0)
Soil or mud 27/120 (23)‡ 2/120 (2)
M1 7/28 (25) 0/28 (0)
M2 8/28 (29) 1/28 (4)
M3 9/33 (27) 0/33 (0)
M4
 3/31 (10)
1/31 (3)
Feces 7/117 (6)‡ 0/117 (0)§
M1 3/30 (10) 0/30 (0)
M2 0/25 (0) 0/25 (0)
M3 3/33 (9) 0/33 (0)
M4
 1/29 (3)
0/29 (0)
Feathers 26/120 (22)‡ 0/120 (0)§
M1 11/30 (37) 0/30 (0)
M2 8/28 (29) 0/28 (0)
M3 4/32 (13) 0/32 (0)
M4
 3/30 (10)
0/30 (0)
Total 90/502 (18) 10/502 (2)
M1 28/134 (21)¶ 2/134 (1)
M2 25/118 (21)¶ 4/118 (3)
M3 27/119 (23)¶ 3/119 (3)
M4 10/131 (8)¶ 1/131 (1)

*qRT-PCR, quantitative real-time reverse transcription PCR; M1, Orussey market in the capital city of Phnom Penh; M2, Chamkar Doung market in Phnom Penh; M3, a market in Takeo, Takeo Province; M4, a market in Kampong Cham, Kampong Cham Province.
†Environmental samples were inoculated into specific pathogen–free embryonated hen eggs for virus isolation.
‡The percentage of samples that were positive was significantly different (by χ2 test) for feces vs. water (p = 0.0007), feces vs. soil/mud (p = 0.0003), and feces vs. feathers (p = 0.0005).
§The percentage of samples that were positive was significantly different (by χ2 test) for water vs. feces (p = 0.001) and water vs. feathers (p = 0.009).
¶The percentage of environmental samples that were positive was significantly different (by χ2 test) for M4 vs. M1 (p = 0.002), M4 vs. M2 (p = 0.002), and M4 vs. M3 (p = 0.0008).

Main Article

1These authors contributed equally to this article.

Page created: January 22, 2013
Page updated: January 22, 2013
Page reviewed: January 22, 2013
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
file_external