Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T20:44:22.935Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors affecting the production of foot-and-mouth disease virus in deep suspension cultures of BHK21 Clone 13 cells

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

P. B. Capstick ,
A. J. M. Garland ,
W. G. Chapman  and
R. C. Masters
P. B. Capstick
Affiliation:
The Animal Virus Research Institute, Pirbright, Woking, Surrey
A. J. M. Garland
Affiliation:
The Animal Virus Research Institute, Pirbright, Woking, Surrey
W. G. Chapman
Affiliation:
The Animal Virus Research Institute, Pirbright, Woking, Surrey
R. C. Masters
Affiliation:
The Animal Virus Research Institute, Pirbright, Woking, Surrey
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

For maximum utilization of deep cultures to produce FMD virus it was important to have adequate control of culture temperature and pH. Culture temperature should be controlled within the range 34·25°7–35°C. and culture pH at 7·2. The culture system became less efficient as the cell concentration was increased from 1 × 106·0 to 9 × 106·0 cells/ml. A cell concentration of 2·5 × 106·0 cells/ml. represented a working compromise between efficiency and antigen titre/ml. for inactivated FMD vaccine production.

The input virus/cell ratio had no effect on the time or titre of peak virus yield in the range 1:1 to 1:320. This makes the production of seed virus from small numbers of monolayer cultures feasible and economical.

Virus yield was improved by the addition of 5% serum. It would be more satisfactory if a serum-free cell strain could be developed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 65 , Issue 3 , September 1967 , pp. 273 - 280
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1967

References

REFERENCES

Bradish, C. J., Jowett, C. & Kirkham, J. B. (1964). The fixation of complement by virus antibody complexes. J. gen. Microbiol. 35, 27.Google Scholar
Brown, F. & Cartwright, B. (1960). Purification of the virus of foot-and-mouth disease by fluorocarbon treatment and its dissociation from neutralizing antibody. J. Immun. 85, 309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, F. & Newman, J. F. E. (1963). In vitro measurement of the potency of inactivated foot-and-mouth disease virus vaccines. J. Hyg., Camb. 61, 345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Capstick, P. B., Telling, R. C., Chapman, W. G. & Stewart, D. L. (1962). Growth of a cloned strain of hamster kidney cells in suspended culture and their susceptibility to the virus of foot-and-mouth disease. Nature, Lond. 195, 1163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elsworth, R., Capel, G. H. & Telling, R. C. (1958). Improvements in the design of a laboratory culture vessel. J. appl. Bact. 21, 80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Telling, R. C. & Elsworth, R. (1965). Submerged culture of hamster kidney cells in a stainless steel vessel. Biotech. Bioengng. 7, 417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Telling, R. C., Radlett, P. & Mowat, G. N. (1967). Production of Semliki Forest virus from hamster kidney cells in deep culture vessels. Biotech. Bioengng. 9, 257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Telling, R. C. & Stone, C. J. (1964). A method of automatic pH control of a bicarbonate/CO2 buffer system for the submerged culture of hamster kidney cells. Biotech. Bioengng. 6, 147.Google Scholar