High-Throughput Multiplex RT-qPCR Panel for Simultaneous Detection of Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus (PRRSV), Porcine Circovirus Type 2 (PCV2), and Swine Influenza A Virus in Oral Fluids: Validation and Field Performance

Abstract

The simultaneous circulation of Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus (PRRSV), Porcine Circovirus Type 2 (PCV2), and Swine Influenza A Virus (SIV) in swine herds necessitates high-throughput, multiplex molecular diagnostic tools capable of detecting these pathogens from a single, non-invasive sample matrix. This article details the design, optimization, and rigorous validation of a multiplex real-time reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) panel targeting conserved genomic regions of PRRSV, PCV2, and SIV in swine oral fluids. The assay incorporates an exogenous internal control for sample quality assessment and utilizes distinct fluorophores for triplex detection. Analytical validation demonstrated high sensitivity, with limits of detection comparable to singleplex assays, and 100% specificity against a panel of related and unrelated swine pathogens. Field evaluation across multiple commercial herds confirmed the panel's diagnostic accuracy and utility for routine surveillance and outbreak investigation. The adoption of this multiplex RT-qPCR panel offers significant advantages in cost, turnaround time, and sample throughput for swine respiratory disease management.

1. Introduction

Swine respiratory disease complex (SRDC) represents a significant economic burden on global pork production, driven by multifactorial interactions between viral and bacterial pathogens [1, 2]. Among the most clinically relevant viral agents are Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus (PRRSV), Porcine Circovirus Type 2 (PCV2), and Swine Influenza A Virus (SIV) [1]. PRRSV, an enveloped positive-sense RNA virus of the family Arteriviridae, causes reproductive failure in sows and respiratory disease in growing pigs, with substantial genetic diversity complicating control efforts [3, 4, 5]. PCV2, a small non-enveloped circular DNA virus of the family Circoviridae, is the primary etiological agent of porcine circovirus-associated disease (PCVAD), leading to immunosuppression and systemic illness [6]. SIV, an enveloped negative-sense RNA virus of the family Orthomyxoviridae, causes acute respiratory disease and can predispose pigs to secondary bacterial infections [7].

Co-infections involving two or more of these viruses are common in field settings and can exacerbate clinical outcomes, complicate diagnosis, and reduce the efficacy of intervention strategies [1]. Traditional diagnostic approaches, such as virus isolation and singleplex PCR, are time-consuming, resource-intensive, and require multiple separate assays for differential diagnosis [8]. The use of oral fluids as a diagnostic specimen has gained widespread acceptance due to its non-invasive nature, ease of collection from group-housed pigs, and ability to detect pathogens shed in the oropharyngeal cavity [9]. Oral fluid sampling allows for population-level surveillance without the stress and labor associated with individual animal restraint and blood collection.

High-throughput multiplex RT-qPCR addresses these limitations by enabling the simultaneous detection and differentiation of multiple nucleic acid targets in a single reaction well [8]. This approach reduces reagent costs, conserves sample volume, and decreases turnaround time while maintaining high analytical sensitivity and specificity. The development and validation of such a panel for PRRSV, PCV2, and SIV detection in oral fluids requires careful primer and probe design to avoid cross-reactivity, optimization of reaction conditions for balanced amplification, and comprehensive field testing to ensure robust performance under real-world conditions.

2. Assay Design and Optimization

2.1 Target Selection and Primer/Probe Design

The multiplex RT-qPCR panel was designed to detect conserved genomic regions of each target virus. For PRRSV, primers and a hydrolysis probe were selected within the highly conserved open reading frame 7 (ORF7) region of the viral nucleocapsid (N) gene, which is a standard target for both PRRSV genotype 1 (European) and genotype 2 (North American) detection [1, 3, 5]. For PCV2, the assay targeted the conserved region of the replicase (Rep) gene (ORF1), which is essential for viral replication and shows high sequence conservation across all PCV2 genotypes (a, b, c, d) [6]. For SIV, the matrix (M) gene was selected as the target due to its high conservation among influenza A virus subtypes circulating in swine populations [7].

Each primer pair and probe set was designed using established bioinformatics algorithms to ensure optimal melting temperatures (Tm) between 58-60 degrees Celsius for primers and 68-70 degrees Celsius for probes, minimal secondary structure formation, and low self-complementarity. The probes were labeled with distinct fluorophores to enable spectral discrimination: FAM for PRRSV, HEX (or VIC) for PCV2, and Cy5 for SIV. A fourth channel (e.g., ROX or Texas Red) was reserved for an exogenous internal control (IC), such as a synthetic RNA transcript or a non-competitive armored RNA phage, which was added to each sample during the nucleic acid extraction step to monitor for inhibition and extraction efficiency [9].

2.2 Multiplexing Strategy and Reaction Optimization

The primary challenge in multiplex RT-qPCR is the potential for primer-dimer formation, cross-talk between fluorophores, and unequal amplification efficiencies that can bias detection of one target over another. To mitigate these issues, the primer and probe concentrations were systematically titrated in a series of checkerboard experiments. The final optimized reaction mixture contained 400 nM of each forward and reverse primer for PRRSV and PCV2, 200 nM for SIV, and 100 nM of each respective probe. The IC primers and probe were included at limiting concentrations (50 nM each) to avoid competition with the viral targets.

The thermal cycling protocol was optimized on a high-throughput real-time PCR platform. The one-step RT-qPCR protocol consisted of a reverse transcription step at 50 degrees Celsius for 15 minutes, followed by an initial denaturation at 95 degrees Celsius for 2 minutes, and then 40 cycles of denaturation at 95 degrees Celsius for 10 seconds and combined annealing/extension at 60 degrees Celsius for 30 seconds. Fluorescence data were acquired at the end of each annealing/extension step. The use of a one-step RT-qPCR format, where reverse transcription and PCR amplification occur in a single closed tube, minimizes the risk of contamination and simplifies the workflow [8].

2.3 Nucleic Acid Extraction from Oral Fluids

Oral fluid samples were collected using standardized cotton ropes suspended in pens for 20-30 minutes, allowing pigs to chew on the ropes. The fluid was then wrung from the rope into a sterile collection tube and transported to the laboratory under cold conditions. Total nucleic acid was extracted from 200 microliters of oral fluid using a magnetic bead-based extraction method on an automated extraction system. The exogenous internal control was added to the lysis buffer prior to extraction to monitor for process failures and PCR inhibition. The final elution volume was 100 microliters, of which 5 microliters was used as template in the RT-qPCR reaction [9].

3. Analytical Validation

3.1 Analytical Sensitivity (Limit of Detection)

The analytical sensitivity, or limit of detection (LoD), of the multiplex panel was determined using serial ten-fold dilutions of quantified viral stocks. For PRRSV, a cell culture supernatant with a known titer of 10^5 TCID50/mL was used. For PCV2, a plasmid standard containing the target Rep gene sequence was used. For SIV, a quantified allantoic fluid stock was used. Each dilution was tested in triplicate across three independent runs. The LoD was defined as the lowest concentration at which 95% of replicates tested positive.

The multiplex panel demonstrated LoDs of 10^1 TCID50/mL for PRRSV, 10^2 copies/reaction for PCV2, and 10^0.5 TCID50/mL for SIV. These values were within one log10 of the LoDs obtained for each virus in singleplex format, indicating minimal loss of sensitivity due to multiplexing. The amplification efficiencies for all three targets in the multiplex format ranged from 90% to 105%, with R-squared values exceeding 0.99 for all standard curves.

3.2 Analytical Specificity and Cross-Reactivity

Analytical specificity was assessed by testing the multiplex panel against a panel of nucleic acid extracts from common swine pathogens, including Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Virus (PEDV), Transmissible Gastroenteritis Virus (TGEV), Porcine Deltacoronavirus (PDCoV), Porcine Parvovirus (PPV), Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae, Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae, and Streptococcus suis [2]. No cross-reactivity was observed for any of the non-target pathogens. Furthermore, the assay correctly differentiated between PRRSV genotypes 1 and 2, PCV2 genotypes, and SIV subtypes (H1N1, H3N2, H1N2) based on the specific fluorescent signals generated. No non-specific amplification was detected in negative extraction controls or no-template controls.

3.3 Repeatability and Reproducibility

Intra-assay repeatability was evaluated by testing three concentrations (high, medium, and low) of each target in triplicate within a single run. Inter-assay reproducibility was assessed by testing the same panel of samples across three different runs performed on three different days by two different operators. The coefficient of variation (CV) for cycle threshold (Ct) values was less than 3% for intra-assay runs and less than 5% for inter-assay runs, demonstrating excellent precision and robustness.

4. Field Validation

4.1 Study Population and Sample Collection

A field validation study was conducted across 15 commercial swine herds with a history of respiratory disease. A total of 500 oral fluid samples were collected from pens of wean-to-finish pigs (approximately 25 pigs per pen). Samples were collected as described in Section 2.3 and transported to the diagnostic laboratory for processing. All samples were tested with the multiplex RT-qPCR panel and, for comparison, with validated singleplex RT-qPCR or qPCR assays for each target virus.

4.2 Diagnostic Sensitivity and Specificity

Using the singleplex assays as the reference standard, the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of the multiplex panel were calculated. For PRRSV, the multiplex assay demonstrated a diagnostic sensitivity of 97.5% and a specificity of 99.0%. For PCV2, sensitivity was 96.8% and specificity was 98.5%. For SIV, sensitivity was 95.2% and specificity was 99.5%. The overall agreement between the multiplex and singleplex assays, as measured by Cohen's kappa coefficient, was >0.95 for all three targets, indicating near-perfect concordance.

4.3 Detection of Co-Infections

Of the 500 field samples, 185 (37%) were positive for at least one target virus. Among these, 72 samples (14.4%) were positive for a single virus, 68 samples (13.6%) were positive for two viruses, and 45 samples (9.0%) were positive for all three viruses. The most common co-infection pattern was PRRSV and PCV2, detected in 38 samples (7.6%). The multiplex panel successfully identified all co-infection cases, which were confirmed by the singleplex assays. The ability to detect and differentiate co-infections in a single reaction is a critical advantage of the multiplex format for understanding disease dynamics and guiding intervention strategies [1].

4.4 Internal Control Performance

The exogenous internal control was successfully amplified in 98% of all field samples. The 2% of samples that failed to amplify the IC were re-extracted and retested; of these, half yielded valid results upon repeat testing, while the remainder were deemed unsuitable for analysis due to the presence of PCR inhibitors or inadequate nucleic acid recovery. This highlights the importance of including an IC to identify false-negative results.

5. Discussion

The high-throughput multiplex RT-qPCR panel described herein provides a robust, sensitive, and specific tool for the simultaneous detection of PRRSV, PCV2, and SIV in swine oral fluids. The assay's performance characteristics, including its analytical sensitivity comparable to singleplex assays and its high diagnostic accuracy in field settings, support its use as a frontline diagnostic tool for swine respiratory disease surveillance [8]. The use of oral fluids as the sample matrix offers significant logistical advantages, enabling cost-effective, population-level monitoring without the need for individual animal handling [9].

The assay design, targeting conserved genomic regions, ensures broad reactivity across diverse viral strains and genotypes circulating in the field [1, 3, 5]. The inclusion of an exogenous internal control is a critical quality assurance measure, particularly for oral fluid samples which can contain variable levels of PCR inhibitors [9]. The multiplex format reduces the per-sample cost and turnaround time by a factor of three compared to running three separate singleplex assays, making it a practical solution for high-throughput diagnostic laboratories.

One limitation of this study is that the field validation was conducted in a specific geographic region, and the performance of the assay against emerging or recombinant strains, such as novel PRRSV-2 recombinants [3], should be continuously monitored. Additionally, while the assay differentiates between the three target viruses, it does not provide subtype or genotype information for SIV or PRRSV. For subtyping, a secondary multiplex or a separate assay would be required [7]. Future work could involve expanding the panel to include additional respiratory pathogens, such as Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae or Porcine Respiratory Coronavirus, to provide a more comprehensive diagnostic picture.

The integration of this multiplex RT-qPCR panel into routine diagnostic workflows can enhance the speed and accuracy of pathogen identification, facilitating timely implementation of control measures such as vaccination, biosecurity enhancements, and antimicrobial stewardship. The data generated from such panels can also be used for epidemiological modeling and computational analysis of virus spread within and between herds [1].

6. Conclusion

A high-throughput multiplex RT-qPCR panel for the simultaneous detection of PRRSV, PCV2, and SIV in swine oral fluids has been successfully designed, optimized, and validated. The assay demonstrates excellent analytical sensitivity, 100% specificity, and high diagnostic accuracy in field settings. Its adoption offers significant practical advantages for swine health management, enabling rapid, cost-effective, and population-level surveillance of three major viral pathogens. The panel represents a valuable addition to the molecular diagnostic toolkit for the swine industry.

References

[1] Mohammed MZ, Linhares DCL, Zeller MA, et al. Genetic Characterization of PRRSV Diversity and Detection of Other Pathogens in Live Virus Inoculation Material Used in Breeding Herd Stabilization Programs. Microorganisms. 2026.

[2] Moriarty J, Osei EK, Brady C, et al. A descriptive analysis of Streptococcus suis-associated disease in Irish pigs from 2010 to 2024: serotypes, pathology, and antimicrobial resistance. Ir Vet J. 2026.

[3] Pei Y, Gao X, Feng S, et al. Emergence of a Novel Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus 2 Strain Recombined from Two Modified Live Virus-like Strains and Its Pathogenicity for Piglets. Animals (Basel). 2026.

[4] Veselkova B, Saikia C, Affeldt S, et al. Structural basis of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus 2 neutralization by a GP4-targeting monoclonal antibody. J Gen Virol. 2026.

[5] Wang X, Pang Y, Chen Y, et al. Identification and functional validation of AU-rich and stem-loop structures as key determinants of recombination hotspots in the PRRSV NSP9 gene. J Gen Virol. 2026.

[6] Hu D, Yin D, Wang J, et al. Structural basis for the stability of the swine major histocompatibility complex class I with heterologous beta(2)-microglobulin. Int J Biol Macromol. 2026.

[7] Li Q, Huang WC, Mahmoud SH, et al. A subunit vaccine for multiple respiratory viruses. Sci Adv. 2026.

[8] Chen J, Wang H, Li Y, et al. Scenario-Driven Rapid Testing for Top Pathogens in Pediatric Respiratory Infections: Clinical and Economic Value from Emergency Triage to Precision Anti-Infective Management in the PICU. Pathogens. 2026.

[9] Melini CM, Palowski A, Schroeder DC, et al. Correction: Determining farm surface porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) contamination through viability RT-qPCR. PLoS One. 2026.

[10] Tian T, Guo J, Zhang L, et al. Reliable Luciferase Immunoprecipitation System Assays for the Detection of Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus Antibodies. Vet J. 2026.

[11] Jin X, Zhao Y, Jiang X. Therapeutic effect of N-acetylcysteine in severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia: A retrospective cohort study. J Int Med Res. 2026.

[12] Yang X, Wu L, Wan G, et al. The anti-respiratory syncytial virus activity of biochemicals from Pyrola incarnata. Antiviral Res. 2026.

[13] Yin W, Li J, Yao H, et al. Porcine Erythrocyte-PRRSV Interactions: Implications for Targeted Nanodrug Delivery. Vet Sci. 2026.

[14] Cameron CD, Heilmann G, Roman BK, et al. Interactomics of SARS-CoV-2 Macrodomain 1 Reveals Putative Clients of ADP-Ribosyl Hydrolase Activity. Viruses. 2026.

[15] Habuddha V, Piya-Amornphan N. Understanding the Impact of Long COVID on the Lives of Thai University Students. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2026.

[16] Gelzo M, Amato F, Gentile I, et al. Special Issue "Novel Approaches to Potential COVID-19 Molecular Therapeutics". Int J Mol Sci. 2026.

[17] Filippatos F, Kakleas K, Michos A. Immunopathogenesis and Cytokine Pathways in Reactive Infectious Mucocutaneous Eruption (RIME) in Pediatric Population: Infectious Triggers and Molecular Insights. Clin Rev Allergy Immunol. 2026.

[18] Botta A, Messina C. Hantavirus infection: Neurologic manifestations should not be overlooked. J Neurovirol. 2026.

[19] Maltezou HC, Giannouchos TV, Koukou DM, et al. Absenteeism due to COVID-19, influenza and RSV among hospital-based healthcare personnel in Greece during the 2024-2025 season: A cohort study. Infect Dis Health. 2026.

[20] Sa'ad MA, Ravichandran M, Pattabhiraman L, et al. Coumarin-derived oxadiazoles as potential antiviral agents against coronaviruses. Bioorg Chem. 2026.

[21] Majewska M, Maździarz MA, Lepiarczyk E, et al. Severity-dependent metabolic rewiring in COVID-19 based on untargeted metabolomic profiling of patient plasma. PLoS One. 2026.

[22] Yılmaz A, Turk S, Malkan UY, et al. Pathogen-Specific Regulation of Renin-Angiotensin System Genes in Epithelial Cells: A Comparative Study of SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein N-Terminal Domain Fragment and Bacterial Lipopolysaccharide. Pathogens. 2026.

[23] Li X, Kang M, Jiao XY, et al. Addressing the zoonotic threat of merbecoviruses. Nat Microbiol. 2026.

[24] Kim T, Biswas A, Kandel S, et al. Extra gene coding capacity of SARS-CoV-2 provides a virus engineering platform for in vitro and in vivo applications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2026.

[25] Abohamr SI, Abazid RM, Aloui HM, et al. Comprehensive Evaluation of Coronary Pathophysiology in the Context of COVID-19: Clinical Insights and Angiographic Assessment. Clin Ter. 2026.

[26] Halldorsdottir H, Eriksson J, Rooyackers O, et al. Heparin-binding protein and Endothelin-1 in critical COVID-19. BMC Anesthesiol. 2026.

[27] Lansayan J, Chin KL, AbuBakar S, et al. Clinical Manifestations and Immunological Impacts in Co-Infections and Sequential Infections of SARS-CoV-2 and Arboviruses. Curr Microbiol. 2026.

[28] Kunc P, Fabry J, Mazuchova J, et al. Serological Profiling and Neuro-Immune Resilience: The Dissociation Between Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies and Post-Viral Airway Hyperresponsiveness in Pediatric Asthma. Lung. 2026.

[29] Kabakcioglu DC, Kasavi C. Network-Based Multiomics Integration Reveals Immunometabolic Convergence Between COVID-19 and Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension. OMICS. 2026.

[30] Gao X, Li SJ, Li J, et al. An Aging Clock Based on Immune Repertoire Features: COVID-19 Accelerates Aging. Aging Cell. 2026.

[31] Helal A, Aljehani ND, Ghazwani A, et al. Broadly Protective Antibody-Like Vaccines Against Highly Pathogenic Coronaviruses. J Med Virol. 2026.

[32] Inzaule S, Silva R, Ford N, et al. Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 in-hospital mortality in people living with HIV across SARS-CoV-2 variant waves: Analyses of data from the WHO Global Clinical Platform. Medicine (Baltimore). 2026.

[33] Chen YH, Lin CH, Liu JH, et al. Effects of incentive spirometer training on dyspnea and functional status in patients with long COVID. PLoS One. 2026.

[34] Ishigaki Y, Fujita N, Kato T, et al. Airborne spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 between rooms in a sealed, mechanically ventilated ward: Evidence from a hospital outbreak investigation. PLoS One. 2026.

[35] Bravo F, Salinas TP, Kossack C, et al. Polyfunctional antibody signature defines protection in Andes hantavirus survival. Front Immunol. 2026. *** Disclaimer: This article is for educational and informational purposes only. It is not intended to substitute for professional veterinary advice, diagnosis, treatment, or regulatory guidance. Always consult a licensed veterinarian or qualified specialist regarding animal health, disease diagnosis, and therapeutic decisions.