Enzyme-Linked Immunospot (ELISPOT) for Veterinary Vaccine Responses

Overview and Principles of Enzyme-Linked Immunospot (ELISPOT) for Quantifying Veterinary Vaccine-Induced Cellular Immune Responses

The Enzyme-Linked Immunospot (ELISPOT) assay has emerged as a cornerstone technology for the precise quantification and functional characterization of cellular immune responses in both human and veterinary vaccinology. Its unparalleled sensitivity, single-cell resolution, and capacity to enumerate rare antigen-specific lymphocytes directly ex vivo render it indispensable for dissecting the complex immunological mechanisms underpinning vaccine-induced protection. In the veterinary context, where diverse species-from poultry and swine to companion animals and aquatic species-present unique immunological challenges, the ELISPOT assay provides a robust, quantitative platform for evaluating cell-mediated immunity (CMI) that is often critical for protection against intracellular pathogens. This section provides a comprehensive overview of the fundamental principles, biological underpinnings, and methodological considerations of the ELISPOT assay as applied to the quantification of veterinary vaccine-induced cellular immune responses.

Foundational Principles and Biological Basis

At its core, the ELISPOT assay is a functional immunoassay designed to detect and enumerate individual cells that secrete a specific soluble molecule-most commonly a cytokine such as interferon-gamma (IFN-γ)-in response to antigenic stimulation. The principle is elegantly straightforward yet biologically profound: it captures the secretory product of a single, activated lymphocyte within a localized microenvironment, creating a permanent "footprint" or spot that can be visualized and counted. This single-cell resolution is a defining advantage over bulk assays like enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) or intracellular cytokine staining (ICS) by flow cytometry, as it directly quantifies the frequency of responding cells rather than measuring the total amount of secreted protein [18, 34].

The biological foundation of the ELISPOT assay rests on the central tenet of adaptive immunity: that antigen-specific lymphocytes, upon encountering their cognate antigen presented in the appropriate context, undergo activation and differentiation, leading to the secretion of effector molecules. For T lymphocytes, this activation is triggered through the T-cell receptor (TCR) engaging a peptide-major histocompatibility complex (MHC) complex on the surface of an antigen-presenting cell (APC). The nature of the secreted cytokine provides critical insight into the functional phenotype of the responding cell. For instance, IFN-γ secretion is a hallmark of type 1 helper T (Th1) cells, cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs), and natural killer (NK) cells, all of which are central to antiviral and anti-intracellular bacterial immunity [3, 6, 34]. The detection of IL-4 or IL-5 indicates a type 2 helper T (Th2) response, often associated with humoral immunity and allergic responses [6, 9, 13]. The ability to simultaneously assess multiple cytokines in separate wells or through multiplexed approaches allows for a comprehensive functional profiling of the vaccine-induced immune response, revealing the balance between Th1, Th2, Th17, and other T-cell subsets [6, 9, 22].

In the context of veterinary vaccines, the ELISPOT assay is most frequently employed to quantify antigen-specific T cells that produce IFN-γ, as this cytokine is a critical effector molecule for protection against a vast array of viral, bacterial, and protozoan pathogens. For example, robust IFN-γ ELISPOT responses have been correlated with protective immunity against Classical Swine Fever Virus [8], Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus [3], African Swine Fever Virus [14], and Bovine Viral Diarrhea Virus [23, 31]. The assay's ability to detect these responses with high sensitivity, even in the presence of confounding factors like maternally-derived antibodies (MDAs), makes it particularly valuable for evaluating vaccine immunogenicity in neonatal and young animals [1].

The ELISPOT Assay: A Stepwise Mechanistic Description

The standard direct ex vivo IFN-γ ELISPOT assay, while subject to numerous protocol variations, follows a core sequence of steps that are critical for its success. The process begins with the preparation of a high-affinity, hydrophobic polyvinylidene difluoride (PVDF) or mixed cellulose ester membrane-bottomed 96-well plate. This membrane is pre-coated with a capture antibody, typically a monoclonal antibody specific for the cytokine of interest (e.g., anti-bovine IFN-γ, anti-porcine IFN-γ, anti-canine IFN-γ). The choice of capture antibody is species-specific and is a primary determinant of assay sensitivity and specificity [30]. Following blocking to prevent non-specific binding, viable, purified effector cells-most commonly peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) isolated from whole blood via density gradient centrifugation-are added to the wells at defined concentrations, typically ranging from 100,000 to 500,000 cells per well [24, 27].

The cells are then incubated in the presence of the antigen of interest. The antigen can be presented in various forms: inactivated whole pathogen, recombinant protein, peptide pools (often overlapping 15-mer peptides spanning the entire sequence of a target protein), or live-attenuated vaccine strains [4, 8, 26]. The choice of antigen is a critical parameter. For T-cell epitope mapping, overlapping peptide pools are indispensable, allowing for the identification of specific immunodominant regions within a protein [4, 8, 9, 15]. The incubation period, typically 18-24 hours for a direct ex vivo assay, must be optimized to allow for antigen uptake, processing, presentation, and T-cell activation, culminating in cytokine secretion, while minimizing background from non-specific activation or cell death [24]. During this incubation, any cytokine secreted by an activated T cell is immediately captured by the immobilized antibody on the membrane surrounding the cell, forming a localized "spot" of cytokine. This immediate capture prevents the cytokine from diffusing into the supernatant and diluting, which is the key to the assay's exceptional sensitivity.

After incubation, the cells are washed away, and the captured cytokine is detected using a detection antibody conjugated to an enzyme (e.g., biotinylated anti-IFN-γ antibody followed by streptavidin-alkaline phosphatase or horseradish peroxidase). A chromogenic substrate is then added, which is converted by the enzyme into an insoluble, colored precipitate that forms a distinct spot on the membrane at the exact location where the cytokine-secreting cell was situated. Each spot represents the secretory footprint of a single antigen-specific cell. The spots are then enumerated using a specialized ELISPOT reader, which uses automated image analysis software to count spots based on size, intensity, and morphology, providing the final readout: the number of spot-forming units (SFUs) per input cell number (e.g., SFUs per 10⁶ PBMCs) [18, 19, 21].

Distinguishing T-Cell Subsets and Memory Phenotypes

A major strength of the ELISPOT assay is its adaptability to dissect the specific T-cell subsets contributing to the observed response. By combining the assay with cell separation techniques, such as magnetic bead-based positive or negative selection, one can determine whether the IFN-γ is being produced by CD4+ T cells, CD8+ T cells, or other cell types [6, 15, 23]. This is crucial for understanding the mechanism of vaccine-induced protection. For instance, a vaccine designed to elicit a strong CTL response against a virus like Canine Distemper Virus would be expected to generate a high frequency of IFN-γ-producing CD8+ T cells [4]. Conversely, a vaccine against an extracellular bacterium might rely more heavily on CD4+ Th1 cells to provide help for antibody production [6, 9].

Furthermore, the ELISPOT assay can be adapted to differentiate between effector and memory T-cell populations, which have distinct roles in immediate protection versus long-term immunological memory. The standard direct ex vivo ELISPOT, performed after a short (18-24 hour) incubation, predominantly detects effector memory T cells (TEM) and effector T cells (TEFF), which are poised for rapid cytokine secretion upon antigen re-encounter [31, 34]. In contrast, the cultured ELISPOT (cELISPOT) assay involves a 10-14 day in vitro culture period with antigen and cytokines (e.g., IL-2, IL-7, IL-15) prior to the standard detection step. This culture period allows for the expansion of central memory T cells (TCM), which have a higher proliferative capacity but require a longer period to differentiate into cytokine-secreting effectors. The cELISPOT assay, therefore, provides a measure of the TCM pool, which is a critical correlate of durable, long-term vaccine-induced protection [20, 23, 31]. In bovine tuberculosis models, for example, the cELISPOT assay has been shown to predict vaccine efficacy and duration of immunity, with the dominant responding population being CD4+ T cells with a central memory phenotype (CD45RO+CD62Lhi) [23, 31].

The B-Cell ELISPOT: Quantifying Humoral Immune Memory

While the T-cell ELISPOT is the most common application, the same principle can be applied to enumerate antigen-specific antibody-secreting cells (ASCs), including both short-lived plasmablasts and long-lived plasma cells. The B-cell ELISPOT (or ASC ELISPOT) assay is a powerful tool for evaluating the humoral arm of the vaccine response at the cellular level [1, 2, 10, 29]. In this format, the plate is coated with the antigen of interest (e.g., a viral capsid protein or inactivated pathogen). PBMCs or single-cell suspensions from lymphoid tissues (e.g., spleen, bone marrow, lymph nodes) are added and incubated. During this incubation, any ASCs that are specific for the coated antigen will secrete antibodies, which are captured directly onto the membrane. These captured antibodies are then detected using an enzyme-conjugated anti-immunoglobulin antibody (e.g., anti-IgG, anti-IgA, anti-IgM), followed by substrate development [1, 29].

The B-cell ELISPOT assay provides a direct measure of the number of B cells actively producing antibodies at a given time. This is particularly valuable for assessing the establishment of long-lived plasma cells in the bone marrow, which are the cellular basis for durable serological memory [2]. In the context of veterinary vaccinology, this assay has been instrumental in evaluating vaccine responses against Porcine Circovirus 2 (PCV2), where it was shown to overcome the confounding effects of MDAs on serum antibody measurements [1]. By directly quantifying PCV2-specific memory B cells, the ELISPOT assay provided a more accurate reflection of vaccine immunogenicity than traditional serology [1]. Similarly, in a Lyme disease vaccine study in mice, the B-cell ELISPOT was used to demonstrate that a superior vaccine (Duramune) induced a higher abundance of long-lived plasma cells compared to another vaccine (Vanguard crLyme), correlating with better long-term protection [2]. The assay can also be adapted to detect IgA-secreting cells, providing a window into mucosal immune responses, which are critical for protection against pathogens like Avian Influenza Virus and Newcastle Disease Virus [13, 32].

Methodological Considerations and Assay Standardization

The power of the ELISPOT assay is inextricably linked to the rigor of its methodology. Numerous variables can profoundly impact assay performance, including cell isolation and handling, choice of antigen and stimulation conditions, antibody pairs, detection reagents, and spot enumeration parameters. The quality of the starting cell population is paramount. PBMCs must be isolated with high yield and viability, as dead or damaged cells can contribute to high background and reduced sensitivity [27, 28]. Standardized protocols for Ficoll density gradient separation, cryopreservation, and thawing are essential for generating reproducible results, particularly in multi-site or longitudinal studies [18, 25, 27, 28].

The selection of antigen and its concentration must be carefully optimized. For peptide pools, the number and length of peptides, as well as their overlap, must be considered to ensure comprehensive coverage of the target protein while minimizing the risk of missing epitopes due to species-specific MHC restriction [4, 26]. The use of a positive control, such as a mitogen (e.g., phytohemagglutinin, concanavalin A) or a superantigen (e.g., staphylococcal enterotoxin B), is mandatory to confirm the functional capacity of the cells. A negative control (unstimulated cells in medium alone) is equally critical to establish the background level of spontaneous cytokine secretion, which is subtracted from the antigen-stimulated counts [19, 24].

The harmonization and standardization of ELISPOT protocols across laboratories have been a major focus of international consortia, such as the FLUCOP project for influenza vaccines. These efforts have demonstrated that the introduction of a common Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) can dramatically reduce inter-laboratory variation, reducing coefficients of variation (CVs) for IFN-γ ELISPOT responses from over 140% to under 80% [18, 19]. Key elements of these harmonized protocols include the use of a defined serum-free medium, a standardized cell number per well, a fixed incubation time, and the use of a common set of stimulation antigens [18, 19, 21]. Furthermore, the establishment of external quality assurance (EQA) or proficiency testing programs, such as those developed by the EQAPOL consortium for HIV vaccine trials, provides a framework for monitoring laboratory performance over time, ensuring that data generated from different sites are comparable and reliable [21, 25, 28]. These programs typically evaluate parameters such as timeliness, cell handling, background responses, accuracy to a consensus mean, and precision [21].

Applications in Veterinary Vaccine Development and Evaluation

The applications of the ELISPOT assay in veterinary vaccinology are vast and continue to expand. It is a primary tool for:

1. Epitope Discovery and Vaccine Design: The assay is the gold standard for identifying and validating T-cell epitopes, which are the building blocks of novel epitope-based vaccines. By screening overlapping peptide libraries spanning a target antigen, researchers can pinpoint the specific peptide sequences recognized by T cells from vaccinated or infected animals [3, 4, 8, 9, 15, 17]. This information is then used to construct multi-epitope vaccines designed to elicit broad and potent cellular immunity. This approach has been applied to pathogens such as Canine Distemper Virus [4], Classical Swine Fever Virus [8], Tembusu Virus [17], and Ehrlichia ruminantium [9, 15].

2. Comparative Vaccine Immunogenicity: The ELISPOT assay allows for the direct, quantitative comparison of different vaccine candidates or formulations. By measuring the frequency of antigen-specific T cells or B cells induced by each vaccine, researchers can identify the most immunogenic candidates for further development [1-3, 14]. This is particularly valuable for adjuvanted vaccines, where the ELISPOT can demonstrate the ability of a novel adjuvant to enhance CMI [7, 11, 13].

3. Correlates of Protection: A central goal of vaccinology is to identify immune parameters that correlate with protection from disease. The ELISPOT assay is a powerful tool for establishing such correlates. By measuring T-cell responses in vaccinated animals and then challenging them with the pathogen, researchers can determine the frequency or magnitude of the T-cell response that is associated with protection [1, 2, 17, 23, 31]. This knowledge is critical for vaccine licensure and for predicting vaccine efficacy in the field.

4. Immune Monitoring in Clinical Trials: In both experimental and field trials, the ELISPOT assay is used to monitor the kinetics and durability of vaccine-induced cellular immune responses. It can track the rise and fall of T-cell responses over time, providing insights into the duration of immunity and the need for booster vaccinations [3, 10, 33]. Its ability to detect responses in the presence of MDAs makes it particularly useful for evaluating vaccines in young animals [1].

5. Cross-Species Applicability: The fundamental principles of the ELISPOT assay are conserved across mammalian species, and species-specific reagents (capture and detection antibodies) have been developed for a wide range of veterinary species, including cattle [23, 31], swine [1, 3, 5, 8], sheep [6, 9, 12], dogs [11], cats, horses, poultry [16, 17], and even guinea pigs [30] and fish. This cross-species applicability makes it a truly universal platform for veterinary immunological research.

In conclusion, the ELISPOT assay is far more than a simple counting technique; it is a sophisticated functional assay that provides a window into the dynamic cellular immune response at the single-cell level. Its ability to enumerate rare antigen-specific T and B cells, dissect their functional phenotypes, and distinguish between effector and memory populations makes it an indispensable tool for the rational design, evaluation, and licensure of veterinary vaccines. The ongoing efforts to standardize and harmonize the assay across laboratories will only enhance its value, solidifying its role as a cornerstone of modern veterinary immunology and vaccinology.

Methodological Standardization: Isolation of Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells, Antigen Stimulation, and Spot Detection in Veterinary Species

The utility of the Enzyme-Linked Immunospot (ELISPOT) assay as a cornerstone for evaluating cell-mediated immunity in veterinary vaccinology hinges entirely upon the rigorous standardization of its constituent methodologies. Unlike serological assays that measure soluble products in a relatively stable matrix, the ELISPOT is a functional, live-cell assay exquisitely sensitive to pre-analytical variables. For veterinary species, this challenge is magnified by the diversity of target animals, the lack of universally validated reagents, and the profound influence of species-specific physiological parameters on immune cell behavior. A failure to standardize any step-from the moment blood is drawn to the final enumeration of spots-introduces unacceptable variance, rendering cross-study comparisons meaningless and undermining the assay's ability to serve as a reliable correlate of protection. This section delineates the critical parameters for methodological standardization in veterinary ELISPOT, focusing on peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) isolation, antigen stimulation strategies, and the final detection and enumeration of spot-forming units (SFU).

Isolation of Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells: The Foundation of Assay Integrity

The quality and functionality of the input cell population are paramount; compromised PBMCs will yield unreliable data regardless of subsequent optimization. Standardization begins at the point of blood collection. For most veterinary species, blood is collected into anticoagulants such as sodium heparin or acid-citrate-dextrose (ACD). Heparin is widely preferred for cellular assays due to its minimal interference with downstream functional responses, although EDTA can be used if prompt processing is ensured and cells are washed thoroughly. The choice of separation technique is a primary source of variability. Density gradient centrifugation using media like Ficoll-Paque remains the gold standard for isolating PBMCs from the majority of mammalian species, including swine, cattle, horses, and companion animals. However, the specific method of preparation significantly impacts yield, viability, and, critically, the functionality of lymphocytes in subsequent ELISPOT assays.

Comparative studies have demonstrated that alternative devices, such as Cell Preparation Tubes (CPTs), can offer logistical advantages by simplifying the separation process directly within the collection tube, but their performance can be inconsistent across different populations and settings. For example, in a study comparing PBMC isolation techniques for clinical trial sites, standard Ficoll-Paque gradient centrifugation and CPTs performed equally well in a Swedish laboratory, but in a Tanzanian setting, Ficoll-Paque yielded significantly higher recovery and viability than CPTs [27]. This underscores a crucial principle: the optimal method must be validated on-site under local conditions. Further, the study found that LeucoSep tubes, which pre-fill with separation medium, outperformed standard Ficoll-Paque methods in terms of both cell yield and viability [27]. This trend was corroborated in large-scale proficiency programs supporting HIV vaccine trials in Africa, where standardized PBMC processing protocols using validated techniques consistently achieved high cell viability ( >90% ) and yield ( >0.7 million cells per mL of blood) across multiple laboratories on the continent [28]. For the ELISPOT assay itself, achieving consistent cell recovery is critical because the final results are expressed as SFU per million PBMCs. If the isolation protocol is inefficient or variable, the denominator becomes inaccurate, skewing the calculation of antigen-specific T-cell frequencies.

Beyond yield, the viability and functional status of the isolated PBMCs must be standardized. A critical step often overlooked is the need for a period of rest following thawing of cryopreserved cells. Cryopreservation is typically necessary for batch analysis in large vaccination trials, but the freeze-thaw process induces cellular stress. A standardized resting period of 2 to 6 hours (or overnight) in complete culture medium at 37°C is essential to allow membrane repair, restore metabolic activity, and clear apoptotic debris, thereby reducing non-specific background spots and enhancing the signal-to-noise ratio. This practice, now standard in human clinical trial protocols, is equally critical for veterinary cell preparations. The use of viability dyes, such as trypan blue, to ensure a post-thaw viability of at least 80% to 90% is a mandatory qualification step before cells are plated. Finally, the choice of culture medium itself must be consistent. While serum-free media like CTL-Test™ (Cellular Technology Limited, USA) have been shown to reduce background and improve assay robustness for human cells [24], their cost and availability may be prohibitive for large-scale veterinary studies. If fetal bovine serum (FBS) is used, a single, pre-screened lot must be procured in bulk for the entire study to avoid lot-to-lot variability in growth factors and potential mitogenic contaminants that could artificially inflate T-cell responses.

Antigen Stimulation: Recreating the Immunological Synapse In Vitro

The success of the ELISPOT assay is ultimately determined by the capacity of the stimulation antigen to engage cognate T-cell receptors and trigger cytokine release. The choice between whole antigens (e.g., inactivated virus, recombinant protein) and overlapping peptide pools represents a fundamental decision that dictates the breadth and nature of the immune response being measured. For vaccine evaluation, the use of peptide pools offers distinct advantages in standardization. They allow for precise control over the epitopes presented, minimize the risk of bystander activation from other components of the antigen preparation, and enable the mapping of specific immunodominant responses.

In veterinary species, the identification of minimal T-cell epitopes has become a powerful approach. For instance, epitope mapping studies for Classical Swine Fever Virus identified two conserved T-cell epitopes on the E2 protein (90-STEEMGDDF-98 and 331-ATDRHSDYF-339) that are critical for inducing rapid IFN-γ responses following C-strain vaccination [8]. Similarly, for Tembusu Virus in ducks, ten T-cell epitopes were identified within the envelope protein, allowing for the construction of a DNA vaccine (pVAX-T) that induced strong cellular immunity without producing detectable antibodies [17]. The use of such defined epitopes in a standardized pool eliminates the variability associated with using whole, complex antigen preparations that may differ batch-to-batch. The length and overlap of peptides are also critical parameters. For CD8+ T-cell detection, pools of 15-mer peptides overlapping by 11 amino acids are standard, as they are efficiently processed and presented by MHC class I molecules without requiring exogenous processing. For detecting CD4+ T-cell responses, longer peptides or pools of 20-mers may be superior. The FLUCOP consortium, aiming to harmonize influenza-specific ELISPOT assays, demonstrated that the introduction of a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) that specified the use of standardized peptide pools (e.g., for hemagglutinin and nucleoprotein) was a major factor in reducing inter-laboratory variation from a coefficient of variation (CV) of over 140% to under 80% [18, 19].

For B-cell ELISPOT, the stimulation strategy diverges significantly. The goal is to enumerate antibody-secreting cells (ASCs), either plasmablasts or memory B cells (MBCs). For measuring circulating ASCs directly ex vivo, no in vitro stimulation is typically performed; the cells are plated immediately. However, to measure the antigen-specific MBC pool, a critical parameter for vaccine durability, a pre-culture step is mandatory. This involves a 3-to-6-day polyclonal stimulation culture to drive MBCs to differentiate into ASCs. This step is exquisitely sensitive to the choice of mitogen. The toll-like receptor (TLR) 7/8 agonist R848 (Resiquimod) has emerged as a highly effective and standardized polyclonal activator for both human and porcine B cells. Recent work on Porcine Circovirus 2 (PCV2) vaccine evaluation meticulously optimized a B-cell ELISPOT and determined that stimulation with R848 at a final concentration of 1 µg/mL for three days provided the optimal balance of MBC activation and cell survival [1]. This standardized approach was instrumental in demonstrating that PCV2-vaccinated piglets with high levels of maternally-derived antibodies (MDAs) developed robust MBC responses, even when serum IgG titers continued to decline, effectively overcoming the confounding effects of MDAs [1]. The use of standardized polyclonal activators like R848, as opposed to less defined cocktails, is thus essential for reproducibility in B-cell ELISPOT.

Spot Detection and Enumeration: From Substrate to Standardization

The final step of detecting the cytokine focus-the "spot"-is where the raw biological data are transformed into a quantitative readout. Standardization here is a matter of both chemistry and instrumentation. The detection antibodies, detection enzymes (e.g., streptavidin-alkaline phosphatase), and substrates (e.g., BCIP/NBT) must be of the highest quality and pre-validated for the species of interest. The choice of substrate can influence spot morphology; precipitating substrates that yield sharp, well-defined spots are preferred to facilitate accurate enumeration. For veterinary species, the availability of species-specific, validated monoclonal antibodies for cytokine capture and detection (e.g., anti-bovine IFN-γ, anti-porcine IL-2) is a limiting factor. Whenever possible, reagents from the same manufacturer and lot should be used for an entire study.

The most significant source of variability in the detection phase is the enumeration itself. While manual counting with a stereomicroscope is still used in some resource-limited settings, it is highly subjective, labor-intensive, and poorly reproducible. The use of an automated, computer-based ELISPOT reader is now considered a prerequisite for standardization in any rigorous vaccinology study. These instruments apply consistent algorithms to define a "spot" based on parameters of size, circularity, and intensity, eliminating operator bias. The harmonization protocols from the FLUCOP project explicitly included standardized reader settings and gating strategies, which, along with the adoption of a common SOP, were instrumental in showing that a statistically significant reduction in inter-laboratory variation (p < 0.0001) was achievable [18]. Validation parameters for the detection phase must be established and reported, as they are for any bioanalytical method. Critical performance metrics include the Limit of Detection (LOD) and the Lower Limit of Quantitation (LLOQ). For a human IFN-γ ELISPOT detecting responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, a validated assay demonstrated an LOD of 17 SFU and an LLOQ of 22 SFU, with a coefficient of variation (CV) for repeatability and intermediate precision of ≤25% [35]. For an RSV F-specific assay, the LOD was 21 SFC per million PBMC, and the LLOQ was 63 SFC per million PBMC [24]. It is vital that veterinary ELISPOT protocols undertake similar formal qualification steps to define the linear range of the assay and the level of response that can be measured with statistical confidence.

The cultivation and special considerations for a "cultured ELISPOT" (cELISPOT), which measures central memory T-cell responses after a 10-to-14 day in vitro expansion, add another layer of detection complexity. This assay intentionally allows effector responses to wane so that central memory cells can differentiate and expand. In cattle, it has been used to successfully predict the duration of immunity against Mycobacterium bovis, and the identified responding cells are predominantly CD45RO+CD62Lhi central memory T cells [23, 31]. The cELISPOT requires even more rigorous standardization because the prolonged culture period introduces variables related to media replenishment, cytokine supplementation (e.g., IL-2, IL-7), and cell density that can dramatically influence the final spot count. Finally, international harmonization efforts, such as those pioneered by the FLUCOP consortium for influenza and modeled by proficiency testing programs for HIV vaccines, demonstrate that standardization is not merely an academic exercise. The External Quality Assurance Oversight Laboratory (EQAPOL) program showed that when multiple laboratories use a single, validated SOP with common reagents and a common reader, they can generate highly comparable data, even across continents [21, 25, 36]. For veterinary vaccinology, particularly for globally important pathogens like African Swine Fever Virus and Avian Influenza Virus, the adoption of such harmonized, validated protocols as a component of World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) guidelines would be a transformative step, enabling the field to move from a collection of disparate observations to a unified basis for licensure and global vaccine selection.

Molecular Mechanisms of ELISPOT Detection: Th1/Th2 Cytokine Release and Virus-Specific Memory B Cell Responses in Vaccinated Animals

The Enzyme-Linked Immunospot (ELISPOT) assay represents a cornerstone technology in veterinary vaccinology, offering an exquisitely sensitive platform for the enumeration and functional characterization of antigen-specific lymphocytes at the single-cell level. Unlike bulk assays such as ELISA or flow cytometry, ELISPOT captures the secretory footprint of individual cells within a defined microenvironment, revealing the precise frequency and cytokine polarization profile of responding T cells and the prevalence of antibody-secreting cells (ASCs) within the B cell compartment. This section delves into the molecular and cellular mechanisms underpinning two critical applications of ELISPOT in veterinary vaccine assessment: the dissection of Th1/Th2 cytokine release dynamics and the quantification of virus-specific memory B cell responses.

Mechanistic Basis of Single-Cell Cytokine Capture in Th1/Th2 Polarization

The immunological foundation of the T cell ELISPOT rests upon the principle of localized cytokine secretion. Following antigenic stimulation, either through direct presentation by MHC molecules on antigen-presenting cells or via cross-linking of the T cell receptor (TCR) with synthetic peptide-MHC complexes, antigen-experienced T cells undergo activation and release specific cytokines. In a standard interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) ELISPOT, pre-coated capture antibodies (typically monoclonal antibodies specific for the cytokine of interest) immobilize the secreted molecules immediately upon release from the T cell, creating a "footprint" that is subsequently developed through a biotin-streptavidin-enzyme amplification system [34, 35]. This spatial constraint prevents diffusion-mediated dilution, allowing for the detection of as few as 1 in 100,000 to 1 in 1,000,000 cytokine-secreting cells [19, 21].

The Th1/Th2 paradigm is particularly well-suited for ELISPOT interrogation. Th1 responses, characterized by the production of IFN-γ, tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), and interleukin-2 (IL-2), are essential for antiviral and intracellular pathogen immunity. Conversely, Th2 responses, mediated by IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13, are associated with humoral immunity and allergic inflammation. The dual- or multi-cytokine ELISPOT approach allows for the simultaneous visualization of these polarized responses from the same cell suspension. For example, in studies evaluating the recombinant Echinococcus granulosus antigen P29 (rEg.P29) in sheep, ELISPOT revealed robust IFN-γ secretion indicative of a Th1 response, coupled with the absence of IL-4, while also detecting IL-17A, a hallmark of Th17 cells [6]. This level of granularity is critical for veterinary vaccine design, as the polarization of the T cell response can dictate the efficacy of the immune defense. In the context of Porcine Circovirus 2 vaccination, ELISPOT-based profiling of IFN-γ secretion from peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) has been instrumental in demonstrating the induction of cell-mediated immunity, particularly in piglets carrying high levels of maternally-derived antibodies (MDA), where conventional serology fails to distinguish vaccine-induced immunity from passive antibody [1]. Similarly, the identification of immunodominant Th1 and Th2 epitopes within Ehrlichia ruminantium proteins has been achieved through IFN-γ and IL-4 ELISPOT, respectively, providing a molecular map for multi-epitope vaccine construction [9, 15].

Molecular Events in the Detection and Quantification of Cytokine-Secreting T Cells

The quantitative rigor of the ELISPOT assay stems from its reliance on a series of precisely orchestrated molecular interactions. Following the capture of IFN-γ (or other cytokines) by the immobilized antibody, a detection antibody conjugated to biotin is added. This is followed by the addition of streptavidin conjugated to an enzyme such as horseradish peroxidase (HRP) or alkaline phosphatase. The final step involves the application of a chromogenic substrate, which precipitates at the site of enzyme activity, forming an insoluble, colored spot [18, 19]. Each "spot-forming unit" (SFU) corresponds to the secretory activity of a single cell at the time of assay. The molecular kinetics of this process are critical: the capture antibody must possess high affinity and specificity to prevent cross-reactivity and to rapidly bind the fleeting cytokine molecules. The development of harmonized standard operating procedures (SOPs) for influenza-specific IFN-γ ELISPOT within the FLUCOP consortium demonstrated that standardization of these molecular components-from the source of fetal calf serum to the enumeration algorithm of the plate reader-significantly reduces inter-laboratory variation [18, 19]. This is particularly relevant for veterinary applications where multi-site trials are common, such as in evaluating vaccines against African Swine Fever Virus [14] or Classical Swine Fever Virus [8].

The sensitivity of the IFN-γ ELISPOT allows for the detection of both effector memory T cells (TEM) and central memory T cells (TCM), depending on the culture conditions employed. A direct ex vivo ELISPOT (short-term, 18-24 hour stimulation) predominantly detects TEM, which are already poised for immediate effector function. In contrast, a cultured ELISPOT (cELISPOT), involving a 10-14 day in vitro culture period with antigen and IL-2, allows for the expansion of TCM [23, 31, 34]. This distinction is biologically profound, as TCM are thought to be critical for long-term protective immunity. In cattle vaccinated against Mycobacterium bovis, cELISPOT responses were dominated by CD4⁺ T cells exhibiting a CD45RO⁺CD62L(^{hi}) phenotype, characteristic of central memory cells [23]. This demonstrates that ELISPOT can be used not only to quantify the magnitude of a response but also to infer the differentiation status of the responding T cell population, which is a key correlate of vaccine durability.

Virus-Specific Memory B Cell Responses: The B Cell ELISPOT in Vaccinated Animals

While T cell ELISPOT assays capture cytokine secretion, the B cell ELISPOT (or ASC ELISPOT) provides a direct molecular window into the humoral memory compartment. This assay detects cells that produce and secrete antibodies, primarily plasma cells and memory B cells (MBCs) that have been stimulated to differentiate into ASCs. The molecular mechanism is analogous to the T cell assay but substitutes the capture antibody for the specific viral antigen of interest. For instance, to detect Porcine Circovirus 2-specific memory B cells, the ELISPOT plate is coated with recombinant PCV2 Cap protein [1]. When PBMCs (or purified B cells) are incubated on this plate, any cell secreting antibodies specific for the Cap protein will be captured by the immobilized antigen. Subsequent detection is performed using an anti-species immunoglobulin (e.g., anti-pig IgG) conjugated to an enzyme, followed by substrate development [1, 29]. Each spot represents the product of a single ASC, providing an absolute count of antigen-specific memory B cells.

The molecular requirements for a successful B cell ELISPOT are more stringent than for T cell assays. The antigen must be presented in its native conformation to ensure that antibodies recognize authentic epitopes. Furthermore, the stimulation protocol is critical. In the PCV2 study, R848 (a TLR7/8 agonist) was used to drive B cell proliferation and differentiation into ASCs over a three-day culture period [1]. This mirrors the in vivo scenario where memory B cells require re-exposure to antigen and T cell help to differentiate into plasma cells. The ability of ELISPOT to detect these rare cells is unparalleled. In piglets vaccinated against PCV2 but possessing high MDA, conventional ELISA showed a continuous decline in serum antibody levels, indistinguishable from unvaccinated controls. However, the ELISPOT revealed a robust, vaccine-induced expansion of PCV2 Cap-specific memory B cells, which correlated with protection against subsequent viral challenge [1]. This demonstrates that the B cell ELISPOT overcomes a major limitation of serology in neonatal and juvenile livestock: the inability to differentiate between passively acquired maternal antibodies and actively generated immunological memory. Similar principles have been applied to evaluate long-lived plasma cell responses in a murine model of Lyme disease vaccination, where ELISPOT detection of antigen-specific ASCs in the bone marrow correlated with the durability of protective antibody titers [2].

Integration with T Cell Immunity and Implications for Vaccine Design

The simultaneous application of Th1/Th2 cytokine ELISPOT and B cell ELISPOT provides a holistic view of the immune response to vaccination. This dual approach was elegantly employed in studies of the modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA)-based MERS-CoV vaccine (MVA-MERS-S). While T cell ELISPOT assays demonstrated robust and persistent IFN-γ responses following initial immunization, a late booster dose at 12 months significantly increased the frequency and persistence of spike-specific B cells (measured by B cell ELISPOT), but did not further augment T cell responses [10]. This dissociation highlights the unique regulatory mechanisms governing the memory B cell pool versus the T cell pool. The molecular pathways involved include the germinal center reaction, where B cells undergo affinity maturation and class switching under the direction of T follicular helper cells (Tfh). ELISPOT, when combined with flow cytometry for Tfh markers, could reveal whether vaccine-induced Th1 responses (with high IFN-γ) are more or less effective than Th2 responses (with IL-4) in supporting B cell memory. For example, the rEg.P29 vaccine in sheep induced a potent Th1/Th17 response without IL-4, yet still generated protective antibodies [6], suggesting that Th1-associated help is sufficient for B cell memory in this context.

The clinical and pathological relevance of these molecular mechanisms is profound. A vaccine that induces a strong Th1-polarized T cell response (detected by IFN-γ ELISPOT) but a weak memory B cell response (detected by B cell ELISPOT) may provide excellent clearance of acute infection but fail to prevent reinfection. Conversely, a vaccine that generates a robust memory B cell pool but poorly recruits cytotoxic T cells may control viremia but not eliminate virus from cellular reservoirs. This is particularly pertinent for pathogens like Equine Infectious Anemia Virus or Feline Leukemia Virus, where both arms of the immune response are critical for sterilizing immunity. In the development of a multiepitope vaccine against Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus, ELISPOT was used to screen for conserved CTL epitopes that induced high levels of IFN-γ, with the resulting vaccine leading to a prolonged Th1 response [3]. Such epitope mapping, guided by ELISPOT, is a direct translation of molecular immunology into rational vaccine design, allowing for the construction of vaccines that stimulate predetermined T cell polarization and B cell memory profiles.

In summary, the molecular mechanisms underlying ELISPOT detection are rooted in the principles of immuno-capture, amplification, and single-cell resolution. The Th1/Th2 cytokine ELISPOT provides a functional readout of T cell polarization, differentiating between effector and central memory subsets based on culture conditions. Simultaneously, the B cell ELISPOT offers a direct measure of the memory B cell compartment, overcoming the confounding effects of maternal antibodies. Together, these assays form a powerful molecular toolkit for dissecting the complex, multi-faceted immune response to veterinary vaccines, guiding the path towards more efficacious and durable immunological protection against viral pathogens in animal populations.

Clinical Application and Performance: Evaluating Porcine Circovirus 2 (PCV2) Vaccine Immunogenicity and Differentiating Vaccine-Induced from Maternally Derived Antibodies

3.1 The Clinical Conundrum of Maternally Derived Antibodies in PCV2 Vaccination

The global swine industry faces a persistent and economically significant challenge in controlling Porcine Circovirus 2 (PCV2), the primary etiological agent of porcine circovirus-associated disease (PCVAD). Vaccination remains the cornerstone of PCV2 control, yet the accurate evaluation of vaccine immunogenicity in young piglets is profoundly confounded by the presence of maternally derived antibodies (MDAs). These passively acquired immunoglobulins, transferred via colostrum from immune sows, are essential for early protection but create a formidable obstacle for veterinary diagnosticians and clinicians. Conventional serological methods, such as enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), measure circulating IgG antibodies but are fundamentally incapable of discriminating between antibodies generated by the piglet's own immune system in response to vaccination and those passively inherited from the dam [1]. This inability to distinguish source leads to a critical interpretive vacuum: a piglet with high MDA titers may appear serologically protected or vaccinated, yet may harbor no functional, vaccine-induced immunological memory, rendering it vulnerable to subsequent infection once MDA wanes. As documented by Fan et al. (2025), this limitation is not merely academic; it directly compromises the ability of producers and veterinarians to select effective vaccines, optimize vaccination timing, and assess herd-level immunity [1]. The clinical imperative, therefore, is to identify a biomarker that reflects active, adaptive immunity-specifically, the generation of long-lived memory B cells-rather than transient, passive serological status.

3.2 B-Cell ELISpot: A Mechanistic Override of Serological Confounders

To address this fundamental diagnostic gap, Fan et al. (2025) developed and validated a B-cell ELISpot assay that directly enumerates PCV2 capsid (Cap) protein-specific memory B cells in porcine peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) [1]. This approach represents a paradigm shift from measuring humoral end-products (antibodies) to quantifying the cellular precursors of humoral immunity. The assay protocol is exquisitely optimized for the porcine system: PBMCs are cultured for three days with the Toll-like receptor 7/8 agonist R848 (resiquimod) at a final concentration of 1 µg·mL⁻¹ to polyclonally stimulate B-cell proliferation and differentiation into antibody-secreting cells (ASCs) [1, 5]. The use of R848 is critical, as it bypasses the need for antigen-specific re-stimulation of B cells in vitro, allowing for the detection of all memory B cells that have undergone class-switching and affinity maturation in vivo. Following this culture period, cells are transferred to ELISpot plates pre-coated with the PCV2 Cap protein (1.25 µg·mL⁻¹), and secreted IgG is captured and visualized using a biotinylated goat anti-pig IgG detection antibody (5 µg·mL⁻¹) followed by HRP-streptavidin (0.25 µg·mL⁻¹) and a chromogenic substrate [1]. Each spot represents a single, PCV2-specific memory B cell that has differentiated into an ASC upon polyclonal activation. This provides a direct, functional readout of the vaccine's ability to establish durable, antigen-specific B-cell memory.

The mechanistic superiority of this assay over conventional serology lies in its ability to detect the "imprint" of vaccination even when circulating antibodies are predominantly of maternal origin. In the study by Fan et al., piglets with high MDA levels were vaccinated with different commercial PCV2 vaccines. Serum antibody levels, measured by ELISA, showed a monotonic decline over time in all groups, including the unvaccinated saline controls, making it impossible to discern any vaccine effect [1]. In stark contrast, the B-cell ELISpot assay revealed a significant and robust increase in PCV2-specific memory B-cell frequencies in all three vaccinated groups compared to the control group. This dissociation between serum antibody titers and cellular memory is the central finding that underscores the clinical utility of the ELISpot platform. The vaccine-induced memory B-cell response was detectable despite the high background of MDA, demonstrating that the assay is not merely redundant with serology but provides orthogonal and clinically actionable information [1].

3.3 Performance Characteristics and Comparative Vaccine Ranking

The ELISpot assay not only overcomes the MDA confound but also provides a quantitative, discriminative measure of vaccine potency that correlates with protective efficacy. In the head-to-head comparison of three commercial vaccines, Fan et al. demonstrated that Vaccine A induced the highest frequency of PCV2 Cap-specific memory B cells, followed by Vaccine B, with Vaccine C eliciting the weakest response, barely distinguishable from the saline control [1]. This ranking was independently validated by virological endpoints: the groups with higher memory B-cell responses (Vaccine A and B) exhibited significantly lower PCV2 infection rates and reduced viremia levels following natural exposure, as measured by quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) [1]. This alignment between the cellular immunogenicity readout and clinical protection is a powerful validation of the B-cell ELISpot as a surrogate marker of vaccine efficacy. It suggests that the magnitude of the vaccine-induced memory B-cell pool is a critical determinant of the host's ability to mount a rapid and effective anamnestic antibody response upon pathogen encounter, thereby controlling viral replication and preventing disease.

From a performance standpoint, the assay demonstrates high specificity and sensitivity. The use of a stringent polyclonal stimulation protocol (R848 for three days) ensures that only antigen-experienced B cells are expanded, while the background spot formation in negative control wells (uncoated or irrelevant antigen) remains low [1]. The dynamic range of the assay, capable of detecting responses ranging from near-zero to several hundred spot-forming units per million PBMCs, allows for robust differentiation between vaccine groups. This is consistent with the principles of ELISpot assay qualification established in other veterinary and human vaccine contexts. Harmonization efforts, such as those conducted by the FLUCOP consortium for influenza-specific IFN-γ ELISpot, have demonstrated that standardized protocols, including defined cell seeding densities, incubation times, and spot enumeration criteria, are essential for reducing inter-laboratory variability and ensuring data comparability [18, 19]. While the PCV2 B-cell ELISpot by Fan et al. was performed within a single laboratory, its adoption by reference diagnostic laboratories would require similar standardization, including the use of a common positive control (e.g., a pool of PBMCs from a hyperimmunized pig) and adherence to validated acceptance criteria for cell viability and background responses [21, 25, 28].

3.4 Clinical Interpretation and Integration with Other Diagnostic Modalities

The clinical interpretation of PCV2-specific memory B-cell frequencies requires careful contextualization. The assay provides a snapshot of the cellular immune memory compartment at a given time point post-vaccination. In the study by Fan et al., sampling was performed at a single time point after vaccination, demonstrating a clear distinction between groups. However, the kinetics of memory B-cell generation and persistence after PCV2 vaccination in the field setting warrant further investigation. It is plausible that the optimal sampling window for ELISot-based immunogenicity assessment may differ from that for serology, given that memory B cells require time to differentiate and enter the peripheral blood after antigen encounter. Longitudinal studies, sampling at multiple intervals (e.g., 2, 4, 8, and 12 weeks post-vaccination), would be invaluable for defining the peak response and the durability of the memory pool [37]. Furthermore, the assay should be integrated with other diagnostic tools. While qPCR for viremia provides a direct measure of infection status, and ELISA provides a measure of total antibody, the B-cell ELISpot provides a mechanistic link between vaccination and protection. A comprehensive assessment of vaccine efficacy would ideally combine all three modalities: a positive ELISpot response indicating successful priming of B-cell memory, low or absent viremia indicating effective control of challenge, and waning MDA levels confirming the timely clearance of passive antibodies [1, 32].

It is also important to acknowledge the logistical considerations of implementing this assay in a clinical or production setting. The B-cell ELISpot requires viable PBMCs, necessitating prompt processing of blood samples and access to cell culture facilities, which may not be feasible for all veterinary diagnostic laboratories. However, advances in cell stabilization and shipping technologies, coupled with the growing availability of centralized reference laboratories with validated platforms, could mitigate these barriers. The cost per assay, while higher than a standard ELISA, is justified by the unique information it provides-information that can guide vaccine selection, optimize timing of the first vaccine dose relative to MDA decay, and identify herds with poor vaccine take, ultimately improving PCV2 control strategies and reducing economic losses associated with PCVAD. The clinical pathologist must therefore view the B-cell ELISpot not as a replacement for serology but as a powerful, complementary tool that provides a definitive answer to a question that serology cannot answer: did this piglet mount its own active immune response to the PCV2 vaccine?

Comparative Utility in Diverse Veterinary Pathogens: From SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccines in Diabetic Models to Livestock and Companion Animal Vaccines

The enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISPOT) assay has demonstrated remarkable versatility across an extraordinarily broad spectrum of veterinary pathogens, spanning from emerging zoonotic threats like SARS-CoV-2 to established pathogens of livestock, companion animals, and aquatic species. This section provides a comprehensive comparative analysis of ELISPOT utility across these diverse applications, examining how the assay's unique capacity for single-cell resolution of antigen-specific immune responses has been leveraged to address distinct challenges in vaccine development and evaluation for each pathogen category.

SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccines in Diabetic Models: A Paradigm for Comorbidity Assessment

The application of ELISPOT to evaluate SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine responses in diabetic animal models represents a particularly sophisticated use of the technology, addressing the critical intersection of vaccine safety and efficacy in populations with underlying metabolic disease. In a landmark study employing streptozotocin (STZ)-induced type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) mouse models, Jo et al. (2025) utilized flow cytometry, ELISA, and ELISPOT analyses to demonstrate comparable activation of Th1 and cytotoxic T cell responses between diabetic and non-diabetic animals following administration of the novel SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine candidate CUK3-1/LNP128 [38]. This finding is particularly significant because it establishes that the cellular immunogenicity of mRNA vaccines is not inherently compromised by the diabetic state, even though the diabetic animals exhibited enhanced cardiotoxic potential as evidenced by elevated c-Troponin-I levels and increased cardiac expression of COX2, NF-κB, TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-6, and IL-12a [38]. The ELISPOT data in this context served a dual purpose: confirming that the vaccine's intended immunogenicity was preserved in the diabetic milieu while simultaneously allowing investigators to dissociate the vaccine's immunological effects from its off-target toxicities. This paradigm has direct relevance for veterinary medicine, where metabolic diseases such as diabetes mellitus in companion animals (particularly dogs and cats) and ketosis in dairy cattle may similarly influence vaccine responsiveness.

The broader context of SARS-CoV-2 ELISPOT applications in veterinary and comparative medicine has been substantially advanced by methodological validation studies. Carreto-Binaghi et al. (2024) performed a rigorous bioanalytical validation of the IFN-γ ELISPOT assay for detecting cellular responses to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, establishing a limit of detection (LOD) of 17 SFU and a lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) of 22 SFU, with correlation coefficients of 0.98 and 0.95 for spike protein and anti-CD3+ stimulation, respectively [35]. Such validation parameters are essential for the assay's transition from research tool to regulated diagnostic and vaccine evaluation platform. The importance of standardized ELISPOT protocols for SARS-CoV-2 vaccine evaluation has been further underscored by Lin et al. (2022), who demonstrated that combined peptide pool strategies (S1&S2&M&N) achieved sensitivity up to 93% with serial evaluation specificity reaching 100% [26]. These methodological advances have direct applicability to veterinary SARS-CoV-2 vaccine development, particularly for species such as cats, dogs, ferrets, and mink that are susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection and may serve as reservoirs or intermediate hosts.

The comparative utility of ELISPOT in SARS-CoV-2 research extends to understanding pre-existing immunity and cross-reactive responses. Ugwu et al. (2024) employed nucleoprotein (N) and spike (S1, S2) direct ex vivo IFN-γ T cell ELISPOT to evaluate natural and vaccine-induced immune responses in Southern Nigeria, revealing pre-existing binding antibodies (N-IgG 60% and S-RBD IgG 44%) in samples collected prior to the COVID-19 pandemic [39]. This finding has profound implications for veterinary vaccinology, where pre-existing immunity from prior infection or maternal antibodies frequently confounds vaccine evaluation. The ability of ELISPOT to discriminate between vaccine-induced and infection-induced T cell responses, particularly through the use of antigen-specific peptide pools that differentiate between structural and non-structural proteins, provides a powerful tool for serological differentiation of infected from vaccinated animals (DIVA) strategies.

Livestock Vaccine Evaluation: From Porcine Circovirus to Classical Swine Fever

The application of ELISPOT to livestock vaccine evaluation has been particularly transformative for pathogens where conventional serological methods fail to provide adequate correlates of protection. The work of Fan et al. (2025) on Porcine Circovirus 2 (PCV2) vaccines exemplifies this paradigm. These investigators developed an ELISPOT assay for detecting PCV2-specific memory B cells and demonstrated that in piglets with high levels of maternally-derived antibodies (MDAs), serum antibody detection showed continuously declining PCV2 antibody levels over time in all vaccinated and control groups, making serological evaluation meaningless [1]. In stark contrast, ELISPOT analysis revealed a significant increase in PCV2-specific memory B cell levels in all three vaccinated groups compared to controls, with Vaccine A inducing the highest levels of specific memory B cells, correlating with lower PCV2 infection rates and viremia levels [1]. This study provides compelling evidence that ELISPOT-based profiling of vaccine-specific memory B cells overcomes the confounding effects of MDA-a pervasive problem in livestock vaccinology where maternal antibodies can persist for weeks to months, rendering conventional serological monitoring unreliable.

The utility of ELISPOT for Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus (PRRSV) vaccine development has been equally impressive. Lei et al. (2024) employed ELISPOT to identify 10 PRRSV-specific CTL epitopes and constructed a multi-epitope peptide (PTE) fused with a modified porcine Fc molecule (pFc-PTE) [3]. The ELISPOT assay was instrumental in demonstrating that pFc-PTE effectively stimulated PRRSV-infected specific splenic lymphocytes to secrete high levels of IFN-γ and, critically, extended the duration of the immune response to at least 10 weeks post-immunization compared to PTE alone [3]. This application highlights ELISPOT's unique capacity for epitope discovery and rational vaccine design-a capability that has been exploited across multiple livestock pathogens.

For Classical Swine Fever Virus (CSFV), Zhao et al. (2023) utilized ELISPOT to identify two novel T cell epitopes on the E2 protein of the C-strain vaccine, 90STEEMGDDF98 and 331ATDRHSDYF339, which were further validated through molecular docking with swine leukocyte antigen-1*0401 [8]. The demonstration that mutants deleting or substituting these epitopes are nonviable, and that CSFV infection is significantly inhibited by the 331ATDRHSDYF339 peptide treatment, underscores the functional relevance of ELISPOT-identified epitopes [8]. This epitope-level resolution is particularly valuable for developing marker vaccines that allow DIVA strategies, a critical requirement for CSFV eradication programs worldwide.

The application of ELISPOT to African Swine Fever Virus (ASFV) vaccine development, as reported by Pérez-Núñez et al. (2019), demonstrates the assay's capacity to evaluate complex, multi-antigen vaccine formulations. Using a modified prime-boost approach with combinations of ASFV recombinant proteins and pcDNAs-expressing ASFV genes, these investigators employed IFN-γ ELISPOT to measure specific cell-mediated immune responses, enabling the identification of antigen combinations that induced both humoral and cellular immunity [14]. Given that ASFV encodes more than 150 proteins and no commercial vaccine is currently available, the ability of ELISPOT to screen multiple antigen combinations for their capacity to induce cellular immunity represents an indispensable tool for rational vaccine design.

Companion Animal Vaccines: Canine Distemper, Rabies, and Lyme Disease

In companion animal vaccinology, ELISPOT has proven particularly valuable for evaluating vaccines against pathogens where T cell responses are critical for protection. The work of Santos et al. (2024) on Canine Distemper Virus (CDV) exemplifies this application. Using ELISPOT assays with 119 overlapped synthetic peptides from the viral hemagglutinin protein, grouped in 22 pools forming a matrix, these investigators mapped T cell reactive epitopes in 32 animals, identifying nine peptides considered potential candidate epitopes for T cell stimulation [4]. The matrix-based approach allowed efficient screening of a large peptide library, demonstrating ELISPOT's capacity for high-throughput epitope discovery in companion animal species where immunological reagents are often more limited than in human or murine systems.

For Rabies Lyssavirus vaccines, Zhang et al. (2019) employed ELISPOT to evaluate the adjuvant activity of PCP-II, a polysaccharide from Poria cocos, on a whole killed rabies vaccine. The ELISPOT assay revealed that PCP-II strongly induced T lymphocyte proliferation in the spleen and high levels of cytokine secretion from splenocytes, correlating with enhanced virus-neutralizing antibody (VNA) titers in both mice and dogs [11]. This study demonstrates ELISPOT's utility in adjuvant screening-a critical application given that adjuvant selection can dramatically influence vaccine efficacy and safety profiles in companion animals.

The evaluation of Lyme disease vaccines in a mouse model by Gutierrez et al. (2024) provides another compelling example of ELISPOT's comparative utility. These investigators used ELISPOT detection of antibody-producing cells to compare two USDA-approved canine vaccines: Duramune (bacterin vaccine) and Vanguard crLyme (subunit vaccine composed of OspA and OspC). The ELISPOT data revealed that the superior long-term protection provided by Duramune at 120 days post-vaccination was characterized by higher abundance of long-lived plasma cells and higher avidity antibodies compared to Vanguard [2]. This application highlights ELISPOT's capacity to discriminate between vaccines that may appear equivalent by conventional serological methods but differ fundamentally in the quality and durability of the memory B cell response they induce.

Avian and Aquatic Species: Expanding the Taxonomic Frontier

The application of ELISPOT to avian species has been particularly challenging due to the limited availability of species-specific immunological reagents, yet several studies have demonstrated its feasibility and value. Stenzel et al. (2018) evaluated the immunogenicity of Pigeon Circovirus (PiCV) recombinant capsid protein (rCP) in pigeons, using ELISPOT to detect anti-PiCV rCP IgY-secreting B cells (SBC) and quantitative PCR to measure IFN-γ gene expression. The results demonstrated seroconversion since 23 days post-vaccination, with significantly higher anti-PiCV rCP IgY-SBC numbers on days 2 and 23 post-vaccination, and significantly higher IFN-γ gene expression since day 2 [16]. This study is notable for adapting ELISPOT to measure B cell responses in an avian species, demonstrating that the assay's core principle-enumerating antigen-specific antibody-secreting cells-translates effectively across taxonomic classes.

For Tembusu Virus (TMUV) in ducks, Zhao et al. (2018) identified T cell epitopes within the envelope (E) protein using synthesized peptides predicted in silico, with ELISPOT in mice and duck lymphocyte proliferation assays confirming that ten peptides could stimulate TMUV-specific T cells [17]. The subsequent construction of a DNA vaccine (pVAX-T) containing these epitopes, and the demonstration that it upregulated IL-2, IL-6, and IFN-γ expression in peripheral blood lymphocytes and spleen, provides a blueprint for epitope-based vaccine development in avian species [17]. The use of ELISPOT in both murine and avian systems for the same study illustrates the assay's cross-species portability, although the requirement for species-specific cytokine detection antibodies remains a significant limitation for many veterinary species.

The aquatic veterinary field presents unique challenges for ELISPOT application, given the phylogenetic distance of fish and crustacean immune systems from mammalian models. For Infectious Salmon Anemia Virus and Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia Virus, the development of ELISPOT assays has been hampered by the limited availability of salmonid-specific cytokine antibodies. However, the fundamental principles of the assay-capturing secreted cytokines or antibodies on a membrane for subsequent detection-are theoretically applicable to any species for which specific detection reagents can be generated. The successful application of ELISPOT to White Spot Syndrome Virus in shrimp and Channel Catfish Virus in fish would require substantial investment in reagent development but could provide unprecedented insights into vaccine-induced immunity in these economically important species.

Methodological Considerations Across Species and Pathogens

The comparative utility of ELISPOT across diverse veterinary pathogens is fundamentally dependent on the availability of species-specific reagents and optimized protocols. The FLUCOP consortium's efforts to harmonize IFN-γ ELISPOT protocols for influenza vaccine evaluation provide a valuable template for veterinary applications. Waerlop et al. (2022) demonstrated that the introduction of a harmonized Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) reduced interlaboratory variation from 148% to 77% for A/California and from 126% to 73% for B/Phuket, with all post-harmonization background responses falling below 50 SFU/million cells [19]. Subsequent proficiency tests confirmed that the harmonized SOP reduced variation of both background and stimulated responses, with a statistically significant reduction in variation (p < 0.0001) [18]. These findings have direct implications for veterinary vaccine trials, where multiple laboratories may be involved in evaluating vaccine candidates across different geographic regions.

The choice between direct ex vivo ELISPOT and cultured ELISPOT (cELISPOT) represents another critical methodological consideration that varies across veterinary applications. As Calarota and Baldanti (2013) have reviewed, standard ELISPOT detects effector memory T cell responses after short-term stimulation, while cultured ELISPOT (10-day culture) detects central memory T cell responses [34]. In the bovine tuberculosis model, Blunt et al. (2015) demonstrated that the main populations contributing to IFN-γ production in the cELISPOT were of the CD45RO+CD62Lhi (central memory) and CD45RO+CD62Llo (effector memory) phenotypes, with central memory T cells being the dominant contributing population [23]. Maggioli et al. (2015) further established that cELISPOT assays in cattle allow effector responses to...

Data Interpretation and Statistical Analysis: Setting Cutoff Thresholds, Quantifying Spot-Forming Units, and Correlating with Vaccine Efficacy

The transition from raw spot counts to clinically meaningful and statistically robust data represents the most intellectually demanding phase of the ELISPOT workflow. In the veterinary context, where genetic heterogeneity, outbred populations, and complex environmental exposures are the norm rather than the exception, the analytical framework must be both rigorous and flexible. As a veterinary clinical pathologist, I have witnessed the catastrophic consequences of poorly defined thresholds-false positives undermining vaccine licensure, false negatives obscuring genuine protective immunity, and irreproducible data eroding confidence in cellular immunology. This section dissects the statistical and biological underpinnings of ELISPOT data interpretation, focusing on the three interdependent pillars of cutoff determination, spot-forming unit (SFU) quantification, and the correlation of these endpoints with bona fide vaccine efficacy.

Establishing Cutoff Thresholds: The Statistical Foundation for Positivity

The most fundamental analytical decision is defining what constitutes a "positive" response. This is not merely a statistical exercise; it is a biological declaration that the observed spot count exceeds the noise floor of the assay and reflects genuine antigen-specific T-cell or B-cell activation. The literature reveals a spectrum of approaches, ranging from simple empirical rules to sophisticated probabilistic models. In a seminal harmonization effort for influenza-specific ELISPOT assays within the FLUCOP consortium, Waerlop et al. demonstrated that the adoption of a standardized operating procedure dramatically reduced inter-laboratory variation, with post-harmonization background responses uniformly falling below an arbitrary threshold of 50 SFU per million cells [18, 19]. This threshold, while practical, lacks the statistical rigor required for regulatory submissions or critical vaccine efficacy trials.

A more defensible approach employs the Poisson distribution to model the stochastic nature of spot formation. The principle is straightforward: if the number of spots in unstimulated (negative control) wells follows a Poisson process, the probability of observing a given number of spots in antigen-stimulated wells can be calculated. The lower limit of detection (LOD) and lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) are thus derived from the distribution of background responses. Carreto-Binaghi et al. validated this approach for a SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific IFN-γ ELISPOT, establishing an LOD of 17 SFU and an LLOQ of 22 SFU, with repeatability demonstrated by coefficients of variation (CV) consistently ≤25% [35]. Similarly, Patton et al. qualified an RSV F-specific IFN-γ ELISPOT, reporting an LOD of 21 SFU per 10⁶ PBMC and an LLOQ of 63 SFU per 10⁶ PBMC, with intra- and inter-assay CVs of <10.5% and <31%, respectively [24]. These qualification parameters are essential for establishing the assay's fitness-for-purpose in a Good Clinical Laboratory Practice (GCLP) environment, a requirement increasingly mandated by regulatory bodies such as the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH, formerly OIE) for veterinary vaccine licensure.

The choice of statistical model for cutoff determination must also account for the assay's dynamic range. For studies involving highly immunogenic vaccines, such as live-attenuated Duck Tembusu Virus vaccines or potent adenoviral vectors, the spot counts may saturate the detection system. In these cases, a stimulation index (SI), calculated as the ratio of stimulated to background spots, often complements the absolute SFU count. However, the SI can be misleading when background responses are low, inflating small absolute differences. A more robust alternative is the use of a negative binomial model, which accounts for overdispersion-the observation that the variance of spot counts often exceeds the mean, particularly in outbred veterinary species. This overdispersion reflects biological variability in T-cell precursor frequencies, which is far greater in cattle, swine, and poultry than in inbred laboratory mice. Maggioli et al. highlighted this issue in their cultured ELISPOT assay for bovine tuberculosis, noting that the central memory T-cell responses measured by this assay exhibited higher variability than effector responses, necessitating larger sample sizes for statistical power [31].

Quantifying Spot-Forming Units: From Enumeration to Biological Meaning

The accurate quantification of SFUs is the linchpin of all downstream analyses. Modern automated ELISPOT readers have largely supplanted manual counting, but their algorithms must be validated for each species and matrix. The FLUCOP consortium's proficiency tests revealed that post-harmonization, the CV for stimulated responses dropped from 148% to 77% for an H1N1 antigen and from 126% to 73% for a B/Phuket antigen, demonstrating that standardization of both the wet-lab protocol and the enumeration algorithm is critical [18]. Importantly, the authors noted a clear correlation between IFN-γ ELISPOT and intracellular cytokine staining (ICS) data, but the two methods were not interchangeable. This finding underscores a crucial point: ELISPOT is a frequency assay, counting individual cytokine-secreting cells, while ICS provides both frequency and phenotype data. For veterinary vaccine studies, where multi-parameter flow cytometry reagents may be limited, ELISPOT often remains the primary tool for cellular immunogenicity.

The choice between direct ex vivo (standard) and cultured ELISPOT assays profoundly influences interpretation. The direct assay detects effector and effector-memory T cells that are actively secreting cytokine within 18-24 hours of antigen exposure. In contrast, the cultured (or "long-term") assay, which involves a 10- to 14-day in vitro expansion step, detects central memory T cells (TCM). Blunt et al. provided a definitive characterization of this distinction in cattle, demonstrating that CD45RO⁺CD62Lhi central memory cells were the dominant contributors to the cultured IFN-γ ELISPOT response following BCG vaccination, while effector memory cells (CD45RO⁺CD62Llo) also contributed but with lower frequency [23]. This distinction is biologically critical: TCM responses are associated with long-term protective immunity and rapid recall upon pathogen re-encounter, making the cultured ELISPOT a potential correlate of durable vaccine efficacy. In the context of Bovine Viral Diarrhea Virus or Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus vaccination, where waning immunity is a major concern, the cultured ELISPOT may be more informative than the direct assay.

For B-cell ELISPOT, which enumerates antibody-secreting cells (ASCs), the quantification paradigm shifts. Brunner et al. described a protocol for murine whole-organ single-cell suspensions, emphasizing the need for careful optimization of coating antigens and detection antibodies [29]. Tian et al. applied this approach to study hepatitis B surface antigen (HBs)-specific B cells in vaccinated and chronically infected humans, demonstrating that B-cell ELISPOT could detect vaccine-induced memory B cells even when circulating antibody titers had waned [37]. This is particularly pertinent for veterinary vaccines where maternally-derived antibodies (MDAs) confound serological assessment. Fan et al. elegantly demonstrated this advantage in piglets vaccinated against Porcine Circovirus 2 (PCV2). While serum antibody levels declined uniformly in all groups, including saline-injected controls, due to MDA catabolism, the ELISPOT for PCV2-specific memory B cells revealed a significant increase in vaccinated animals, with Vaccine A inducing the highest levels, correlating with lower PCV2 infection rates and viremia [1]. This study provides a compelling case for B-cell ELISPOT as a superior analytical tool for evaluating vaccine immunogenicity in the presence of passive immunity.

Correlating with Vaccine Efficacy: Bridging the Gap Between SFU and Protection

The ultimate validation of any analytical threshold is its correlation with clinically relevant protection. This is the domain where statistical rigor meets biological reality. The challenge is multi-faceted: the magnitude of the SFU response must be linked to a reduced risk of infection, disease, or transmission, and this correlation must be robust across different populations, vaccine platforms, and challenge models.

One of the most direct approaches is the identification of immunological correlates of protection (CoPs) through receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. By comparing SFU counts from vaccinated animals that are protected versus those that are not following a controlled challenge, a threshold SFU value can be derived that maximizes sensitivity and specificity. Gutierrez et al. employed this strategy in a mouse model of Lyme disease, comparing two USDA-approved canine vaccines (Duramune and Vanguard). They found that long-term protection (120 days post-vaccination) was associated with higher antibody titers, higher abundance of long-lived plasma cells (LLPCs) detected by ELISPOT, and higher avidity antibodies [2]. Importantly, the ELISPOT-derived LLPC frequency was a more robust correlate of protection than serum antibody titer alone, highlighting the utility of cellular assays in defining the quality, not just the quantity, of the humoral response.

For T-cell responses, the correlation with efficacy is often more complex, involving not just the magnitude but also the breadth and polyfunctionality of the response. Zhao et al. used ELISPOT to identify two novel CD8⁺ T-cell epitopes on the E2 protein of Classical Swine Fever Virus (CSFV) C-strain, demonstrating that these epitopes were critical for the rapid onset of protection characteristic of this live-attenuated vaccine [8]. The correlation between epitope-specific IFN-γ responses and protection was particularly strong, suggesting that these epitopes could serve as vaccine efficacy markers. Similarly, Lei et al. employed ELISPOT to screen for CTL epitopes of PRRSV, constructing a multi-epitope peptide that induced strong and sustained IFN-γ responses in mice [3]. The correlation of these responses with reduced viral load in future challenge studies will be the definitive test.

The relationship between ELISPOT responses and efficacy is not always linear. High SFU counts do not invariably equate to protection, and low counts do not preclude it. This is particularly evident in the context of regulatory B cells (Breg) and other immunomodulatory populations. Jimbo et al. identified IL-10-secreting CD21⁺ Breg cells in ovine lymphoid tissues using ELISPOT, noting that these cells could suppress IFN-γ secretion and potentially dampen vaccine-induced responses [12]. In a vaccine trial, a high frequency of Breg cells could paradoxically correlate with poor efficacy, despite robust antigen-specific T-cell responses. This highlights the need for a multi-parametric analytical approach, measuring both effector and regulatory populations.

The impact of external factors on the ELISPOT readout must also be considered when interpreting correlations. Pierron et al. demonstrated that the mycotoxins deoxynivalenol (DON) and zearalenone (ZEN), common contaminants of swine feed, significantly reduced B-cell proliferation and IgG-secreting cell frequencies in an ELISPOT assay, with effects observed at concentrations as low as 0.4 µM for DON and 10 µM for ZEN [5]. In a field setting, where mycotoxin exposure is variable, this could confound vaccine efficacy assessments. Similarly, the route of vaccine administration profoundly influences the anatomical distribution of T-cell responses. Zhao et al. compared pulmonary delivery (PD) versus intramuscular electroporation (EP) of a Mycobacterium tuberculosis ag85ab DNA vaccine in mice, finding that PD induced earlier and stronger IFN-γ ELISPOT responses in lung lymphocytes, correlating with enhanced mucosal protection [32]. These findings underscore the importance of sampling the appropriate anatomical compartment when correlating ELISPOT responses with protection against respiratory or enteric pathogens.

Finally, the experience from HIV vaccine trials, as documented by Sanchez et al. and Samri et al., provides a cautionary tale for veterinary applications. Despite standardized protocols, inter-laboratory concordance for IFN-γ ELISPOT responses ranged from moderate to excellent (kappa index 0.38-0.92), with better agreement for immunodominant viral peptide pools than for subdominant HIV peptides [21, 36]. For veterinary vaccines targeting complex pathogens like African Swine Fever Virus (ASFV), where the protective antigens are still being defined, this variability could be exacerbated. Pérez-Núñez et al. used ELISPOT to evaluate a DNA-protein immunization strategy against ASFV, measuring IFN-γ responses to selected viral antigens [14]. While they demonstrated immunogenicity, the correlation with protection against lethal challenge remained imperfect, highlighting the need for a systems immunology approach that integrates ELISPOT data with antibody profiling, transcriptomics, and functional assays.

In summary, the statistical analysis and interpretation of ELISPOT data for veterinary vaccine efficacy require a rigorous framework that accounts for assay variability, biological heterogeneity, and the specific immunological requirements of the target pathogen. The field is moving away from simple binary cutoffs toward probabilistic models and quantitative CoPs, driven by the need for reproducible, translatable data in support of vaccine licensure. As we expand into novel platforms-mRNA vaccines, viral vectors, and multi-epitope constructs-the ELISPOT assay will remain an indispensable tool, provided its analytical foundations are as robust as its biological readout.

Quality Control, Validation, and Troubleshooting for ELISPOT Assays in Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratories

The deployment of the Enzyme-Linked Immunospot (ELISPOT) assay in veterinary diagnostic laboratories demands a rigorous framework of quality control (QC), comprehensive validation, and systematic troubleshooting to ensure the generation of reliable, reproducible, and clinically meaningful data. Unlike research settings where exploratory findings may tolerate higher variability, diagnostic applications-particularly those informing vaccine efficacy assessments for pathogens such as Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus, Classical Swine Fever Virus, or Avian Influenza Virus-require assay performance characteristics that meet or exceed regulatory standards established by organizations such as the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH). The inherent complexity of the ELISPOT assay, which integrates cell culture, antigen stimulation, cytokine capture, and chromogenic detection, introduces multiple potential failure points that must be systematically controlled.

Foundational Quality Control Parameters

The foundation of any robust ELISPOT assay begins with stringent QC of the biological starting material: peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) or splenocytes. Cell viability and recovery are paramount, as compromised cells will not secrete cytokines reliably, leading to false-negative results or uninterpretable high-background artifacts. The International AIDS Vaccine Initiative (IAVI) proficiency programs have established benchmarks that are directly applicable to veterinary diagnostics: acceptable post-thaw viability should exceed 90%, with cell recovery rates above 70% [25, 28]. In a landmark multi-laboratory proficiency study involving African clinical research laboratories, 94% of processed PBMC samples achieved viability above 90%, and 96% demonstrated cell yields exceeding 0.7 million cells per milliliter of blood [28]. These metrics should serve as minimum acceptance criteria for veterinary ELISPOT laboratories.

The method of PBMC isolation significantly impacts downstream assay performance. Comparative studies evaluating Ficoll-Paque gradient centrifugation, BD Vacutainer Cell Preparation Tubes (CPT), and Greiner Bio-One LeucoSep tubes have demonstrated that local conditions-including blood transport time, ambient temperature, and technician experience-dictate optimal methodology [27]. For veterinary species, additional considerations apply: porcine blood, for instance, contains higher proportions of granulocytes that can interfere with PBMC separation, while avian blood nucleated erythrocytes require modified protocols. Laboratories should conduct on-site validation of isolation techniques, establishing site-specific standard operating procedures (SOPs) that account for species-specific blood characteristics.

Cryopreservation introduces another critical QC variable. The FLUCOP consortium, which harmonized influenza-specific IFN-γ ELISPOT protocols across European laboratories, demonstrated that standardized cryopreservation and thawing procedures significantly reduced inter-laboratory variation [18, 19]. Post-harmonization, background responses uniformly fell below the arbitrary threshold of 50 spot-forming units (SFU) per million cells, a dramatic improvement over pre-harmonization variability where background ranged from 0 to over 200 SFU [18]. For veterinary applications, particularly when samples must be transported from field sites to centralized diagnostic facilities, cryopreservation protocols must be validated for each target species. The use of serum-free cryopreservation media, controlled-rate freezing, and immediate post-thaw resting (2-4 hours at 37°C in 5% CO₂) before plating are essential steps to minimize non-specific activation and ensure consistent cell functionality.

Assay Validation: Establishing Performance Characteristics

Validation of the ELISPOT assay for veterinary diagnostic use requires systematic determination of key performance parameters: limit of detection (LOD), lower limit of quantification (LLOQ), upper limit of quantification (ULOQ), linearity, precision (repeatability and intermediate precision), accuracy, and specificity. The FLUCOP consortium's qualification study provides an exemplary framework: using a harmonized SOP, they established an LOD of 34.4 SFU per million cells and demonstrated linearity across a cell input range of 120,000 to 360,000 cells per well [19]. Similarly, a validation study for SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific IFN-γ ELISPOT reported an LOD of 17 SFU and an LLOQ of 22 SFU, with correlation coefficients exceeding 0.95 for both antigen-specific and positive control (anti-CD3) responses [35].

For veterinary applications, validation must account for species-specific reagents. The development of a guinea pig-specific IFN-γ ELISPOT assay for evaluating vaccines against guinea pig cytomegalovirus illustrates the challenges: monoclonal antibodies against guinea pig IFN-γ were required, and optimal coating and detection antibody concentrations had to be determined empirically [30]. In porcine systems, the validation of a Porcine Circovirus 2 (PCV2)-specific memory B cell ELISPOT required optimization of multiple parameters: R848 stimulation at 1 µg/mL for three days, PCV2 Cap protein coating at 1.25 µg/mL, biotinylated goat anti-pig IgG at 5 µg/mL, and HRP-streptavidin at 0.25 µg/mL [1]. These species-specific optimizations cannot be extrapolated from human or murine protocols; each veterinary species requires independent validation.

Precision assessment should include both repeatability (intra-assay variation) and intermediate precision (inter-assay and inter-operator variation). Acceptable coefficients of variation (CV) for ELISPOT assays typically fall below 25% for stimulated responses, though lower CVs are achievable with well-optimized protocols. The FLUCOP consortium reported intra-assay CVs below 10.5% and inter-assay CVs below 31% for influenza-specific responses [19]. In the context of veterinary vaccine evaluation, these precision metrics must be established for each antigen system. For example, when evaluating African Swine Fever Virus vaccine candidates, IFN-γ ELISPOT responses showed considerable variability depending on the specific antigen combination used, underscoring the need for assay-specific validation rather than reliance on generic performance characteristics [14].

Antigen Selection and Stimulation Conditions

The choice of antigen and stimulation conditions represents a critical determinant of assay performance and a frequent source of troubleshooting challenges. Overlapping peptide pools spanning the entire protein of interest are preferred for comprehensive T cell epitope mapping, as demonstrated in studies identifying T cell epitopes for Classical Swine Fever Virus E2 protein [8], Tembusu Virus envelope protein [17], and Canine Distemper Virus hemagglutinin [4]. However, peptide quality and purity must be verified by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and mass spectrometry, as truncated or oxidized peptides can yield false-negative results or non-specific stimulation.

The concentration of antigen must be optimized through titration experiments. For peptide pools, concentrations typically range from 1-2 µg/mL per individual peptide, but this must be validated for each target and species. The FLUCOP consortium standardized on 2 µg/mL for influenza peptide pools, a concentration that maximized signal-to-noise ratios without inducing peptide-mediated toxicity [19]. In veterinary applications, mitogen positive controls (e.g., phytohemagglutinin, concanavalin A, or anti-CD3 antibody) must be included to confirm cell viability and functional capacity. Notably, the choice of positive control can affect background: phytohemagglutinin at 5-10 µg/mL typically induces robust IFN-γ responses but may also trigger non-specific spot formation if incubation exceeds 24 hours.

Spot Enumeration and Reader Standardization

Automated ELISPOT readers have largely replaced manual counting, but reader-to-reader and software version variability remain significant sources of inter-laboratory variation. The FLUCOP proficiency tests revealed that even with harmonized SOPs, spot enumeration parameters-including spot size minimum, intensity threshold, and background subtraction algorithms-required standardization across participating laboratories [18]. For veterinary diagnostic laboratories, this necessitates: (1) validation of reader performance using reference plates with known spot counts, (2) establishment of instrument-specific SOPs for parameter settings, and (3) periodic cross-calibration exercises when multiple readers are used within a laboratory network.

The development of reader-free ELISPOT assays using membrane-punching devices and ImageJ-based particle analysis offers an alternative for resource-limited veterinary laboratories [40]. This approach demonstrated high inter-assay and inter-examiner concordance, though it requires careful standardization of membrane punching and image acquisition parameters. The antigen-specific immune response (IR) index, calculated as the ratio of spot counts in antigen-stimulated wells to unstimulated controls, provides a normalization strategy that accounts for inter-individual variability in spontaneous cytokine secretion [40].

Troubleshooting Common Assay Failures

High background spots represent the most common and frustrating troubleshooting challenge in ELISPOT assays. Excessive background can result from multiple factors: (1) inadequate blocking of the PVDF membrane, (2) residual activation of PBMCs from cryopreservation or isolation procedures, (3) cross-reactivity of detection antibodies with serum components, (4) excessive cell density, or (5) contamination of reagents with endotoxin or other microbial products. Systematic troubleshooting should begin with examination of negative control wells (unstimulated cells and medium-only wells). If background exceeds 50 SFU per million cells, the assay should be considered invalid [18, 19].

For veterinary species, high background may also reflect pre-existing immune activation due to concurrent infections or environmental exposures. This is particularly relevant for livestock species where subclinical infections with pathogens such as Bovine Viral Diarrhea Virus or Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus can modulate immune responses. In such cases, pre-screening animals for relevant pathogens and documenting health status is essential for data interpretation.

Low or absent responses in positive control wells indicate cellular dysfunction. Common causes include: (1) excessive time between blood collection and PBMC isolation (>4 hours), (2) cryopreservation-induced damage, (3) mycoplasma contamination of cell culture reagents, (4) incorrect incubation temperature or CO₂ levels, or (5) degradation of mitogens or cytokines. The use of a standardized viability dye (e.g., trypan blue or automated viability counters) and inclusion of a viability control (e.g., CD3 stimulation) in every assay plate are mandatory QC steps.

Proficiency Testing and External Quality Assessment

Participation in external quality assessment (EQA) programs is essential for veterinary diagnostic laboratories performing ELISPOT assays. The EQAPOL (External Quality Assurance Oversight Laboratory) program, originally developed for HIV vaccine trials, provides a model that can be adapted for veterinary applications [21]. This program evaluates laboratories on five parameters: timeliness of data reporting, ability to handle cellular samples, detection of background responses, accuracy relative to consensus results, and precision of measurements. Laboratories are assigned numeric and adjectival performance ratings, enabling longitudinal monitoring of assay performance.

For veterinary applications, the development of species-specific proficiency panels is critical. These panels should include cryopreserved PBMC samples from animals with known vaccine-induced responses (high, medium, and low responders) as well as negative controls. The IAVI proficiency program demonstrated that laboratories across three continents could achieve concordant results when using standardized SOPs, common reagents, and centralized training [25]. Importantly, this study showed that inter-laboratory variation could be reduced to approximately half a log for antigen-specific responses, a level of concordance that is achievable for veterinary networks.

Data Analysis and Interpretation Criteria

Establishing objective criteria for defining positive responses is essential for diagnostic applications. The most common approach uses a combination of statistical and biological thresholds: responses exceeding both a minimum spot count (e.g., 50 SFU per million cells) and a fold-increase over background (e.g., 3-4 times the mean background) are considered positive [19, 35]. More sophisticated approaches employ binomial distribution statistics or Poisson regression to determine response cutoffs based on the variability of replicate wells.

For veterinary vaccine evaluation, the interpretation of ELISPOT data must account for confounding factors such as maternally-derived antibodies (MDAs). A landmark study on PCV2 vaccination demonstrated that traditional serological assays could not distinguish vaccine-induced antibodies from MDAs, whereas ELISPOT detection of PCV2-specific memory B cells successfully differentiated vaccinated from unvaccinated piglets despite high MDA levels [1]. This finding has profound implications for vaccine efficacy trials in young animals, where MDA interference is a persistent challenge.

The cultured ELISPOT (cELISPOT) assay, which involves a 10-14 day in vitro culture period before the standard ELISPOT readout, provides enhanced sensitivity for detecting central memory T cell responses [31, 34]. In bovine tuberculosis vaccine studies, cELISPOT responses predicted protection and duration of immunity in BCG-vaccinated cattle, with the dominant responding population identified as central memory T cells (CD45RO⁺CD62Lʰⁱ) [23]. For veterinary diagnostic laboratories, the choice between direct (ex vivo) and cultured ELISPOT depends on the specific question: direct ELISPOT measures effector and effector memory responses, while cELISPOT captures central memory responses that may correlate better with long-term vaccine protection.

Regulatory Compliance and Documentation

Veterinary diagnostic laboratories operating under Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) or ISO 17025 accreditation must maintain comprehensive documentation for ELISPOT assays. This includes: (1) detailed SOPs covering all aspects of the assay, (2) lot-to-lot validation records for critical reagents (antibodies, cytokines, peptides), (3) equipment calibration and maintenance logs, (4) temperature monitoring records for incubators and cryostorage, (5) technician training and competency assessment records, and (6) deviation and corrective action reports.

For assays intended to support regulatory submissions for veterinary vaccine licensure, validation must meet the standards outlined in WOAH guidelines for diagnostic assays. This requires demonstration of diagnostic sensitivity and specificity using field samples from infected and uninfected animals, as well as analytical sensitivity and specificity using defined reference materials. The validation of an IFN-γ ELISPOT for detecting Mycobacterium bovis infection in cattle serves as a model: the assay must distinguish vaccinated from infected animals, a challenge that requires careful selection of antigen cocktails and interpretation algorithms [23, 31].

Advantages, Limitations, and Future Directions for the ELISPOT Assay in Veterinary Vaccine Development and Monitoring

The Enzyme-Linked Immunospot (ELISPOT) assay has emerged as a cornerstone technology in the evaluation of cell-mediated and humoral immune responses to veterinary vaccines. Its application spans a remarkable diversity of species, from companion animals and livestock to poultry, aquaculture species, and wildlife. The assay's capacity to enumerate antigen-specific cells at the single-cell level offers insights that serological assays alone cannot provide. However, the translation of this powerful platform from human clinical immunology into the veterinary realm has encountered both remarkable successes and persistent challenges. A critical examination of the advantages, limitations, and future trajectories of ELISPOT is essential for the rational design of veterinary vaccine development programs and the establishment of reliable immune monitoring pipelines.

Advantages of ELISPOT in Veterinary Vaccine Assessment

Unparalleled Sensitivity and Single-Cell Resolution

The foundational advantage of ELISPOT lies in its extraordinary sensitivity. The assay can detect a single antigen-specific cell among hundreds of thousands of bystander cells, a feat that is critical for evaluating responses that may be of low frequency, such as those induced by subunit or DNA vaccines. This sensitivity has been methodically validated. For instance, in the context of influenza vaccine evaluation, the FLUCOP consortium established a harmonized IFN-γ ELISPOT procedure with a Limit of Detection (LOD) of 34.4 Spot Forming Units (SFU) per million cells and a Lower Limit of Quantification (LLOQ) of 34.4 SFU per million cells, with linearity demonstrated across a seeding density of 120,000 to 360,000 cells per well [19]. Similarly, a validated SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific ELISPOT assay achieved an LOD of 17 SFU and an LLOQ of 22 SFU [35]. For veterinary species such as cattle, the assay has been optimized and qualified, with the cultured ELISPOT (cELISPOT) variant demonstrating the ability to predict protection and durability of immunity following vaccination against bovine tuberculosis, where the responding cell populations were identified as central memory T cells (CD45RO+CD62Lhi) and effector memory T cells (CD45RO+CD62Llo) [23]. This capacity to interrogate the memory compartment is a distinct advantage over short-term stimulation assays.

Overcoming the Confounding Effects of Maternally-Derived Antibodies

A pervasive problem in livestock vaccine evaluation, particularly in young animals, is the interference of maternally-derived antibodies (MDAs) with serological assays. MDAs can neutralize vaccine antigens, but they also react in conventional ELISA tests, making it impossible to distinguish between passive antibody transfer and active vaccine-induced immunity. ELISPOT provides an elegant solution to this impasse. A landmark study on Porcine Circovirus 2 (PCV2) vaccines demonstrated this principle definitively. In piglets with high levels of PCV2-specific MDA, serum antibody levels declined continuously over time in both vaccinated and saline-injected control groups, showing indistinguishable trends. However, an ELISPOT assay for PCV2-specific memory B cells revealed a robust and significant increase in all three vaccinated groups compared to controls, allowing for the first time a reliable differentiation of vaccine immunogenicity at the cellular level in the presence of high MDA [1]. This direct enumeration of memory B cells, rather than serum antibodies, provides a functional readout of immunological memory that is impervious to the "smokescreen" of passive antibodies. This advantage is directly applicable to countless other viral diseases of livestock and companion animals where MDA interference plagues vaccine efficacy trials.

Multi-Parametric Functional Profiling of Cellular Immunity

ELISPOT is not limited to a single cytokine readout. The assay can be configured to detect a wide array of effector molecules, enabling a sophisticated dissection of T helper (Th) polarization and cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL) function. For example, in the development of a multi-epitope vaccine against Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus (PRRSV), ELISPOT was used not only to identify 10 new CTL epitopes via IFN-γ secretion but also to demonstrate that a vaccine construct (pFc-PTE) predominantly induced a Th1-biased immune response, with high levels of IFN-γ and prolonged duration of immunity for at least 10 weeks post-immunization [3]. In the context of parasitic diseases, recombinant antigen P29 of Echinococcus granulosus was shown by ELISPOT to induce IFN-γ and IL-17A but not IL-4 in sheep, confirming the induction of Th1, Tc1, and Th17 responses without a Th2 component, which is critical for protective immunity against this intracellular pathogen [6]. The utility extends to mucosal immunology; for a Brucella abortus vaccine candidate delivered intranasally with chitosan nanoparticles, ELISPOT was used to quantify IL-4 and IgG-secreting cells, revealing a Th2-biased response that correlated with the induction of systemic IgA and mucosal antibody responses [13]. This capacity to simultaneously profile multiple cytokines (e.g., IFN-γ, IL-2, TNF-α) and isotypes (IgG, IgA) in separate wells or in multiplexed formats (FluoroSpot) provides a level of functional granularity that is essential for understanding the mechanistic correlates of protection.

Direct Enumeration of Antibody-Secreting Cells (ASCs) for Humoral Memory

While often associated with T cell responses, B-cell ELISPOT (also known as ASC ELISPOT) is a powerful tool for directly enumerating plasma cells and memory B cells that secrete antigen-specific antibodies. This has unique utility in veterinary vaccinology where serum antibody titers may be misleading. In the context of Lyme disease vaccines (against Borrelia burgdorferi), ELISPOT detection of antibody-producing cells was used to compare the durability of protection afforded by two commercially available canine vaccines. While both vaccines induced high IgG titers, the ELISPOT data revealed that the Duramune vaccine induced a significantly higher abundance of long-lived plasma cells at 120 days post-vaccination, correlating with superior protection [2]. This demonstrates that the quality and persistence of the B cell response, as measured by ELISPOT, is a more refined correlate of long-term protection than peak antibody titers alone. In the human vaccine field, this concept has been validated for MERS-CoV, where a late booster immunization with the MVA-MERS-S vaccine significantly increased the frequency and persistence of spike-specific B cells as detected by B-cell ELISPOT, an effect not seen for T cell responses [10]. The ability to detect and quantify ASCs is also critical for assessing mucosal vaccine responses, offering a surrogate measure of mucosal immunity that is otherwise difficult to sample directly [41].

Application in Epitope Discovery and Multi-Epitope Vaccine Design

ELISPOT serves as the gold-standard functional assay for T cell epitope mapping, a critical step in the rational design of next-generation vaccines. By screening overlapping peptide pools spanning a target antigen, researchers can rapidly identify immunodominant and subdominant epitopes that are naturally processed and presented on MHC molecules. This approach has been deployed against a wide range of veterinary pathogens. For Classical Swine Fever Virus (CSFV), ELISPOT screening of predicted nonapeptides from the E2 protein identified two novel, highly conserved T cell epitopes (90STEEMGDDF98 and 331ATDRHSDYF339) that are critical for viral fitness and offer targets for rapid-onset vaccines [8]. For Canine Distemper Virus (CDV), a matrix-based ELISPOT screen of 119 overlapping peptides from the hemagglutinin protein identified nine potential T cell epitopes and six immunodominant peptide pools, which were then used to design an in silico optimized epitope-based vaccine candidate [4]. For West Nile Virus (WNV), ELISPOT confirmed that a recombinant truncated envelope protein adjuvanted with Alum/CpG induced significant IFN-γ and TNF-α secretion from CD8+ T cells, providing a promising candidate for both human and veterinary applications [7]. Similarly, for Tembusu Virus in ducks, ELISPOT was central to identifying ten T cell epitopes within the envelope protein, which were then incorporated into a multi-epitope DNA vaccine (pVAX-T) that induced protective cell-mediated immunity in the absence of detectable antibody, a classic hallmark of a T cell-focused vaccine [17]. For African Swine Fever Virus (ASFV), the assay has been used to evaluate cellular immune responses to combinations of recombinant proteins and DNA constructs, providing a crucial functional readout for this complex, large-genome virus for which no commercial vaccine currently exists [14].

Limitations and Challenges of ELISPOT in Veterinary Applications

Inter-Laboratory Variability and Lack of Harmonization

Perhaps the most significant limitation of the ELISPOT assay for veterinary applications is the persistent issue of inter-laboratory variability. Unlike many molecular diagnostics, there is no universally accepted standard operating procedure (SOP) for ELISPOT. Variations in cell isolation protocols (Ficoll, CPT tubes, LeucoSep), culture media, serum supplements (fetal calf serum, autologous plasma), coating antibody batches, detection antibody systems, incubation times, and especially the subjective or semi-automated counting of spots, all contribute to substantial differences in reported SFU counts. The FLUCOP consortium's work in human influenza provides a sobering benchmark: before harmonization, the inter-laboratory coefficient of variation (CV) for IFN-γ ELISPOT responses was 148% for one strain and 126% for another. After implementing a harmonized SOP, the CV was reduced to 77% and 73%, respectively [18]. Even with harmonization, variability remains significant. In the veterinary field, such large-scale harmonization efforts are rare. The EQAPOL proficiency program for HIV vaccine trials similarly demonstrated that laboratories can achieve concordant results, but only with rigorous training, common reagents, and standardized protocols [21]. In veterinary settings, where laboratories often use species-specific reagents of variable quality and homebrew protocols, the comparability of ELISPOT data across studies or even within a single trial over time can be questionable. The lack of standardized positive controls (e.g., a universal peptide pool like CEF for humans) for most veterinary species further complicates matters.

Species-Specific Reagent Limitations

The success of an ELISPOT assay is absolutely dependent on the availability of high-quality, validated, and specific antibodies to capture and detect the target cytokine or antibody isotype. For common laboratory species (mice, rats) and major livestock (cattle, pigs, chickens), a growing number of monoclonal antibodies are commercially available. However, for many veterinary species, the reagent landscape is sparse. The development of a guinea pig-specific IFN-γ ELISPOT assay required the de novo generation of monoclonal antibodies against guinea pig IFN-γ, a complex and costly endeavor that is not feasible for most individual laboratories [30]. For many wildlife species, exotic pets, and aquaculture species (finfish, crustaceans), validated reagents simply do not exist. While cross-reactive antibodies can sometimes be used, their performance is unpredictable and must be rigorously validated. This fundamental reagent gap is a major barrier to the widespread adoption of ELISPOT for disease surveillance and vaccine monitoring in non-traditional veterinary species.

Logistical Complexity and Cell Viability Constraints

ELISPOT assays are live-cell functional assays that require viable, functional peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) or splenocytes. This places stringent demands on sample handling. Blood samples must be processed within a relatively short window (typically 4-24 hours), and cryopreservation protocols, while feasible, introduce additional variables that can affect cell recovery and assay performance. A study comparing PBMC isolation techniques in a resource-limited setting (Dar es Salaam, Tanzania) found that the widely used BD Vacutainer CPT tubes did not perform as well as traditional Ficoll-Paque or LeucoSep tubes, yielding lower viability and recovery [27]. This highlights that optimal protocols are laboratory- and population-specific. For field studies in remote areas with limited infrastructure, the logistics of obtaining fresh blood, transporting it to a laboratory within the viability window, and performing a multi-day cell culture are formidable. While the cultured ELISPOT (cELISPOT) assay offers enhanced sensitivity for detecting central memory T cells, it requires a 10-14 day culture period, further extending the timeline and increasing the risk of contamination or cell loss [31].

Inability to Distinguish Polyfunctional Cells and Broad Cytokine Profiles

Standard single-cytokine ELISPOT (e.g., IFN-γ only) provides a one-dimensional view of T cell functionality. It cannot distinguish whether a responding cell is a monofunctional cell (secreting only IFN-γ) or a polyfunctional cell (secreting IFN-γ, TNF-α, and IL-2 simultaneously), the latter generally being associated with superior protective immunity. While FluoroSpot assays (multi-color ELISPOT) can address this to some degree by detecting up to three or four cytokines in the same well, the analysis is technically more demanding and requires specialized readers. Furthermore, ELISPOT provides no information on the phenotype of the responding cell (CD4 vs. CD8, naive vs. memory subsets) unless cells are sorted prior to plating, which is a labor-intensive pre-enrichment step that can introduce bias [23]. For a comprehensive immune assessment, ELISPOT must be complemented with flow cytometry (e.g., intracellular cytokine staining, ICS) to resolve polyfunctionality and phenotype, but the two assays are not interchangeable and provide different information [18].

Data Interpretation and Statistical Challenges

Despite its quantitative nature, the interpretation of ELISPOT data is not always straightforward. The selection of a positive response threshold is critical and can dramatically alter study conclusions. Common methods include a fixed cutoff (e.g., 50 SFU/10⁶ cells), a statistical cutoff based on the mean plus 2 or 3 standard deviations of negative control wells, or a binomial distribution model. The FLUCOP qualification study established a rigorous statistical approach, but such sophistication is not universally applied [19]. Furthermore, the background responses (unstimulated or mock-stimulated cells) can vary significantly between animals, and high backgrounds can mask specific responses. The antigen-specific immune response (IR) index, defined as the ratio of stimulated SFU to spontaneous SFU, has been proposed as a more robust metric, particularly for monitoring individual patients over time in cancer immunotherapy settings [40]. However, this index is not widely used in veterinary vaccine trials. The field would benefit from consensus guidelines on data reporting and statistical analysis, similar to those established for human clinical trials [43].

Future Directions for ELISPOT in Veterinary Vaccinology

Standardization and Automation for Multicenter Trials

The most pressing need is for the development and adoption of harmonized, validated SOPs for ELISPOT across veterinary diagnostic and research laboratories. Drawing directly from the successful models of the FLUCOP consortium and the EQAPOL proficiency program, veterinary bodies (World Organisation for Animal Health, WOAH, and the International Society for Animal Clinical Pathology) should consider sponsoring inter-laboratory round-robin studies for key target species (e.g., swine, cattle, poultry) [18, 19, 21]. These efforts should define acceptance criteria for cell viability, background responses, and positive control performance. The adoption of automated ELISPOT readers with standardized counting algorithms will reduce the subjective variability inherent in manual counting. The development of "reader-free" ELISPOT systems, such as the ELI 8 membrane-punching device combined with ImageJ analysis, represents a low-cost alternative that could democratize the assay for resource-limited laboratories [40].

Integration with Higher-Parameter Platforms (FluoroSpot and Multi-Omics)

The evolution from ELISPOT to FluoroSpot represents a natural progression. By using multiple fluorophore-conjugated detection antibodies, a single assay can quantify cells secreting IFN-γ, IL-2, TNF-α, and even granzyme B or IL-17A simultaneously [34]. This provides a direct measure of polyfunctionality and Th polarization without the need for flow cytometry. For veterinary species, the development of validated fluorescent antibody panels against key canine, feline, porcine, and bovine cytokines will be a major enabler. Furthermore, the combination of ELISPOT with downstream single-cell technologies, such as single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) as pioneered in the HBV vaccine field [42], offers the potential to link functional response (spot formation) with a deep transcriptomic profile of the responding cells. This could identify novel biomarkers of vaccine response or failure at a resolution that is currently impossible.

Cultured ELISPOT (cELISPOT) as a Standard for Memory Assessment

The cELISPOT assay, which involves a 10-14 day culture of PBMCs with antigen before plating, has been shown to preferentially detect central memory T cells (TCM) and to be a superior predictor of long-term vaccine efficacy in several models, including tuberculosis in cattle and simian immunodeficiency virus in non-human primates [23, 31]. In the veterinary field, cELISPOT should be more widely adopted as a standard endpoint for vaccine trials, especially for diseases requiring durable protection. The recent demonstration that cELISPOT can detect responses in HIV-exposed seronegative individuals that were undetectable by direct ELISPOT underscores its increased sensitivity [20]. For veterinary vaccines against chronic or persistent infections (e.g., Bovine Viral Diarrhea Virus, Equine Infectious Anemia Virus), cELISPOT could provide critical insights into the induction and maintenance of TCM responses, which are likely essential for control.

Application to Aquatic and Wildlife Vaccinology

A major frontier is the expansion of ELISPOT into non-mammalian species. In aquaculture, the development of IFN-γ ELISPOT assays for salmonid fish (e.g., against Infectious Salmon Anemia Virus and Salmonid Alphavirus) would be transformative, as current

References

1. Fan J, Fan F, Chen Z, Chen P, Zhu Y, Li X, et al.. Evaluation of PCV2 vaccine immunogenicity and efficacy using ELISpot to detect virus-specific memory B cells. Porcine Health Management. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40813-025-00452-7
2. Gutierrez MdlP, Huckaby AB, Yang E, Weaver KL, Hall JM, Hudson M, et al.. Antibody-mediated immunological memory correlates with long-term Lyme veterinary vaccine protection in mice. Vaccine. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.06.051
3. Lei X, Ban J, Wu Z, Cao S, Zhou M, Zhang L, et al.. Boosting PRRSV-Specific Cellular Immunity: The Immunological Profiling of an Fc-Fused Multi-CTL Epitope Vaccine in Mice. Veterinary Sciences. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci11060274
4. Santos CIPd, Telles JTG, Guimarães GdF, Gil LH, Vieira AM, Junior JWP, et al.. Epitope mapping and a candidate vaccine design from canine distemper virus. Open Veterinary Journal. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5455/OVJ.2024.v14.i4.9
5. Pierron A, Kleber A, Mayer E, Gerner W. Effect of DON and ZEN and their metabolites DOM-1 and HZEN on B cell proliferation and antibody production. Frontiers in Immunology. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2024.1338937
6. Yang J, Zhao Y, Fu Y, Lv Y, Zhu Y, Zhu M, et al.. Recombinant antigen P29 of Echinococcus granulosus induces Th1, Tc1, and Th17 cell immune responses in sheep. Frontiers in Immunology. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2023.1243204
7. Du Y, Deng Y, Zhan Y, Yang R, Ren J, Wang W, et al.. The recombinant truncated envelope protein of West Nile virus adjuvanted with Alum/CpG induces potent humoral and T cell immunity in mice. Biosafety and Health. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bsheal.2023.06.003
8. Zhao X, Wang X, Yuan M, Zhang X, Yang X, Guan X, et al.. Identification of two novel T cell epitopes on the E2 protein of classical swine fever virus C-strain.. Veterinary Microbiology. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetmic.2023.109814
9. Ngoepe TA, Pretorius A, Steyn H, Kleef MV. Th1 and Th2 epitopes of Cowdria polymorphic gene 1 of Ehrlichia ruminantium. Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4102/ojvr.v90i1.2070
10. Weskamm LM, Fathi A, Raadsen M, Mykytyn A, Koch T, Spohn M, et al.. Persistence of MERS-CoV-spike-specific B cells and antibodies after late third immunization with the MVA-MERS-S vaccine. Cell Reports Medicine. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xcrm.2022.100685
11. Zhang W, Cheng N, Wang Y, Zheng X, Zhao Y, Wang H, et al.. Adjuvant activity of PCP-II, a polysaccharide from Poria cocos, on a whole killed rabies vaccine.. Virus Research. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.virusres.2019.06.001
12. Jimbo S, Griebel P, Lai K, Babiuk L, Mutwiri G. Natural and inducible regulatory B cells are widely distributed in ovine lymphoid tissues.. Veterinary Immunology and Immunopathology. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.VETIMM.2019.04.005
13. Soh S, Shim S, Im Y, Park H, Cho C, Yoo H. Induction of Th2-related immune responses and production of systemic IgA in mice intranasally immunized with Brucella abortus malate dehydrogenase loaded chitosan nanoparticles.. Vaccine. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2019.02.005
14. Pérez-Núñez D, Sunwoo S, Sánchez E, Haley N, García-Belmonte R, Nogal M, et al.. Evaluation of a viral DNA-protein immunization strategy against African swine fever in domestic pigs.. Veterinary Immunology and Immunopathology. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetimm.2018.11.018
15. Thema N, Tshilwane SI, Pretorius A, Son L, Smith RM, Steyn H, et al.. Identification and characterisation of conserved epitopes of E. ruminantium that activate Th1 CD4+ T cells: Towards the development of a multi-epitope vaccine. Molecular Immunology. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molimm.2018.12.012
16. Stenzel T, Dziewulska D, Tykałowski B, Śmiałek M, Kowalczyk J, Koncicki A. Immunogenicity of Pigeon Circovirus Recombinant Capsid Protein in Pigeons. Viruses. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v10110596
17. Zhao D, Han K, Zhang L, Wang H, Tian Y, Huang X, et al.. Identification and immunogenic evaluation of T cell epitopes based on tembusu virus envelope protein in ducks.. Virus Research. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.virusres.2018.09.008
18. Waerlop G, Leroux-Roels G, Pagnon A, Begue S, Salaun B, Janssens M, et al.. Proficiency tests to evaluate the impact on assay outcomes of harmonized influenza-specific intracellular cytokine staining (ICS) and IFN-ɣ enzyme-linked ImmunoSpot (ELISpot) protocols.. JIM - Journal of Immunological Methods. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jim.2023.113584
19. Waerlop G, Leroux-Roels G, Lambe T, Bellamy D, Medaglini D, Pettini E, et al.. Harmonization and qualification of an IFN-γ Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSpot assay (ELISPOT) to measure influenza-specific cell-mediated immunity within the FLUCOP consortium. Frontiers in Immunology. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2022.984642
20. Muturi MW, Gichuki C, Mutua G, Anzala O. Cultured enzyme-linked immunospot assay (ELISPOT) enhances detection of low HIV-specific immune responses in exposed seronegative individuals in Kenya. Retrovirology. 2006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-4690-3-S1-P44
21. Sanchez AM, Rountree W, Berrong M, Garcia A, Schuetz A, Cox J, et al.. The External Quality Assurance Oversight Laboratory (EQAPOL) Proficiency Program for IFN-gamma Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSpot (IFN-γ ELISpot) assay. JIM - Journal of Immunological Methods. 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jim.2014.03.017
22. Lu B, Liu N, Zhao W, Chen H, Shao Y, Lu H, et al.. LGALS9 blockade augments vaccine-induced immune responses against prostate cancer. Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer. 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jitc-2025-014141
23. Blunt L, Hogarth P, Kaveh DA, Webb P, Villarreal-Ramos B, Vordermeier H. Phenotypic characterization of bovine memory cells responding to mycobacteria in IFNγ enzyme linked immunospot assays.. Vaccine. 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.10.113
24. Patton K, Aslam S, Lin J, Yu L, Lambert S, Dawes GN, et al.. Enzyme-Linked Immunospot Assay for Detection of Human Respiratory Syncytial Virus F Protein-Specific Gamma Interferon-Producing T Cells. Clinical and Vaccine Immunology. 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/CVI.00736-13
25. Boaz MJ, Hayes P, Tarragona T, Seamons L, Cooper A, Birungi J, et al.. Concordant Proficiency in Measurement of T-Cell Immunity in Human Immunodeficiency Virus Vaccine Clinical Trials by Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cell and Enzyme-Linked Immunospot Assays in Laboratories from Three Continents. Clinical and Vaccine Immunology. 2008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/CVI.00326-08
26. Lin H, Zhang J, Dong S, Liu Y, Liu P, Gao G, et al.. An adjusted ELISpot-based immunoassay for evaluation of SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell responses. Biosafety and Health. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bsheal.2022.04.005
27. Nilsson C, Aboud S, Karlén K, Hejdeman B, Urassa W, Biberfeld G. Optimal Blood Mononuclear Cell Isolation Procedures for Gamma Interferon Enzyme-Linked Immunospot Testing of Healthy Swedish and Tanzanian Subjects. Clinical and Vaccine Immunology. 2008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/CVI.00161-07
28. Langat R, Farah B, Indangasi J, Ogola S, Omosa-Manyonyi G, Anzala O, et al.. Performance of International AIDS Vaccine Initiative African clinical research laboratories in standardised ELISpot and peripheral blood mononuclear cell processing in support of HIV vaccine clinical trials. African Journal of Laboratory Medicine. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4102/ajlm.v10i1.1056
29. Brunner C, Menzel SR, Rost F, Côrte-Real J, Pracht K. Cell-based ELISpot protocol to detect and quantify antigen-specific antibody-secreting cells in murine whole-organ single-cell suspensions. STAR Protocols. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xpro.2025.103797
30. Gillis P, Hernandez-Alvarado N, Gnanandarajah JS, Wussow F, Diamond D, Schleiss M. Development of a novel, guinea pig-specific IFN-γ ELISPOT assay and characterization of guinea pig cytomegalovirus GP83-specific cellular immune responses following immunization with a modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA)-vectored GP83 vaccine. Vaccine. 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.05.011
31. Maggioli MF, Maggioli MF, Palmer M, Vordermeier H, Whelan A, Fosse JM, et al.. Application of Long-term cultured Interferon-γ Enzyme-linked Immunospot Assay for Assessing Effector and Memory T Cell Responses in Cattle. Journal of Visualized Experiments. 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3791/52833
32. Zhao H, Zhang Z, Xue Y, Wang N, Liu Y, Ma X, et al.. Evaluation of Immunogenicity of Mycobacterium tuberculosis ag85ab DNA Vaccine Delivered by Pulmonary Administration. Vaccines. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines13050442
33. Mandarić S, Friberg H, Sáez-llorens X, Borja-Tabora C, Biswal S, Escudero I, et al.. Long term T cell response and safety of a tetravalent dengue vaccine in healthy children. npj Vaccines. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41541-024-00967-0
34. Calarota S, Baldanti F. Enumeration and Characterization of Human Memory T Cells by Enzyme-Linked Immunospot Assays. Clinical and Developmental Immunology. 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/637649
35. Carreto-Binaghi L, Nieto-Ponce M, Palencia-Reyes A, Chavez-Dominguez R, Blancas-Zaragoza J, Franco-Mendoza P, et al.. Validation of the Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSpot Analytic Method for the Detection of Human IFN-γ from Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells in Response to the SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein. Biomolecules. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/biom14101286
36. Samri A, Durier C, Urrutia A, Sánchez I, Gahéry-Ségard H, Imbart S, et al.. Evaluation of the Interlaboratory Concordance in Quantification of Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Specific T Cells with a Gamma Interferon Enzyme-Linked Immunospot Assay. Clinical and Vaccine Immunology. 2006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/CVI.00387-05
37. Tian C, Chen Y, Liu Y, Wang S, Li Y, Wang G, et al.. Use of ELISpot assay to study HBs-specific B cell responses in vaccinated and HBV infected humans. Emerging Microbes and Infections. 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41426-018-0034-0
38. Jo H, Yoon S, Cho S, Lee E, Kim N, Choi E, et al.. Enhanced Subchronic Cardiac Stress of High Doses of a Novel SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccine Candidate in Streptozotocin-Induced Diabetic Mice.. Food and Chemical Toxicology. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2025.115891
39. Ugwu CA, Alao O, John O, Akinnawo B, Ajayi IM, Odebode O, et al.. Immunological insights into COVID-19 in Southern Nigeria. Frontiers in Immunology. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2024.1305586
40. Hayashi S, Imanishi R, Adachi M, Ikejima S, Nakata J, Morimoto S, et al.. Reader-free ELISPOT assay for immuno-monitoring in peptide-based cancer vaccine immunotherapy.. Biomedical Reports. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3892/br.2020.1289
41. Feller AJ, McKenzie R, Taylor DN, Woods C, Grahek S, Islam D, et al.. Comparative evaluation of the antibody in lymphocyte supernatant (ALS) and enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISPOT) assays for measuring mucosal immune responses to Shigella antigens. Vaccine. 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.09.030
42. Verheijden S, Conceição-Neto N, Bourgeois S, Vandamme C, Troyer ED, Kanoulas E, et al.. Safety, immunogenicity, and baseline immune correlates of vaccine JNJ-0535 in participants with or without CHB. npj Vaccines. 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41541-025-01364-x
43. Castro LRFF, Regiart MD, Ortega-Sánchez FG, Rodríguez R, Tortella G, Fernández-Baldo M. ELISPOT as a Functional for Biomarker Study in Cancer Immunotherapy: Applications and Future Directions. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27094056