Integrated Virus Detection System (IVDS)
Bee-L Members
I’ve been deliberately staying out of the IAPV discussions, but given some
recent statements to the list, I see a need to clarify some points. The
authors of the Science paper published their preliminary results and presented
their conclusions. Unfortunately, we question the association between IAPV and
CCD, and we disagree with comments implying a link to Australian imports.
Any talk of banning imports from Australia seems premature.
As noted by Erik Stokstad, who wrote an overview article that was published
in the same issue of Science, our data (Bee Alert, BVS, working with the ARMY
ECBC laboratory in Aberdeen, MD) does not implicate any one virus as being
associated with CCD, not even as a biomarker.
We have looked at bee samples from across the county. In these samples, we
have detected more than a dozen different viruses with as many as 4-6 new,
heretofore unclassified and unnamed viruses.
In every bee operation, we see combinations of viruses, usually 2-3. But,
we have not found a common virus or assemblage of viruses among and across CCD
operations, regardless of the origin of the bees (i.e., U.S., Australian,
intermixed).
We have looked at some Australian imports, and we did find viruses, but
again, the data does not support a link between a virus in Australian bees and
CCD colonies. In one Australian sample, we found yet another unknown virus,
maybe even two, but these did not show up in any CCD colonies.
If CCD is associated with a virus, we would expect to see the same virus
showing up in a consistent manner and to see a pattern to emerge, as projected
for IAPV by the Science article. However, as stated, our data does not
corroborate this finding.
To sort all of this out is going to take a better sampling strategy and more
samples than the limited sampling being done (by all parties combined). We
have been advocating that many samples from many beekeepers and from many
different areas need to be screened for a common connection. We have proposed to
USDA a national survey and CCD screening program.
The Army has provided methods development and initial Integrated Virus
Detection System (IVDS) screening. However, the Army does not have unlimited
resources and can not continue to provide this as a free service to every
beekeeper (as implied by a previous post to Bee-L).
The Army has indicated to us a willingness to continue to assist, especially
with respect to the issue of risk from imported bees and emergent cases of
CCD. But large scale sampling and analysis, in a production mode and on a
national scale, is beyond their capability and is not part of their mission.
We (Bee Alert and BVS) have proposed placing a priority on obtaining samples
from Australia, taken according to a rigorous sampling scheme, and sent
directly to the Army lab for screening. That step needs to be done before any
decisions are made regarding restricting bee imports from Australia.
We (Bee Alert and BVS) also have recommended that funds be made available to
purchase 1-3 IVDS instruments that could be used to screen bees from CCD
colonies, from nutrition experiments, entering the country, etc. for viruses.
Initially, screening would be provided to beekeepers as a free service in
exchange for samples and survey data from the beekeepers themselves.
In 12-24 months, assuming that this approach proves out to be useful to bee
management, we recommend that virus screening be provided as a fee-based
service (less than $50 per sample). We see this becoming a service, much like a
veterinarian provides lab services for disease diagnosis. In that way, virus
screening would no longer depend on public funds.
Finally, mention has been made in this post and others about the IVDS
technology (Integrated Virus Detection System). IVDS was developed by the Army for
inexpensive and rapid screening of viruses, especially new and unknown
viruses. It is a unique and relatively recent technology. It does not name
viruses, like PCR, but it separates them out by physical size. It also provides
the titer or concentration of each virus in a sample.
Sample processing consists of blending bees in sterile water, centrifuging
and filtering, and then introducing the sample into a column using an
electro-spray system. A laser sizes and counts all virus sized particles in each
sample. Instrument time is less than 5 minutes. From start to finish, a
sample can be prepped and analyzed in about 2 hours.
IVDS can separate viruses by a 4 nm difference. The viruses we have
detected range from 20 nm to 39 nm in size. Some of the bee virus literature reads
that all the bee viruses are 30 nm in size, an out-dated concept based on
IVDS technology.
Finally, although IVDS does not identify specific viruses, IVDS can be used
in conjunction with sequencing and protenomic GC/MS data to put a name on
each virus detected by its size. Of course, if a detected virus is unknown,
that will take additional work. But if it has been characterized (sequenced),
we can look for it with IVDS.
So, IVDS provides a way of looking at all viruses, regardless of whether they
’ve ever been seen before, and does so at a fraction of the cost and time of
more traditional approaches such as sequencing. In addition, the
instruments and sample processing equipment are small enough that they could be put
into a van. We'd like to see transportable labs that could be driven to where
ever these are most needed (e.g., CCD outbreak, backup to a research project
such as evaluating diets, meet imported bees at the dock, screen queens and
bees for breeders, etc.).
Our proposal to USDA was that the initial screening would be provided to
beekeepers as a free service in exchange for samples and survey data from the
beekeepers themselves. Obviously, our ability to provide a free service
depends on on obtaining external funding. Funding is needed to acquire an
instrument for production scale testing, whether the funds come from USDA, from
beekeepers, from growers, from foundations, or even public interest groups.
If this is the direction that the beekeepers want to go, we could
immediately start providing services through Bee Alert and BVS using the IVDS
technology, but we would need to charge for the services (in the absence of any
external funds such as a grant from USDA).
Our services would provide a screening for all viruses in the samples and
would be coordinated with the national effort, when and if it ever happens.
We think that virus screening is needed and overdue, but if we wait for
federal funding, we may very well be waiting a long time. Give us your feedback
and suggestions. We’d like to get started. Perhaps it is time for a new
research arrangement – one in which the bee industry plays a more direct role
in research, both in its direction and funding. We'd envision a close
partnership with the bee industry and the grower community, possibly as a research
consortium?
Thank you for your assistance.
Jerry J. Bromenshenk, CEO
Bee Alert Technology, Inc.
406-541-3160
Dave Wick, CEO
BVS, Inc. (Biological Virus Screening)
406-369-4214
Disclaimer: The opinions stated in this correspondence are those of the
stated authors. Although we work closely with the Army laboratory, we can not
speak for them.
************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
******************************************************
* Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm *
******************************************************
|