JCM Figure table search 04
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hammond, G W
Right arrow Articles by Hazelton, P R
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hammond, G W
Right arrow Articles by Hazelton, P R

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

J Clin Microbiol. 1984 March; 19(3): 439-441

Human rotavirus detection by counterimmunoelectrophoresis versus enzyme immunoassay and electron microscopy after direct ultracentrifugation.

G W Hammond, G S Ahluwalia, B Klisko and P R Hazelton

ABSTRACT

The sensitivity of the counterimmunoelectrophoresis test with NCDV, Wa, and SA-11 rotavirus antisera was 60, 60, and 67%, respectively. The counterimmunoelectrophoresis specificity was greater than 99%, but the low sensitivity is a limiting feature of this test as a first-line immunodiagnostic test for rotavirus detection.

J Clin Microbiol. 1984 March; 19(3): 439-441






Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
Clin. Vaccine Immunol. ALL ASM JOURNALS

Copyright © 1984 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.