<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:contributor>Kathryn M. Griffin</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Hon S. Ip</dc:contributor>
  <dc:creator>Erik K. Hofmeister</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2023</dc:date>
  <dc:description>&lt;div class="hlFld-Abstract"&gt;&lt;div class="abstractSection abstractInFull"&gt;&lt;p&gt;We compared a bead RNA extraction method with a one-tube method that required only a heat block and ice. RNA was first extracted from liver samples from nine rabbits dying from rabbit hemorrhagic disease virus 2 (RHDV2) using magnetic beads, and RT-PCR was used to detect RHDV2 sequence. Following freezing, RNA was extracted a second time using the SwiftX™ Swabs Viral RNA Extraction Reagent. RHDV2 was detected in all nine samples. Cycle threshold values were higher in the RT-PCR following SwiftX extraction (mean: 3.79), indicating that the second extraction method resulted in approximately a 1 log&lt;sub&gt;10&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;reduction in sensitivity. A second freeze–thaw for the samples and less tissue extracted using SwiftX may have contributed additionally to the loss in sensitivity.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>10.2144/btn-2022-0022</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>Eaton Publishing Company</dc:publisher>
  <dc:title>Comparison of magnetic bead and rapid swab RNA extraction methods for detecting rabbit hemorrhagic disease virus 2 in rabbit liver samples</dc:title>
  <dc:type>article</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>