Literature DB >> 10596410

Effect of challenge dose and route on porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) infection in young swine.

K J Yoon1, J J Zimmerman, C C Chang, S Cancel-Tirado, K M Harmon, M J McGinley.   

Abstract

Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) is perceived to be highly infectious because of the rapid spread of the virus through populations of domestic swine throughout the world. However, no information has been published on the minimum infectious dose of PRRSV and the effect of challenge dose on clinical response. In this experiment, ten groups of pigs (n = 3 per group) were inoculated with one of five different quantities (10(1)-10(5) fluorescent foci units per millilitre) of PRRSV (isolate ISU-P) by either intramuscular or intranasal routes. Clinical signs and body temperature were monitored for 21 days. Serum was collected periodically throughout the study period to monitor the presence of virus in serum and the early immune response of pigs. A 2-mL inoculum containing 10(1) fluorescent foci units of virus per millilitre was found sufficient to achieve infection by either route. Time to onset of clinical signs was highly associated with challenge dose (P < 0.01), regardless of route of exposure. However, no dose- or route-dependent differences in the severity of clinical manifestation were observed. No significant differences in the time of onset or degree of humoural immune response to PRRSV infection were observed between different treatment groups. However, intramuscular exposure appeared to induce a more uniform antibody response compared to intranasal exposure. These results confirmed that PRRSV is highly infectious; a fact that should be taken into consideration when designing strategies for the prevention and control of PRRSV.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10596410

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vet Res        ISSN: 0928-4249            Impact factor:   3.683


  18 in total

1.  Impact of route of exposure and challenge dose on the pathogenesis of H7N9 low pathogenicity avian influenza virus in chickens.

Authors:  Erica Spackman; Mary Pantin-Jackwood; David E Swayne; David L Suarez; Darrell R Kapczynski
Journal:  Virology       Date:  2015-02-06       Impact factor: 3.616

2.  Comparison of molecular and biological characteristics of a modified live porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) vaccine (ingelvac PRRS MLV), the parent strain of the vaccine (ATCC VR2332), ATCC VR2385, and two recent field isolates of PRRSV.

Authors:  T Opriessnig; P G Halbur; K-J Yoon; R M Pogranichniy; K M Harmon; R Evans; K F Key; F J Pallares; P Thomas; X J Meng
Journal:  J Virol       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 5.103

3.  Evaluation of the presence of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus in pig meat and experimental transmission following oral exposure.

Authors:  Ronald Magar; Renée Larochelle
Journal:  Can J Vet Res       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 1.310

4.  Experimental quantification of the transmission of Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus.

Authors:  Enrique Mondaca-Fernández; Tom Meyns; Claudia Muñoz-Zanzi; Carlos Trincado; Robert B Morrison
Journal:  Can J Vet Res       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 1.310

5.  Strain predominance following exposure of vaccinated and naive pregnant gilts to multiple strains of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus.

Authors:  Kelly M Lager; William L Mengeling; Ronald D Wesley
Journal:  Can J Vet Res       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 1.310

6.  Duration of infection and proportion of pigs persistently infected with porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus.

Authors:  Robert W Wills; Alan R Doster; Judith A Galeota; Jung-Hyang Sur; Fernando A Osorio
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 5.948

7.  An experimental model to evaluate the role of transport vehicles as a source of transmission of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus to susceptible pigs.

Authors:  Scott A Dee; John Deen; Satoshi Otake; Carlos Pijoan
Journal:  Can J Vet Res       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 1.310

8.  Immune response to ORF5a protein immunization is not protective against porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus infection.

Authors:  Sally R Robinson; Marina C Figueiredo; Juan E Abrahante; Michael P Murtaugh
Journal:  Vet Microbiol       Date:  2013-03-21       Impact factor: 3.293

9.  Comparison of host genetic factors influencing pig response to infection with two North American isolates of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus.

Authors:  Andrew S Hess; Zeenath Islam; Melanie K Hess; Raymond R R Rowland; Joan K Lunney; Andrea Doeschl-Wilson; Graham S Plastow; Jack C M Dekkers
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2016-06-20       Impact factor: 4.297

Review 10.  Review on the transmission porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus between pigs and farms and impact on vaccination.

Authors:  Emanuela Pileri; Enric Mateu
Journal:  Vet Res       Date:  2016-10-28       Impact factor: 3.683

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.