Literature DB >> 12243517

Prevention of inclusion body hepatitis/hydropericardium syndrome in progeny chickens by vaccination of breeders with fowl adenovirus and chicken anemia virus.

H Toro1, C González, L Cerda, M A Morales, P Dooner, M Salamero.   

Abstract

The hypothesis that an effective protection of progeny chickens against inclusion body hepatitis/hydropericardium syndrome (IBH/HP) can be achieved by dual vaccination of breeders with fowl adenovirus (FAV) serotype 4 and chicken anemia virus (CAV) was tested. Thus, 17-wk-old brown leghorn pullet groups were vaccinated by different schemes including single FAV (inactivated), single CAV (attenuated), FAV and CAV dually, or were not vaccinated (controls). Subsequent progenies of these breeders were challenged with the virulent strains FAV-341 and CAV-10343 following three strategies: 1) FAV-341 intramuscularly (i.m.) at day 10 of age (only FAV-vaccinated and control progenies); 2) FAV + CAV i.m. simultaneously at day 10 of age (all progenies); 3) CAV i.m. at day 1 and FAV orally at day 10 of age (all progenies). The induction of IBH/HP in these progenies was evaluated throughout a 10-day period. Both breeder groups vaccinated against FAV and those vaccinated against CAV increased virus neutralizing specific antibodies. Challenge strategy 1 showed 26.6% mortality in control progeny chickens and 13.3% in the progeny of FAV-vaccinated breeders. Presence of lesions in the liver of these groups showed no significant differences (P > 0.05), suggesting a discreet protective effect of the vaccine. Challenge strategy 2 showed 29.4% mortality in controls and 94% of chickens showed hepatic inclusion bodies (HIB). Single CAV vaccination of breeders did not demonstrate a beneficial effect, with both mortality and liver lesions resembling the nonvaccinated controls. FAV vaccination of breeders significantly reduced both mortality (7.4%) and liver lesions (26% HIB) (P < 0.05), providing protection against this challenge strategy. Dual vaccination of breeders with FAV and CAV proved to be necessary to achieve maximum protection of the progeny (no mortality and 7% HIB). Challenge strategy 3 produced no mortality but consistent liver damage in controls (96% HIB). In this case, both CAV and FAV + CAV-vaccinated breeders showed best protection results in terms of liver histopathology (8% and 0% HIB, respectively). FAV vaccination alone produced 24% HIB, similar to challenge strategy 2, demonstrating a lower protective effect.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12243517     DOI: 10.1637/0005-2086(2002)046[0547:POIBHH]2.0.CO;2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Avian Dis        ISSN: 0005-2086            Impact factor:   1.577


  5 in total

Review 1.  Economically important non-oncogenic immunosuppressive viral diseases of chicken--current status.

Authors:  V Balamurugan; J M Kataria
Journal:  Vet Res Commun       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 2.459

2.  Fowl adenovirus strains 1/A and 11/D isolated from birds with reovirus infection.

Authors:  Jowita Samanta Niczyporuk; Wojciech Kozdrun; Hanna Czekaj; Natalia Stys-Fijol
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-08-19       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 3.  The hydropericardium syndrome in poultry--a current scenario.

Authors:  V Balamurugan; J M Kataria
Journal:  Vet Res Commun       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 2.459

4.  Pathogenicity and Complete Genome Characterization of Fowl Adenoviruses Isolated from Chickens Associated with Inclusion Body Hepatitis and Hydropericardium Syndrome in China.

Authors:  Jing Zhao; Qi Zhong; Ye Zhao; Yan-xin Hu; Guo-zhong Zhang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-13       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 5.  Historical Investigation of Fowl Adenovirus Outbreaks in South Korea from 2007 to 2021: A Comprehensive Review.

Authors:  Jongseo Mo
Journal:  Viruses       Date:  2021-11-10       Impact factor: 5.048

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.