| Literature DB >> 20454644 |
Darong Cheng1, Shanyuan Zhu, Huaichang Sun.
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to investigate feasibility of sodium lauryl sulfoacetate (SLS) as an immunoadjuvant in chickens. After treating with 62.5, 125, 250, or 500 mug/mL SLS in vitro, lymphocyte proliferation assay of chicken peripheral blood mononuclear cells showed that the OD(570) values of all experimental groups, as well as Con A-stimulated group, were significantly higher than that of the untreated control group. After injection with 1.0, 2.0, or 4.0 mg/kg of SLS for 3 consecutive days, chickens were vaccinated with an attenuated vaccine against Newcastle disease virus (NDV), and the immunoadjuvant effects of SLS were evaluated on the basis of immune organ index, antibody response, and CD(4) (+)/CD(8) (+) T-cell ratio. The results confirmed that SLS could enhance NDV-specific antibody response and increase CD(4) (+)/CD(8) (+) T-cell ratio in vivo. Furthermore, SLS could improve NDV-specific antibody response in thiamphenicol-treated chickens. These data indicate that SLS not only can improve humoral immune response but also reverse the immunosuppressive effect of thiamphenicol in chickens.Entities:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20454644 PMCID: PMC2863157 DOI: 10.4061/2010/485060
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Vet Med Int ISSN: 2042-0048
Figure 1Chemical structure of sodium lauryl sulfoacetate.
Promotion of chicken PBMC proliferation by SLS.
| Group (dose) | OD570 |
|---|---|
| SLS (500 | 0.154 ± 0.015* |
| SLS (250 | 0.171 ± 0.024* |
| SLS (125 | 0.158 ± 0.017* |
| SLS (62.5 | 0.140 ± 0.031* |
| Con A (5 | 0.149 ± 0.017* |
| Normal saline | 0.073 ± 0.012 |
The data are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 12) in relation to the blank well. *P < .05 was accepted as significant differences compared to the normal saline control.
The antibody response in SLS-treated and vaccinated chickens.
| Group (dose) | HI titer on different days after primary immunization (log2) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 d | 17 d | 24 d | 31 d | 38 d | ||
| SLS (4 mg/kg) | 5.31 ± 0.25 | 6.02 ± 0.45 | 6.87 ± 0.27 | 7.68 ± 0.33* | 7.06 ± 0.41 | 6.53 ± 0.28 |
| SLS (2 mg/kg) | 5.72 ± 0.19 | 6.83 ± 0.33* | 7.46 ± 0.49* | 8.79 ± 0.11* | 8.87 ± 0.52* | 8.15 ± 0.19* |
| SLS (1 mg/kg) | 5.11 ± 0.32 | 6.21 ± 0.42 | 6.75 ± 0.32 | 8.02 ± 0.29* | 7.46 ± 0.54 | 6.92 ± 0.16 |
| Normal saline | 4.71 ± 0.37 | 5.12 ± 0.39 | 5.51 ± 0.37 | 6.03 ± 0.24 | 6.14 ± 0.21 | 5.83 ± 0.31 |
The data are expressed as mean ± SD (day 10, n = 36; day 17, n = 30; day 24, n = 24; day 31, n = 18; day 38, n = 12; day 45, n = 6) in relation to the HI titers of chickens. *P < .05 was accepted as significant differences compared to the normal saline control group.
The CD4 +/CD8 + T-cell ratio in PBMCs of SLS-treated and vaccinated chickens.
| Group (dose) | CD4 +/CD8 + T-cell ratio on different days after primary immunization | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 d | 17 d | 24 d | 31 d | 38 d | ||
| SLS (4 mg/kg) | 2.15 ± 0.22 | 2.31 ± 0.25 | 2.48 ± 0.22 | 3.29 ± 0.27* | 2.94 ± 0.21* | 2.46 ± 0.21 |
| SLS (2 mg/kg) | 2.21 ± 0.28 | 2.49 ± 0.23 | 2.80 ± 0.17* | 3.57 ± 0.31* | 3.50 ± 0.19* | 3.21 ± 0.24* |
| SLS (1 mg/kg) | 2.13 ± 0.16 | 2.24 ± 0.22 | 2.45 ± 0.25 | 3.41 ± 0.19* | 3.10 ± 0.14* | 2.47 ± 0.22 |
| Normal saline | 2.10 ± 0.23 | 2.16 ± 0.29 | 2.19 ± 0.11 | 2.30 ± 0.23 | 2.25 ± 0.25 | 2.11 ± 0.32 |
The data are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 6) in relation to the CD4 +/CD8 + T-cell ratio of chickens. *P < .05 was accepted as significant differences compared to the normal saline control group.
Influence of SLS on immune organ indices of NDV-vaccinated chickens.
| Organs | Group (dose) | Organ index | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 d | 17 d | 24 d | 31 d | 38 d | 45 d | ||
| Thymus | SLS (4 mg/kg) | 0.335 ± 0.015 | 0.351 ± 0.026 | 0.384 ± 0.021 | 0.366 ± 0.022 | 0.360 ± 0.024 | 0.335 ± 0.015 |
| SLS (2 mg/kg) | 0.327 ± 0.027 | 0.352 ± 0.023 | 0.383 ± 0.029 | 0.368 ± 0.019 | 0.361 ± 0.021 | 0.327 ± 0.027 | |
| SLS (1 mg/kg) | 0.333 ± 0.028 | 0.359 ± 0.016 | 0.380 ± 0.028 | 0.365 ± 0.031 | 0.363 ± 0.026 | 0.333 ± 0.028 | |
| Normal saline | 0.328 ± 0.025 | 0.357 ± 0.025 | 0.380 ± 0.014 | 0.364 ± 0.023 | 0.362 ± 0.024 | 0.328 ± 0.025 | |
|
| |||||||
| Spleen | SLS (4 mg/kg) | 0.163 ± 0.018 | 0.222 ± 0.025 | 0.265 ± 0.023 | 0.270 ± 0.027 | 0.242 ± 0.020 | 0.232 ± 0.017 |
| SLS (2 mg/kg) | 0.169 ± 0.019 | 0.226 ± 0.021 | 0.270 ± 0.012 | 0.276 ± 0.018 | 0.246 ± 0.017 | 0.269 ± 0.016 | |
| SLS (1 mg/kg) | 0.160 ± 0.029 | 0.223 ± 0.026 | 0.264 ± 0.019 | 0.273 ± 0.022 | 0.243 ± 0.016 | 0.230 ± 0.019 | |
| Normal saline | 0.163 ± 0.016 | 0.224 ± 0.013 | 0.266 ± 0.011 | 0.274 ± 0.027 | 0.244 ± 0.015 | 0.234 ± 0.014 | |
|
| |||||||
| Cloacal bursa | SLS (4 mg/kg) | 0.331 ± 0.031 | 0.354 ± 0.027 | 0.373 ± 0.025 | 0.355 ± 0.022 | 0.349 ± 0.021 | 0.321 ± 0.022 |
| SLS (2 mg/kg) | 0.329 ± 0.030 | 0.357 ± 0.029 | 0.369 ± 0.033 | 0.368 ± 0.028 | 0.359 ± 0.025 | 0.325 ± 0.023 | |
| SLS (1 mg/kg) | 0.330 ± 0.026 | 0.355 ± 0.031 | 0.371 ± 0.037 | 0.363 ± 0.032 | 0.357 ± 0.029 | 0.328 ± 0.024 | |
| Normal saline | 0.332 ± 0.019 | 0.352 ± 0.022 | 0.370 ± 0.027 | 0.355 ± 0.028 | 0.348 ± 0.024 | 0.331 ± 0.017 | |
The data are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 6).
Anti-immunosuppressive effect of SLS on thiamphenicol.
| Group | HI titer on different days after immunization (log2) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 d | 17 d | 24 d | 31 d | 38 d | ||
| SLS+Florfenicol | 4.82 ± 0.29 | 5.09 ± 0.19 | 5.46 ± 0.24 | 6.26 ± 0.19 | 6.76 ± 0.24 | 6.43 ± 0.19 |
| Florfenicol | 3.01 ± 0.21* | 3.43 ± 0.13* | 3.83 ± 0.28* | 4.06 ± 0.33* | 3.96 ± 0.28* | 3.83 ± 0.33* |
| Saline | 4.52 ± 0.35 | 5.05 ± 0.36 | 5.61 ± 0.34 | 6.07 ± 0.24 | 6.21 ± 0.21 | 5.82 ± 0.31 |
The data are expressed as mean ± SD (day 10, n = 36; day 17, n = 30; day 24, n = 24; day 31, n = 18; day 38, n = 12; day 45, n = 6) in relation to the HI titers of chickens. *P < .05 was accepted as significant differences compared to the saline control group.
Influence of SLS on CD4 +/CD8 + T-cell ratio of thiamphenicol-treated chickens.
| Group | CD4 +/CD8 + T-cell ratio | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 d | 17 d | 24 d | 31 d | 38 d | ||
| SLS+Florfenicol | 2.15 ± 0.23 | 2.24 ± 0.19 | 2.61 ± 0.17 | 3.01 ± 0.18* | 2.98 ± 0.24* | 2.74 ± 0.21* |
| Florfenicol | 2.01 ± 0.19 | 2.02 ± 0.24 | 2.02 ± 0.27 | 2.04 ± 0.23 | 2.03 ± 0.27 | 2.00 ± 0.22 |
| Saline | 2.09 ± 0.22 | 2.18 ± 0.27 | 2.19 ± 0.15 | 2.30 ± 0.23 | 2.23 ± 0.24 | 2.11 ± 0.31 |
The data are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 6) in relation to the CD4 +/CD8 + T-cell ratio of chickens. *P < .05 was accepted as significant differences compared to the saline control group.