Brazilian irradiated vaccine compared to british commercial vaccine "Dictol", against Dictyocaulus viviparus
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2014 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pab/article/view/15396 |
Resumo: | This study was carried out at the Divisão de Ciências Animais of the Centro de Energia Nuclear para a Agricultura (CENA). in Piracicaba, SP, Brazil, to test and compare the immunity produced by the use of vaccine prepared at the CENA using gamma irradiation and the British comrnercial Dictol against Dictyocaulus viviporus (Block 1782). Eighteen calves were divided into three groups, each with six animals: group A received Dictol; group B, the gamma irradiated vaccine; and C, without vaccine, was the control group. Two doses were given orally with a tour-week interval. One month after the second dose the calves were challenged with D. viviparus larvae at the rate of 60 larvae per kg of body weight, and five weeks later all animals were killed. The number of lungworms was then determined. There was little difference between treatments A and B, but both had significantly reduced challenge worm burdens compared with group C, i.e. 84% for Dictol and 86% for CENA vaccinates. The clinical symptoms of husk were present in the three treatments, but they were minimal in the vaccinated animals. Both vaccines were efficient in the immunization of calves against D. viviparus. |
id |
EMBRAPA-4_b27f5056a9a2a12a7649b8ce07b4993b |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.seer.sct.embrapa.br:article/15396 |
network_acronym_str |
EMBRAPA-4 |
network_name_str |
Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Brazilian irradiated vaccine compared to british commercial vaccine "Dictol", against Dictyocaulus viviparusVacina brasileira irradiada, comparada com a britânica "Dictol", no combate ao Dictyocaulus viviparusbovine helminthosishelmintose bovinaThis study was carried out at the Divisão de Ciências Animais of the Centro de Energia Nuclear para a Agricultura (CENA). in Piracicaba, SP, Brazil, to test and compare the immunity produced by the use of vaccine prepared at the CENA using gamma irradiation and the British comrnercial Dictol against Dictyocaulus viviporus (Block 1782). Eighteen calves were divided into three groups, each with six animals: group A received Dictol; group B, the gamma irradiated vaccine; and C, without vaccine, was the control group. Two doses were given orally with a tour-week interval. One month after the second dose the calves were challenged with D. viviparus larvae at the rate of 60 larvae per kg of body weight, and five weeks later all animals were killed. The number of lungworms was then determined. There was little difference between treatments A and B, but both had significantly reduced challenge worm burdens compared with group C, i.e. 84% for Dictol and 86% for CENA vaccinates. The clinical symptoms of husk were present in the three treatments, but they were minimal in the vaccinated animals. Both vaccines were efficient in the immunization of calves against D. viviparus. Estudo realizado na Divisão de Ciências Animais, do Centro de Energia Nuclear da Agricultura (CENA), em Piracicaba, SP, visando testar e comparar a vacina do CENA, atenuada pela radiação gama, e a comercial britânica Dictol, aplicadas, ambas em bezerros, contra o Dictyocaulus viviparus (Bloch 1782). Dezoito animais foram divididos em três grupos de seis: grupo A, vacinado com Dictol; grupo B, com a vacina irradiada do CENA; e grupo C, sem vacina testemunha. Foram ministradas duas doses por via oral, com intervalo de quatro semanas. Um mês após a segunda dose, os animais dos três grupos foram submetidos ao teste de desafio, com 60 larvas por quilo de peso vivo, e cinco semanas depois, abatidos. Contou-se o número de vermes presentes nos pulmões. Os tratamentos A e B não diferiram entre si, mas foram significativamente inferiores ao C quanto ao número de vermes nos pulmões: houve redução de 86% no tratamento A e 84% no B, em comparação com a testemunha. Sintomas clínicos de dictiocaulose estiveram presentes em todos os animais, porém com um quadro mais ameno nos vacinados. As duas vacinas mostraram eficiência igual.Pesquisa Agropecuaria BrasileiraPesquisa Agropecuária BrasileiraGennari, Solange MariaDuncan, James L.2014-04-16info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pab/article/view/15396Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira; v.18, n.8, ago. 1983; 911-917Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira; v.18, n.8, ago. 1983; 911-9171678-39210100-104xreponame:Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online)instname:Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa)instacron:EMBRAPAporhttps://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pab/article/view/15396/9285info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2014-04-16T19:06:19Zoai:ojs.seer.sct.embrapa.br:article/15396Revistahttp://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pabPRIhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phppab@sct.embrapa.br || sct.pab@embrapa.br1678-39210100-204Xopendoar:2014-04-16T19:06:19Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online) - Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Brazilian irradiated vaccine compared to british commercial vaccine "Dictol", against Dictyocaulus viviparus Vacina brasileira irradiada, comparada com a britânica "Dictol", no combate ao Dictyocaulus viviparus |
title |
Brazilian irradiated vaccine compared to british commercial vaccine "Dictol", against Dictyocaulus viviparus |
spellingShingle |
Brazilian irradiated vaccine compared to british commercial vaccine "Dictol", against Dictyocaulus viviparus Gennari, Solange Maria bovine helminthosis helmintose bovina |
title_short |
Brazilian irradiated vaccine compared to british commercial vaccine "Dictol", against Dictyocaulus viviparus |
title_full |
Brazilian irradiated vaccine compared to british commercial vaccine "Dictol", against Dictyocaulus viviparus |
title_fullStr |
Brazilian irradiated vaccine compared to british commercial vaccine "Dictol", against Dictyocaulus viviparus |
title_full_unstemmed |
Brazilian irradiated vaccine compared to british commercial vaccine "Dictol", against Dictyocaulus viviparus |
title_sort |
Brazilian irradiated vaccine compared to british commercial vaccine "Dictol", against Dictyocaulus viviparus |
author |
Gennari, Solange Maria |
author_facet |
Gennari, Solange Maria Duncan, James L. |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Duncan, James L. |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Gennari, Solange Maria Duncan, James L. |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
bovine helminthosis helmintose bovina |
topic |
bovine helminthosis helmintose bovina |
description |
This study was carried out at the Divisão de Ciências Animais of the Centro de Energia Nuclear para a Agricultura (CENA). in Piracicaba, SP, Brazil, to test and compare the immunity produced by the use of vaccine prepared at the CENA using gamma irradiation and the British comrnercial Dictol against Dictyocaulus viviporus (Block 1782). Eighteen calves were divided into three groups, each with six animals: group A received Dictol; group B, the gamma irradiated vaccine; and C, without vaccine, was the control group. Two doses were given orally with a tour-week interval. One month after the second dose the calves were challenged with D. viviparus larvae at the rate of 60 larvae per kg of body weight, and five weeks later all animals were killed. The number of lungworms was then determined. There was little difference between treatments A and B, but both had significantly reduced challenge worm burdens compared with group C, i.e. 84% for Dictol and 86% for CENA vaccinates. The clinical symptoms of husk were present in the three treatments, but they were minimal in the vaccinated animals. Both vaccines were efficient in the immunization of calves against D. viviparus. |
publishDate |
2014 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2014-04-16 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pab/article/view/15396 |
url |
https://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pab/article/view/15396 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://seer.sct.embrapa.br/index.php/pab/article/view/15396/9285 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira; v.18, n.8, ago. 1983; 911-917 Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira; v.18, n.8, ago. 1983; 911-917 1678-3921 0100-104x reponame:Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online) instname:Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa) instacron:EMBRAPA |
instname_str |
Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa) |
instacron_str |
EMBRAPA |
institution |
EMBRAPA |
reponame_str |
Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online) |
collection |
Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira (Online) - Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
pab@sct.embrapa.br || sct.pab@embrapa.br |
_version_ |
1793416685541130240 |