Field evaluation of commercial vaccines against Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis (Ibr) Virus using different immunization protocols
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/10183/225035 |
Resumo: | Bovine alphaherpesvirus 1 is ubiquitous in cattle populations and is associated with several clinical syndromes, including respiratory disease, genital disease, infertility and abortions. Control of the virus in many parts of the world is achieved primarily through vaccination with either inactivated or live modified viral vaccines. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of four commercially available BoHV-1 vaccines commonly used in Central and South America. Animals were divided into eight groups and vaccinated on days 0 and 30. Groups 1 to 4 received two doses of four different BoHV-1 commercial vaccines (named A to D). Groups 5 and 6 received vaccine D plus a vaccine for either Clostridial or Food-and-Mouth-Disease (FMD), respectively. Group 7 received one dose of two different brands of reproductive vaccines. Serum samples were collected from all animals on days 0, 30 and 60 to evaluate neutralizing and isotype-specific (IgG1 and IgG2) antibodies. Of the four commercial vaccines evaluated, only vaccine A induced neutralizing antibodies to titers ≥ 1:8 in 13/15 (86%) of the animals 60 days post-vaccination. Levels of IgG2 antibody increased in all groups, except for group 2 after the first dose of vaccine B. These results show that only vaccine A induced significant and detectable levels of BoHV-1-neutralizing antibodies. The combination of vaccine D with Clostridial or FMD vaccines did not affect neutralizing antibody responses to BoHV-1. The antibody responses of three of the four commercial vaccines analyzed here were lower than admissible by vaccine A. These results may be from vaccination failure, but means to identify the immune signatures predictive of clinical protection against BoHV-1 in cattle should also be considered. |
id |
UFRGS-2_1f6a8e0cad41b11607fe81dda17f9206 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:www.lume.ufrgs.br:10183/225035 |
network_acronym_str |
UFRGS-2 |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Brun, Laureana deLeites, MauroFurtado, AgustínCampos, Fabrício SouzaRoehe, Paulo MichelPuentes, Rodrigo2021-08-04T04:43:33Z20212076-393Xhttp://hdl.handle.net/10183/225035001127077Bovine alphaherpesvirus 1 is ubiquitous in cattle populations and is associated with several clinical syndromes, including respiratory disease, genital disease, infertility and abortions. Control of the virus in many parts of the world is achieved primarily through vaccination with either inactivated or live modified viral vaccines. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of four commercially available BoHV-1 vaccines commonly used in Central and South America. Animals were divided into eight groups and vaccinated on days 0 and 30. Groups 1 to 4 received two doses of four different BoHV-1 commercial vaccines (named A to D). Groups 5 and 6 received vaccine D plus a vaccine for either Clostridial or Food-and-Mouth-Disease (FMD), respectively. Group 7 received one dose of two different brands of reproductive vaccines. Serum samples were collected from all animals on days 0, 30 and 60 to evaluate neutralizing and isotype-specific (IgG1 and IgG2) antibodies. Of the four commercial vaccines evaluated, only vaccine A induced neutralizing antibodies to titers ≥ 1:8 in 13/15 (86%) of the animals 60 days post-vaccination. Levels of IgG2 antibody increased in all groups, except for group 2 after the first dose of vaccine B. These results show that only vaccine A induced significant and detectable levels of BoHV-1-neutralizing antibodies. The combination of vaccine D with Clostridial or FMD vaccines did not affect neutralizing antibody responses to BoHV-1. The antibody responses of three of the four commercial vaccines analyzed here were lower than admissible by vaccine A. These results may be from vaccination failure, but means to identify the immune signatures predictive of clinical protection against BoHV-1 in cattle should also be considered.application/pdfengVaccines. Basel. Vol. 9, no. 4 (Apr. 2021), 408, 11 p.Herpesvirus bovino 1Vacinas sintéticasAnticorposField evaluation of commercial vaccines against Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis (Ibr) Virus using different immunization protocolsEstrangeiroinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRGSinstname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)instacron:UFRGSTEXT001127077.pdf.txt001127077.pdf.txtExtracted Texttext/plain34474http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/225035/2/001127077.pdf.txt2cf1b01fa61cbf0ad737d85020ef8d10MD52ORIGINAL001127077.pdfTexto completo (inglês)application/pdf1646130http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/225035/1/001127077.pdf6242f975ef872e625b8127c01361d451MD5110183/2250352021-08-18 04:40:20.840401oai:www.lume.ufrgs.br:10183/225035Repositório de PublicaçõesPUBhttps://lume.ufrgs.br/oai/requestopendoar:2021-08-18T07:40:20Repositório Institucional da UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)false |
dc.title.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
Field evaluation of commercial vaccines against Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis (Ibr) Virus using different immunization protocols |
title |
Field evaluation of commercial vaccines against Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis (Ibr) Virus using different immunization protocols |
spellingShingle |
Field evaluation of commercial vaccines against Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis (Ibr) Virus using different immunization protocols Brun, Laureana de Herpesvirus bovino 1 Vacinas sintéticas Anticorpos |
title_short |
Field evaluation of commercial vaccines against Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis (Ibr) Virus using different immunization protocols |
title_full |
Field evaluation of commercial vaccines against Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis (Ibr) Virus using different immunization protocols |
title_fullStr |
Field evaluation of commercial vaccines against Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis (Ibr) Virus using different immunization protocols |
title_full_unstemmed |
Field evaluation of commercial vaccines against Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis (Ibr) Virus using different immunization protocols |
title_sort |
Field evaluation of commercial vaccines against Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis (Ibr) Virus using different immunization protocols |
author |
Brun, Laureana de |
author_facet |
Brun, Laureana de Leites, Mauro Furtado, Agustín Campos, Fabrício Souza Roehe, Paulo Michel Puentes, Rodrigo |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Leites, Mauro Furtado, Agustín Campos, Fabrício Souza Roehe, Paulo Michel Puentes, Rodrigo |
author2_role |
author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Brun, Laureana de Leites, Mauro Furtado, Agustín Campos, Fabrício Souza Roehe, Paulo Michel Puentes, Rodrigo |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Herpesvirus bovino 1 Vacinas sintéticas Anticorpos |
topic |
Herpesvirus bovino 1 Vacinas sintéticas Anticorpos |
description |
Bovine alphaherpesvirus 1 is ubiquitous in cattle populations and is associated with several clinical syndromes, including respiratory disease, genital disease, infertility and abortions. Control of the virus in many parts of the world is achieved primarily through vaccination with either inactivated or live modified viral vaccines. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of four commercially available BoHV-1 vaccines commonly used in Central and South America. Animals were divided into eight groups and vaccinated on days 0 and 30. Groups 1 to 4 received two doses of four different BoHV-1 commercial vaccines (named A to D). Groups 5 and 6 received vaccine D plus a vaccine for either Clostridial or Food-and-Mouth-Disease (FMD), respectively. Group 7 received one dose of two different brands of reproductive vaccines. Serum samples were collected from all animals on days 0, 30 and 60 to evaluate neutralizing and isotype-specific (IgG1 and IgG2) antibodies. Of the four commercial vaccines evaluated, only vaccine A induced neutralizing antibodies to titers ≥ 1:8 in 13/15 (86%) of the animals 60 days post-vaccination. Levels of IgG2 antibody increased in all groups, except for group 2 after the first dose of vaccine B. These results show that only vaccine A induced significant and detectable levels of BoHV-1-neutralizing antibodies. The combination of vaccine D with Clostridial or FMD vaccines did not affect neutralizing antibody responses to BoHV-1. The antibody responses of three of the four commercial vaccines analyzed here were lower than admissible by vaccine A. These results may be from vaccination failure, but means to identify the immune signatures predictive of clinical protection against BoHV-1 in cattle should also be considered. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv |
2021-08-04T04:43:33Z |
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv |
2021 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
Estrangeiro info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10183/225035 |
dc.identifier.issn.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
2076-393X |
dc.identifier.nrb.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
001127077 |
identifier_str_mv |
2076-393X 001127077 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10183/225035 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.ispartof.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
Vaccines. Basel. Vol. 9, no. 4 (Apr. 2021), 408, 11 p. |
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.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRGS instname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) instacron:UFRGS |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) |
instacron_str |
UFRGS |
institution |
UFRGS |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv |
http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/225035/2/001127077.pdf.txt http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/225035/1/001127077.pdf |
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv |
2cf1b01fa61cbf0ad737d85020ef8d10 6242f975ef872e625b8127c01361d451 |
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv |
MD5 MD5 |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1815447760324788224 |