Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T03:19:58.394Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Humoral response of pregnant sows to foot and mouth disease vaccination

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2009

M. J. Francis  and
L. Black
M. J. Francis
Affiliation:
Wellcome Biotechnology Ltd, FMD Division, Ash Road, Pirbright, Woking, Surrey, GU24 0NQ
L. Black
Affiliation:
Wellcome Biotechnology Ltd, FMD Division, Ash Road, Pirbright, Woking, Surrey, GU24 0NQ
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Four groups of sows were inoculated, either once or twice, with O1BFS 1860 foot and mouth disease oil-emulsion vaccine during pregnancy and samples of serum. for analysis, were collected at intervals for > 300 days.

The pregnant sows responded well to vaccination regardless of their state of gestation. Single vaccination produced protective levels of antibody (> 1·53 log10SN50) in 3 out of 4 sows while double vaccination produced protective levels in all 6 sows tested. Anti-FMD IgM antibodies could be detected for 40–60 days after vaccination or revaccination. Anti-FMD IgG antibodies appeared within 10 days of vaccination and persisted, in each sow, for the duration of the study. The anti-FMD IgA response observed was less easy to characterize due to significant animal to animal variation. Although there was no evidence of a fall in the neutralizing antibody titres over one year post vaccination the anti-FMD IgG antibody population did show signs of a change in its heterogenity and avidity.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 96 , Issue 3 , June 1986 , pp. 501 - 511
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

References

REFERENCES

Anderson, E. C. (1969). Some observations on the serological response of pigs to emulsified foot and mouth disease vaccine. European Commissionfor the Control of FMD, Meeting of the Research Group Standing Technical Committee, Italy, 24–26th September.Google Scholar
Anderson, E. C., Masters, R. C. & Mowat, G. N. (1971). Immune response of pigs to inactivated foot and mouth disease vaccines. Response to oil emulsion vaccines. Research in Veterinary Science 12, 342–350.Google Scholar
Basarab, O. (1978). The protection of fattening pigs against footand mouth disease with an oil adjuvanted vaccine. I. Studies on European foot and mouth disease virus strains. Proceedings of the 5th World International pig Veterinary Society Congress, Zagreb KB46.Google Scholar
Basarab, O.& Pay, T. W. F. (1982). The protection offattening pigs against foot and mouth disease with an oil adjuvant vaccine. Revue scientifique et technique de l'Office international des Epizoolies 1, 1147–1154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blank, S. E., Leslie, G. A. & Clem, W. (1972). Antibody affinity and valence in viral neutralization. Journal of Immunology 108, 665–673.Google Scholar
Burrows, R. (1966). The infectivity assay of foot and mouth disease virus in pigs. Journal of Hygiene 64, 419–429.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, M. S. & Uhr, J. W. (1966). Antibody formation. V. The avidity of γM and γG guinea pig antibodies to bacteriophage Φ174. Journal of Immunology 97, 565–576.Google Scholar
Francis, M. J. & Black, L. (1983). Antibody response in pig nasal fluid and serum following foot and mouth disease infection or vaccination. Journal of Hygiene 91, 329–334.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Francis, M. J. & Black, L. (1984 a). The effectof vaccination regimen on the transfer of foot and mouth disease antibodies from the sowto her piglets. Journal of Hygiene 93, 123–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Francis, M. J.& Black, L. (1984 b). Effect of the sow vaccination regimen on the decay rate of maternally derived foot and mouth disease antibodies in piglets. Research in Veterinary Science 37, 72–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Francis, M. J., Ouldridge, E. J. & Black, L. (1983). Antibody response in Bovine pharyngeal fluid following foot-and-mouth disease vaccination and, or, exposure to live virus. Research in Veterinary Science 35, 206–210.Google Scholar
Graves, J. H., Cowan, K. M. & Trautman, R. (1968). Immunochemical studies of foot and mouth disease. II. Characteristics of RNA-free virus like particles. Virology 34, 269–274.Google Scholar
Hingley, P. J. & Ouldridge, E. J. (1985). The use of a logistic model for the quantitative interpretation of indirect sandwich labelled immunosorbent assays (ELISA) for antibodies and antigens in foot and mouth disease. Computers in Biology and Medicine 15, 137–152.Google Scholar
McKercher, P. D. & Giordano, A. R. (1967 a). FMD in swine. I. Immune responses of swine to chemically treated and untreated FMD virus. Archiv fur die Gesamte Virusforschung 20. 39–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKercher, P. D. & Giordano, A. R. (1967 b). FMD in swine. II. Some physical-chemical characteristics of antibodies produced by chemically-treated and non-treated foot and mouth disease virus. Archiv fur die Gesamte Virusforchung 20, 54–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, D. O.& McKercher, P. D. (1978). Immune response of neonatal swine to inactivated foot and mouth disease virus vaccine with oil adjuvant. I. Influence of colostral antibody. Proceedings of the annual Meeting of the U.S. Animal Health Association 81, 244–255.Google Scholar
Ouldridge, E. J., Francis, M. J. & Black, L. (1982). Antibody response of pigs to foot and mouth disease oil emulsion vaccine: the antibody class involved. Research in Veterinary Science 32, 327–331.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Svehag, S. E. (1965). The formation and properties of poliovirus neutralizing antibody. 5. Changes in the quality of 19S and 7S rabbit antibodies following immunization. Acta Pathologica et Microbiologica Scandinavica 64,103–118.Google Scholar
Webster, R. G. (1968). The immune response to influenza virus. III. Changes in the avidity and specificity of early IgM and IgG antibodies. Immunology 14, 39–52.Google Scholar
Wittman, G., Bauer, K. & Mussgay, M. (1969). Essais de vaccination de pores avec des vaeeins a base de virus aphteux inactive. I. Essais avec du virus O inactive par l'hydroxylamine, le formal, la chaleur et le pH. (Vaccination trials in pigs of inactivated foot and mouth disease vaccines. I. Trials with type O virus inactivated by hydroxylamine, formalin, heat and pH). Bulletin de l'office International des Epizooties 71, 351–379.Google Scholar