Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T13:27:01.478Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Immunity in experimentally induced enzootic pneumonia of pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

R. F. W. Goodwin
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge
Ruth G. Hodgson
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge
P. Whittlestone
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge
Rosemary L. Woodhams
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge
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.

Hysterectomy-produced, colostrum-deprived pigs, reared in special isolation accommodation, were infected with enzootic pneumonia and later challenged with the same strain of the disease. Both the original infections and the subsequent challenges were made with intranasal inoculations of suspensions of ground pneumonic lung, but there was no evidence to suggest that any mycoplasma other than the J strain of Mycoplasma suipneumoniae was involved.

Pigs that had recovered from the disease were strongly immune to challenge, in that they developed virtually no lung lesions when inoculated with lung suspensions that produced extensive lesions of enzootic pneumonia in control animals. This was the case, even when the pigs were as young as 16 days old when first infected and were not challenged until up to 60 weeks later.

Sera from these pigs taken before infection, about 2–3 weeks after infection, at various times after natural recovery, and before and after challenge were examined using the metabolic-inhibition test, the indirect-haemagglutination test and the complement-fixation test.

The metabolic-inhibition test proved of little value, because non-specific inhibitory substances were present in the sera of some pigs both before and after infection: these substances inhibited the growth of Mycoplasma hyorhinis, Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Mycoplasma gallisepticum as effectively as M. suipneumoniae. Sometimes the non-specific inhibition was reduced by heating the sera at 56° C. for 30 min., but at other times it was not, which suggests that at least two types of non-specific inhibitors were present.

Apart from one pig, all the sera that were expected to be negative for antibodies against M. suipneumoniae proved to be so by the indirect-haemagglutination test. Titres of less than 1/5 were obtained in this test using the sera from pigs killed 12–22 days after infection, but high titres were obtained 16–60 weeks after infection. It was not possible to say whether these titres correlated with immunity.

All the pre-infection sera when examined by the complement-fixation test had titres of less than 1/10, but by 12–22 days after infection over half the serum samples had titres of 1/40 or more, and titres of 1/80–1/640 were obtained at 4 and 9 months after infection. There was some evidence to show that these titres declined more rapidly than the titres obtained in the indirect-haemagglutination test; for they were very low at 60 weeks after infection, at which time the indirect-haemagglutination titres were still high.

It seemed, therefore, that these two serological tests were measuring different aspects of the post-infection response. Also, because the complement-fixation titres were very low in two pigs that were shown to be powerfully immune, these titres did not appear to correlate with immunity.

Our work with the metabolic-inhibition test and the complement-fixation test has benefited from discussions with Dr D. Taylor-Robinson and Mr A. S. Wallis, respectively. We are grateful to Drs H. P. Chu, R. H. Leach and D. Taylor-Robinson for the reference sera and the culture mentioned in the text. Most of the expenses of this work, including the salary of two of the authors (R. G.H. and R.L.W.), were met by a grant from the Agricultural Research Council.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1969

References

REFERENCES

Betts, A. O., Whittlestone, P. & Beveridge, W. I. B. (1955). Investigations on the control of virus pneumonia of pigs (v.p.p.) in the field. Vet. Rec. 67, 685.Google Scholar
Boulanger, P. & L'Ecuyer, C. (1968). Enzootic pneumonia of pigs: complement-fixation tests for the detection of mycoplasma antibodies in the serum of immunized rabbits and infected swine. Can. J. comp. Med. 32, 547.Google Scholar
Bradstreet, C. M. P. & Taylor, C. E. D. (1962). Technique of complement-fixation test applicable to the diagnosis of virus diseases. Mon. Bull. Minist. Hlth 21, 96.Google Scholar
Davies, G. & Hudson, J. R. (1968). The relationship between growth-inhibition and immunity in contagious bovine pleuro-pneumonia. Vet. Rec. 83, 256.Google Scholar
Goiš, M. (1968). Serological response of pigs to infection with mycoplasma. Demonstration of growth and metabolism-inhibiting antibodies in sera of pigs inoculated intranasally with Mycoplasma hyorhinis. Zentbl. Vet Med. 15 (B), 382.Google Scholar
Goodwin, R. F. W. (1965). The phenomenon of suppressed respiratory disease in the litters of older sows. Vet. Rec. 77, 383.Google Scholar
Goodwin, R. F. W., Pomeroy, A. P. & Whittlestone, P. (1965). Production of enzootic pneumonia in pigs with a mycoplasma. Vet. Rec. 77, 1247.Google Scholar
Goodwin, R. F. W., Pomeroy, A. P. & Whittlestone, P. (1967). Characterization of Mycoplasma suipneumoniae: a mycoplasma causing enzootic pneumonia of pigs. J. Hyg., Camb. 65, 85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, R. F. W., Pomeroy, A. P. & Whittlestone, P. (1968). Attempts to recover Mycoplasma suipneumoniae from experimental and natural cases of enzootic pneumonia in pigs. J. Hyg., Camb. 65, 595.Google Scholar
Herderscheê, D. (1963). An improved medium for the cultivation of the Eaton agent. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 29, 154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lannek, N. & Börnfors, S. (1957). Immunity to enzootic pneumonia in pigs following recovery from the disease. Nord. VetMed. 9, 91.Google Scholar
Roberts, D. H. (1968). Serological diagnosis of Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae infection in pigs. Vet. Rec. 82, 362.Google Scholar
Ross, R. F. & Switzer, W. P. (1963). Comparison of isolates of Mycoplasma hyorhinis by indirect haemagglutination. Am. J. vet. Res. 24, 622.Google Scholar
Takatori, I., Huhn, R. G. & Switzer, W. P. (1968). Demonstration of complement-fixation antibody against Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae in the sera of pigs infected with swine enzootic pneumonia. Natn. Inst. Anim. Hlth Q., Tokyo 8, 195.Google Scholar
Taylor-Robinson, D., Purcell, R. H., Wong, D. C. & Chanock, R. M. (1966). A colour test for the measurement of antibody to certain mycoplasma species based upon the inhibition of acid production. J. Hyg., Camb. 64, 91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor-Robinson, D., Shirai, A., Soběslavský, O. & Chanock, R. M. (1966). Serological response to Mycoplasma pneumoniae infection II. Significance of antibody measured by different techniques. Am. J. Epidem. 84, 301.Google Scholar
Whittlestone, P. (1957). Some respiratory diseases of pigs. Vet. Rec. 69, 1354.Google Scholar
Whittlestone, P. (1967). Mycoplasma in enzootic pneumonia of pigs. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 143, Art. 1, 271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed