Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T16:29:22.083Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The immunological consequences of challenge with bovine tubercle bacilli in badgers (Meles meles)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2009

K. H. Mahmood ,
G. A. W. Rook ,
J. L. Stanford ,
Fiona A. Stuart  and
D. G. Pritchard
K. H. Mahmood
Affiliation:
School of Pathology, Middlesex Hospital Medical School, Riding House Street, London W1, U.K.
G. A. W. Rook
Affiliation:
School of Pathology, Middlesex Hospital Medical School, Riding House Street, London W1, U.K.
J. L. Stanford
Affiliation:
School of Pathology, Middlesex Hospital Medical School, Riding House Street, London W1, U.K.
Fiona A. Stuart
Affiliation:
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Central Veterinary Laboratory, Weybridge, Surrey, U.K.
D. G. Pritchard
Affiliation:
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Central Veterinary Laboratory, Weybridge, Surrey, U.K.
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.

Optimal conditions were determined for performing antibody measurements (ELISA), lymphocyte transformation tests and, to some extent, skin tests in badgers. These parameters, together with the bacteriological and pathological studies reported previously (Pritchard et al. 1987), were used to follow the course of intradermal and intratracheal challenge of badgers with bovine tubercle bacilli. Two challenge doses were used for each route of infection and two animals received each dose. None of the four animals challenged by the intratracheal method showed any evidence of infection, suggesting that adult badgers may have some resistance to challenge by this method. All four animals challenged intradermally developed lesion of tuberculosis.

Immunologically the disease passed through three phases. There was an early phase in which lymphocyte transformation to whole BCG steadily and significantly increased, and skin tests to tuberculin became positive but there was little change in antibody levels. This was followed by an intermediate phase of variable skin responses, fluctuating lymphocyte transformation and significant increase in antibody levels. The final phase, which was only seen in two animals with extensive disease, was associated with changing skin reactions and falling lymphocyte responses, together with a sudden increase in antibody levels.

This paper presents the first formal evidence of cell-mediated immunity to tuberculosis in the badger, which may delay onset and prolong the survival of challenged animals.

Type
Research Article
Information
Epidemiology & Infection , Volume 98 , Issue 2 , April 1987 , pp. 155 - 163
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

References

REFERENCES

Böyum, A. (1968). Isolation of leucocytes from human blood: further observations. Scandinavian Journal of Clinical Laboratory Investigation 21, suppl. 97, 31–49.Google Scholar
Corbel, M. J., Morris, J. A., Thorns, C. J. & Redwood, D. W. (1983). Response of the badger (Meles meles) to Brucella abortus. Research in Veterinary Science 34, 296–300.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gallagher, J., Muirhead, R. H. & Burn, K. J. (1976). Tuberculosis in wild badgers (Meles meles) in Gloucestershire: pathology. Veterinary Record 98, 9–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Higgins, D. A. & Gatrill, A. J. (1984). A comparison of the antibody response of badgers (Meles meles) and rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) to some common antigens. International Archives of Allergy and Applied Immunology 75, 219–226.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Higgins, D. A. (1985). The skin inflammatory response of the badger. British Journal of Experimental Pathology 66, 643–653.Google ScholarPubMed
Little, T. W. A., Naylor, P. F. & Wilesmith, J. W. (1982). Laboratory study of Mycobacterium bovis infection in badgers and calves. Veterinary Record 111, 550–557.Google ScholarPubMed
Mackintosh, C. G., MacArthur, J. A., Little, T. W. A. & Stuart, P. (1976). The immobilization of the badger (Meles meles). British Veterinary Journal 132, 609–614.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morris, J. A., Stevens, A. E., Little, T. W. A. & Stuart, P. (1978). Lymphocyte unresponsiveness to PPD tuberculin in badgers infected with Mycobacterium bovis. Research in Veterinary Science 25, 390–392.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morris, J. A., Stevens, A. E., Stuart, P. & Little, T. W. A. (1979). A pilot study to assess the usefulness of ELISA in detecting tuberculosis in badgers. Veterinary Record 104, 14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muirhead, R. H., Gallagher, J. & Burn, K. J. (1974). Tuberculosis in wild badgers in Gloucestershire: epidemiology. Veterinary Record 95, 552–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nassau, E., Parsons, E. R. & Johnson, G. D. (1976). The detection of antibodies to M. tuberculosis by microplate enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Tubercle 57, 67–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paul, R. C., Stanford, J. L. & Carswell, J. W. (1975). Multiple skin testing in leprosy. Journal of Hygiene 75, 57–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pritchard, D. G., Stuart, Fiona A., Brewer, Jacky I. & Mahmood, K. H. (1987). Experimental infection of badgers (Meles meles) with Mycobacterium bovis. Epidemiology and Infection 98, 145–154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rook, G. A. W., Champion, B. R., Steele, J., Varey, A. M. & Stanford, J. L. (1985). I-A restricted activation by T cell lines of anti-tuberculosis activity in murine macrophages. Clinical and Experimental Immunology 59, 414–420.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. & Cochran, W. G. (1971). In Statistical Methods, 6th ed., p. 163. USA: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Stanford, J. L. (1983). Immunologically important constituents of mycobacteria: antigens. In Biology of Mycobacteria vol. 2. (eds. Ratledge, C. & Stanford, J.L.), pp. 85–127. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Stanford, J. L., Nye, P. M., Rook, G. A. W., Samuel, N. & Fairbank, A. (1981). A preliminary investigation of the responsiveness or otherwise of patients and staff of a leprosy hospital to groups of shared or species specific antigens of mycobacteria. Leprosy Review 52, 321–328.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thorns, C. J. & Morris, J. A. (1983). The immune spectrum of Mycobacterium bovis infections in some mammalian species: a review. Veterinary Bulletin 53, 543–550.Google Scholar
Voller, A., Bidwell, D. E. & Bartlett, A. (1979). The Enzyme-lined Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA). In A Guide with Abstracts of Microplate Application, pp. 1–125. Guernsey: Flowline Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, M. B. & Makane, P. K. (1978). Developments in the periodate method of conjugating horseradish peroxidase to antibodies. In Immuno-fluorescence and Related Staining Techniques (ed. Knapp, W., Holuber, K. and Wick, G.), pp. 215–225. Amsterdam: Scientific Publishing Co.Google Scholar