Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T03:18:50.519Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Practical use of vaccines for the control of coccidiosis in the chicken

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2007

H.D. Chapman
H.D. Chapman
Affiliation:
Department of Poultry Science, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA
Get access

Abstract

Immunological control is recognised as the only major practical alternative to chemotherapy for the control of coccidiosis. Initial hopes that it would be possible to develop a genetically engineered vaccine against Eimeria species have not yet been realised, and there is therefore renewed interest in the development and application of vaccines based upon live parasites. Recognition that existing drugs are not as effective as in the past, that few new drugs are currently under investigation, and that the inclusion of drugs in the feed may be restricted in the future has focused attention on the need for new vaccines. Although considerable research has been undertaken on the basic mechanisms involved in the acquisition of immunity, very little attention has been given to the practical aspects of vaccination. In order for an anticoccidial drug to be successful, it is necessary to generate considerable information on efficacy and safety. With few exceptions, little information is available to support the use of coccidiosis vaccines. Hopefully, the introduction of new vaccines and improved application methods will encourage manufacturers to generate more information concerning their products. In future, coccidiosis should be controlled by adopting an integrated approach where drugs and vaccines are both used to prevent this disease. In addition to immunisation, a possible advantage to the application of certain vaccines is that their use could repopulate a poultry house with drug-sensitive organisms. Theoretical rotation programmes, in which the use of drugs is alternated with that of vaccines, are described.

Keywords

VaccinechickencoccidiosisEimeria
Type
Reviews
Information
World's Poultry Science Journal , Volume 56 , Issue 1 , March 2000 , pp. 7 - 20
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anon, (1989) Avian Disease Manual (Whiteman, C.E. and Bickford, A.A., Eds), American Association of Avian Pathologists, University of PennsylvaniaGoogle Scholar
Bafundo, K.W. and Donovan, D.J. (1988) Predicting effects of coccidial lesions in broilers. Misset International 4: 36–37Google Scholar
Bedrnik, P., Hiepe, TH., Mielke, D. and Drossigk, V. (1995) Antigens and immunisation procedures in the development of vaccines against poultry coccidiosis. In: Guidelines on Techniques in Coccidiosis Research. EUR 16602. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, pp. 176–189Google Scholar
Benno, P., Endo, K., Shiragami, N. and Mitsuoka, T. (1988) Susceptibility of fecal anaerobic bacteria from pigs and chickens to five polyether antibiotics for growth promotion. Japan Journal of Veterinary Science 50: 783–790Google ScholarPubMed
Chapman, H.D. (1989) Eimeria tenella, E. acervulina and E. maxima: studies on the development of resistance to diclazuril and other anticoccidial drugs in the chicken. Parasitology 99: 189–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, H.D. (1994) Sensitivity of field isolates of Eimeria to monensin following the use of a coccidiosis vaccine in broiler chickens. Poultry Science 73: 476–478CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chapman, H.D. (1996) Restoration of drug sensitivity following the use of live coccidiosis vaccines. In: Coccidiosis (2) Special Supplement World Poultry, 08 1996, Misset International, pp. 20–21Google Scholar
Chapman, H.D. (1997) Biochemical, genetic and applied aspects of drug resistance in Eimeria parasites of the fowl. Avian Pathology 26: 221–244CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chapman, H.D. (1999) Anticoccidial drugs and their effects upon the development of immunity to Eimeria infections in poultry. Avian Pathology 28: 521–535CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chapman, H.D. and Cherry, T.E. (1997) Eye spray vaccination: infectivity and development of immunity to Eimeria aceroulina and Eimeria tenella. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 6: 274–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, P. (1999) Coccidiosis vaccination in New Zealand. Proceedings of the Queensland Poultry Science Symposium 8: 23(1–4)Google Scholar
Danforth, H.D. (1998) Use of live oocyst vaccines in the control of avian coccidiosis: experimental studies and field trials. International Journal for Parasitology 28: 1099–1109CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Danforth, H.D., Lee, E.H., Martin, A. and Dekich, M. (1997) Evaluation of a gel immunization technique used with two different Immucox vaccine formulations in battery and floor-pen trials with broiler chickens. Parasitology Research 83: 445–451CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Devriese, L.A., Daube, G., Hommez, J. and Haesebrouck, F. (1993) In vitro susceptibility of Clostuidium perfringens isolated from farm animals to growth-enhancing antibiotics. Journal of Applied Bacteriology 75: 55–57CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jeffers, T.K. (1986) Attenuation of coccidia – a review. In: Avian Coccidiosis (McDougald, L.R., Joyner, L.P. and Long, P.L., Eds), Proceedings of the Georgia Coccidiosis Conference, University of Georgia, pp. 482–501Google Scholar
Long, P.L. and Millard, B.J. (1979) Immunological differences in Eimeria maxima: effect of a mixed immunizing inoculum on heterologous challenge. Parasitology 79: 451–457CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Long, P.L., Johnson, J.K. and Wyatt, R.D. (1980) Eimeria tenella: clinical effects in partially immune and susceptible chickens. Poultry Science 59: 2221–2224CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martin, A.G., Danforth, H.D., Barta, J.R. and Fernando, M.A. (1997) Analysis of immunological cross-protection and sensitivities to anticoccidial drugs among five geographical and temporal strains of Eimeria maxima. International Journal for Parasitology 5: 527–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathis, G.F. (1999) The influence of the coccidiosis vaccine, Coccivac-B, on compensatory weight gain of broiler chickens in comparison with the anticoccidial, salinomycin. Poultry Science 78(Supplement 1): 117Google Scholar
Newman, L.J. (1999) Coccidiosis control with vaccine: been there, done that. Or have we? In: Proceedings of the Arkansas Poultry Symposium, Springdale, Arkansas p. 52Google Scholar
Rose, M.E. (1987) Eimeria, Isospora and Cyptosporidium. In: Immunology, Immunopathology and Immunoprophylaxis of Parasitic Infections (Soulsby, E.J.L., Ed.), Volume 3, CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp. 275–312Google Scholar
Schnitzler, B.E., Thebo, P.L., Mattsson, J.G., Tomley, F.M. and Shirley, M.W. (1998) Development of a diagnostic PCR assay for the detection and discrimination of four pathogenic Eimeria species of the chicken. Avian Pathology 27: 490–497CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shirley, M.W. (1993) Live vaccines for the control of coccidiosis. In: Proceedings of the VIth International Coccidiosis Conference, University of Guelph, pp. 61–72Google Scholar
Vanparijs, P., Marsboom, R. and Desplenter, L. (1989) Diclazuril, a new broad spectrum anticoccidial drug in chickens. 1. Dose titration studies and pilot floor pen trials. Poultry Science 68: 489–495CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Victoria, P., Pavon, E., Rebollo, M., Torres De, C.A. and Vazquez, R. (1996) A comparison of toltrazuril vs. amprolium as coccidial post-vaccination treatments and their effects on immunity in broilers. In: Proceedings of the 45th Western Poultry Disease Conference, Cancun, Mexico, pp. 112–115Google Scholar
Watkins, K.L., Shryock, T.R., Dearth, R.N. and Saif, Y.M. (1997) In-vitro antimicrobial susceptibility of Clostridium perfringens from commercial Turkey and broiler chicken origin. Veterinary Microbiology 54: 195–200CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, R.B. (1998) Epidemiological aspects of the use of live anticoccidial vaccines for chickens. International Journal for Parasitology 28: 1089–1098CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, R.B., Bushell, A.C., Reperant, J.M., Doy, T.G., Morgan, J.H., Shirley, M.W., Yvore, P., Carr, M.M. and Fremont, Y. (1996) A survey of Eimeria species in commercially reared chickens in France during 1994. Avian Pathology 25: 113–130CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, R.B., Carlyle, W.W.H., Bond, D.R. and Brown, I.A.G. (1999) The efficacy and economic benefits of Paracox®, a live attenuated anticoccidial vaccine in commercial trials with standard broiler chickens in the United Kingdom. International Journal for Parasitology 29: 341–355CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed