Kapczynski Darrell R, King Daniel J
Southeast Poultry Research Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, 934 College Station Road, Athens, GA 30605, USA.
Vaccine. 2005 May 16;23(26):3424-33. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2005.01.140.
During 2002-2003, exotic Newcastle disease (END) virus caused a major outbreak among commercial and backyard poultry in southern California and adjacent states. The outbreak raised concerns regarding the protective immunity of commercially available vaccines for prevention and control of this virus in poultry. We sought to determine if existing commercial live and inactivated Newcastle disease virus (NDV) vaccines could provide protection against the 2002-2003 END virus, and whether current commercial NDV-vaccination programs for broiler-breeders (BB) and broilers (Br) would protect against END-challenge. In the first experiment, birds received a single dose of either inactivated or live B1-type vaccine at 2 weeks-of-age and were challenged 2 weeks post-vaccination with a lethal dose of END. In the second experiment, a high (10(6.9)EID50/bird) or low (10(3.9)EID50/bird) dose of live B1 was applied to 8-week-old chickens, followed by lethal END challenge. In the third experiment, NDV field-vaccinated commercial BB (65 weeks-of-age) and Br (36 days-of-age) were challenged against END virus. Results indicated that both the live and inactivated vaccines protected against morbidity and mortality and significantly reduced the incidence and viral titers shed from chickens in comparison with sham controls, but did not prevent infection and virus shedding. In addition, both doses of live vaccine protected birds and significantly decreased the number of birds shedding virus. All unvaccinated control chickens challenged with END died within 6 days post-challenge (pc). Protection from disease correlated with the presence of antibody titers (determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) or hemagglutination inhibition (HI)) at day of challenge. Commercial BB were protected from disease and exhibited low incidence and titer of challenge virus shed. In contrast, commercial Br exhibited 66% mortality and shed significantly more virus than the BB birds. These results underscore the need to develop new NDV vaccines and vaccine strategies for use during outbreak situations to protect birds from both disease and infection to reduce virus shedding.
2002年至2003年期间,新城疫外来病毒(END)在南加州及周边各州的商业和后院家禽中引发了一场大规模疫情。此次疫情引发了人们对市售疫苗预防和控制家禽中这种病毒的保护性免疫力的担忧。我们试图确定现有的商业活疫苗和灭活新城疫病毒(NDV)疫苗是否能抵御2002 - 2003年的END病毒,以及当前针对种鸡(BB)和肉鸡(Br)的商业NDV疫苗接种计划是否能抵御END病毒攻击。在第一个实验中,雏鸡在2周龄时接受一剂灭活或活的B1型疫苗,并在接种疫苗2周后用致死剂量的END病毒进行攻击。在第二个实验中,将高剂量(10(6.9)EID50/只鸡)或低剂量(10(3.9)EID50/只鸡)的活B1疫苗接种于8周龄的鸡,随后进行致死性END病毒攻击。在第三个实验中,对经NDV疫苗免疫的商业种鸡(65周龄)和肉鸡(36日龄)进行END病毒攻击。结果表明,与假对照相比,活疫苗和灭活疫苗均能预防发病和死亡,并显著降低鸡的发病率和病毒滴度,但不能预防感染和病毒排出。此外,两种剂量的活疫苗均能保护鸡,并显著减少病毒排出鸡的数量。所有接受END病毒攻击的未接种疫苗对照鸡在攻击后6天内死亡。对疾病的保护与攻击当天的抗体滴度(通过酶联免疫吸附测定(ELISA)或血凝抑制(HI)测定)有关。商业种鸡受到疾病保护,攻击病毒排出的发生率和滴度较低。相比之下,商业肉鸡的死亡率为66%,且排出的病毒比种鸡显著更多。这些结果强调了开发新型NDV疫苗和疫苗策略的必要性,以便在疫情爆发期间使用,保护家禽免受疾病和感染,减少病毒排出。