Production testing of antigenicity and immunogenicity of bivalent inactivated vaccine salmonellosis vaccine
Abstract
Scientists of both human and veterinary medicine combine their potential to develop new or improve old instruments in order to rein the problem of foodborne salmonellosis in Ukraine. According to the experience of European poultry industry, the most effective measure for the prevention of avian salmonellosis is total vaccination against salmonellosis of laying hens and breeding birds. In our country, the epizootic situation of salmonellosis of animals and poultry is consistently favorable. At the same moment nearly 90% of foods born Salmonella outbreaks are of poultry and egg products origin. In other words the source of major source of Salmonella agent is avian origin. Currently no vaccines of native origin have been registered in Ukraine. Although there have been numerous attempts to develop a vaccine against avian salmonellosis. The purpose of our work is to evaluate the antigenicity and immunogenicity of the two experimental series of bivalent inactivated emulsified vaccine against avian salmonellosis in production conditions. During the examination of the vaccine in the poultry farm it was found that for 21 days after the re-introduction of the vaccine, the titers of antibodies to the mono-antigens S. Typhimurium, Enteritidis and Gallinarum in the Agglutination Test (AT) and Indirect Hemagglutination Test (IH) were: 1 : 640–1280 to 1 : 2560–5120 respectively. This indicates high antigenicity of the vaccine. No significant difference between the levels of antibodies to Typhimurium and Enteritidis antigens was detected neither in AT nor IH. At the same time the levels of antibodies to mono-antigen Gallinarum were markedly lower in both reactions (1 : 160–1 : 320 – in AT and 1 : 320–1 : 1280 – in IH), but high enough to indicate that the vaccine creates a tense cross-humoral immunity to Salmonella surface antigens of Gallinarum serovar. The results of study of immunogenicity of the vaccine show that the vaccine is highly immunogenic. It means that after control infection of vaccinated hens none of tested Salmonella strains (S. Typhimurium and S. Enteritidis) were isolated from any organs, whereas in the control non-vaccinated group of birds both Salmonella test-strains were isolated from all organs. The obtained results provide a basis for further phases of the vaccine estimating followed by its registration in the prescribed manner.
Downloads
References
Boiko, O.P. Niedosiekov, V.V., Pundiak, T.O., & Sen, O.M. (2018). Porivnialna otsinka antyhennosti ta imunohennosti dvokh vaktsynnykh preparativ pro-ty salmonelozu ptytsi. Zbirnyk materialiv mizhnarodnoi naukovo-praktychnoi konferentsii “Rozvytok veterynarnoi nauky v Ukraini: zdobutky i problemy”. Kharkiv: IE-KVM, 148–150 (in Ukrainian).
Boiko, O.P., Boiko, P.K., Voloshyn, R.V., Kurtiak, B.M., Pundiak, T.O., Romanovych, M.S., & Sobko, H.V. (2018). Porivnialna kharakterystyka napruzhenosti epizootychnoi ta epidemichnoi sytuatsii shchodo salmonelozu na terytorii Lvivskoi oblasti. Veterynarna biotekhnolohiia. Biuleten, 32(2), 51–60. http://vetbiotech.kiev.ua/volumes/JRN32/2_7.pdf (in Ukrainian).
Boiko, O.P., Sen, O.M., Boiko, P.K., Kurtiak, B.M., Pundiak, T.O., & Sobko, H.V. (2017). Kharakterystyka morfolohichnykh oznak ta fiziolohichnykh vlastyvostei shtamiv salmonel, izolovanykh vid ptytsi i teliat. Naukovyi visnyk LNUVMB imeni S.Z. Gzhytskoho, 19(78), 129–135. doi: 10.15421/nvlvet7826 (in Ukrainian).
Boiko, P.K., Sobko, A.Iu., & Sen, O.M. (2014). Salmoneloz ptytsi: kontrol epizootychnoho protsesu. Suchasna veterynarna medytsyna, 5, 31–34 (in Ukrainian).
Holovko, A.M., & Ushkalov, V.O. (2012). Veterynarni imunobiolohichni zasoby: dovidnyk. Kharkiv: NTMT, 437–441 (in Ukrainian).
Iakubchak, O.M., & Kobysh, A.I. (2012). Salmonella enteritidis – zbudnyk emerdzhentnoi kharchovoi toksykoinfektsii. Suchasne ptakhivnytstvo, 7, 9–12. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Sps_2012_7_4 (in Ukrainian).
Kuczkowski, M., & Wieliczko, A. (2015). Immunoprofilaktyka salmoneloz u drobiu. Życie Weterynaryjne, 90(1), 28–32. http://yadda.icm.edu.pl/yadda/element/bwmeta1.element.agro-b7116938-6446-4142-b6d9-a3185902f833.
Mead, G., Lammerding, A.M., Cox, N., Doyle, M.P., Humbert, F., Kulikovskiy, A., Panin, A., Nascimento, V.P., & Wierup, M. (2010). Scientific and Technical Factors Affecting the Setting of Salmonella Criteria for Raw Poultry: A Global Perspective. Journal of Food Protection, 73(8), 1566–1590. doi: 10.4315/0362-028x-73.8.1566.
Obukhovska, O.V., Stehnii, B.T., Zavhorodnii, A.I., Petrenchuk, E.P., Hliebova, K.V., Kriukova, N.V., Vovk, S.I., Plys, V.M., Bila, N.V., & Kolbasina, T.V. (2012). Vyvchennia imunohennykh ta protektyvnykh vlastyvostei eksperymentalnykh serii inaktyvovanykh vaktsyn proty salmonelozu ptytsi. Vet. medytsyna: Mizhvid. temat. nauk. zb. Kharkiv: NNTs IEKVM, 96, 166–168. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/vetmed_2012_96_66 (in Ukrainian).
Prohrama derzhavnoho veterynarno-sanitarnoho kontroliu salmonelozu broileriv ptakhohos-podarstvakh Ukrainy na 2014–2018 rr., 25 (in Ukrainian).
Stegnij, B.T. (2002). Znachenie sal'monellezov ptic v veterinarnoj medicine. Veterinarnaja medicina, 80, 149–152 (in Russian).
Stehnii, B.T., Hadzevych, D.V., Hadzevych, O.V., & Alimov, S.S. (2018). Efektyvnist vaktsynoprofilaktyky ekonomichno znachymykh bakterialnykh zakhvoriuvan velykoi rohatoi khudoby. Veterynarna biotekhnolohiia, 32(1), 430–435. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/vbtb_2018_32%281%29__59 (in Ukrainian).
The European Union summary report on trends and sources of zoonoses, zoonotic agents and food-borne outbreaks in 2017 (2018). European Food Safety Authority and European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (EFSA and ECDC). EFSA Journal, 16(12), 5500. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5500.
Trotskyi, M.S. (2012). Salmoneloz ptakhiv – osnovna prychyna salmonelozu liudei. Tvarynnytstvo sohodni, 2, 34–37 (in Ukrainian).
Wray, C., Morris, J.A., & Sojka, W.J. (1975). A сomparison of Indirect Haemagglutination Tests and Serum Agglutination Tests for the Serological Diagnosis of Salmonella Dublin Infection in Cattle British. British Veterinary Journal, 131(6), 727–737. doi: 10.1016/S0007-1935(17)35145-X.
Zadorozhna, V.I., & Vynnyk, N.P. (2018). Pytannia bioetyky i biobezpeky v problemi biotekhnolohii i vykorystannia vaktsyn dlia profilaktyky infektsiinykh khvorob liudyny. Veterynarna biotekhnolohiia, 32(1), 459–465. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/vbtb_2018_32%281%29__64 (in Ukrainian).
Zavhorodnii, A.I., Hadzevych, D.V., Beliavtseva, O.A., Ionkina, I.B., & Hadzevych, O.V. (2010). Etiolohichna struktura salmoneloziv v AR Krym. Veterynarna medytsyna, 94, 113–118 (in Ukrainian).
Zimmerman, R.A., Mathews, J., & Wilson, E. (1968). Microtiter Indirect Hemagglutination Procedure for Identification of Streptococcal M-Protein Antibodies. Appl Microbiol, 16(11), 1640–1645. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC547732.
Abstract views: 96 PDF Downloads: 78
