Identification of antigenic differences that discriminate between cattle vaccinated with Anaplasma centrale and cattle naturally infected with Anaplasma marginale

Molloy, J.B.; Bock, R.E.; Templeton, Jillian; Bruyeres, Anthea G.; Bowles, P.M.; Blight, GW; Jorgensen, W.K.

doi:10.1016/s0020-7519(00)00145-4

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The question of whether A. centrale is a subspecies of A. marginale, as originally suggested by Theiler (30), or a separate species is unresolved (6,11). Nonetheless, there are clear differences in other genes, antigens, and virulence between the two organisms (14,16,19,27). The presence of a closely related MSP-2 ortholog in A. centrale is unsurprising given that both Anaplasma ovis and Anaplasma phagocytophila, the agent of human granulocytic ehrlichiosis, also contain a MSP-2 ortholog (3, 10, 17, 18, 35).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expression of Major Surface Protein 2 Variants with Conserved T-Cell Epitopes in Anaplasma centrale Vaccinates

Shkap¹,

Molad²,

Brayton

et al. 2002

Infect Immun

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Major surface protein 2 (MSP-2), identified as a protection-inducing immunogen against Anaplasma marginale challenge, is an immunodominant outer membrane protein with orthologues in all examined Anaplasma species. Although immunization with live Anaplasma centrale has long been used to induce protection against acute disease upon challenge with virulent A. marginale, its MSP-2 structure and whether MSP-2 variants are generated during persistence of the vaccine strain was unknown. In this study, we showed that the A. centrale vaccine strain persisted for a minimum of 4 years postvaccination and generated sequential MSP-2 variants. ؉ -T-cell epitopes between these two genetically distinct Anaplasma species indicates that they present a similar repertoire of MSP-2 epitopes to the immune system and that this similarity may be responsible for all or part of the A. centrale vaccine efficacy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expression of Major Surface Protein 2 Variants with Conserved T-Cell Epitopes in Anaplasma centrale Vaccinates

Shkap¹,

Molad²,

Brayton

et al. 2002

Infect Immun

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, nested PCRs of higher sensitivity than previously described were developed for identification of both Anaplasma species, and performance of the molecular assays compared. The assays were performed along with the immunofluorescent fluorescent antibody (IFA) and the competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (cELISA) (Molloy et al, 2001). The results obtained confirm the utility of the molecular and the serological assays as valuable epidemiological tools.…”

mentioning

confidence: 72%

“…A commercial cELISA based on the MSP 5 surface protein has been developed for detection of antibodies against A. marginale (Knowles et al, 1996 andTorioni de Echaide et al, 1998) but, similarly to the IFA, it was found not to be applicable for discrimination between A. centrale-specific antibodies (Molloy et al, 1999 andDe la Fuente et al, 2005). The IFA based on 80 kDa A. centrale antigen differentiated between A. marginale and A. centrale in patent infections only, while the cELISA based on 116 kDa antigen was highly sensitive and specific in carrier infections (Molloy et al, 2001). The cELISA developed by Molloy et al (2001), was successfully used in this study to detect the A. centrale-specific antibodies produced against the vaccine strain (Molloy et al, 2001), three years after vaccination the vast majority (94%) of cattle were serologically positive.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…The IFA based on 80 kDa A. centrale antigen differentiated between A. marginale and A. centrale in patent infections only, while the cELISA based on 116 kDa antigen was highly sensitive and specific in carrier infections (Molloy et al, 2001). The cELISA developed by Molloy et al (2001), was successfully used in this study to detect the A. centrale-specific antibodies produced against the vaccine strain (Molloy et al, 2001), three years after vaccination the vast majority (94%) of cattle were serologically positive. The discrepancies in positive by serology (cELISA), but negative by molecular methods might be associated with the ability to clear Anaplasma infection by individual animals, while carrying serum antibodies (Torioni de Echaide et al, 1998).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Highly specific cELISA for identification of A. centrale antibodies in vaccinated cattle was performed as described by Molloy et al (2001).…”

Section: Serologymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Molecular and serological detection of A. centrale- and A. marginale-infected cattle grazing within an endemic area

Molad¹,

Mazuz²,

Fleiderovitz³

et al. 2006

Veterinary Microbiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A reverse line blot hybridization (RLB) one-stage nested PCR (nPCR) for Anaplasma centrale and a nested PCR for Anaplasma marginale were used to detect infected cattle grazing within an endemic region in Israel. A novel set of PCR primers and oligonucleotide probes based on a 16S ribosomal RNA gene was designed for RLB detection of both Anaplasma species, and the performance of the molecular assays compared. The immunofluorescent antibody test (IFA) was used to detect antibodies to both Anaplasma species, whereas, a highly sensitive and specific competitive enzymelinked immunosorbent assay (cELISA) was used to detect antibodies in A. centralevaccinated cattle. The RLB and the nested PCR procedures showed bacteremia with sensitivity of 50 infected erythrocytes per milliliter. Up to 93% of the A. centrale vaccinates carried specific antibodies that were detected by cELISA, and up to 71% of the vaccinated cattle were found to be naturally infected with A. marginale according to the PCR and the RLB assays. Nevertheless, no severe outbreaks of A. marginale infection occurred among vaccinated herds in this endemic region. It appears that both, molecular tools and serology are useful for evaluation of the vaccine efficacy. In the light of wide natural field infection with A. marginale, strong recommendations to continue the A. centrale vaccination program regime will continue until a new generation of non-bloodbased vaccine will be developed. Article Outline

show abstract

A msp1α polymerase chain reaction assay for specific detection and differentiation of Anaplasma marginale isolates

Lew¹,

Bock²,

Minchin³

et al. 2002

Veterinary Microbiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Identification of antigenic differences that discriminate between cattle vaccinated with Anaplasma centrale and cattle naturally infected with Anaplasma marginale

Cited by 9 publications

References 14 publications

Expression of Major Surface Protein 2 Variants with Conserved T-Cell Epitopes in Anaplasma centrale Vaccinates

Expression of Major Surface Protein 2 Variants with Conserved T-Cell Epitopes in Anaplasma centrale Vaccinates

Molecular and serological detection of A. centrale- and A. marginale-infected cattle grazing within an endemic area

A msp1α polymerase chain reaction assay for specific detection and differentiation of Anaplasma marginale isolates

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About