Local Immunization of Ewes with Staphylococcal Cell and Cell-toxoid Vaccines

McDowell, GH; Lascelles, A. K.

doi:10.1016/s0034-5288(18)34188-2

Cited by 28 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It was found that the numbers of leucocytes and bacteria were lower in milk from locally immunised than non-immunised glands which is in conformity with the results of Outteridge and Lascelles (1967) and McDowell and Lascelles (1971b). A feature of the results was the variation in leucocyte and bacterial counts between individual animals.…”

Section: Leucocyte and Bacterial Countssupporting

confidence: 83%

Immunity to Experimental Staphylococcal Mastitis: Comparison of Local and Systemic Immunisation

McDowell

Watson

1974

Aust Veterinary J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Leucocyte and Bacterial Countssupporting

confidence: 83%

Immunity to Experimental Staphylococcal Mastitis: Comparison of Local and Systemic Immunisation

McDowell

Watson

1974

Aust Veterinary J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Various explanations can be offered for this observation but one suggestion is differences in opsonic capacity of the milk (78). Although some data are contradictory (182), increased opsonin as a consequence of immunization might stimulate phagocytosis (118,78).…”

Section: Host Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The structure of the bovine teat is ideal for the intracisternal infusion of an antigen and the best responses are obtained when immunization is performed in the dry period (118). Although antibody concentration will be highest in the immunized gland, some increase in IgA is also detected in serum and in companion non-immunized glands (150).…”

Section: Host Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reviews of the progress of Dairy Science: Mastitis control – progress and prospects

Bramley

Dodd

1984

Journal of Dairy Research

213

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Development of control methods Antibiotic therapy Hygiene Control schemes Milking machine research Mastitis awareness The value of current control methods Aetiology of mastitis Staphylococcus aureus Streptococcus agalactiae Streptococcus dysgalactiae Streptococcus uberis Coliforms Pseudomonas aeruginosa Mycoplasma bovis Corynebacteria General characteristics of bovine mastitis Stages in the infection process Exposure to pathogenic microorganisms CONTENTS PAGE 481 482 482 483 483 484 484 485 486 486 486 487 487 487 488 488 488 489 489 490 Penetration of the teat duct by pathogens Establishment of an intramammary infection Parasite factors Host factors Cellular and immune defence of the udder Nonspecific defence mechanisms Elimination of infections Culling Spontaneous recovery from infection Antibiotic therapy Dynamics of infection in dairy herds Effects of mastitis monitoring systems on awareness and control Conclusions References * Grant aided by the Agricultural and Food Research Council.

show abstract

“…Local immunization with toxoided a-haemolysin was found to protect ewes from intramammary challenge during lactation with «-haemolysin or staphylococci elaborating this toxin (Outterridge & Lascelles 1967). In later experiments vaccines containing killed staphylococci, with or without tox-oided «-haemolysin, were used for immunization (Outterridge et al 1968b, McDowell & Lascelles 1971b. It was found that locally-immunized glands were protected from local challenge with virulent staphylococci and it appeared that antibody to cell wall antigens of the staphylococcus were largely responsible for the protection observed.…”

Section: Lascelles and Mcdowellmentioning

confidence: 99%