Quality control procedure for Coccidial vaccines versus different routes of immunization

Elnaggar, Arwa; Mahmoud, Hala; Saber, Sahar

doi:10.14202/vetworld.2022.2342-2347

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, intramuscular injection inevitably causes stress to immune animals, leading to potential deviations in immune responses. Non-injection immunization (e.g., via eye and nasal drops) [ 78 , 79 , 80 ] is more suitable for large-scale clinical practice than intramuscular immunization. In future studies, we will consider non-injectable vaccination routes to immunize chickens.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Protective Efficacy Induced by the Common Eimeria Antigen Elongation Factor 2 against Challenge with Three Eimeria Species in Chickens

Mi,

Ding,

et al. 2023

Vaccines

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Avian coccidiosis arises from co-infection involving multiple Eimeria species, which could give rise to substantial economic losses in the global poultry industry. As a result, multivalent anticoccidial vaccines containing common Eimeria antigens offer considerable promise for controlling co-infection in clinical practice. In our previous study, Elongation factor 2 (EF2) was deemed as an immunogenic common antigen across various Eimeria species. This current investigation aimed to further assess the immunogenicity and protective efficacy of EF2 in recombinant subunit vaccine format against three Eimeria species. The EF2 gene cloned from Eimeria maxima (E. maxima) cDNA was designated as EF2 of E. maxima (EmEF2). The immunogenicity of the recombinant protein EmEF2 (rEmEF2) was assessed through Western blot analysis. The evaluation of the vaccine-induced immune response encompassed the determination of T lymphocyte subset proportions, cytokine mRNA transcription levels, and specific IgY concentrations in rEmEF2-vaccinated chickens using flow cytometry, quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR), and indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Subsequently, the protective efficacy of rEmEF2 was evaluated through vaccination and challenge experiments. The findings demonstrated that rEmEF2 was effectively recognized by the His-tag monoclonal antibody and E. maxima chicken antiserum. Vaccination with rEmEF2 increased the proportions of CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes, elevated IL-4 and IFN-γ mRNA transcription levels, and enhanced IgY antibody levels compared to the control groups. Moreover, compared to the control groups, vaccination with rEmEF2 led to decreased weight loss, reduced oocyst outputs, and alleviated enteric lesions. Furthermore, in the rEmEF2-immunized groups, challenges with E. maxima and E. acervulina resulted in anticoccidial index (ACI) scores of 166.35 and 185.08, showing moderate-to-excellent protective efficacy. Nevertheless, challenges with E. tenella and mixed Eimeria resulted in ACI scores of 144.01 and 127.94, showing low protective efficacy. In conclusion, EmEF2, a common antigen across Eimeria species, demonstrated the capacity to induce a significant cellular and humoral immune response, as well as partial protection against E. maxima, E. acervulina, and E. tenella. These results highlight EmEF2 as a promising candidate antigen for the development of multivalent vaccines targeting mixed infections by Eimeria species.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Protective Efficacy Induced by the Common Eimeria Antigen Elongation Factor 2 against Challenge with Three Eimeria Species in Chickens

Mi,

Ding,

et al. 2023

Vaccines

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Efficiency of Various Poultry Vaccination Methods in Industrial Poultry Farming

Zelenkova,

Ustyantsev,

Pakhomova

et al. 2023

Vetpat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction. Due to the growth of poultry stocking density in the allotted area in conditions of the industrial poultry farming, the issue of ensuring the epizootic welfare through vaccine-prophylaxis proves to be relevant. Another important aspect of poultry farming is reducing production costs, which could be achieved, among other things, through implementation of the cost-efficient methods of vaccination. A manual mode of spray vaccination method, which is currently used at the poultry farms, has a disadvantage because the dose of vaccine received by different birds may be unequal. However, under modern conditions, in order to increase the labour productivity and efficiency, the efforts are made to get the poultry vaccination process automated. The vaccination frame spray machines used in the industrial poultry farming have not been studied or evaluated before in a comparative aspect. Thus, the purpose of this research is to compare two methods of spray vaccination in chickens at the operating poultry farm with regard to the biological efficiency and economic profitability.Materials and Methods. The objects of the study were the young Brown Nick crossbreed chickens (n=46 heads). Vaccination was carried out in the young poultry at the age of 42-days. During the research, the dried live Newcastle disease and avian infectious bronchitis vaccines were used. To control the quality of vaccination, the amount of antibodies was estimated in the blood serum of poultry aged 56, 70 and 95 days old by ELISA method with TICAN equipment. Two groups of poultry were studied. In group 1 the “DESVAK” hand sprayer was used (“DESVAK” KIT– 2 model, produced by Ceva Santé Animale), in group 2 the automated frame spray machine was used (“SIMBIO ITERIS” model, produced by SIMBIO).Results. As a result of studies, in group 2 the higher intensity of immunity was obtained, showing on average the following figures: 56 days – antibody titre was 29 % higher (p≤0.05); 70 days – antibody titre was 18 % higher (p≤0.005); 95 days – antibody titre was 15 % higher (p≤0.05) compared to group 1. Economic efficiency was calculated based on the indicators of labour costs and labour intensity of the vaccination process: when using a frame spray machine, the costs turned out to be 2.3 times lower (1,131.4 person-rubbles) than with the DESVAK sprayer (2,590.4 person-rubbles). Additionally, the labour intensity of the vaccination process per head decreased by 5 times. In group 1 it was 0.0015 person-hour/head, in group 2 – 0.0003 person-hour/head.Discussion and Conclusion. Based on the results of the study, it was found that the spray vaccination method by means of the frame spray machine (the automated mode) is more efficient according to both biological and economic indicators compared to the manual mode. Taking into account all of the above, the frame spray machines could be recommended to the veterinary specialists for carrying out vaccine prophylaxis at the poultry farms by the spray method.

show abstract

Quality control procedure for Coccidial vaccines versus different routes of immunization

Cited by 2 publications

References 34 publications

Protective Efficacy Induced by the Common Eimeria Antigen Elongation Factor 2 against Challenge with Three Eimeria Species in Chickens

Protective Efficacy Induced by the Common Eimeria Antigen Elongation Factor 2 against Challenge with Three Eimeria Species in Chickens

Efficiency of Various Poultry Vaccination Methods in Industrial Poultry Farming

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About