1968
DOI: 10.1136/vr.83.12.284
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Relationship between Marek's disease and coccidiosis. II. The effect of Marek's disease on the susceptibility of chickens to coccidial infection

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
1

Year Published

1977
1977
2002
2002

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
16
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This is the first report of increased susceptibility to secondary infection with E. coli as a result of concurrent MDV infection. Increased susceptibility following MDV challenge has also been reported for coccidial and cryptosporidial infections (Biggs et al, 1968;Abbassi et al, 1999Abbassi et al, , 2000. It is important to note that the greatest reduction in lymphocyte counts occurred in experiment 2 at day 35, a week after coinfection with E. coli.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This is the first report of increased susceptibility to secondary infection with E. coli as a result of concurrent MDV infection. Increased susceptibility following MDV challenge has also been reported for coccidial and cryptosporidial infections (Biggs et al, 1968;Abbassi et al, 1999Abbassi et al, , 2000. It is important to note that the greatest reduction in lymphocyte counts occurred in experiment 2 at day 35, a week after coinfection with E. coli.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, functional deficiencies of effector cells such as downregulation of expression of CD8 and Major Histocompatibility Complex (MHC) molecules may also be important (Morimura et al, 1995(Morimura et al, , 1996. Consequences of this immunosuppression in terms of reduced resistance to concurrent infection have been reported for coccidiosis and renal cryptosporidiosis (Biggs et al, 1968;Abbassi et al, 1999Abbassi et al, , 2000, but the extent of immunosuppression varies according to several host resistance factors and the pathotype of virus (Calnek et al, 1998;Baigent & Davison, 1999).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We showed that CD8 was down-regulated at the transcriptional level during MDV infection (Figs 3 and 4). It is well known that MDV can cause a functional deficiency of CTL, for example delayed rejection of Rous sarcomas or MD transplantable tumour cells (Calnek et al, 1975), increased susceptibility to coccidiosis (Biggs et al, 1968) and absence of specific cytotoxic activities against MD tumour cells (Schat et al, 1982;Powell et al, 1983). Down-regulation of CD8, therefore, may be important for the immunosuppression of T cells.…”
Section: T Morimura and Othersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At the same time, MDV causes secondary immunosuppression, which is characterized by unresponsiveness to mitogen stimulation (Theis et al, 1975), delayed rejection of Rous sarcomas or MD transplantable tumour cells (Calnek et al, 1975), and increased susceptibility to coccidiosis (Biggs et al, 1968). Interestingly, cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTL) against syngenic MD tumour cell lines, which had been thought to be important for tumour inhibition, were not detected in chickens infected with MDV (Schat et al, 1982).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The economic damage of MD is probably even greater because immunosuppression induced by the MD virus reduces resistance to other pathogens, which can lead to symptoms in young, market-weight broilers (Biggs et al, 1968; Abbassi et al, 1999), and lowers feed efficiency and other production traits (Groves, 1995; Islam et al, 2002). Vaccines have been produced that initially were effective in reducing MD incidence (Witter, 1985), but MD virus strains have evolved to the point that commercial vaccines are no longer fully protective.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%