Banda CA, Valladares de la CJC, Navarro HJA

Idioma: Español/Inglés
Referencias bibliográficas: 42
Paginas: 7-18
Archivo PDF: 264.59 Kb.

RESUMEN

Se aislaron tres virus de la infección de la bolsa de Fabricio (VIBF) a partir de muestras obtenidas de muestras en granjas avícolas en México, aquéllos se denominaron H, P y G. Se determinaron sus propiedades antigénicas mediante la técnica de ELISA por captura de antígeno, utilizando los anticuerpos monoclonales (Mab) B-29, R-63, BK-9, B-69 y 57. Se evaluó su virulencia en aves inoculadas mediante la observación de signos clínicos, mortalidad, proporción del peso bursal con el peso corporal, lesiones microscópicas, persistencia de los virus en tejidos linfoides, serología contra VIBF y medición de la respuesta inmune hacia Brucella abortus y eritrocitos de ovino. Los virus P y G presentaron los epítopes reconocidos por los B-29, R-63 y B-69, que están presentes en las cepas clásicas de VIBF, el virus H no pudo ser reconocido por ningún Mab. Los tres aislamientos indujeron la presentación subclínica de la IBF en las aves inoculadas, se observó marcada atrofia bursal con deplesión linfoide severa, persistencia del VIBF en bolsa hasta los catorce días posinoculación y seroconversión de las aves a partir de la segunda semana después de la inoculación. A pesar de que no se detectó plenamente un estado de inmunodepresión mediante la respuesta a los dos antígenos utilizados, no se puede descartar un eventual efecto inmunodepresor por el aislamiento "H". Tampoco se detectaron diferencias en la virulencia de los tres VIBF aislados.

REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

1. Lukert PD, Saif YM. Infectious bursal disease. In: Calnek BW, editor. Diseases of poultry. Ames (IA): lowa State University Press, 1991:648-663.

2. Saif YM. Immunosuppression induced by infectious bursal disease virus. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 1991;30:45-50.

3. Winterfield RW, Thacker HL. Immune response and pathogenicity of different strains of infectious bursal disease applied as vaccines. Avian Dis 1978;22:721-731.

4. Mazariegos LA, Lukert PD, Brown J. Pathogenicity and immunosuppressive properties of infectious bursal disease "intermediate" strains. Avian Dis 1990;34:203-208.

5. Rosenberger JK. El papel de la IBF en la inmunosupresión. World Poultry 1995; (Suplemento Gumboro):7.

6. Van der Sluis W. El virus de la infección de la bolsa de Fabricio: destructor del sistema inmune. World Poultry 1995; (Suplemento Gumboro):4-6.

7. Lukert PD. Infectious bursal disease: Past, present and future. Proceedings of the International Poultry Symposium Summit on Infectious Bursal Disease; 1995 April 3-4; Athens (GA). Athens (GA): University of Georgia, 1995:33-34.

8. Sharma JM, Dohms JE, Metz AL. Comparative pathogenesis of serotype 1 and variant serotype 1 of infectious bursal disease virus and their effect on humoral and celular immune competence of specificpathogen-free chickens. Avian Dis 1989;33:112-124.

9. Snyder DB. Changes in the field status of infectious bursal disease virus. Avian Pathol 1990;19:419-423.

10. Kouwenhoven B, Bos VJ. Control of very virulent infectious bursal disease (Gumboro disease) in the Netherlands with more virulent vaccines. Proceedings of the International Poultry Symposium Summit on Infectious Bursal Disease; 1995 April 3-4; Athens (GA). Athens (GA): University of Georgia, 1995:29-32.

11. Ducatelle RVA, Uyttebroek E, De Ruyne L, Mast J, Goddeeris B, Desmidt M et al. Infectious bursal disease in Europe, consequences of changing epidemiological conditions. Proceedings of the International Poultry Symposium Summit on Infectious Bursal Disease; 1995 April 3-4; Athens (GA). Athens (GA): University of Georgia, 1995:10-13.

12. Senne DA. Virus propagation in embrionating eggs. In: Purchase HG, Arp LH, Domermuth CH, Pearson JE, editors. A laboratory manual for the isolation and identification of avian pathogens. Kennett Square (PA): American Association of Avian Pathologists, 1989:179-181.

13. Villegas P, Purchase HG. Titration of biological suspensions. In: Purchase HG, Arp LH, Domermuth CH, Pearson JE, editors. A laboratory manual for the isolation and identification of avian pathogens. Kennett Square (PA): American Association of Avian Pathologists, 1989:186-190.

14. Snyder DB, Lana DP, Savage PK, Yancey FS, Mengel SA, Marquardt WW. Differentiation of infectious bursal disease viruses directly from infected tissues with neutralizing monoclonal antibodies: evidence of a major antigenic shift in recent field isolates. Avian Dis 1988;32:535-539.

15. Beard CW. Serologic procedures. In: Purchase HG, Arp LH, Domermuth CH, Pearson JE, editors. A laboratory manual for the isolation and identification of avian pathogens. Kennett Square (PA): American Association of Avian Pathologists, 1989:192-200.

16. Lucio B, Hitchner SB. Infectious bursal disease emulsified vaccine: effect upon neutralizing antibody levels in the dam. Avian Dis 1979;23:466-478.

17. Kawamura A. Fluorescent antibody techniques and their applications. 2nd ed. Tokyo, Japan: University of Tokyo Press, 1977.

18. Allan GM, McNulty MS, Connor TJ, McCraken RM, McFerran JB. Rapid diagnosis of infectious bursal disease infection by immunofluorescence on clinical material. Avian Pathol 1980;13:419-427.

19. Luna GL. Manual of histologic staining methods of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1968.

20. Muskett JC, Hopkins JG, Edwards KR, Thornton DH. Comparison of two infectious bursal disease vaccine strains: efficacy and potential hazards in susceptible and maternally immune birds. Vet Rec 1979;14:332-334.

21. Toivanen P, Toivanen A, Good RA. Ontogeny of bursal function in chicken. I Embryonic stem cell for Humoral immunity. J Immunol 1972;109:1058-1070.

22. Steel RGD, Torrie JH. Bioestadística. Principios y procedimientos. México (DF): McGraw-Hill, 1988.

23. Hitchner SB. Infectivity of infectious bursal disease virus for embrionating eggs. Poultry Sci 1970;49:511-516.

24. Lana DP. Monoclonal antibodies to Newcastle virus and infectious bursal disease virus and their use in the diagnosis of disease. Proceedings of Improved diagnosis of Avian Diseases Using Molecular Biology of the 129th American Veterinary Medical Association Meeting; 1992 August 2; Boston (MA). Boston (MA): American Association of Avian Pathologists, 1992:50-53.

25. Snyder DB, Lana DP, Cho BR, Marquardt WW. Group and strain-specific neutralization sites of infectious bursal disease virus defined with monoclonal antibodies. Avian Dis 1988;32:527-534.

26. Weinstock D, McRee WA, Suyeremoto MM, Ficken MD. Late IBDV challenge of a commercial broiler flock: immunologic assessment and performance. Proceedings of the 44th Western Poultry Disease Conference; 1995 March 5-7. Sacramento (CA). Davis (CA): Western Poultry Disease Conference, 1995:59.

27. Lucio B, Hitchner SB. Immunosuppression and active response induced by infectious bursal disease virus in chickens with passive antibodies. Avian Dis 1980;24:189-196.

28. Rosales AG, Villegas P, Lukert PD, Fletcher OJ, Mohamed MA, Brown J. Pathogenicity of recent isolates of infectious bursal disease virus in specificpathogen-free chickens: protection conferred by an intermediate vaccine strain. Avian Dis 1989;33:729-734.

29. Rosales AG, Villegas P, Lukert PD, Fletcher OJ, Mohamed MA, Brown J. Isolation, identification and pathogenicity of two field strains of infectious bursal disease virus. Avian Dis 1989;33:35-41.

30. Schat KA, Lucio B, Carlisle JC. Pathogenes is of infectious bursal disease in embryonally bursectomized chickens. Avian Dis 1981;25:996-1004.

31. Valdez ILE, Lucio MB, Antillón RA. Estudio clínicopatológico y por inmunofluorescencia de la infección de la bolsa de Fabricio. Vet Méx 1971;2:5-10.

32. Vindevogel H, Gouffaux M, Meulemans G. Maladie de Gumboro: Distribution et persistance du virus de poussin inoculé, études sur la transmission de la maladie. Avian Pathol 1976;5:31-38.

33. Cheville NF. Studies on the pathogenesis of Gumboro disease in the bursa of Fabricius, spleen, and thymus of the chicken. Am J Pathol 1967;51:527-551.

34. noue M, Fukuda M, Miyano K. Thymic lesions in chickens infected with infectious bursal virus. Avian Dis 1994;38:839-846.

35. Becht H. Infectious bursal disease virus. Curr Topics Microbiol Immunol 1980;90:107-121.

36. Tanimura N, Tsukamoto K, Nakamura K, Narita M, Maeda M. Association between pathogenicity of infectious bursal disease virus and viral antigen distribution detected by immunohistochemistry. Avian Dis 1995;39:9-20.

37. Tsukamoto K, Tanimura N, Mase M, Imai K. Comparison of virus replication efficiency in lymphoid tissues among three infectious bursal disease virus strain Avian Dis 1995;39:844-852.

38. Riddell C. Avian histopathology. Kennett Square (PA): American Association of Avian Pathologists, 1987.

39. Sharma JM, Belzer S, Rodenberg J. Characteristics of infectious bursal disease virus-induced immunodepression in chickens. Proceedings of the 41st Western Poultry Disease Conference; 1992 March 3- 5. Sacramento (CA). Davis (CA): Western Poultry Disease Conference, 1992:54.

40. Goodman JW. Inmunogenicidad y especificidad antigénica. En: Stites DP, Stobo JD, Well JV, editores. Inmunología básica y clínica. México (DF): El Manual Moderno, 1988:17-23.

41. Craft DW, Brown J, Lukert P. Effects of standard and variant strains of infectious bursal disease virus on infections of chickens. Am J Vet Res 1990;51:1192-1197.

42. Hopkins IG, Edwards KR, Thornton DH. Measurement of immunosuppression in chickens caused by infectious bursal disease vaccines using Brucella abortus strain 19. Res Vet Sci 1979;27:260-261.