medigraphic.com

1999, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Vet Mex 1999; 30 (1)

Clinical and pathological characterization of three isolates of infectious bursal disease virus obtained from commercial broiler flocks in Mexico

Banda CA, Valladares de la CJC, Navarro HJA

Language: English/Spanish
References: 42
Page: 7-18
PDF size: 264.59 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Three field isolates of infectious bursal disease virus (IBDV) were obtained from commercial broiler flocks in Mexico. Their antigenic properties were determined by antigen-capture-ELISA using monoclonal antibodies: B-29, R-63, BK-9, B-69 and 57. Virulence of the three isolates was evaluated in inoculated birds based on clinical signs, production of neutralizing antibodies against IBDV, mortality, bursa/body weight ratio, histological lesions, IBDV antigen permanence in lymphoid tissues and humoral response against Brucella abortus and red blood cells of sheep. Isolates P and G held the epitopes recognized by the monoclonal antibodies B-29, R-63 and B-69. These epitopes usually appear in classical IBDV strains, whereas isolate H was not recognized. The three isolates caused the subclinical form of IBD. Marked bursal atrophy with severe lymphocyte depletion was observed in inoculated birds. IBDV was detected by immunofluorescence up 14 days postinoculation, and antibody production between the first to the second week postinoculation. Although immunosuppression was not detected by the measurement of immune response towards antigens used, the eventual immunosuppressive effect by isolate H cannot be excluded. Finally, no difference of virulence among the three isolates was observed.


REFERENCES

  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.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com