4.7 Article

Comparative Efficacy in Challenge Dose Models of a Toxin Expressing Whole-Cell Vaccine against Eight Serovars of Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae in Pigs

Journal

ANIMALS
Volume 12, Issue 23, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ani12233244

Keywords

swine; pleuropneumonia; lung lesion score; vaccine; protection; Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae; serovar independent; Coglapix

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The whole-cell A. pleuropneumoniae C-vaccine, containing ApxI-III toxins, showed high serovar-independent protection against multiple serovars, significantly reducing lung lesions. This finding is important for disease prevention in the field.
Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae is a major economically significant bacterial respiratory pig pathogen, and whole cell vaccines are used to prevent disease. However, there is little data available on multi-serovar whole cell vaccine protection. Therefore, we determined the protective efficacies of a whole-cell A. pleuropneumoniae serovar 1 and 2 vaccine comprising ApxI-III toxins (C-vaccine, Coglapix (R), Ceva, France) against serovars 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9/11, and 13. The infection doses used induced disease representative of endemic field conditions, and standard protocols were used for all studies. Protection against homologous serovars 1 and 2 significantly reduced lung lesion scores (LLS) compared to positive controls: p = 0.00007 and p = 0.00124, respectively. The protection against heterologous serovars 4, 5, 6, 7, 9/11, and 13 also significantly reduced LLS: range p = 2.9 x 10(-10) to p = 0.00953. As adjudged by the estimated random effect, reproducibility between studies was high. A highly significant serovar-independent reduction of pathological lung lesions by the C-vaccine was found for all the serovars tested (1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9/11, and 13). We conclude that the C-vaccine gives high serovar-independent protection against disease and is suitable for this use in the field.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available