4.2 Article Proceedings Paper

Avian Influenza Virus H13 Circulating in Ring-Billed Gulls (Larus delawarensis) in Southern Ontario, Canada

Journal

AVIAN DISEASES
Volume 54, Issue 1, Pages 411-419

Publisher

AMER ASSOC AVIAN PATHOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.1637/8808-040109-Reg.1

Keywords

avian influenza virus; H13; H16; ring-billed gull; Larus delawarensis; epidemiology; pathology; Canada

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Avian influenza virus (AN) was studied in ring-billed gulls (Lams delawarensis) in one breeding colony on Lake Erie in 2000, and two on Lake Ontario in both 2000 and 2004. Antibodies to H13 AIV were detected in 92% of adults in 2000 and 82% in 2004. Antibody prevalence in 3-wk-old chicks was 5%-30% (overall 15%) in 2000 and 21% and 76% (overall 48%) in 2004. In 5-wk-old chicks, antibody prevalence was 23%-75% (overall 53%) in 2000 and 53% and 79% (overall 66%) in 2004. Geometric mean antibody titers at 3 and 5 wk did not differ in 2000, but increased significantly at one colony in 2004. In 2000, overall prevalence of AIV isolation from cloaca in embryonated chicken eggs was 32% (3 wk old), 13% (5 wk old), and 0 (adults), but AIV was also isolated From kidney and lung it, a high proportion of tissues cultured from 3-wk-old birds in one colony. Isolates from cloaca were characterized as subtype H13 by serology; all 15 tested for neuraminidase were H13N6. However, three AIV detections considered on the basis of nucleotide sequence to be subtype H16 were among the 28 detected retrospectively by PCR in archived cloacal swabs; the remainder were subtype H13. Outcome of virus isolation was not related to presence of antibody titers in chicks. The presence of antibody to AIV in chicks was associated significantly with inflammation in heart, kidney, pancreas, and liver. AIV was not isolated in 2004. AIV infected chicks annually within the first 3 wk of life, ultimately infecting the majority of birds in most colonies, but did not appear to cause clinical disease.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available