4.2 Article

Protective immunity against Newcastle disease: The role of antibodies specific to Newcastle disease virus polypeptides

Journal

AVIAN DISEASES
Volume 44, Issue 1, Pages 138-144

Publisher

AMER ASSOC AVIAN PATHOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.2307/1592517

Keywords

Newcastle disease virus; passive immunization; humoral immune response; protection

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Studies were performed to determine if passive immunization with hyperimmune sera generated to specific Newcastle disease virus (NDV) proteins conferred protection against virus challenge. Six groups of S-wk-old chickens were passively immunized with antiserum against either hemagglutinin-neuraminidase/fusion, (HN/F) protein, nucleoprotein/phosphoprotein (NP/P), Matrix (M) protein, a mixture of all NDV proteins (ALL), intact ultraviolet-inactivated NDV (UVNDV), or negative sera. Blood samples were collected 2 days postimmunization, and the birds were challenged with Texas GB strain of NDV. Antibody titers were detected from those recipient birds that had received the antisera against the HN/F ALL, or UVNDV by a hemagglutination inhibition test, an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and a virus neutralization test. Antibodies were detected only by the ELISA from the birds that had received antisera against NP/P and M protein. Antibody titers in the recipient birds dropped by two dilutions (log(2)) after 2 days postinjection. Birds passively immunized with antisera against HN/F, ALL, and UVNDV were protected from challenge, whereas chickens passively immunized with antisera against NP/P and M protein and specific-pathogen-free sera developed clinical signs of Newcastle disease. The challenge virus was recovered from the tracheas of all passively immunized groups. The presence of neutralizing antibodies to NDV provided protection from clinical disease bur was unable ro prevent virus shedding from the trachea.

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