4.6 Article

Intranasal Exposure to Rift Valley Fever Virus Live-Attenuated Strains Leads to High Mortality Rate in Immunocompetent Mice

期刊

VIRUSES-BASEL
卷 14, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/v14112470

关键词

Rift Valley fever virus; attenuated vaccine strains; intranasal exposure; pathogenicity

类别

资金

  1. Metaprogram FORESEE of the INRAe
  2. Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes
  3. Institut National de la Recherche pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement
  4. University of Lyon 1
  5. French Government's Investissement d'Avenir programme, Laboratoire d'Excellence Integrative Biology of Emerging Infectious Diseases [ANR-10-LABX-62-IBEID]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study showed that intranasal inoculation of Rift Valley fever virus resulted in higher mortality rate and neurovirulence compared to subcutaneous infection, with high levels of virus detected in the brain.
Rift Valley fever virus (RVFV) is a pathogenic arthropod-borne virus that can cause serious illness in both ruminants and humans. The virus can be transmitted by an arthropod bite or contact with contaminated fluids or tissues. Two live-attenuated veterinary vaccines-the Smithburn (SB) and Clone 13 (Cl.13)-are currently used during epizootic events in Africa. However, their residual pathogenicity (i.e., SB) or potential of reversion (i.e., Cl.13) causes important adverse effects, strongly limiting their use in the field. In this study, we infected immunocompetent mice with SB or Cl.13 by a subcutaneous or an intranasal inoculation. Interestingly, we found that, unlike the subcutaneous infection, the intranasal inoculation led to a high mortality rate. In addition, we detected high titers and viral N antigen levels in the brain of both the SB- and Cl.13-infected mice. Overall, we unveil a clear correlation between the pathogenicity and the route of administration of both SB and Cl.13, with the intranasal inoculation leading to a stronger neurovirulence and higher mortality rate than the subcutaneous infection.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据