4.5 Article

Quantification of the horizontal transmission of Mycoplasma synoviae in non-vaccinated and MS-H-vaccinated layers

期刊

AVIAN PATHOLOGY
卷 46, 期 4, 页码 346-358

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/03079457.2017.1282602

关键词

Quantification; transmission; M. synoviae; vaccination; layers

资金

  1. Dutch Commodity Board for Poultry and Eggs

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The number of newly infected birds attributable to one infectious bird per day (= transmission rate) was assessed in non-vaccinated and MS-H-vaccinated experimental specified pathogen-free White Leghorns after Mycoplasma synoviae challenge. Furthermore, the effect of vaccination on the shedding of the challenge strain was determined. The following groups were made: a negative control group (n=5), a vaccinated (MS-H vaccine by eye drop (>10(5.7) colour changing units/bird)) non-challenged group (n=5), two non-vaccinated challenged groups (n=18 each) and two vaccinated challenged groups (n=18 each). In the challenged groups, six seeder birds were intratracheally inoculated with 10(5.4) colony forming units (CFUs)/bird. Trachea swabs were taken at day (D)2, D3, D4, D5, D7, D9, D11, D14, D17, D21, D25, D28, D32, D35, D42 and D46 after contact with seeders and analyzed with a quantitative PCR able to detect the vaccine and field strain separately. The transmission rate and shedding were estimated using the susceptible exposed infectious transmission model and a linear mixed model, respectively. The mean shedding of the challenge strain was 10(6.4) CFU equivalents M. synoviae/g trachea mucus in vaccinates shedding MS-H, while in the birds not shedding the vaccine (non-vaccinates and vaccinates not shedding MS-H) it was 10(6.9) CFU equivalents M. synoviae/g trachea mucus. In vaccinates shedding MS-H, was 0.0012 (95% C.I.: 0.00048 - 0.0024), while in birds not shedding vaccine (non-vaccinates and vaccinates not shedding MS-H) a significantly higher of 0.022 (95% C.I.: 0.015 - 0.031) was found.

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

4.5
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