4.3 Article

Effects of polyether ionophores on the protective immune responses of broiler chickens against angara disease and newcastle disease viruses

期刊

VETERINARY RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS
卷 31, 期 7, 页码 909-929

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11259-007-0030-7

关键词

angara disease virus; antibody response; chickens; immunomodulation; ionophores; mortality; newcastle disease virus

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Immunization against Angara disease virus (ADV), a serotype 4 avian adenovirus, and Newcastle disease virus (NDV), an avian paramyxovirus serotype 1, is the mainstay of a broiler vaccination programme, while polyether ionophores usually form an essential component of a broiler medication programme in most parts of India and Pakistan. The role of polyether ionophores in the protective immune responses of broiler chickens vaccinated and challenged with ADV and NDV was investigated. A total of 1600 birds were divided into eight groups of 200 birds each. First four groups were vaccinated against NDV and ADV, while the remaining four served as unvaccinated controls. The first 3 groups of birds were administered salinomycin, monensin and cyclophosphamide (CYP), respectively. The last group served as an untreated control. The same treatment schedule was also followed for the next four unvaccinated groups. The post-vaccination and post-challenge serological responses to NDV and ADV, body and lymphoid organ weight gains, post-challenge survival rate and detection of NDV and ADV in the tissues of infected birds were evaluated. Birds administered salinomycin showed a significant stimulation of protective immune responses against both NDV and ADV as compared to the untreated and CYP-treated birds. Monensin also enhanced the protective immune responses against both viruses but the effect was not statistically significant. Thus, it is concluded that monensin and salinomycin augment the anti-NDV and anti-ADV immune responses in broiler chickens, which supports their use in poultry flocks.

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

4.3
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