4.1 Article

Marek's disease virus-induced transient paralysis is associated with cytokine gene expression in the nervous system

期刊

VIRAL IMMUNOLOGY
卷 19, 期 2, 页码 167-176

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/vim.2006.19.167

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Marek's disease (MD)-associated transient paralysis (TP) was experimentally induced in chickens by intraperitoneal inoculation of RB1B strain of Marek's disease virus (MDV). Between 7 and 11 days post-infection (d.p.i.), neck and limb paralysis was observed in 18% of infected chickens, which was associated with various degrees of edema, vacuolation, perivascular cuffing of mononuclear cells, and glial cell infiltration mainly in the cerebrum, cerebellum, and brain stem. The chickens that were infected but did not progress to develop TP until 12 d.p.i. also had similar lesions suggestive of encephalitis in the cerebrum, cerebellum, and brain stem. Chickens infected with MDV had more interleukin (IL)-6, IL-12, and interferon (IFN)-gamma in their brain tissues compared to uninfected chickens. Moreover, IL-18 was significantly increased in brain tissues of birds showing clinical signs of TP compared to uninfected birds. Importantly, the expression of IL-6, IL-18, and IFN-gamma in brain tissues of MDV-infected chickens with signs of TP was significantly increased compared to that in asymptomatic MDV-infected birds. MDV genome load in the brain of chickens showing clinical signs of TP was higher than that in asymptomatic MDV-infected chickens but was not statistically significant. The lesions in the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spinal cord segments in MDV-infected chickens were characterized mainly by perivascular cuffing of mononuclear cells irrespective of the group. The expression of mRNA for IL-18 and IFN-gamma genes was not significantly different in spinal cord tissues of chickens with TP compared to clinically normal, MDV-infected and noninfected chickens. These results suggest possible underlying immunologic mechanisms for MDV-induced TP.

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

4.1
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