4.1 Article

Development of an antibody ELISA for potency testing of furunculosis (Aeromonas salmonicida subsp salmonicida) vaccines in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L)

期刊

BIOLOGICALS
卷 40, 期 1, 页码 67-71

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biologicals.2011.09.011

关键词

Vaccination; Temperature; Antibody response; Aeromonas salmonicida; Atlantic salmon; ELISA; Protection

资金

  1. Norwegian Research Council [174213]
  2. North-Trondelag County Council, Norway

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study was conducted in Atlantic salmon to establish the initial and basic scientific documentation for an alternative batch potency test for salmon furuculosis vaccines. We assessed the antibody response development for Aeromonas salmonicida vaccines at different immunisation temperatures (3, 12 and 18 degrees C), by an enzyme-linked-immunosorbent assay (ELISA) 3, 6, 9 and 12 weeks post vaccination, and the correlation between antibody response and protection in cohabitation challenge experiments performed 6 and 12 weeks post vaccination. Fish immunised with a vaccine containing full antigen dose had a significant increase in antibody response after 252 day degrees and the measured values correlated well with protection after 500 day degrees. Fish vaccinated with a reduced antigen dose showed a significant lower antibody response than fish vaccinated with the full dose vaccine at all samplings, and showed a similar low relative percent survival (RPS) in the challenges. The results from this study indicate that an antibody ELISA can discriminate between vaccines of different antigen content and the method may replace challenge tests in batch potency testing of furunculosis vaccines in Atlantic salmon. An immunisation temperature of 12 degrees C and sampling after 6-9 weeks, seemed to be the most appropriate time for using antibody responses to confirm batch potency. (C) 2011 The International Alliance for Biological Standardization. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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