Study the Feedback of Mycoplasma Gallisepticum Infection on the Efficacy of Inactivated Viral Vaccines of Poultry
Author(s)
Marwa Fathy El Sayed , Marwa M.S. Khedr , Maha Magdy Sayed , Reem A. Soliman , Marwa S. Diab , Mounir Mohamed El Safty ,
Download Full PDF Pages: 22-38 | Views: 185 | Downloads: 55 | DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7611818
Abstract
The present study monitored the effect of Mycoplasma gallisepticum infection on the humeral immune response of chickens against the different inactivated bivalent vaccines (ND, AI), (ND, IB), (ND, IBD) and monovalent (Reo Vaccine). These inactivated vaccines were used to inoculate three hundred 3-week-old specific pathogen-free (SPF) chicks by S/C route. They were grouped into nine groups; Groups (1, 3, 5 and 7) pre-infected with MG one week before vaccination and Groups (2,4, 6 and 8)vaccinated and non-infected. Group (9) was kept as control. In this study field infection of Mycoplasma gallisepticum was designed by inoculation of 250uL of the infectious material suspension containing 106cfu of MG was instilled in the nasal sinuses as well as injected subcutaneously one week before vaccination. The immune response was estimated and evaluated by using HI, ELISA and challenge tests. The bacterial stress of M. gallisepticum was recorded by the lesion scores. The results of HI and ELISA tests for the pre-infected groups showed highest antibody titers against (ND, AI), (ND,IB), (ND,IBD), and Reo vaccines which were significantly( at P > 0.05) higher (7.7 log2, 7.8 log2, 7.9 log2, respectively)for ND,(7.1 log2)for AI antigen, andS/P ratio showed non significant increase (1.7, 1.7, 0.3) for IBV, IBDV, and Reovirus antigens respectively28 days post-vaccination. The lowest titer appeared in non-infected vaccinated groups (G2, G4 and G6) (6.5 log2, 6.7 log2, 7.1 log2, respectively) for ND, (6.5 log2)for AI antigen, and S/P ratio was (0.6, 0.8, 0.28) for IBV, IBDV, and Reovirus antigens respectively. This study used serological immune responses to emphasize the results of chicken vaccination with inactivated viral vaccines, particularly in the presence or absence of Mycoplasma infection in chicks. Indeed, there is evidence that vaccinated chicken flocks pre-infected with MG can introduce inaccurate results compared to non infected vaccinated flocks. For the previous conclusion the evaluation of any inactivated viral vaccine must be performed in free Mycoplasma chickens, (SPF chickens as an example) in order to obtain accurate evaluation results.
Keywords
Avian influenza, IB, IBD, Inactivated Vaccine, Mycoplasma gallisepticum, HI, SPF chicks.
References
Abd-Alla H I, Sweelam HM, Mohamed TA, Gabr MM, El-Safty MM and Hegazy MF (2017): Efficacy of extracts and iridoid glucosides fromPentaslanceolataon humoral and cell-mediated immune response of viral vaccine. Med. Chem. Res., 26: 2196.activating the TLR-2/MyD88/NF-kB signaling pathway andNLRP3 inflammasome. Vet. Res. 51:52.
Al-Afaleq A, Bradbury JM, Jones RC and Metwali AM (1989): Mixed infection of turkeys with Mycoplasma synoviae and reo virus: field and experimental observations. Avian Pathol., 18: 441-453.
Bano, S., K. Naeem and S. A. Malik (2003): Evaluation of pathogenic potential of avian influenza virus serotype H9N2 in chickens. Avian Dis., 47:817–822.
Bolha L, Benčina D, Cizelj I, Oven I, Slavec B, Zorman RO, et al (2013): Effect of Mycoplasma synoviae and lentogenic Newcastle disease virus coinfection on cytokine and chemokine gene expression in chicken embryos.Poult. Sci., 92: 3134-3143.
Butcher, G. D. 2002. Last accessed Jul. 2020. MycoplasmaGallisepticum-A continuing problem in commercial poultry.https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ps034.
Chen D, Wei1 Y, Huang L, Wang Y, Sun J, Du W, Wu Het al(2016): Synergistic pathogenicity in sequential coinfection withMycoplasma hyorhinisand porcine circovirus type 2. Vet. Microbiol., 182: 123-130.
Chen, C., J. Li, W. Zhang, S. Shah, and M. Ishfaq. 2020. Mycoplasmagallisepticum triggers immune damage in the chicken thymus by
Evan, J. D., S. A. Leigh, S. L. Branton, S. D. Collier, G. T. Pharr, and S. M. D. Bearson. 2005. Mycoplasma gallisepticum: current anddeveloping means to control the avian pathogen. J. Appl. Poult.Res. 14:757–763.
Fathy M,El-SaftyMM, El-JakeeJK,Abd-AllaHI andMahmoudH(2017):Study the effect ofMycoplasmacontamination of eggs used in virus titration and efficacy of some liveattenuated poultry viral vaccines.Asian J. Pharm. Clin. Res.,10: 216-222.
Feizi, A., Nikpiran, H., Bijanzad, P., Moggadam, A.R.J. and Hosseini, H. (2013): Molecular Identification and Sequencing of Mycoplasma gallisepticum Recovered from Broilers in Egypt. Adv. Biores., 4: 50-53. Gharaibeh, S. and Al Roussan, D., 2008. Int. J. Poult. Sci.,7: 28-35.https://doi.org/10.3923/ijps.2008.28.35
Gaunson JE, Philip CJ, Whithear KG and Browning GF (2000): Lymphocytic infiltration in the chicken trachea in response toMycoplasma gallisepticum infection. Microbiology, 146: 1223-1229.
Gharibi, D., R. Ghadimipour, and M. Mayahi (2018): Detection of Mycoplasma Gallisepticum and Mycoplasma Synoviae Among Commercial Poultry in Khouzestan Province, Iran. Arch. Razi Inst., 73:139–146.
Gole, V. C., K. K. Chousalkar and J. R. Roberts(2012): Prevalence of antibodies to Mycoplasma synoviae in laying hens and possible effects on egg shell quality. Prev.Vet. Med., 106:75–78.
Gondal, M.A., Rabbani, M., Muhammad, K., Yaqub, M.T., Babar, A., Sheikh, A.A., Ahmad, A., Shabbir, M. and Khan, M.I. (2013): Immunomodulatory Effect of New Castle Disease Virus on Inactivated Mycoplasma gallisepticum Vaccine Response in Broilers. J. Anim. Pl. Sci., 23: 1094-1098.
Hassanin, O., Abdallah, F. and Awad, A. (2014): Effects of florfenicol on the immune responses and the interferon- inducible genes in broiler chickens under the impact of E. coliinfection. Vet Res Commun, 38: 51–58.
Hopkins SR and Jr Yoder HW (1984): Increasedincidence of airsacculitis in broilers infected with Mycoplasma synoviae and chicken passaged infectious bronchitis vaccine virus. Avian Dis., 28: 386-396.J. Anim. Pl. Sci., 23: 1094-1098.
Jordan FTW, Yavari C and Knight D (1987): Some observations on the indirect ELISA for antibodies to Mycoplasma iowaeserovar in sera from turkeys considered to be free fromMycoplasmainfections.Avian Pathol., 16: 307-318.
Kanci, A., D. S. Wijesurendra, N. K. Wawegama, G. J. Underwood, A. H. Noormohammadi, P. F. Markham, andG. F. Browning. 2018. Evaluation of Mycoplasma gallisepticum (MG) ts-304 vaccine as a live attenuated vaccine in turkeys. Vaccine 36:2487–2493.Kleven, S. H. (1998:(Mycoplasmas in the Etiology of Multifactorial Respiratory DiseasePoultry Science, 77:1146–1149.
Leigh, S.A., S.L. Branton, J.D. Evans and S.D. Collier(2012): Effect of infection route and concurrent infectious bronchitis virus vaccination on Mycoplasma gallisepticumdisease pathology in an experimental model. Avian Pathol., 41:497–503.
Li, J., Z. Qiao, W. Hu, W. Zhang, S. W. A. Shah, and M. Ishfaq. 2019.Baicalin mitigated Mycoplasma gallisepticum-induced structuraldamage and attenuated oxidative stress and apoptosis in chickenthymus through the Nrf2/HO-1 defence pathway. Vet. Res. 50:83.
Lianmei Qin, Yiwen Chen and Xiaoxing You (2019): Subversion of the Immune Response by Human Pathogenic Mycoplasmas, Front Microbiol., 10: 1934.
Marangon S and Busani L (2006): The use of vaccination in poultry production. Rev. Sci. Tech. Int. Epiz., 26: 265-274.
Marois, C., F. Oufour-Gesbert and I. Kempf (2000: Detection of Mycoplasma synoviae in poultry environment samples by culture and polymerase chain reaction. Vet. Microbiol., 73:311–318.
Marwa FathyEl Sayed, Reem A. Soliman, Heba Mohamed Ghanem, Marwa M.S. Khedr, Gina M. Mohamed and Mounir Mohamed Diab El Safty (2021):Trials for preparation and evaluation of a combined inactivated reassorted H5N1 and Escherichia coli O157 vaccine in poultry.Vet.World,14(6):1677-1681.
Muhammad Ishfaq, Wanying Hu, Mohammad Zeb Khan, Ijaz Ahmad, Wenxin Guo,and Jichang Li (2020):Current status of vaccine research, development, and challenges of vaccines for Mycoplasma gallisepticum,Poultry Science 99:4195–4202.
Mukhtar, M., Awais, M., Anwar, M.I., Hussain, Z., Bhatti, N. and Ali. S. (2012): seroprevalence of Mycoplasma gallisepticum Among commercial layer in Faisalabad,Pakistan, J. Basic Appl. Sci., 8: 183-186.
Naglaa F.S. Awad, Marwa I. Abd El-Hamid, Yousreya M.H., A.M. Erfan, B.A. Abdelrahman, and Hala I. Mahmoud (2019): Impact of single and mixed infections with Escherichia coli and Mycoplasma gallisepticum on Newcastle disease virus vaccine performance in broiler chickens: an in vivo perspective. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 127:396-405.
Nascimiento, E., V. L. A. Pereira, M. G. F. Nascimiento, and M. L. Barreto. 2005. Avian micoplasmosis update. Braz. J. Poult. Sci., 7:1–9.
Naylor, C.J., A.R. Al-Ankari, A.I. Al-Afaleq, J.M. Bradbury andR.C. Jones (1992): Exacerbation ofMycoplasma gallisepticuminfection in turkeys by rhino-tracheitis virus. Avian Pathol., 21:295–305.
OIE (2019): Manual of Standard of Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial Animals Safety Test. Ch. 2.3.4. Avian Influenza, OIE, Paris. p446.
Olanrewaju, H.A., Collier, S.D. and Branton, S.L. (2011):Effects of single and combined Mycoplasma gallisepticum vaccinations on blood electrolytes and acid-base balance in commercial egg-laying hens,Poult. Sci.,90: 358-363. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2010-01006
Orabi, A., Hussein, A., Saleh, A.A., El-Magd, M.A. and Munir, M. (2017): Evolutionary insights into the fusion protein of Newcastle disease virus isolated from vaccinated chickens in 2016 in Egypt. Arch. Virol., 162(10): 3069-3079.
Rabia Riaz, Khushi Muhammad, Masood Rabbani, Muhammad Amjad Iqbal, Aamir Riaz Khan, Sadia Sarfaraz, Mudassar Naseer and Khalid Majeed (2021): Immunomodulatory Effect of New Castle Disease Virus on Inactivated Mycoplasma gallisepticumVaccine Response in Broilers. Pakistan J. Zool., Vol. 53, Iss. 2, pp. 793-796. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjz/20190701160742
Razin Sand Tully JG (1983):Methods in Mycoplasmology:Mycoplasma Characterization. Academic Press. New York, NY. 431–439
Reck C, Menin AM, Pilati C and Milettia LC (2012): Clinical and histologic lesions of mixed infection with Avianorthoreovirus and Mycoplasma synoviae in broilers. Pesqui. Vet. Bras., 32: 687-691.
Rodwell AW and Whitcomb RF (1983): Methods for direct and indirect measurement ofMycoplasmagrowth. In: Razin S, Tully JG. Methods in Mycoplasmology. 1st ed., Academic Press, New York, 185-196.
Samy, A.andNaguib, M.M. (2018).Avian Respiratory Co-infection and Impact on Avian Influenza Pathogenicity in Domestic Poultry: Field and Experimental Findings. Veterinary Sciences, 5(1), 23; https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci5010023
Snedecor, G.W. and Cochran, W.G. (1980) Statistical Methods. 7thed. Iowa State University, Ames.
Sid H, Benachour K andRautenschlein S. (2015): Co-infection with multiple respiratory pathogens contributes to increased mortality rates in Algerianpoultry flocks. Avian Dis., 59: 440-446.
Silva RCF, Nascimen ER, Pereira VLA, Barreto ML, Nascimento MGF(2008): Mycoplasma synoviae infection on Newcastle disease vaccination of chickens. Braz. J. Microbiol., 39: 384-389.
Sly, P.D. and Jones, C.M. (2011): Viral co-infection in infants hospitalized with respiratory disease: is it important to detect? J Pediatr(Rio J). 87:277–280.
Stipkovits, L.; Egyed, L.; Palfi, V.; Beres, A.; Pitlik, E.; Somogyi, M.; Szathmary, S. and Denes, B. (2012): Effect of low-pathogenicity influenza virus H3N8 infection on Mycoplasma gallisepticum infection of chickens. Avian Pathol., 41(1): 51-57.
Subtain SM, SohailManzoor S, Khan FM, Hussain Z, Mukhtar M, Sadia H, Abbas S and Choudhary I (2016): Study on co-infection of Mycoplasma gallisepticumand low pathogenic avian influenza virus H9 in broilers. J. Antivir. Antiretrovir., 8: 95-99.
Thacker EL,ThackerBJ and JankeBH (2001): Interaction between Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae and swine influenza virus. J. Clin. Microbiol., 39: 2525-2530.
Veronica Cortes,Sandra Sevilla-Navarro, Cristina García,*Ana Tudon,Clara Marín, and Pablo Catala-Gregori (2021): Seroprevalence and prevalence ofMycoplasma synoviaein laying hens and broiler breeders in Spain, 2021. Poultry Science 100:10091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2020.11.076
Volokhov DV,GrahamLJ,BrorsonKA and ChizhikovVE(2011):Mycoplasma testing of cell substrates and biologics: Review of alternative non-microbiological techniques. Mol. Cell Probes, 25: 69-77.
Wang, Y., K. G. Whithear, and E. Ghiocas. 1990. Isolation of Myco-plasma gallinarumand M. gallinaceum fromthe reproductive tractof hens. Aust. Vet. J. 67:31–32.
Wei Zhang, Yuhao Liu, Qiaomei Zhang, Syed Waqas Ali Shah, Zhiyong Wu, Jian Wang, Muhammad Ishfaq and Jichang Li (2020): Mycoplasma gallisepticum Infection Impaired the Structural Integrity and Immune Function of Bursa of Fabricius in Chicken: Implication of Oxidative Stress and Apoptosis, Front. Vet. Sci. 7:225. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2020.00225
Xue, J., M. Y. Xu, Z. J. Ma, J. Zhao, N. Jin, and G. Z. Zhang (2017): Serological investigation of Mycoplasma synoviae infection in China from 2010 to 2015. Poultry Science, 96:3109–3112.
Yilmaz, F., Timurkaan, N., Kilic, A., Kalender, H. and Kilinc, U. (2011): Detection of Mycoplasma synoviae and Mycoplasma gallisepticum in chickens by immunohistochemical, PCR and culture methods. Rev. Med. Vet., 162: 79-80.
Zhu, L., M.A. Shahid, J. Markham, G.F. Browning, A.H. Noormohammadi and M.S. And Marenda (2018): Phylogenetic and pathogenic analysis of Mycoplasma Synoviae isolated from native chicken breeds in China. BMC Genom., 19:117.
Zulfekar, A.M.;Rahman,M.M.D. and Sultana, S. (2015): Seroprevalence of Mycoplasma gallisepticum antibody by ELISA and serum plate agglutination test of laying chicken. Vet. J., 8(1): 9–14.
Zute I and Valdovska A (2015):Prevalence of Mycoplasma gallisepticum in the commercial layer flock, research for rural development. Vet. Med., 1: 168-173.
Cite this Article: