Effect of infectious bursal disease virus on response of turkeys to infection by avian influenza virus (H9N2) | ||
| مجله تحقیقات دامپزشکی (Journal of Veterinary Research) | ||
| Article 10, Volume 72, Issue 3, September 2017, Pages 341-346 PDF (801.93 K) | ||
| DOI: 10.22059/jvr.2017.127985.2322 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Farhad Hashemzade1; Mansouir Mayahi* 2; Abdol Hamid Shoshtary3; Masoud Reza Seyfi Abad Shapouri4; Masoud Gourbanpoor5 | ||
| 14Graduated from Avian Health and Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Shahid Chamran University of ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran | ||
| 2Faculty of Veterinary Medicine of Ahvaz | ||
| 32Department of Avian Diseases, Razi Vaccine and serum research institute, Karaj,Iran | ||
| 4Department of Pathobiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran | ||
| 5Graduated from Avian Health and Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Shahid Chamran University of ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran | ||
| Abstract | ||
| BACKGROUND: Infection by infectious bursal disease virus (IBDV) in turkeys may lead to immunosuppression effects and therefore turkeys could not resist against pathogenic or less pathogenic agents. OBJECTIVE: The aim of present study was to examine the effects of IBDV on response of turkey’s poults to avian influenza virus (AIV).METHODS: A total of 100 day-old poults were divided randomly into 4 equal groups. Groups 1 and 2 were infected with 104CID50 of IBDV by oral route at 1 day of age; groups 1 and 3 were infected with 106 EID50 of AIV (H9N2) by the oculo-nasal route at day 30. Poults of group 4 were kept as uninfected control group. All groups were vaccinated with Newcastle disease virus (NDV) vaccine. Blood samples via wing web were collected at days 0, 30, 37, 44, 51 and 58 and anti- NDV and anti-AIV serum titers were measured by HI test. At days 33 and 41 three poults of each group were euthanized and their splenic lymphocytes proliferation repose to phytohaemagglutinin was assessed. RESULTS: Influenza clinical signs were prolonged and more intensive in group 1 than group 3. The mean HI titers to NDV were significantly lower in group 1 than group 3, in all sampling times, but anti-AIV titers were significantly lower in group 1 compared to group 3 from days 14 AIV (H9N2) post infection. The lymphocyte proliferation assay with PHA did not show any differences between groups 1 and 3. CONCLUSIONS: IBDV suppresses immune response in turkey and causes prolonged and more intensive clinical signs after challenge with AIV. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Turkey; Avian Influenza; IBD; Immunosuppression | ||
| References | ||
|
Brown, I.H., Banks, J., Manvell, R.J., Essen, S.C., Shell, W., Stomka, M. (2006) Recent epidemiology and ecology of influenza A viruses in avian species in Europe and the Middle East. Dev Biol. (Basel). 124: 45-50.
Capua. I., Alexander, D.J. (2009) Avian influenza infection in birds: a challenge and opportunity for the poultry veterinarian. Poult Sci. 88: 842-846.
Chui, C., Thorsen, J. (1984) Experimental infection of turkeys with infectious bursal disease virus and the effect on the immunocompetence of infected turkeys. Avian Dis. 28: 197-207.
Confer, A.W., Springer, W.T., Shane, S.M., Conovan. J.F. (1981) Sequential mitogen stimulation of peripheral blood lymphocytes from chickens inoculated with infectious bursal disease virus. Am J Vet Res. 42: 2109-2113.
Dohms, J.E., Lee, K.P., Rosenberger, J.K. (1981) Plasma cell changes in the gland of Harder following infectious bursal disease virus infection of the chicken. Avian Dis. 25: 683-695.
Faragher. J.T., Allan, W.H., Wyeth, C.J. (1974) Immunosuppressive effect of infectious bursal agent on vaccination against Newcastle disease. Vet Rec. 95: 385-388.
Giambrone, J.J., Fletcher, O.J., Lukert, P.D., Page, R.K., Eidson, C.E. (1978) Experimental infection of turkeys with infectious bursal disease virus. Avian Dis. 22: 451-458.
Loa, C. C., Lin, T. L., Wu, C. C., Bryan, T., Thacker, H. L., Hooper, T., Schrader, D. (2001) Humoral and cellular immune responses in turkey poults infected with turkey coronavirus. Poult Sci. 80: 1416-1424.
Motamed, N., Mayahi, M., Seifi, M.R. (2013) Effect of infectious bursal disease virus on pathogenicity of avian influenza virus subtype H9N2 in broiler chicks. J Vet Med Anim Health. 5: 276-280.
Nili, H., Asasi, K. (2002) Natural cases and an experimental study of H9N2 avian influenza in commercial broiler chickens of Iran. Avian Pathol. 31: 247-252.
Nusbaum, K.E., Lukert, P.D., Fletcher, O.J. (1988) Experimental infections of one-day-old poults with turkey isolates of infectious bursal disease virus 1. Avian Pathol. 17: 51-62.
Oladele, O. A., Adene, D. F., Obi, T. U., Nottidge, H. O. (2009) Comparative susceptibility of chickens, turkeys and ducks to infectious bursal disease virus using immunohistochemistry. Vet Res. Commun. 33: 111-121.
Ramirez-Nieto, G., Shivaprasad, H.L., Lillehoj, H.S., Perez, D.R. (2010) Adaptation of a Mallard H5N2 low pathogenicity influenza virus in chickens with prior history of infection with infectious bursal disease virus. Avian Dis. 54: 513-521.
Reed, L.J., Muench, H. (1938) A simple method of estimating fifty percent endpoint. Am J Hyg. 27: 493-497.
Sharma, J.M., Lee, L.F. (1983) Effect of infectious bursal disease virus on natural killer cell activity and mitogenic response of chicken lymphoid cells: Role of adherent cells in cellular immune suppression. Infect Immun. 42: 747-754.
Swayne, D.E., Glisson, G.R., McDougald, L.R., Nolan, L.K., Suarez D.L., Nair, V. L. (2013) Diseases of Poultry. (13th ed.) Wiley-Blackwell, USA.
Tumpey, T. M., Kapczynski, D.R., Swayne, D.E. (2004) Comparative susceptibility of chickens and turkeys to avian influenza A H7N2 virus infection and protective efficacy of a commercial avian influenza H7N2 virus vaccine. Avian Dis. 48: 167-76.
Webester, R.G., Cox, N.J., Sthor, K. (2002) WHO manual on animal influenza diagnosis and surveillance. (1st ed.) Geneva, Switzerland.
Zarkov, I., Tsachev, I. (2011) Detection of antibodies against avian isolate of influenza A virus H9N2 in turkey poults after infection via different routes. Trakia J Sci. 9: 87-91. | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 795 PDF Download: 603 |
||