Premium
Antigenic and cross‐protection studies of biotype 1 and biotype 2 isolates of Yersinia ruckeri in rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss (Walbaum)
Author(s) -
Tinsley J.W.,
Lyndon A.R.,
Austin B.
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
journal of applied microbiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.889
H-Index - 156
eISSN - 1365-2672
pISSN - 1364-5072
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2011.05020.x
Subject(s) - yersinia ruckeri , biology , antigen , microbiology and biotechnology , rainbow trout , serotype , virology , immunology , fish <actinopterygii> , fishery
Aims: The study investigated antigen characteristics of biotype (bt) 1 and bt 2 isolates of Yersinia ruckeri . Methods and Results: The cell surface characteristics of Y. ruckeri were compared for their antigenic characteristics using polyclonal antibodies that revealed that both biotypes had a homogenous whole‐cell protein antigenic profile. Notable differences in the antigenic properties were observed in the lipopolysaccharide profile of both biotypes. Two iron‐regulated outer membrane proteins (IROMP) of c. 90 and 100 kDa were shown to be major specific antigens. The results demonstrate for the first time differences in antigens between bt 1 and bt 2 isolates of serotype O1 isolates of Y. ruckeri . The protection induced in rainbow trout by a commercial monovalent, and bivalent inactivated vaccine was tested with the outcome that the ability of isolates to cause mortality in vaccinated fish varied with geographical location. In this context, vaccination studies suggested that the O antigen was the dominant immunogenic molecule involved in protection against the disease. Conclusions: The O antigen of Y. ruckeri was the dominant immunogenic molecule involved in the protection of rainbow trout against enteric redmouth disease. Significance and Impact of the Study: There are distinct phenotypic and antigenic differences in Y. ruckeri bt 1 and bt 2 with O antigen recognized as the dominant immunogenic molecule. The data have significance in explaining the lack of success of the earlier monovalent vaccine and demonstrate the effectiveness of the newer bivalent vaccine.