z-logo
Premium
Cross‐Protection Between Geographically Distinct A naplasma marginale Isolates Appears to be Constrained by Limited Antibody Responses
Author(s) -
Kenneil R.,
Shkap V.,
Leibovich B.,
Zweygarth E.,
Pfister K.,
Ribeiro M. F. B.,
Passos L. M. F.
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
transboundary and emerging diseases
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.392
H-Index - 63
eISSN - 1865-1682
pISSN - 1865-1674
DOI - 10.1111/tbed.12125
Subject(s) - anaplasmosis , biology , heterologous , anaplasma , tick borne disease , virology , antibody , rickettsiales , strain (injury) , anaplasmataceae , immunology , microbiology and biotechnology , tick , genetics , bacteria , anatomy , gene
Summary The rickettsia A naplasma marginale causes the haemolytic disease bovine anaplasmosis, an economic problem in tropical and subtropical areas worldwide. The closely related but less pathogenic A naplasma centrale is commonly used as a live vaccine to prevent anaplasmosis, but it can only be produced from infected blood. UFMG 1 is a low pathogenic B razilian strain of A . marginale, which has been shown to protect cattle against a high pathogenic B razilian isolate. As UFMG 1 can be grown in tick cells, the strain was proposed as a possible cell culture‐derived vaccine. We have evaluated whether UFMG 1 could protect cattle against a geographically distant heterologous strain, using A . centrale vaccination as a standard for comparison. Trial calves were infected with UFMG 1, A . centrale or PBS . UFMG 1‐infected animals were more symptomatic than those infected with A . centrale , but none required treatment. All calves were then challenged with the I sraeli A . marginale Gonen strain (one of the most prevalent strain in I srael). The A . centrale group had the mildest symptoms, while UFMG 1 and control groups both had a more severe response. Nevertheless, the challenge did not cause life‐threatening disease in any group. Animals infected with A . centrale had a significantly higher I g G response than UFMG 1, when measured in an ELISA against initial bodies from their homologous strain or G onen. The level of cross‐reactivity of the response to initial infection correlated significantly with reduced symptoms after challenge. In conclusion, UFMG 1 had limited effect in preventing disease by the geographically distant heterologous G onen strain. While the low pathogenicity of the G onen strain in this trial makes it impossible to conclusively state that UFMG 1 would have given no protective effect against more serious disease, the comparatively low I g G response to UFMG 1 suggests it would not have been as effective as A . centrale .

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom