Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Artigo em Inglês | VETINDEX | ID: vti-717740

Resumo

False positive serologic reactions and difficulties in the diagnosis of Mycoplasma gallisepticum (MG) in chickens have increased lately as a result of infection by low virulent MG strains and the use of live MG vaccines in poultry. The objective of this study was to evaluate the serologic responses of SPF chickens exposed to the three commercially available live MG vaccines, and one low virulent MG strain (MG-70), contributing to the diagnosis and monitoring of MG infection in birds. Six groups of SPF chickens were used. The control group was not infected nor challenged; one group was infected with the low virulent strain MG-70 (MG-70); three groups were immunized and named after the MG vaccine used, i.e., MG-6/85, MG-ts11, and MG-F; and finally one group was infected with the virulent MG standard strain, MGR. Random Amplification of Polymorphic DNA (RAPDPCR) was used to compare the strains to each other, to the standard MG-A5969, and to MGR. All strains were found to be genetically distinguishable from each other. Birds in the control group showed negative results throughout the experiment and showed no cross-reaction with M. synoviae in any serologic test. ELISA tests at 21 days post first exposure (P1E) and seven days after the second exposure (P2E), evidenced that 25% of the MG70 birds were positive, whereas vaccine groups yielded higher positivity rate, i.e., 57%, 43% and 29% for MG-6/85, MG-ts11 and MG-F, respectively. Serum plate agglutination (SPA) evidenced the first positive results at 35 days P1E on birds in the MG-F group at the rate of 100%; followed by 40% of birds in the MG-70 group at 63 days P1E. Chickens in MG-ts11 and MG 6/85 groups had identical behavior and yielded 100% positive SPA at 77 days P1E. In regard to hemagglutination inhibition (HI), 14 % of the birds in MG-F and MG-ts11 reacted at 42 days P1E, while MG-70 and MG-6/85 groups yielded positive results only after challenge; MG-70 birds reacted at 56 days P1E at the rate of 17% against 63 days P1E for 100% of MG-6/85 birds. The time lag for positive serologic response was monitored on a weekly basis and was statistically different among groups (p 0.05) by Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). No clinical signs or gross lesions were seen in the control, vaccinated or MG-70 infected birds. Tracheitis and airsaculitis were observed in birds in the MG-R group. MG was isolated from all studied groups.

2.
Artigo em Inglês | LILACS-Express | VETINDEX | ID: biblio-1491099

Resumo

False positive serologic reactions and difficulties in the diagnosis of Mycoplasma gallisepticum (MG) in chickens have increased lately as a result of infection by low virulent MG strains and the use of live MG vaccines in poultry. The objective of this study was to evaluate the serologic responses of SPF chickens exposed to the three commercially available live MG vaccines, and one low virulent MG strain (MG-70), contributing to the diagnosis and monitoring of MG infection in birds. Six groups of SPF chickens were used. The control group was not infected nor challenged; one group was infected with the low virulent strain MG-70 (MG-70); three groups were immunized and named after the MG vaccine used, i.e., MG-6/85, MG-ts11, and MG-F; and finally one group was infected with the virulent MG standard strain, MGR. Random Amplification of Polymorphic DNA (RAPDPCR) was used to compare the strains to each other, to the standard MG-A5969, and to MGR. All strains were found to be genetically distinguishable from each other. Birds in the control group showed negative results throughout the experiment and showed no cross-reaction with M. synoviae in any serologic test. ELISA tests at 21 days post first exposure (P1E) and seven days after the second exposure (P2E), evidenced that 25% of the MG70 birds were positive, whereas vaccine groups yielded higher positivity rate, i.e., 57%, 43% and 29% for MG-6/85, MG-ts11 and MG-F, respectively. Serum plate agglutination (SPA) evidenced the first positive results at 35 days P1E on birds in the MG-F group at the rate of 100%; followed by 40% of birds in the MG-70 group at 63 days P1E. Chickens in MG-ts11 and MG 6/85 groups had identical behavior and yielded 100% positive SPA at 77 days P1E. In regard to hemagglutination inhibition (HI), 14 % of the birds in MG-F and MG-ts11 reacted at 42 days P1E, while MG-70 and MG-6/85 groups yielded positive results only after challenge; MG-70 birds reacted at 56 days P1E at the rate of 17% against 63 days P1E for 100% of MG-6/85 birds. The time lag for positive serologic response was monitored on a weekly basis and was statistically different among groups (p 0.05) by Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). No clinical signs or gross lesions were seen in the control, vaccinated or MG-70 infected birds. Tracheitis and airsaculitis were observed in birds in the MG-R group. MG was isolated from all studied groups.

3.
Artigo em Inglês | VETINDEX | ID: vti-717692

Resumo

Avian mycoplasmas occur in a variety of bird species. The most important mycoplasmas for chickens and turkeys are Mycoplasma gallisepticum (MG), M. synoviae (MS), and M. meleagridis. Besides, M. iowe (MI) is an emerging pathogen in turkeys, but of little concern for chickens. Mycoplasmas are bacteria that lack cell wall and belong to the class Mollicutes. Although they have been considered extracellular agents, scientists admit nowadays that some of them are obligatory intracellular microorganisms, whereas all other mycoplasmas are considered facultative intracellular organisms. Their pathogenic mechanism for disease include adherence to host target cells, mediation of apoptosis, innocent bystander damage to host cell due to intimate membrane contact, molecular (antigen) mimicry that may lead to tolerance, and mitotic effect for B and/or T lymphocytes, which could lead to suppressed T-cell function and/or production of cytotoxic T cell, besides mycoplasma by-products, such as hydrogen peroxide and superoxide radicals. Moreover, mycoplasma ability to stimulate macrophages, monocytes, T-helper cells and NK cells, results in the production of substances, such as tumor necrosing factor (TNF-alpha), interleukin (IL-1, 2, 6) and interferon ( FONT FACE=Symbol>a, b, g /FONT>). The major clinical signs seen in avian mycoplasmosis are coughing, sneezing, snicks, respiratory rales, ocular and nasal discharge, decreased feed intake and egg production, increased mortality, poor hatchability, and, primarily in turkeys, swelling of the infraorbital sinus(es). Nevertheless, chronic and unapparent infections are most common and more threatening. Mycoplasmas are transmitted horizontally, from bird to bird, and vertically, from dam to offspring through the eggs. Losses attributed to mycoplasmosis, mainly MG and MS infections, result from decreased egg production and egg quality, poor hatchability (high rate of embryonic mortality and culling of day-old birds), poor feed efficiency, increase in mortality and carcass condemnations, besides medication costs. Mycoplasmas are diagnosed by serologic tests, culture and PCR and are sensitive to antimicrobials whose action sites are other than the bacterial cell wall, such as tetracyclines, macrolides, quinolones and tiamulin. However, mycoplasma control is more efficiently achieved by acquisition of birds free of MG, MS, MM and/or MI, vaccination of layers, and monitoring of breeder flocks, followed by elimination of the infected flocks that are detected.

4.
Artigo em Inglês | LILACS-Express | VETINDEX | ID: biblio-1491047

Resumo

Avian mycoplasmas occur in a variety of bird species. The most important mycoplasmas for chickens and turkeys are Mycoplasma gallisepticum (MG), M. synoviae (MS), and M. meleagridis. Besides, M. iowe (MI) is an emerging pathogen in turkeys, but of little concern for chickens. Mycoplasmas are bacteria that lack cell wall and belong to the class Mollicutes. Although they have been considered extracellular agents, scientists admit nowadays that some of them are obligatory intracellular microorganisms, whereas all other mycoplasmas are considered facultative intracellular organisms. Their pathogenic mechanism for disease include adherence to host target cells, mediation of apoptosis, innocent bystander damage to host cell due to intimate membrane contact, molecular (antigen) mimicry that may lead to tolerance, and mitotic effect for B and/or T lymphocytes, which could lead to suppressed T-cell function and/or production of cytotoxic T cell, besides mycoplasma by-products, such as hydrogen peroxide and superoxide radicals. Moreover, mycoplasma ability to stimulate macrophages, monocytes, T-helper cells and NK cells, results in the production of substances, such as tumor necrosing factor (TNF-alpha), interleukin (IL-1, 2, 6) and interferon ( FONT FACE=Symbol>a, b, g /FONT>). The major clinical signs seen in avian mycoplasmosis are coughing, sneezing, snicks, respiratory rales, ocular and nasal discharge, decreased feed intake and egg production, increased mortality, poor hatchability, and, primarily in turkeys, swelling of the infraorbital sinus(es). Nevertheless, chronic and unapparent infections are most common and more threatening. Mycoplasmas are transmitted horizontally, from bird to bird, and vertically, from dam to offspring through the eggs. Losses attributed to mycoplasmosis, mainly MG and MS infections, result from decreased egg production and egg quality, poor hatchability (high rate of embryonic mortality and culling of day-old birds), poor feed efficiency, increase in mortality and carcass condemnations, besides medication costs. Mycoplasmas are diagnosed by serologic tests, culture and PCR and are sensitive to antimicrobials whose action sites are other than the bacterial cell wall, such as tetracyclines, macrolides, quinolones and tiamulin. However, mycoplasma control is more efficiently achieved by acquisition of birds free of MG, MS, MM and/or MI, vaccination of layers, and monitoring of breeder flocks, followed by elimination of the infected flocks that are detected.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA