Advertisement

Principles of Vaccination

  • J. M. Aynaud
Part of the Developments in Veterinary Virology book series (DVVI, volume 5)

Abstracts

A great number of vaccines against hog cholera (HC) have been reported and used in the control of the disease. Two major types of vaccines are the inactivated and the attenuated live virus vaccines. In the past, inactivated virus vaccines were widely used but their low efficacy contributed to the development of live virus vaccines which are known to be more effective. However, the live virus vaccines were constantly reproached on account of their lack of safety. Advances over the last 20 years in our knowledge of hog cholera virus (HCV) and the immunology of the swine species has created a new basis for the development of several live virus vaccines. These are now considered as being effective and totally safe.

Keywords

Virus Vaccine Serial Passage Classical Swine Fever African Swine Fever African Swine Fever Virus 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Gheorghiu I, Albu T, Surdan C, Carp N and Popa M: La valeur immunogène du vaccin antipesteux porcin formulé-adsorbé, préparé avec l’antigène bactériologique stérile et infecté par la Salmonella in vivo et in vitro. Lucr. Inst. Pasteur (Bucarest). 5: 129–138, 1961.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    McBryde C and Cole CG: Crystal-violet vaccine for the prevention of hog cholera. J. Amer. Vet. Med. Ass. 89: 652–663, 1936.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Janowski H, Majdan S and Mierzejewska M: Recherches concernant la résistance chez les porcs vaccinés contre la peste porcine avec le vaccin au cristal violet. Med. Weteryn. 2: 71–85, 1959.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Van Bekkum JG: Serological aspects of the vaccination against Hog cholera with crystal violet vaccine. Tijdschr. Diergeneesk. 91: 149–158, 1966.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pilchard I: Experimental inactivated virus hog cholera vaccines: induction period of immunity. Am. J. Vet. Res. 28: 915–923, 1967.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Corthier G, Galicher C and Gelfi J: Peste porcine: étude comparée du pouvoir immunogène des vaccins à virus vivant et à virus inactivé par la cinétique des anticorps neutralisants dans le sérum. Ann. Rech. Vét. 6: 93–101, 1975.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Huck RA and Aston FW: The “carrier” sow in swine fever. Vet. Rec. 76: 1151–1154, 1964.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stewart WC, Carbrey EA and Kress JL: Transplacental hog cholera infection in immune sows. Am. J. Vet. Res. 33: 791–798, 1972.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Larenaudie B, Remond M and Dhennin L: A new inactivated virus: classical swine fever vaccine. Agricultural Research Seminar on Hog Cholera, classical swine fever and African swine fever. EEC Seminar, Hannover, Germany, pp. 303–373, 1976.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jerabek J, Hrabak R and Sima O: Crystal violet inactivation of hog cholera virus growin in tissue culture. Acta Vet. 39: 467–477, 1970.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dalsgaard K and Overby E: Vaccination against hog cholera (classical swine fever) with a detergent split vaccine. Acta. Vet. Scand. 17: 465–474, 1976.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Koprowski H, James TR, Cox HR: Propagation of Hog cholera virus in rabbits. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 63: 178–183, 1946.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Baker JA: Serial passages of hog cholera virus in rabbits. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 63: 183–185, 1946.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dunne HW: Hog Cholera (European Swine fever) in: Advances in Veterinary Sciences and Comparative Medecine, 17: 315–359, 1973.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Phillips CE: Safety testing HC live virus vaccine. Proc. U.S. Liv. San. Assoc. 7th Ann. Meet., 302–309, 1966.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pilchard EI: HC lesions in swine given modified vaccine. J. Am. Vet. Med. Ass. 148: 48–51, 1966.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Emerson JL and Delez AL: Cerebellar hypoplosia, hypomyelinogenesis and congenital tremors of pigs associated with prenatal hog cholera vaccination of sows. J. Am. Vet. Med. Ass. 147: 1346–1349, 1965.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dunne HW and Clark CD: Embryonic death, foetal mummification, still birth, and neonatal death in pigs of gilts vaccinated with attenuated Hog Cholera virus. Am. J. Vet. Res. 29: 787–796, 1968.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stewart WC, Carbrey EA and Kresse BS: Transplacental HC infection in susceptible sows. Am. J. Vet. Res. 34: 637–640, 1973.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sheffy BE, Coggins L and Baker JA: Protection of pigs against Hog cholera with virus diarrhea virus of cattle. Proc. U.S. Livestock San. Assoc. 65: 347–353, 1961.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tamoglia TW, Tellejohn AL, Phillips CE and Wilkinson FB: Further evaluation of hog cholera immunizing agents: Bovine virus diarrhea and hog cholera vaccine, MLV, TCO. Proc. 69th Annu. Meet. U.S., Livestock San. Assoc. p. 385–392, 1966.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Baker JA, Coggins L, Robson D, Sheffy BE and Volenec FJJ: A possibility of decreasing the cost of Hog cholera eradication with use of a heterotypic BVD vaccine. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 155: 1866–1873, 1969.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Carbrey EA, Stewart MS, Kresse JI and Snyder BA: Bovine viral diarrhea infection in pigs and its differenciation from infection with hog cholera strains of low virulence in proceedings: Diagnosis and epizootiology of classical swine fever. EEC Seminar, Amsterdam, pp. 126–158, 1976.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lin Tracy TC et al.: An overall report on the development of highly safe and potent lapinized hog cholera virus strain for hog cholera control in Taiwan. Special publication by National Science Council, Taipei, Taiwan, No.5, pp. 1–44, 1981.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bognar K and Meszaros J: Experiences with a lapinized hog cholera virus strain of decreased virulence. Acta. Vet. Acad. Sci. Hung. 13: 429–438, 1963.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Janowski H, Mierzejewska M and Wasinski K: Immunological properties of the “Chinese” strain of the lapinized hog cholera. Bull. Vet. Inst. Pulawy, 8: 54–58, 1964.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Olah P and Palatka Z: Immunobiological study of lapinized HC strain. Act. Vet. Acad. Sci. Hung. 17: 239–247, 1967.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mihaita S, Totorcea N, Popa M and Albu T: Persistance du virus Peste porcine “C” dans le porc vacciné. Bull. Off. Int. Epiz. 72: 885–897, 1969.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bran L, Mihaita S, Popa M and Totorcea N: Transuterine and transplacenta transmission of C strain. Bull. Off. Int. Epiz. 72: 899–912, 1969.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Precausta P, Perrenot F and Jost Ph: Souche chinoise CL du virus de la PPC sur culture cellulaire. Innocuité, diffusibilité. Rev. Med. Vet. 124: 181–189, 1973.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Precausta P, Brun A, Kato F, Terre J and Marcon C: Peste porcine classique. Etude d’un vaccin préparé à partir de la souche chinoise CL adaptée à la culture cellulaire. Rev. Med. Vet. 126: 969–981, 1975.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jerabek J and Pivnik L: Studium nekterych biologickych vlastonosti “cinskeho” lapinizovaneho virus moru prasat. Vet. Med. (Praha) 12: 9–17, 1967.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lin TC, Shieh CM, Su JF and Chen C: Pathogenicity of the hog cholera line vaccine viruses by reverse passages through SPF pigs. Exp. Rep. Taiwan Prov. Res. Inst. An. Hlth. 9: 1–5, 1972.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Aynaud JM and Asso J: La souche lapinisée dite “chinoise” du virus de la Peste Porcine classique. Rec. Med. Vet. 146: 119–139, 1970.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Aynaud JM, Galicher C, Lombard J, Bibard C and Mierzejewska M: Peste porcine classique: les facteurs d’identification in vitro (marqueurs génétiques) du virus en relation avec le pouvoir pathogène pour le porc. Ann. Rech. Vet. 3: 209–235, 1972.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Aynaud JM, Rigaud C, Leturdu Y, Galicher C, Lombard J, Corthier G and Laude H: Peste porcine classique: les variations sérologiques du virus en France et leur rôle dans l’évolution de la maladie sous sa forme subclinique ou chronique sur le terrain. Ann. Rech. Vet. 5, 57–85, 1974.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sasahara J: Hog cholera: Diagnosis and Prophylaxis. Nat. Inst. Hlth. Quart., 10: 57–81, 1970.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sasahara J, Kumagai T, Shimizu Y and Furuuchi S: Field experiment of hog cholera vaccine prepared in guinea-pig kidney cell culture. Nat. Inst. Anim. Hlth. Quart. 9: 83–91, 1969.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sasahara J: Diagnosis and epizootiology of classical swine fever. EEC Seminar, Amsterdam, pp. 67–82, 1976.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ogawa N, Nakagawa H, Yamamoto H, Sawada M, Hanaki T. and Sazawa H: Tran smissibility of hog cholera GPE- vaccine virus from vaccinated to susceptible contact pigs. Annual Report of the National Veterinary Assay Laboratory 9: 11–15, 1972.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Okaniwa A, Nakagawa M, Shimizu Y and Furunchi S: Lesions in swine inoculated with attenuated HCV. Nat. Inst. Anim. Hlth. Quart. 9: 92–103, 1969.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Aynaud JM: Etude des propriétés de mutants froids du virus de la Peste Porcine classique. Application à la vaccination. Lejolly, J.C., Bibard, C. and Galicher, C. Bull. Off. Int. Epiz. 75: 654–659, 1971.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Launais M, Aynaud JM and Corthier G: Peste Porcine classique: propriétés d’un clone (souche “Thiverval”) isolé en culture cellulaire à basse température. Application dans la vaccination. Rev. Med. Vet. 123: 1537–1554, 1972.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Launais M, Aynaud JM, Corthier G and Laude H: Peste Porcine classique. Caractères de l’immunité, innocuité vis-à-vis des truies en gestation et stabilité génétique de la souche “Thiverval”. Rev. Med. Vet. 125: 175–194, 1974.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Launais M and Aynaud JM: Peste Porcine classique: durée de l’immunité obtenue chez la truie avec la souche “Thiverval” dans les conditions de la pratique. Rec. Med. Vet. 153, 349–352, 1977.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Florent A, Thomas J and Leunen J: Contrôle des vaccines contre la Peste Porcine. Intérêt de l’immunodépression pour la mise en évidence de la virulence résiduelle. Ann. Med. Vet. 114: 75–79, 1970.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Terpstra C and Tielen MJM: Antibody response against swine fever following vaccination with C-strain virus. Zbl. Vet. Med. B. 23: 809–821, 1976.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Corthier G and Aynaud JM: Comparison of the immune response in serum and buccopharyngeal secretions following immunization by different routes with a live hog cholera virus vaccine (Thiverval strain). Ann. Rech. Vét. 8: 159–165, 1977.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Corthier G and Charley B: Influence of colostral antibodies on pig immunization against hog cholera virus. Ann. Rech. Vét. 9: 245–253, 1978.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Jerabek J and Kolar P: Immunity response in pigs following various routes of administration of vaccine TVM-1 against hog cholera. Acta. Vet. BRNO, 45: 199–203, 1976.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Van Oirscholt JT: Persistent and inapparent infections with swine fever virus of low virulence. Their effects on the immune system. DVM Thesis, University of Utrecht, pp. 120–125, 1980.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Corthier G: Cellular and humoral immune response in pigs given vaccinal and chronic Hog cholera viruses. Am. J. Vet. Res. 39: l841-l844, 1978.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Charley D, Corthier G, Houdayer M and Rouzé P: Modifications desréactions immunitaires au cours de la Peste Porcine classique. Ann. Rech. Vet. 11: 27–33, 1980.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Launais M, Aynaud JM and Corthier G: Hog cholera virus: active immunization of piglets with the Thiverval strain in the presence and absence of colostral passive immunity. Vet. Microbiol. 3: 31–43, 1978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Mierzejewska M: Peste porcine classique: influence des anticorps d’origine colostrale sur la réponse immunitaire du porcelet consécutive à la vaccination avec l’aide de la souche lapinisée dite chinoise. Ann. Rech. Vet. 8: 227–240, 1977.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Terpstra C: The immunity against challenge with swine fever virus of piglets from sows vaccinated with C-strain virus. Tijdschr. Diergeneesk. 102: 1293–1298, 1977.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Precausta P, Kato F and Brun A: Swine fever. Immunization of piglets. Comp. Immun. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 6: 281–289, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Corthier G: Swine fever: influence of passive immunity on pig immune response following vaccination with a live virus vaccine. Ann. Rech. Vet. 7: 361–372, 1976.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Coggins L: Study of Hog cholera colostral antibody and its effect on active hog cholera immunization. Am. J. Vet. Res. 25: 613–616, 1964.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Martinus Nijhoff Publishing, Boston 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. M. Aynaud

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations