These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Effect of route of vaccination on the prevention of infectious laryngotracheitis in commercial egg-laying chickens.
    Author: Fulton RM, Schrader DL, Will M.
    Journal: Avian Dis; 2000; 44(1):8-16. PubMed ID: 10737639.
    Abstract:
    Commercial egg-laying chickens were vaccinated for infectious laryngotracheitis (ILT) with one of five commercially available vaccines (designated A, B, C, D, and E) on five separate farms by either eyedrop (e), spray (s), or double dose in the water (w) method. Groups were identified by the vaccine designation and the method of vaccination. Birds from the test groups were transferred to an isolation facility and challenged intratracheally 3 wk after vaccination. The remaining birds were given a second vaccination with the original chicken embryo origin vaccine by spray or a chicken embryo origin vaccine if the first vaccine was of tissue culture origin. After challenge, birds were monitored for clinical signs. Those surviving were euthanatized on day 6 postchallenge, and tissues and blood were collected for histopathology, virus isolation, and serology. On the basis of histopathology and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) results, after one vaccination, all chickens given vaccines by eyedrop were provided better protection than nonvaccinated controls (CTLs). Birds in groups Bs and Ds had lower microscopic lesion scores whereas only birds given Bs had higher ELISA titers than CTLs. Birds in groups As and Cs and groups Bw birds taken from the rear of the barn (r) had microscopic lesion scores that were no different from those of CTLs. These same birds in addition to vaccine Ds had ELISA titers no different from those of CTLs. Of all vaccines, only A given by eyedrop or spray produced higher virus isolation titers than those of CTLs. The remainder of the vaccines produced virus isolation titers that were no different from those of CTLs. After two vaccinations, all groups had lower microscopic lesion scores than CTLs. Only Bw birds from the middle of the barn Bs, EeDs, and AsAs had virus isolation results that were higher than those of CTLs. Only groups BwrBs, CsCs, and DsDs had ELISA titers no different from those of controls. These results suggest that a priming vaccination followed by a booster dose offers better protection against ILT than a single vaccination alone. Vaccine application by eyedrop provides more uniform protection if only one vaccination is given, whereas spray vaccination may serve as an alternative method of vaccination for birds receiving two doses of vaccine.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]