Archiv für die gesamte Virusforschung

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 227–235 | Cite as

The epizootiological importance of foot-and-mouth disease carriers

I. Experimentally produced foot-and-mouth disease carriers in susceptible and immune cattle
  • Paul Sutmoller
  • John W. McVicar
  • George E. Cottral
Article

Summary

  1. 1.

    Susceptible and immunized cattle were exposed to FMDV in varying amounts, and by different routes, and a high percentage of cattle became carriers after pharyngeal or nasal exposure.

     
  2. 2.

    The percentage of virus “takes” was not altered appreciably by the immune status of the cattle; however, as could be expected, the susceptible cattle more often became clinically ill.

     
  3. 3.

    If only minimal amounts of virus were inoculated, carriers were sometimes produced without overt disease. In immune cattle, this direct establishment of asymptomatic carriers appeared to be the rule.

     
  4. 4.

    In immunized cattle, the number of virus “takes” was somewhat reduced when low doses of virus were inoculated by the pharyngeal or nasal route.

     
  5. 5.

    If the virus was able to establish itself in the pharynx of immunized cattle, active virus multiplication took place in spite of preinfection serum antibody and the absence of clinical signs.

     

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bachrach, H. L., J. J. Callis, W. R. Hess, andR. E. Patty: A plaque assay for foot-and-mouth disease virus and kinetics of virus reproduction. Virology4, 224–236 (1957).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beard, C. W., andB. C. Easterday: The influence of the route of administration of Newcastle disease virus on host response. I. Serological and virus isolation studies. J. infect. Dis.12 (1), 55–70 (1967).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bodian, D.: Experimental studies on passive immunization against poliomyelitis: III. Passive-active immunization and pathogenesis after virus feeding in chimpanzees. Amer. J. Hyg.58, 81–100 (1953).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brown, F., andB. Cartwright: Purification of the virus of foot-and-mouth disease by fluorocarbon treatment and its dissociation from neutralizing antibody. J. Immunol.85, 309–313 (1960).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Burrows, R.: Studies on the carrier state of cattle exposed to foot-andmouth disease virus. J. Hyg. (Lond.)64, 81–90 (1966).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cottral, G. E., R. E. Patty, P. Gailiunas, andF. W. Scott: Relationship of foot-and-mouth disease virus plaque size on cell cultures to infectivity for cattle by intramuscular inoculation. Arch. ges. Virusforsch.18, 276–293 (1966).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cunha, R. G., J. R. Bapitista, Jr.,U. M. Serrao, andI. Torturella: El uso de los ratones lactantes en la evaluacion de los anticuerpos contra el virus de la fiebre aftosa su significacion immunologica. Gac. vet. (B.Aires)19, 243–267 (1957).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cunha, R. G., andM. N. Honigman: A comparison of serum tests in mice for the detection of foot-and-mouth antibody. Amer. J. vet. Res.24, 371–375 (1963).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Doll, E. R., W. T. McCollum, andElizabeth M. Wallace: Immunization of chicks hatched from hens immunized against Newcastle disease. Vet. Med.65, 365–369 (1950).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gailiunas, P.: Detection of minimal quantities of foot-and-mouth disease virus with bovine kidney tissue culture. Appl. Microbiol.13, 872–875 (1965).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Graves, J. H., P. D. McKercher, H. E. Farris, Jr., andK. M. Cowan: Early response of cattle and swine to inactivated foot-and-mouth disease vaccine. Res. Vet. Sci. (in press).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hulse, E. C., andJ. T. Edwards: Foot-and-mouth disease in hibernating hedgehogs. J. comp. Path.50, Part 4 (1937).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Korn, G.: Experimentelle Untersuchungen zum Virusnachweis im Inkubationsstadium der Maulund Klauenseuche und zu ihrer Pathogenese. Arch. exp. Vet.-Med.11, 637–649 (1957).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sabin, A. nB.: Present position of immunization against poliomyelitis with live virus vaccines. Brit. med. J.5123, 663–680 (1959).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sutmoller, P., P. Auge de Mello, M. N. Honigman, andK. E. Federer: Infectivity for cattle and pigs of three strains of foot-and-mouth disease virus isolated from carrier cattle. Amer. J. vet. Res.28, 112, 101–105 (1967).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sutmoller, P., andG. E. Cottral: Improved techniques for the detection of foot-and-mouth disease virus in carrier cattle. Arch. ges. Virusforsch.21, 170–177 (1967).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tessler, J.: Reactivation of antibody-neutralized foot-and-mouth disease virus by organic chemicals and inhibition by 1-butanol. Amer. J. vet. Res.27, 917–922 (1966).PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1968

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul Sutmoller
    • 1
  • John W. McVicar
    • 1
  • George E. Cottral
    • 1
  1. 1.Plum Island Animal Disease Laboratory, Animal Disease and Parasite Research Division, Agricultural Research ServiceU.S. Department of AgricultureGreenport, Long IslandUSA

Personalised recommendations