Protective immunity against Eimeria tenella infection in chickens following oral immunization with Bacillus subtilis expressing Eimeria tenella 3-1E protein
- 398 Downloads
The current experiment was conducted to construct recombinant Bacillus subtilis WB600 expressing Eimeria tenella 3-1E protein to investigate the oral immunization protective effects against E. tenella. The merozoite surface antigen 3-1E gene of E. tenella was introduced into the pBS-H1 expression vector with a novel signal peptide sequence. After the electro-transformation, the expression of objective protein in B. subtilis WB600 was detected by Western blot. The results showed that the recombinant B. subtilis strain with the ability of high-level secretion of 3-1E was constructed successfully. Seven-day-old broiler chickens were orally vaccinated with B. subtilis WB600 harboring 3-1E (B.S-pBS-H1-3-1E) or B. subtilis WB600 with empty plasmid (B.S-pBS-H1) 10 days prior to challenge with sporulated E. tenella oocysts. The results showed the recombinant B. subtilis strain with the ability of high-level secretion of 3-1E was constructed successfully. Vaccination with B.S-pBS-H1-3-1E strain significantly increased the anti-coccidial index and reduced cecal lesion scores compared with the positive control group (chickens were challenged with sporulated E. tenella oocysts without oral administration of B.S-pBS-H1-3-1E strain) and B.S-pBS-H1 group. Ceca mucosal sIgA, secretion, and IL-2, IL-12, IFN-γ, and IL-10 level after challenge were greater in the B.S-pBS-H1-3-1E group than in the positive control group. Taken together, these results indicated that B. subtilis WB600 harboring 3-1E protein induces protective immunity against E. tenella.
KeywordsBacillus subtilis Chickens Eimeria tenella Oral immunization 3-1E protein
The present research was funded by Science and Technology Program of Zhejiang Province (No.2011C16039) and Science and Technology Program of Hangzhou (No.20120232B26). The authors also thank Zhusuo Wang (Director of Chia Tai Broiler Development Center, Zhejiang University, China) for his kind assistance with the feeding trial.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interest.
- Ferreira LC, Ferreira RC, Schumann W (2005) Bacillus subtilis as a tool for vaccine development: from antigen factories to delivery vectors. Ann Acad Bras Cienc 77:113–124Google Scholar
- Heydari A, Moosazadeh Moghaddam M, Aghamollaei H, Yakhchali M, Bambaee B, Latifi A (2013) Cloning and expression of the Bacillus pumilus F3 lipase gene into Bacillus subtilis and determining of comparative expression level between native and recombinant enzyme. New cell Mol Biotech J 3(9):67–73Google Scholar
- Jang SI, Lillehoj HS, Lee SH, Lee KW, Park MS, Bauchan GR, Lillehoj EP, Bertrand F, Dupuis L, Deville S (2010) Immunoenhancing effects of Montanide™ ISA oil-based adjuvants on recombinant coccidia antigen vaccination against Eimeria acervulina infection. Vet Parasitol 172(3–4):221–228CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Luiz WB, Cavalcante RC, Paccez JD, Souza RD, Sbrogio-Almeida ME, Ferreira RC, Ferreira LC (2008) Boosting systemic and secreted antibody responses in mice orally immunized with recombinant Bacillus subtilis strains following parenteral priming with a DNA vaccine encoding the enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) CFA/I fimbriae B subunit. Vaccine 26(32):3998–4005CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- McDougald LR, Reid WM (1991) Coccidiosis. In: Calnek BW, Barnes HJ, Beard CW, Reid WM, Yoder HW (eds) Diseases of poultry. Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa, pp 780–797Google Scholar
- Nicholson WL, Setlow P (1990) Sporulation, germination and outgrowth. In: Harwood CR, Cutting SM (eds) Molecular biological methods for Bacillus. Wiley Press, Chichester, UK, pp 391–450Google Scholar
- Xue GP, Johnson JS, Dalrymple BP (1999) High osmolarity improves the electro-transformation efficiency of the gram-positive bacteria Bacillus subtilis and Bacilluslicheniformis. J Microbiol Method 34:183–191Google Scholar