Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Foot-and-mouth disease in swine

I. The immune response of swine to chemically-treated and non-treated foot-and-mouth disease virus

  • Published:
Archiv für die gesamte Virusforschung Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Serums of swine inoculated with chemically-treated foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV) combined with an oil adjuvant had an enduring level of antibody and the swine were resistant to challenge by exposure to FMD-infected swine for at least 90 days. The antibody level was significantly higher in the animals inoculated with the treated virus and oil adjuvant than in the animals inoculated with the treated virus and aluminium hydroxide adjuvant as indicated by analysis of variance of mouse protective dose (PD50) values. Swine recovered from experimental infection with FMDV may become reinfected when exposed to homologous virus.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Armbruster, O., H. G. Garbe, W. Pilz, andO. E. Schweckendiek: Vet.-med. Nachr., No. 2, 75 (1960).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bengelsdorff, H. J., andB. Schneider: Bull. Off. int. Epizoot.61, 1185 (1964).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brown, F., andJ. Crick: Virology5, 133 (1958).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Brown, F., andJ. Crick: J. Immunol.82, 444 (1959).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Brown, F., N. St. G. Hyslop, J. Crick, andA. W. Morrow: J. Hyg. (Lond.)61, 337 (1963).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Burrows, R.: Report Presented to the European Commission for the Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease, Report of Standing Technical Committee, Pirbright, united Kingdom (1963).

  7. Cowan, K. M.: J. Immunol.86, 465 (1960).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Cowan, K. M.: Amer. J. vet. Res.24, 756 (1963).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cunliffe, H. R.: Canad. J. comp. Med.26, 182 (1962).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cunliffe, H. R., andJ. H. Graves: Canad. J. comp. Med.27, 193 (1963).

    Google Scholar 

  11. European Commission for the Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease (1962).

  12. European Commission for the Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease (1963).

  13. European Commission for the Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease (1964).

  14. Fellowes, O. N.: J. Immunol.88, 488 (1962).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Fogedby, E.: Report of the European Commission for the Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease, Rome, Italy (1963).

  16. Geiger, W., andB. Otte: Tierheilk.10, 35 (1958).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Girard, H. C., U. Charutamara, P. Supavilai, P. Smitinondana, S. Punya-Upaphat, andT. Chandrakeo: Bull. Off. int. Epizoot.59, 1081 (1963).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Graves, J. H.: J. Immunol.91, 251 (1963).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Graves, J. H., K. M. Cowan, andR. Trautman: J. Immunol.92, 501 (1964).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Henderson, W. M.: J. Hyg. (Lond.)50, 195 (1952).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kabat, E. A., A. Wolf, andA. E. Bezer: J. exp. Med.85, 117 (1947).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kubin, G.: Appendix II, European Commission for the Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease, Report of Standing Technical Committee, Pirbright, United Kingdom (1963).

  23. Leskowitz, S., andB. H. Waksman: J. Immunol.84, 58 (1960).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Martinsen, J. S.: Amer. J. Vet. Res.25, 1417 (1964).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Michelsen, E.: Arch. exp. vet.-Med.15, 317 (1961).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Möhlmann, A.: Exp. vet. Med.2, 79 (1950).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Nathans, I.: Centraal Diergeneeskundig Instituut, Amsterdam, Holland, Doctorate Thesis (1965).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Polatnick, J., andH. L. Bachrach: Appl. Microbiol.12, 368 (1964).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Reed, L. J., andH. Muench: Amer. J. Hyg.27, 493 (1938).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Scheidegger, J. J.: Int. Arch. Allergy7, 103 (1955).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Skinner, H. H.: XVth Int. Vet. Congr. IB,45, 3 (1953).

    Google Scholar 

  32. Ubertini, B., L. Nardelli, S. Barei, G. L. Gualandi, G. F. Panina, andC. Bagini: Bull Off. int. Epizoot.61, 1311 (1964).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Uchitel, I. Ya., andE. L. Khasman: J. Immunol.94, 492 (1965).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Bekkum, J. G. van, S. Frenkel, andI. Nathans: T. Diergeneesk.25, 1936 (1963).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Vittoz, R.: Report XXXIII Gen. Sess. O.I.E. Comm., Paris, France, (1965).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This study is based on part of a dissertation submitted by the senior author in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the DVSc. degree, Graduate School, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McKercher, P.D., Giordano, A.R. Foot-and-mouth disease in swine. Archiv f Virusforschung 20, 39–53 (1967). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01245768

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01245768

Keywords

Navigation