Summary
Animal response to anaplasmosis vaccination was measured using an attenuated organism, a killed adjuvant vaccine, and a virulentAnaplasma marginale. A total of 7 calves (2–4 months of age) and 5 heifers (18 months of age) received the attenuated organism; 8 calves were given the adjuvant vaccine; 7 calves were premunized with virulentA. marginale; and 7 calves remained as non-vaccinated controls. The animals were vaccinated at Tibaitata on the Bogota Savannah, and later moved to the north coast of Colombia, an anaplasmosis enzootic area.
All vaccination methods produced positive CF results. The live agents resulted in low parasitaemias in most instances, although the attenuated organism was particularly mild in the younger animals.
Protection from field challenge was observed in all calves premunized with virulent organism, and in two of five heifers premunized with the attenuated organism. All other vaccinated animals developed anaplasmosis which was equally as severe as seen in the non-vaccinated controls.
Résumé
La réponse à la vaccination contre l'anaplasmose, utilisant un organisme atténué, un vaccin tué contenant des adjuvants et desAnaplasma marginale virulents, a été évalué. Au total 7 veaux (âgés de 2 à 4 mois) et 5 génisses (âgés de 18 mois) ont reçu l'organisme atténué; 8 veaux ont reçu le vaccin avec adjuvants; 7 veaux ont été prémunis avec l'A. marginale virulent; et 7 veaux non-vaccinés, ont servi de témoins. Les animaux ont été vaccinés à Tibaitata sur la savane de Bogota, et ont été transportés par la suite sur la côte nord de la Colombie, région où l'anaplasmose est enzootique. Toutes les méthodes de vaccination ont produit des réactions positives de fixation du complément. Les organismes vivants ont le plus souvent causé une faible parasitémie, bien que le germe atténué ait été particulièrement bénin pour les animaux les plus jeunes.
Une protection contre l'épreuve naturelle à été observée chez tous les veaux prémunis avec des organismes virulents, et chez 2 génisses sur 5 prémunies avec l'organisme atténué. Tous les autres animaux vaccinés ont contracté une anaplasmose aussi sévère que celle observée chez les témoins non-vaccinés.
Sumario
La respuesta de los animales a la vacuna contra anaplasmosis se midió usando organismos atenuados, vacuna adyuvante muerta y una cepa virulenta deAnaplasma marginale. Un total de 7 terneros (2–4 meses de edad) y 5 novillas (18 meses de edad) recibieron Anaplasma atenuado; 8 terneros recibieron vacuna muerta; 7 terneros fueron premunizados conA. marginale virulento; 7 terneros no vacunados se usaron como controles. Los animales se vacunaron en Tibaitatá, localizado en la Sabana de Bogotá y más tarde se llevaron a la Costa Norte de Colombia, la cual es un área enzoótica de anaplasmosis.
Todos los métodos de vacunación usados produjeron resultados positivos a la fijación del complemento (CF).
Los grupos de animales que recibieron organismos vivos resultaron con baja parasitemia en muchos casos, aunque los animales que recibieron anaplasma atenuado, la parasitemia resultó particularmente moderada especialmente en los animales más jóvenes.
La protección a la infección natural fue observada en todos los animales premunizados con organismos virulentos, y en 2 de las 5 terneras premunizadas con organismo atenuado. Los demás animales vacunados desarrollaron anaplasmosis, la cual fue tan severa como la observada en los animales del grupo control.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Brock, W. E., Kliewer, I. O. &Pearson, C. C. (1965). ‘A vaccine for anaplasmosis’.Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association,147, 948–951.
Hidalgo, R. T. &Dimopoullos, G. T. (1967). ‘Complement-fixation micro procedures for anaplasmosis’.American Journal of Veterinary Research,28, 245–251.
Kuttler, K. L. (1961). ‘Anaplasmosis immunization studies’.65th Annual Proceedings, United States Livestock Sanitation Association, 79–87.
Kuttler, K. L. (1967). ‘A study of the immunological relationship ofAnaplasma marginale andAnaplasma centrale’.Research in Veterinary Science,8, 467–471.
Kuttler, K. L., Adams, L. G. &Zaraza, H. (1969). ‘An epidemiologic and geographic survey ofAnaplasma marginale andTrypanosoma theileri in Colombia’.Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association,154, 1398.
Kuttler, K. L., Zaraza, H. & Roberts, E. D. (1968). ‘Hematologic and clinical response to anaplasmosis vaccines and the comparative efficacy of these vaccines, as measured by field and experimental challenge’.Proceedings of the 5th National Anaplasmosis Conference, 39–49.
Mott, L. O. & Gates, D. W. (1948). ‘Anaplasmosis immunization studies’.Report of the First National Anaplasmosis Conference.
Ristic, M., Sibinovic, S. & Welter, C. J. (1968). ‘An attenuatedAnaplasma marginale vaccine’.Proceedings of the 72nd Annual Meeting of the United States Livestock Sanitation Association, 56–69.
Schmidt, H. (1947). ‘Anaplasmosis in cattle’.Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association,90, 723–736.
U.S.D.A. (1958). ‘A manual of conducting the complement-fixation test for Anaplasmosis’.
Welter, C. J. &Woods, R. D. (1968). ‘Preliminary evaluation of an attenuatedAnaplasma marginale vaccine in cattle’.Veterinary Medicine/Small Animal Clinician,63, 798–802.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zaraza, H., Kuttler, K.L. Comparative efficacy of different immunization systems against anaplasmosis. Trop Anim Health Prod 3, 77–82 (1971). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02356479
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02356479