Virologica Sinica

, Volume 27, Issue 5, pp 286–291 | Cite as

Comparison of immune responses against FMD by a DNA vaccine encoding the FMDV/O/IRN/2007 VP1 gene and the conventional inactivated vaccine in an animal model

  • Farahnaz Motamedi SedehEmail author
  • Hoorieh Soleimanjahi
  • AmirReza Jalilian
  • Homayoon Mahravani
Research Article


Foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV) is highly contagious and responsible for huge outbreaks among cloven hoofed animals. The aim of the present study is to evaluate a plasmid DNA immunization system that expresses the FMDV/O/IRN/2007 VP1 gene and compare it with the conventional inactivated vaccine in an animal model. The VP1 gene was sub-cloned into the unique Kpn I and BamH I cloning sites of the pcDNA3.1+ and pEGFP-N1 vectors to construct the VP1 gene cassettes. The transfected BHKT7 cells with sub-cloned pEGFP-N1-VP1 vector expressed GFP-VP1 fusion protein and displayed more green fluorescence spots than the transfected BHKT7 cells with pEGFP-N1 vector, which solely expressed the GFP protein. Six mice groups were respectively immunized by the sub-cloned pcDNA3.1+-VP1 gene cassette as the DNA vaccine, DNA vaccine and PCMV-SPORT-GMCSF vector (as molecular adjuvant) together, conventional vaccine, PBS (as negative control), pcDNA3.1+ vector (as control group) and PCMV-SPORT vector that contained the GMCSF gene (as control group). Significant neutralizing antibody responses were induced in the mice which were immunized using plasmid vectors expressing the VP1 and GMCSF genes together, the DNA vaccine alone and the conventional inactivated vaccine (P<0.05). Co-administration of DNA vaccine and GMCSF gene improved neutralizing antibody response in comparison with administration of the DNA vaccine alone, but this response was the most for the conventional vaccine group. However, induction of humeral immunity response in the conventional vaccine group was more protective than for the DNA vaccine, but T-cell proliferation and IFN-γ concentration were the most in DNA vaccine with the GMCSF gene. Therefore the group that was vaccinated by DNA vaccine with the GMCSF gene, showed protective neutralizing antibody response and the most Th1 cellular immunity.


DNA vaccine Foot-and-mouth disease virus Immune Response VP1 gene 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Barteling S J, Vreeswijk J. 1991. Developments in FMD vaccines. Vaccine, 9: 75–87.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berzofsky J A, Ahlers J D, Belyakov I M. 2001. Strategies for designing and optimizing new gene ration vaccines. Nat Rev Immunol, 1(3): 209–219.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Collen T, Pullen L, Doel T R. 1989. T-cell-dependent induction of antibody against foot-and-mouth disease virus in a mouse model. J Gen Virol, 70: 395–403.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Francis M J, Hastings G Z, Syred A D, et al. 1987. Non-responsiveness to a foot-and-mouth disease virus peptide overcomes by addition of foreign helper T-cell determinants. Nature, 330: 168–170.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Frescura T, Vivoli P. 1973. Studies of the FMD virus sub-types using antigens inactivated by gamma radiations. Zentralbl Veterinarmed B, 20(10): 822–825.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Grubman M J, Lewis S A, Morgan D O. 1993. Protection of swine against foot-and-mouth disease with viral capsid proteins expressed in heterologous systems. Vaccine, 11: 825–829.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Guo H, Liu Z, Sun S, et al. 2005. Immune response in guinea pigs vaccinated with DNA vaccine of foot-and-mouth disease virus O/China99. Vaccine, 23(25): 3236–3242.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Haratian K, Roustaei M H, Mahravani H, et al. 2000. Neutralizing Antibody Response in Cattle Following Vaccination against Foot-and-Mouth Disease. Arch Razi Ins, 51: 129–132.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lv K, Guo Y, Zhang Y, et al. 2009. Transient inhibition of foot-and-mouth disease virus replication by siRNAs silencing VP1 protein coding region. Res Vet Sci, 86(3): 443–452.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kim S A, Liang C M, Cheng I C, et al. 2006. DNA vaccination against foot-and mouth disease via electroporation: stdy of molecular approaches for enhancing VP1 antigenicity. J Gene Med, 8: 1182–1191.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mahravani H, Keyvanfar H, Izadi H, et al. 2007. Genetic and antigenic analysis of type O and A FMD viruses isolated in Iran.Arch Razi Ins, 62(2): 63–68.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ma M, Jin N, Liu H, et al. 2007. Immunogenicity of plasmids encoding P12A and 3C of FMDV and swine IL-18. Antiviral Res, 76: 59–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Moraes M P, Chinsangaram J, Brum M C, et al. 2003. Immediate protection of swine from foot-and-mouth disease: a combination of adenoviruses expressing interferon alpha and a foot-and-mouth disease virus subunit vaccine. Vaccine, 22(2): 268–279.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Park J H, Kim S J, Oem J K, et al. 2006. Enhanced immune response with foot and mouth disease virus VP1 and interleukin-1 fusion genes. J Vet Sci, 7(3): 257–262.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Qian F, Chen X, Ma O, et al. 2002. Serotype and VP1 gene sequence of a foot-and-mouth disease virus from Hong Kong. Biochem Biophys Res Commun, 30: 715–721.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Reed L J, Muench H. 1938. A simple method of estimating 50 % end points. Am J Hyg, 27: 493–497.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sanz-Parra A, Blasco R, Sobrino F, et al. 1998. Analysis of the B and T cell response in guinea swine induced with recombinant vaccinia expressing foot-and-mouth disease virus structural proteins. Arch Virol, 143: 389–398.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sharma A K, Khuller G K. 2001. DNA vaccines: future strategies and relevance to intracellular pathogens. Immunol Cell Biol, 79(6): 537–546.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sin J I, Kim J J, Arnold R L, et al. 1999. IL-12 gene as a DNA vaccine adjuvant in a herpes mouse model: IL-12 enhances Th1-type CD4+ T cell-mediated protective immunity against herpes simplex virus-2 challenge. J Immunol, 162: 2912–2921.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Taboga O, Tami C, Carrillo E, et al. 1997. A large-scale evaluation of peptide vaccines against foot-and-mouth disease: lack of solid protection in cattle and isolation of escape mutants. J Virol, 71: 2606–2614.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wittmann G. 1990. Virus carriers in foot-and-mouth disease. Berl Munch Tierarztl Wochenschr, 103(5): 145–150.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wong H T, Cheng S C, Chan E W, et al. 2000. Plasmids encoding foot-and-mouth disease virus VP1 epitopes elicited immune responses in mice and swine and protected swine against viral infection. Virology, 278(1): 27–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wong H T, Cheng S C, Sin F W, et al. 2002. A DNA vaccine against foot-and-mouth disease elicits an immune response in swine which is enhanced by co-administration with interleukin-2. Vaccine, 20(21–22): 2641–2647.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zhang H Y, Sun S H, Guo Y J, et al. 2008. Optimizing strategy for plasmid DNAs containing multiple-epitopes of foot-and-mouth disease virus by cis-expression with IL-2. Vaccine, 26: 769–777.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhang Z D, Kitching R P. 2001. The localization of persistent foot and mouth disease virus in the epithelial cells of the soft palate and pharynx. J Comp Pathol, 124(2–3): 89–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Wuhan Institute of Virology, CAS and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Farahnaz Motamedi Sedeh
    • 1
    Email author
  • Hoorieh Soleimanjahi
    • 2
  • AmirReza Jalilian
    • 1
  • Homayoon Mahravani
    • 3
  1. 1.Agricultural, Medical and Industrial Research SchoolKarajIran
  2. 2.Virology Department, Faculty of Medical ScienceTarbiat Modares UniversityTehranIran
  3. 3.Razi Vaccine and Serum Research InstituteKarajIran

Personalised recommendations