Effects of the In Ovo Vaccination of the ts-11 Strain of Mycoplasma gallisepticum in Layer Embryos and Posthatch Chicks
The transmission of the ts-11 strain of (MG) vaccine (ts-11MGV) between incubated eggs and between hatchlings that was administrated via in ovo injection, and its subsequent effects on their posthatch performance were evaluated. Marek's disease diluent alone (sham-injected) or containing either...
Saved in:
Published in | Animals (Basel) Vol. 12; no. 9; p. 1120 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Switzerland
MDPI AG
27.04.2022
MDPI |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | The transmission of the ts-11 strain of
(MG) vaccine (ts-11MGV) between incubated eggs and between hatchlings that was administrated via in ovo injection, and its subsequent effects on their posthatch performance were evaluated. Marek's disease diluent alone (sham-injected) or containing either 3.63 × 10
, 10
, 10
, or 10
cfu of ts-11MGV was manually in ovo-injected into the amnion on 18 days of incubation. Egg residue analysis, percentage incubational egg weight loss, hatchability of viable injected eggs, and hatchling body weight (BW) were assessed. Selected hatchlings from each treatment replicate group were swabbed in the choanal cleft for MG DNA detection. Female chick live performance was also assessed through 21 days of posthatch age. Unexposed control sentinel chicks were allocated to each treatment replicate group to assess horizontal transmission. Birds were later swabbed and bled respectively, for detection of MG DNA and IgM production at 21 days posthatch. In all birds, no MG DNA was detected and SPA tests for IgM were negative. Among all variables, only 0 to 21 day BW gain was significantly affected by treatment and was lower in the 3.63 × 10
ts-11 MGV treatment in comparison to all the other treatments. Because ts-11MGV does not exhibit vertical or horizontal transmission capabilities under commercial conditions, it may not be a good candidate for in ovo injection. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 This publication is a contribution of the Mississippi Agriculture and Forestry Experiment Station. This material is based upon work that is supported by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Hatch project under accession number 1011797. Use of trade names in this publication does not imply endorsement by Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station of these products, nor similar ones not mentioned. |
ISSN: | 2076-2615 2076-2615 |
DOI: | 10.3390/ani12091120 |