• 1.

    MacMillan AP, Schleicher H & Korslund J, et al. Brucellosis. In: Straw BE, Zimmerman JJ, D'Allaire S, et al, eds. Diseases of swine. 9th ed. Ames, Iowa: Blackwell Publishing, 2006;603612.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Deyoe BL. Immunology and public health significance of swine brucellosis. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1972;160:640643.

  • 3.

    Deyoe BL, Manthei CA. Sites of localization of Brucella suis in swine. Proc Annu Meet U S Anim Health Assoc 1967;71:102108.

  • 4.

    Starnes CT, Talwani R & Horvath JA, et al. Brucellosis in two hunt club members in South Carolina. J S C Med Assoc 2004;100:113115.

  • 5.

    Trout D, Gomet TM & Bernard BP, et al. Outbreak of brucellosis at a United States pork packing plant. J Occup Environ Med 1995;37:697703.

  • 6.

    Veterinary Services. National Center for Animal Health Programs. Status of current eradication programs. Available at: www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/nahps/domestic-animal.html. Accessed Jan 24, 2006.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Ewalt DR, Payeur JB & Rhyan JC, et al. Brucella suis biovar 1 in naturally infected cattle: a bacteriological, serological, and histological study. J Vet Diagn Invest 1997;9:417420.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Schurig GG, Roop RM & Bagchi T, et al. Biological properties of RB51; a stable rough strain of Brucella abortus. Vet Microbiol 1991;28:171188.

  • 9.

    Cheville NF, Stevens MG & Jensen AE, et al. Immune responses and protection against infection and abortion in cattle experimentally vaccinated with mutant strains of Brucella abortus. Am J Vet Res 1993;54:15911597.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Cheville NF, Olsen SC & Jensen AE, et al. Effects of age at vaccination on efficacy of Brucella abortus strain RB51 to protect cattle against brucellosis. Am J Vet Res 1996;57:11531156.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Olsen SC, Jensen AE & Stoffregen WC, et al. Efficacy of calfhood vaccination with Brucella abortus strain RB51 in protecting bison against brucellosis. Res Vet Sci 2003;74:1722.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Stevens MG, Hennager SG & Olsen SC, et al. Serologic responses in diagnostic tests for brucellosis in cattle vaccinated with Brucella abortus 19 or RB51. J Clin Microbiol 1994;32:10651066.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Olsen SC, Evens D & Hennager SG, et al. Serologic responses of calfhood-vaccinated cattle to Brucella abortus strain RB51. J Vet Diagn Invest 1996;8:451454.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Edmonds MD, Samartino LE & Hoyt PG, et al. Oral vaccination of sexually mature pigs with Brucella abortus vaccine strain RB51. Am J Vet Res 2001;62:13281331.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Lord VR, Cherwonogrodzky JW & Schurig GG, et al. Venezuelan field trials of vaccines against brucellosis in swine. Am J Vet Res 1998;59:546551.

  • 16.

    Olsen SC, Stevens MG & Cheville NF, et al. Experimental use of a dot blot assay to measure serologic responses of cattle vaccinated with Brucella abortus strain RB51. J Vet Diagn Invest 1997;9:363367.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Paulo PS, Vigliocco AM & Ramondina RF, et al. Evaluation of primary binding assays for presumptive serodiagnosis of swine brucellosis in Argentina. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 2000;7:828831.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Alton GG, Jones LM & Angus RD, et al. Techniques for the brucellosis laboratory. Paris: Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, 1988;17136.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Hornsby RL, Jensen AE & Olsen SC, et al. Selective media for isolation of Brucella abortus strain RB51. Vet Microbiol 2000;73:5160.

  • 20.

    Ficht TA, Bearden SW & Sowa BA, et al. DNA sequence and expression of the 36 kilodalton outer membrane protein gene of Brucella bortus. Infect Immun 1989;57:32813291.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Vemulpalli R, McQuiston JR & Schurig GG, et al. Identification of an IS711 element interrupting the wboA gene of Brucella abortus vaccine strain RB51 and a PCR assay to distinguish strain RB51 from other Brucella species and strains. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 1999;6:760764.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Bricker BJ, Halling SM. Enhancement of the Brucella AMOS PCR assay for differentiation of Brucella abortus vaccine strains S19 and RB51. J Clin Microbiol 1995;33:16401642.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    Olsen SC. Responses of adult cattle to vaccination with a reduced dose of Brucella abortus strain RB51. Res Vet Sci 2000;69:135140.

  • 24.

    Olsen SC. Immune responses and efficacy after administration of a commercial Brucella abortus strain RB51 to cattle. Vet Ther 2000;1:183191.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25.

    Olsen SC, Jensen AE & Palmer MV, et al. Evaluation of serologic responses, lymphocyte proliferative responses, and clearance from lymphatic organs after vaccination of bison with Brucella abortus strain RB51. Am J Vet Res 1998;59:410415.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26.

    Kaneene JM, Anderson RK & Johnson DW, et al. Cell-mediated immune responses in swine from a herd infected with Brucella suis. Am J Vet Res 1978;39:16071611.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27.

    Olsen SC, Cheville NF & Kunkle RA, et al. Bacterial survival, lymph node pathology, and serological responses of bison (Bison bison) vaccinated with Brucella abortus strain RB51 or strain 19. J Wildl Dis 1997;33:146151.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28.

    Olsen SC, Kreeger TJ, Schultz W. Immune responses of bison to ballistic or hand vaccination with Brucella abortus strain RB51. J Wildl Dis 2002;38:738745.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29.

    Olsen SC, Bricker B & Palmer MV, et al. Responses of cattle to two dosages of Brucella abortus strain RB51: serology, clearance and efficacy. Res Vet Sci 1999;66:101106.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30.

    Manthei CA. Research on swine brucellosis by the bureau of animal industry (1941–1947). Am J Vet Res 1948;9:4045.

  • 31.

    Juerado FR, Cedro VCF, Morán BL. Vacunacion de porcinos con Brucella abortus cepa 19. Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia Publicacion Miscelanea 1950;327:127.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 32.

    Cedro VCF, Cisale HO & Cacchione RA, et al. Vacunacion antibrucelica de porcinos a campo. Revista de Investigaciones Ganaderas 1959;7:297314.

  • 33.

    Cedro VCF, Cisale HO, Barrantes R. Vacunacion contra la brucellosis porcina 2° ensayo a campo. Revista de Investigaciones Ganaderas 1960;10:337345.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement

Parenteral vaccination of domestic pigs with Brucella abortus strain RB51

View More View Less
  • 1 Bacterial Diseases of Livestock Research Unit, National Animal Disease Center, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Ames, IA 50010.
  • | 2 Bacterial Diseases of Livestock Research Unit, National Animal Disease Center, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Ames, IA 50010.
  • | 3 Bacterial Diseases of Livestock Research Unit, National Animal Disease Center, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Ames, IA 50010.

Abstract

Objective—To determine the immunogenicity and efficacy of Brucella abortus strain RB51 (SRB51) as a vaccine in domestic pigs.

Animals—Sixty-eight 6-week-old crossbred domestic pigs and twenty-four 4-month-old gilts.

Procedures—In experiment 1, pigs were vaccinated IM (n = 51) with 2 × 1010 CFUs of SRB51 or sham inoculated (17). Periodic blood samples were obtained to perform blood cultures, serologic evaluations, and cell-mediated immunity assays. Necropsies were performed at selected times between weeks 1 and 23 after vaccination to determine vaccine clearance. In experiment 2, gilts were similarly vaccinated (n = 18) or sham inoculated (8) and similar samples were obtained after vaccination. Gilts were bred and challenged conjunctivally with 5.0 × 107 CFUs of virulent Brucella suis strain 3B. Necropsies were performed on gilts and on fetuses or neonates after abortion or parturition, respectively. Bacterial cultures and serologic evaluations were performed on samples obtained at necropsy to determine vaccine efficacy.

Results—Humoral and cell-mediated immune responses did not differ between vaccinates and controls. After vaccination, SRB51 was not isolated from blood cultures of either group and was isolated from lymphoid tissues of 3 pigs at 2 weeks (n = 2) and 4 weeks (1) after vaccination. No differences were found in isolation of B suis or in seroconversion between vaccinated and control gilts and between their neonates or aborted fetuses.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Parenteral vaccination with SRB51 does not induce humoral or cell-mediated immune responses. Vaccination with SRB51 did not protect gilts or their neonates and fetuses from virulent challenge with B suis.

Abstract

Objective—To determine the immunogenicity and efficacy of Brucella abortus strain RB51 (SRB51) as a vaccine in domestic pigs.

Animals—Sixty-eight 6-week-old crossbred domestic pigs and twenty-four 4-month-old gilts.

Procedures—In experiment 1, pigs were vaccinated IM (n = 51) with 2 × 1010 CFUs of SRB51 or sham inoculated (17). Periodic blood samples were obtained to perform blood cultures, serologic evaluations, and cell-mediated immunity assays. Necropsies were performed at selected times between weeks 1 and 23 after vaccination to determine vaccine clearance. In experiment 2, gilts were similarly vaccinated (n = 18) or sham inoculated (8) and similar samples were obtained after vaccination. Gilts were bred and challenged conjunctivally with 5.0 × 107 CFUs of virulent Brucella suis strain 3B. Necropsies were performed on gilts and on fetuses or neonates after abortion or parturition, respectively. Bacterial cultures and serologic evaluations were performed on samples obtained at necropsy to determine vaccine efficacy.

Results—Humoral and cell-mediated immune responses did not differ between vaccinates and controls. After vaccination, SRB51 was not isolated from blood cultures of either group and was isolated from lymphoid tissues of 3 pigs at 2 weeks (n = 2) and 4 weeks (1) after vaccination. No differences were found in isolation of B suis or in seroconversion between vaccinated and control gilts and between their neonates or aborted fetuses.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Parenteral vaccination with SRB51 does not induce humoral or cell-mediated immune responses. Vaccination with SRB51 did not protect gilts or their neonates and fetuses from virulent challenge with B suis.

Contributor Notes

The authors thank Deb Buffington, Jeremy Carpenter, Jean Donald, Travis Duit, Aileen Hudspith, Eliza Johnson, Stephanie Olson, Rachel Renshaw, Darl Pringle, and Sharla van Roekel for technical assistance.

Names are necessary to report factually on available data. Mention of trade names or commercial products in the article is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the USDA.

Address correspondence to Dr. Stoffregen.