Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-hfldf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-07T15:15:47.046Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Observations on the carrier state and related antibody titres during an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

R. S. Hedger
Affiliation:
Animal Virus Research Institute, Pirbright, Surrey
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

An outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in a partially immune population of cattle in Botswana is described. The results show that when cattle immunized by vaccination were presented with natural field challenge of FMD, many animals with immunity sufficient to protect them against clinical disease were, however, susceptible to pharyngeal infection and subsequently became virus carriers. The proportion of animals becoming carriers appeared to vary with the degree of severity of the challenge.

Vaccination before exposure to virus appeared to have little effect on the duration of the carrier state. No evidence was obtained of the spread of carrier virus to immune herds following the outbreak.

Antibody titres during the outbreak were higher in the clinically infected animals than in the carrier animals and the uninfected animals. Evidence suggested that natural challenge boosted the titres of immune animals. After the outbreak, however, it was not possible to distinguish by their antibody titres between the carrier animal and the virus-negative animal.

Antigenic studies on the strains of virus isolated are described.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1970

References

Van Bekkum, J. G., Frenkel, H. S., Frederiks, H. H. J. & Frenkel, S. (1959). Observations on the carrier state of cattle exposed to foot-and-mouth disease virus. Tijdschrift voor Diergeneeskunde 84, 1159–64.Google Scholar
Burrows, R. (1966). Studies on the carrier state of cattle exposed to foot-and-mouth disease virus. Journal of Hygiene 64, 8190.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burrows, R. (1968). Excretion of foot-and-mouth disease virus prior to the development of lesions. Veterinary Record 82, 387–8.Google Scholar
Casey, H. L. (1965). Standardized diagnostic complement fixation method and adaptation to micro test. Public Health Monographs, Washington 74, 134.Google ScholarPubMed
Davie, J. (1964). A complement-fixation technique for the quantitative measurement of antigenic differences between strains of the virus of foot-and-mouth disease. Journal of Hygiene 62, 401–11.Google ScholarPubMed
Hedger, R. S. (1968). The isolation and characterization of foot-and-mouth disease virus from clinically normal herds of cattle in Botswana. Journal of Hygiene 66, 2736.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hedger, R. S., Condy, J. & Falconer, J. (1969). The isolation of foot-and-mouth disease virus from African Buffalo (Syncerus caffer). Veterinary Record 84, 516–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kärber, G. (1931). Beitrag zur kollektiven Behandlung pharmakologischer Reihenversuche. Archiv für experimentelle Pathologie und Pharmakologie 162, 480–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, W. B. & Chapman, W. G. (1961). The tissue culture colour test for assaying the virus and neutralising antibody of foot-and-mouth disease and its application to the measurement of immunity in cattle. Research in Veterinary Science 2, 5361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sütmoiler, P. & Gaggero, A. (1965). Foot-and-mouth disease carriers. Veterinary Record 77, 968–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sütmoller, P., McVicar, J. W. & Cottral, G. E. (1968). The epizootiological importance of foot-and-mouth disease carriers. I. Experimentally produced carriers in susceptible and immune cattle. Archiv für die gesamte Virusforschung 23, 227–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ubertini, B., Nardelli, L., Dal Prato, A., Panina, G., & Santero, G. (1964). Subtype variation of foot-and-mouth disease virus and vaccination. Wiener tierärtzliche Monatsschrift 51, 99110.Google Scholar