2004
DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-0813.2004.tb11108.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of the efficacy of a subunit and a live streptomycin‐dependent porcine pleuropneumonia vaccine

Abstract: Both of the vaccines provided significant protection against a severe challenge with serovar 1 A pleuropneumoniae. Neither vaccine was effective against a serovar 15 A pleuropneumoniae challenge. There was evidence that the Porcilis APP vaccine did provide some protection against the serovar 15 challenge because the ADG, after challenge of pigs given this vaccine, was greater than the control pigs.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
43
1

Year Published

2007
2007
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
43
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Limited cross‐serovar protection hampers the efficacy of bacterins that are based on specific serovars (Fenwick & Henry, ). Some subunit vaccines, which contain Apx toxins and either outer membrane proteins or whole bacterial cells, have been commercialized and are reported to convey better cross‐protection than bacterins (Shao et al., ; Thevenon et al., ; Tumamao et al., ; van den Bosch & Frey, ). The commercially available second‐generation subunit vaccines contain four to five recombinant proteins and confer cross‐protection against all serovars to some degree (Meeusen, Walker, Peters, Pastoret, & Jungersen, ).…”
Section: Prevention Control and Treatmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Limited cross‐serovar protection hampers the efficacy of bacterins that are based on specific serovars (Fenwick & Henry, ). Some subunit vaccines, which contain Apx toxins and either outer membrane proteins or whole bacterial cells, have been commercialized and are reported to convey better cross‐protection than bacterins (Shao et al., ; Thevenon et al., ; Tumamao et al., ; van den Bosch & Frey, ). The commercially available second‐generation subunit vaccines contain four to five recombinant proteins and confer cross‐protection against all serovars to some degree (Meeusen, Walker, Peters, Pastoret, & Jungersen, ).…”
Section: Prevention Control and Treatmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Currently, clinical APP outbreaks are mainly controlled by giving antibiotics to all pigs in an infected facility, whether or not they are clinically affected (Hoflack, Maes, Mateusen, Verdonck, & de Kruif, ; Gottschalk, ). Control and prevention of APP are currently achieved by vaccination (Tumamao et al, ) or the use of antimicrobials such as enrofloxacin, amoxicillin and ceftiofur (Mengelers, Kuiper, Pijpers, Verheijden, & van Miert, ; Hoflack et al, ; Klinkenbeg et al, ). APP serotypes show large differences in virulence and weak cross‐protection capacity among serotypes (Chen, Xiao, & Wen, ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These subunit vaccines are effective at preventing acute disease, but do not sufficiently protect against colonization and are not widely cross-protective [33,47]. Therefore, further A. pleuropneumoniae outer membrane and/or secreted proteins are screened and tested as candidates for inclusion into next generation vaccines [54].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%