Fish Vaccines

Vinitnantharat, Somsak; Gravningen, Kjersti; Greger, E.

doi:10.1016/s0065-3519(99)80040-8

Cited by 46 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While several delivery methods of vaccination are available (including immersion, oral delivery and injection vaccination) [6], injection vaccination is the most widely used vaccination method for disease control in aquaculture [7,8]. Recently, a fourth delivery method, the nasal vaccination, has been shown to be potentially useful in aquaculture [5,9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An attenuated virus vaccine appears safe to the central nervous system of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) after intranasal delivery

Larragoite

Tacchi

LaPatra³

et al. 2016

Fish & Shellfish Immunology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nasal vaccines are very effective but the olfactory organ provides direct access of antigens to the brain. Infectious hematopoietic necrosis virus (IHNV) is known to cause high mortalities in salmonids. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety of a live attenuated IHNV nasal (I.N) vaccine in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). In the olfactory organ, the vaccine was detected 1 and 4 days after primary I.N vaccination but not in the intramuscular (i.m) or control groups. In the brain, IHNV was detected by RT-qPCR 4 and 21 days after i.m primary vaccination. One i.m and one I.N vaccinated trout were positive at days 4 and 28 days post-boost, respectively. Presence of IHNV in the brain of i.m vaccinated fish correlated with moderate increases in IL-1β and TNF-α expression in this tissue. These results demonstrate that IHNV vaccine lasts for 4 days in the local nasal environment and that nasal vaccination appears to be safe to the CNS of rainbow trout.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An attenuated virus vaccine appears safe to the central nervous system of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) after intranasal delivery

Larragoite

Tacchi

LaPatra³

et al. 2016

Fish & Shellfish Immunology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Efforts to reduce fish production losses due to ESC of channel catfish, have spurred a quest for prophylactic vaccines and vaccination methods (Saeed & Plumb 1986; Klesius & Shoemaker 1997; Shoemaker & Klesius 1997; Vinitnantharat, Gravningen & Greger 1999). The fact that vaccines composed of attenuated bacteria are far superior to killed bacteria (bacterins) or bacterial products (antigenic components) as immunogens are well founded (Klesius & Shoemaker 1999; Shoemaker, Klesius & Bricker 1999; Seder & Hill 2000; Janeway, Travers, Walport & Shlomchik 2001).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-protection elicited in channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatusRafinesque) immunized with a low dose of virulentEdwardsiella ictaluristrains

Panangala

Shoemaker

Klesius

et al. 2009

Aquaculture Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cross‐protection of channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus Rafinesque) immunized with a low dose of virulent Edwardsiella ictaluri and challenged with six E. ictaluri strains was examined in four trials. The relative per cent survival among low‐dose immunized and then challenged fish ranged from 27.7% to 100%. Significant protection (P<0.05), with the exception of strain ATCC‐33202, was conferred by immunization with a given E. ictaluri strain challenged either with a homologous or a heterologous strain. Antibody titres of pooled serum collected on day 22 from surviving fish examined by enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) ranged from 1:40 to 1:320, but no differences were apparent among different vaccinated groups. The protein profiles of six E. ictaluri strains examined by Sodium dodecyl sulphate‐polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS‐PAGE) showed a relatively homogeneous pattern. Immuno‐blots probed with pooled serum from immunized and challenged fish showed a pattern similar to LPS‐reaction patterns observed with E. ictaluri in other studies. Since the present studies further corroborate that E. ictaluri is a clonal bacterial species with no apparent antigenic differences, it is possible that immunization with a single E. ictaluri field strain should confer protection against any other strain.

show abstract

“…Fish vaccines are authorized for a range of species including salmon and trout in areas of northern Europe (Tatner, 1993;Vinitnantharat et al ., 1999). These too are generally very safe but adverse injection site reactions may occur with the use of oil‐based products (Evensen, 2003).…”

Section: Suspected Adverse Reactions In Animalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Veterinary pharmacovigilance. Part 3. Adverse effects of veterinary medicinal products in animals and on the environment

Woodward¹

2005

Vet Pharm & Therapeutics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Like humans, animals may experience adverse effects when treated with medicinal products. These effects may be related to the pharmacological or toxicological properties of the substances used or they may arise because of hypersensitivity. Veterinary medicinal products may also possess the ability to harm the environment. This paper reviews the potential of veterinary medicinal products to cause adverse effects in animals and on the environment.

show abstract

Fish Vaccines

Cited by 46 publications

References 5 publications

An attenuated virus vaccine appears safe to the central nervous system of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) after intranasal delivery

An attenuated virus vaccine appears safe to the central nervous system of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) after intranasal delivery

Cross-protection elicited in channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatusRafinesque) immunized with a low dose of virulentEdwardsiella ictaluristrains

Veterinary pharmacovigilance. Part 3. Adverse effects of veterinary medicinal products in animals and on the environment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About