Short Communication

Interference of Maternal Derived Immunity Against Vaccination with Baculovirus H5 and ND Inactivated Vaccine

Mahmoud Said1*, Abd El Satar Arafa1, Mohammed A. Rohaim2* and Hussein A. Hussein2

1Reference Laboratory for Veterinary Quality Control on Poultry Production, Animal Health Research Institute, Giza (AHRI), Egypt; 2Faculty of veterinary medicine-Cairo university, Egypt.

Editor | Muhammad Munir, The Pirbright Institute, UK.

Received | February 18, 2017; Accepted | April 19, 2017; Published | June 15, 2017

*Correspondence | Mahmoud Said, Reference Laboratory for Veterinary Quality Control on Poultry Production, Animal Health Research Institute, Giza (AHRI), Egypt; Email: dr_mahmoud.said@yahoo.com

DOI | http://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.hv/2017/4.3.40.45

Citation | Said, M., A.S. Arafa, M.A. Rohaim and H.A. Hussein. Interference of maternal derived immunity against vaccination with baculovirus H5 and Nd inactivated vaccine in broilers. Hosts and Viruses, 4(3): 40-45.

Keywords: Baculovirus, Expressed H5 protein, NDV, MDA

Introduction

Broiler farms in Egypt are exposed to multiple infections, most of them become enzootic and cause economic losses. Infections such as Newcastle disease virus (NDV) and avian influenza viruses are the mainrestriction to backyard poultry rearing in the developing countries. In non-vaccinated flocks, the mortality rate may reach up to 100% (Spradbrow, 1992). NDV and influenza viruses including H5N1 are endemic in the Egyptian poultry sector and excessive use of vaccines is employed mass vaccination is being applied to control the infections. However, maternal derived antibodies (MDA) can provide protection but can also interfere with the vaccine-induced antibodies.

Velogenic ND and avian influenza viruses have become the most disaster in the poultry industry all over the world (Swayne, 2003; Tadelle, 2004). In Egypt the first case of influenza appeared in 2006 (Aly, 2006) and since then the disease remain endemic and devastating for the industry. Vaccination could be a helpful tool in controlling influenza outbreaks followed by good monitoring and biosecurity tools applications, but there were many factors affecting on vaccine efficacy and vaccination strategies such as maternally derived antibodies, which can guard young chickens against viral diseases (Otaki et al., 1992; Mondal and Naqi, 2001; Nemeth and Bowen, 2007). On the other hand, maternal antibodies can also hinder vaccination due to rising clearance of vaccine antigens, which may prevent maximum exposure to the immune system (Naqi et al., 1983; Van Eck et al., 1991). For the vaccination of chicks against viral poultry diseases such as ND, live vaccines are commonly used. Depending on the antibody titers and the virulence of vaccine viruses, it is important to optimize the suitable time of vaccination (Solano et al., 1986). Previous studies reported that decreasing the efficacy of live vaccines in chickens with maternal immunity cannot be generalized to influenza vaccination, as the vaccines contain inactivated virus. Inactivated poultry vaccines are commonly used as a booster before the laying period to prompt efficient and homogenous antibody titers. It is important to compare the benefits of maternal immunity (i.e. guard against H5N1) with the negative impact maternal immunity may occur on vaccine efficacy. Due to these shortcomings in poultry sectors, risk time can be estimated in which chicken flocks are susceptible for HPAI H5N1 infection and cannot yet be vaccinated. If there is such a period, alternative vaccination strategies must be considered, as good biosecurity measures to overcome this period without any economic losses.

Material and Methods

Vaccines

Volvac® baculovirus-expressed inactivated H5-NDV vaccine (Lot no.1408024 A.) Avian Influenza (Baculovirus Expressed H5) + Newcastle disease Inactivated vaccine was used. The vaccine preparation contained 256 HA units of the H5 antigen (AI) and 128 HA units of the Newcastle disease virus antigen per dose (0.5ml). The H5 antigen is insect-cell-expressed H5 (recH5). Insect cells were infected with a recombinant baculovirus encoding the hemagglutinin (HA) protein of an HPAI A/duck/China/E319-2/2003 (H5N1) belonging to clade 2.3.2 and fusion (F) protein of Lasota strain (genotype II).

Animal experiments

One hundred commercial chicks (Hubbard) were divided into 5 groups (n=20 in each group) that were vaccinated with LaSota vaccine using spray on one-day of age as routine vaccination regime in a commercial chicks company in the hatchery. Following groups were used in this study:

Group 1: Chicks not vaccinated and not challenged (negative control)

Group 2: Chicks not vaccinated and challenged with H5N1 virus (H5 positive control)

Group 3: Chicks not vaccinated and challenged by vNDV genotype VII (NDV positive control).

Groups 4: commercial chicks were vaccinated with baculovirus-expressed H5+ND inactivated vaccine 0.5 ml per dose s/c. injection at 5th day old and were challenged by H5N1 virus then vNDV genotype VII with 3 days intervals.

Groups 5: commercial chicks were vaccinated with baculovirus-expressed H5+ND inactivated vaccine 0.5 ml per dose s/c. injection at 5th day old challenged by H5N1 virus only at 21 days post vaccination.

Challenge viruses

Purified Egyptian virus A/chicken/Egypt/1575s/2015 (H5N1) HPAI H5N1 clade 2.2.1.2/2015 (S75/EGY/2015) and NDV-B7-RLQP-CH-EG-12 as vNDV genotype VII NDV were used in the challenge experiments. Birds of each group were challenged at 21st days post-vaccination with 106EID50 in 100 ul of allantoic fluid dose per bird by intra-nasal route. The challenge viruses’ titers were determined by back-titration.

Sampling and Serology

At 1st day of age serum samples were collected from 10 birds then collection each week from all groups until the day of challenge and 1st and 2nd week post challenge.

HA assay was performed according to the recommendation of the OIE (OIE, 2009). HI assay was performed for individual serum samples collected at 11st, 7th, 14th and 21st days pre-challenge and 7th and 14th days post-challenge using 4 HAU of H5N1&NDV antigens. Reference antigens and antisera for NDV

Maternally derived antibodies guard young chicks against viral diseases (Otaki et al., 1992; Mondal and Naqi, 2001; Nemeth and Bowen, 2007). On the other hands, after routine vaccination of the breeders, high levels of MDAs are transferred to the progeny. MDAs provide some protection during the early life of chicks when the immune system is not yet fully developed, but they also interfere with successful vaccination of these young chicks because of their ability to neutralize, at least partially, the vaccine’s virus and increase the clearance of the vaccine antigens, thereby preventing the optimal exposure to the immune system (Abdelwhab et al., 2012; De Vriese et al., 2010; Maas et al., 2011; Poetri et al., 2011; Akhtar et al 2017). In this study, the GMT for H5 decreased by time in non-vaccinated groups till almost disappeared (0.4 log2) at the 3rd week of age. It is thus likely that MDA in chickens are high after hatching, and reduced to zero within 3 or 4 weeks. The GMT for H5 in vaccinated groups were 7 log2 with RE-5 antigen and 5.2 log2 with S75 antigen at the 3rd week of age (Figure 1) while the GMT post-challenge was increased from 8.3 log2 - 9.3 log2 and 5.3 log2-7 log2 by RE-5 and S75 antigens respectively in group 4 (Figure 1). In case of single infection with H5 (group 5) the GMT increased from 8 log2-10 log2 by RE-5antigen and from 4.3 log2-7.3 log2 with S75 antigen at 14th day post-challenge (Figure 1). On the other hand, the percentage of protection was 70%-80% in group 4 and 5 post-challenge, respectively (data not shown). Similar to observations made by Maas et al. 2011, the chickens should have HI-antibody titers higher than 24 to be protected against clinical disease and reduce the virus shedding upon infection.

From the field experience, vaccinated chickens with quantifiable HI antibody titers are usually guarded against clinical disease post-infection with HPAIV, as has been detected for vaccination against H7N7 (Maas et al., 2009). However, morbidity and mortality can be seen in some chickens with HI antibody titers of below 23 log2 after challenge with a high dose of HPAIV H5N1. So, at least 25 log2 antibody titer is being required to have efficient clinical protection in chickens with maternal immunity (Maas et al., 2011). Breeder chickens are mainly vaccinated against viral diseases by live vaccines at a young age, followed by boaster vaccination with inactivated vaccines before production. In particular, this is able to inhibit diseases such as Newcastle disease and Gumboro disease (infectious bursal disease). In case of AI, only the inactivated vaccine is permissible. Inactivated vaccines could stimulate a systemic antibody response, while live vaccines stimulate a broader immune response through infection of targeted cells and stimulation of the immune system similar to natural infection (Figure 2) (Maas et al., 2011).

In conclusion, it is recommended to delay the vaccination with baculovirus-expressed H5+ND inactivated vaccine in broilers to 10th-14th day of age as the MDA will be in the decline phase to avoid its negative impact on the vaccine efficacy.

Authors Contirbution

Mahmoud Said, Mohammed A. Rohaim and Hussein A. Hussein drafted and revised the manuscript. Mahmoud Said, Abd El Satar Arafa attended to the case and performed animal experiments and follow-up. All authors contributed to the writing of the manuscript and approved it for submission.

Reference

Abdelwhab, E.M., C. Grund, M.M. Aly, M. Beer, T.C. Harder and H.M. Hafez. Influence of maternal immunity on vaccine efficacy and susceptibility of one day old chicks against Egyptian highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1. Vet. Microbiol. 155(1):13–20. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetmic.2011.08.004

Aly, M.M., Hassan, M.K. and Arafa, A. 2006. Emergence of first outbreak of avian influenza (H5N1) in poultry in Egypt in 2006. J. Egy. Vet. Med. Assoc. 66(2): 263-276.

Akhtar, S., M.A. Muneer, K. Muhammad, M.Y. Tipu, M. Anees, I. Rashid, Raza-ur-Rehman and I. Hussain. Molecular Characterization and Epitope Mapping of Fusion (F) and Hemagglutinin (HN) Genes of Avian Paramyxovirus Serotype I from Peacocks in Pakistan. Pak. J. Zool. 49 (2): 755-759. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjz/2017.49.2.sc9

De Vriese, J., M. Steensels, V. Palya, Y. Gardin, K. Dorsey Moore, B. Lambrecht, S. Van Borm, and T. van den Berg. Passive protection afforded by maternally-derived antibodies in chickens and the antibodies’ interference with the protection elicited by avian influenza–inactivated vaccines in progeny. Avian Dis. 54 (Suppl. 1): 246–252. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1637/8908-043009-Reg.1

Maas, R., Tacken, M., van Zoelen, D. and Oei, H. 2009. Dose response effects of avian influenza H7N7 vaccination in chickens: serology, clinical protection and reduction of virus excretion. Vaccine, 27: 3592-3597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2009.03.066

Maas, R., S. Rosema, D. van Zoelen, and S. Venema. 2011. Maternal immunity against avian influenza H5N1 in chickens: limited protection and interference with vaccine efficacy. Avian Pathol. 40(1):87–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/03079457.2010.541226

Mondal, S.P. and Naqi, S.A. 2001. Maternal antibody to infectious bronchitis virus: its role in protection against infection and development of active immunity to vaccine. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 79: 31-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-2427(01)00248-3

Naqi, S.A., Marquez, B. and Sahin, N. 1983. Maternal antibody and its effect on infectious bursal disease immunizations. Avian Diseases. 27: 623-631. https://doi.org/10.2307/1590304

Nemeth, N.M. and Bowen, R.A. 2007. Dynamics of passive immunity to West Nile virus in domestic chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus). Am. J. Trop. Med. Hygiene. 76: 310-317.

OIE. 2009. Manual of Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial Animals.5th edition. Part 2 section 21. Chapter 2, 7, 12.

Otaki, Y., Saito, K., Tajima, M. and Normua, Y. 1992. Persistence of maternal antibody to chicken anaemia agent and its effect on thesusceptibility of young chickens. Avian Pathol. 21: 147-151. https://doi.org/10.1080/03079459208418828

Poetri, O., A. Bouma, I. Claassen, G. Koch, R. Soejoedono, A. Stegeman, and M. van Boven. 2011. A single vaccination of commercial broilers does not reduce transmission of H5N1 highly pathogenic avian influenza. Vet. Res. 42(1):74–86. https://doi.org/10.1186/1297-9716-42-74

Solano, W., Giambrone, J.J., Williams, J.C., Lauerman, L.H., Panangala, V.S. and Garces, C. 1986. Effect of maternal antibody on timing of initial vaccination of young white leghorn chickens against infectious bursal disease virus. Avian Diseases. 30: 648-652. https://doi.org/10.2307/1590562

Spradbrow, P.B. 1992. A review of the use of food carriers for the delivery of oral Newcastle disease vaccine. In: Spradbrow P.B. (ed.): Newcastle Disease in village.

Swayne, D.E. 2003. Vaccines for list A poultry diseases; emphasis on avian influenza. Dev. Biol. (Basel). 114: 201- 212.

Tadelle, D. and Jobre Y. 2004. A review of the importance and control of Newcastle disease in Ethiopia. Ethiop. Vet. J. 1: 71-81.

Van Eck, J.H., Van Wiltenburg, N. and Jaspers, D. 1991. An Ulster 2C strain-derived Newcastle disease vaccine: efficacy and excretion in maternally immune chickens. Avian Pathol. 20: 481-495. https://doi.org/10.1080/03079459108418786