Ovine Progressive Pneumonia Virus Is Transmitted More Effectively via Aerosol Nebulization than Oral Administration

A new method of experimental infection of ovine progressive pneumonia virus (OPPV), aerosol nebulization (Nb), was compared to intravenous (IV) and oral (PO) methods of experimental infection. Seven month old lambs were given 3.5 107 TCID50 of Dubois OPPV LMH19 isolate using IV, PO, or Nb methods an...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Open journal of veterinary medicine (Irvine, CA) CA), 2012-09, Vol.2 (3), p.113-119
Hauptverfasser: M. Herrmann-Hoesing, Lynn, N. White, Stephen, E. Broughton-Neiswanger, Liam, C. Johnson, Wendell, M. Noh, Susan, A. Schneider, David, Li, Hong, S. Taus, Naomi, Reynolds, James, Truscott, Thomas, P. Dassanayake, Rohana, P. Knowles, Donald
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 119
container_issue 3
container_start_page 113
container_title Open journal of veterinary medicine (Irvine, CA)
container_volume 2
creator M. Herrmann-Hoesing, Lynn
N. White, Stephen
E. Broughton-Neiswanger, Liam
C. Johnson, Wendell
M. Noh, Susan
A. Schneider, David
Li, Hong
S. Taus, Naomi
Reynolds, James
Truscott, Thomas
P. Dassanayake, Rohana
P. Knowles, Donald
description A new method of experimental infection of ovine progressive pneumonia virus (OPPV), aerosol nebulization (Nb), was compared to intravenous (IV) and oral (PO) methods of experimental infection. Seven month old lambs were given 3.5 107 TCID50 of Dubois OPPV LMH19 isolate using IV, PO, or Nb methods and were monitored for infection using cELISA and OPPV quantitative (q) PCR for 35 weeks. Four out of four sheep in the IV group, six out of six sheep in the Nb group, but only two out of six sheep in the PO group became infected by OPPV; whereas the uninoculated controls (n = 2) and a sentinel control (n = 1) remained uninfected during the course of the study. The time to a cELISA or OPPV qPCR positive result in the Nb group was quicker and statistically different from the time to a cELISA or OPPV qPCR positive result in the PO group (cELISA P value = 0.0021 and OPPV qPCR P value = 0.0007). When the Nb and IV groups were compared, sheep became cELISA and OPPV qPCR positive at similar times (cELISA P value = 0.6 and OPPV qPCR P value = 0.1). In addition, sheep became OPPV qPCR positive prior to cELISA in both the IV and Nb groups (IV P value = 0.027 and Nb P value = 0.007). Aerosol nebulization is a more natural experimental method of transmitting OPPV and may be valuable for testing potential vaccines or specific host genetics.
doi_str_mv 10.4236/ojvm.2012.23019
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1439219869</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1439219869</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1609-b68ec34029e5382274d4db70803a01603897b209913eed66194bf30788749ee33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kD1PwzAQhiMEElXpzOqRJa0_Usceq6pApUIZCqvlJBdwldjFTiKVX4_bIm65V7pHJ71PktwTPM0o4zO3H9opxYROKcNEXiUjSvg8ZYxn1_95zm-TSQh7HCfPJWFilITtYCygN-8-PYRghpgt9K2zRqMP4_uA1gHtvLahNV0HFXpxHtCqrqHsIt0c0RDJBXgXXINeoegb86M74yzqvrRFW68btKhaY03o_Plwl9zUugkw-dvj5P1xtVs-p5vt03q52KQl4VimBRdQsgxTCXMmKM2zKquKHAvMNI4EEzIvKJaxCEDFOZFZUTOcC5FnEoCxcfJw-Xvw7ruH0KnWhBKaRltwfVAkY5ISKbiM6OyClrFH8FCrgzet9kdFsDoZVifD6mRYnQ2zXxcWb48</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1439219869</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Ovine Progressive Pneumonia Virus Is Transmitted More Effectively via Aerosol Nebulization than Oral Administration</title><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>M. Herrmann-Hoesing, Lynn ; N. White, Stephen ; E. Broughton-Neiswanger, Liam ; C. Johnson, Wendell ; M. Noh, Susan ; A. Schneider, David ; Li, Hong ; S. Taus, Naomi ; Reynolds, James ; Truscott, Thomas ; P. Dassanayake, Rohana ; P. Knowles, Donald</creator><creatorcontrib>M. Herrmann-Hoesing, Lynn ; N. White, Stephen ; E. Broughton-Neiswanger, Liam ; C. Johnson, Wendell ; M. Noh, Susan ; A. Schneider, David ; Li, Hong ; S. Taus, Naomi ; Reynolds, James ; Truscott, Thomas ; P. Dassanayake, Rohana ; P. Knowles, Donald</creatorcontrib><description>A new method of experimental infection of ovine progressive pneumonia virus (OPPV), aerosol nebulization (Nb), was compared to intravenous (IV) and oral (PO) methods of experimental infection. Seven month old lambs were given 3.5 107 TCID50 of Dubois OPPV LMH19 isolate using IV, PO, or Nb methods and were monitored for infection using cELISA and OPPV quantitative (q) PCR for 35 weeks. Four out of four sheep in the IV group, six out of six sheep in the Nb group, but only two out of six sheep in the PO group became infected by OPPV; whereas the uninoculated controls (n = 2) and a sentinel control (n = 1) remained uninfected during the course of the study. The time to a cELISA or OPPV qPCR positive result in the Nb group was quicker and statistically different from the time to a cELISA or OPPV qPCR positive result in the PO group (cELISA P value = 0.0021 and OPPV qPCR P value = 0.0007). When the Nb and IV groups were compared, sheep became cELISA and OPPV qPCR positive at similar times (cELISA P value = 0.6 and OPPV qPCR P value = 0.1). In addition, sheep became OPPV qPCR positive prior to cELISA in both the IV and Nb groups (IV P value = 0.027 and Nb P value = 0.007). Aerosol nebulization is a more natural experimental method of transmitting OPPV and may be valuable for testing potential vaccines or specific host genetics.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2165-3356</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2165-3364</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.4236/ojvm.2012.23019</identifier><language>eng</language><subject>Ovine progressive pneumonia virus</subject><ispartof>Open journal of veterinary medicine (Irvine, CA), 2012-09, Vol.2 (3), p.113-119</ispartof><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1609-b68ec34029e5382274d4db70803a01603897b209913eed66194bf30788749ee33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1609-b68ec34029e5382274d4db70803a01603897b209913eed66194bf30788749ee33</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>M. Herrmann-Hoesing, Lynn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>N. White, Stephen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>E. Broughton-Neiswanger, Liam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>C. Johnson, Wendell</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>M. Noh, Susan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>A. Schneider, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Hong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>S. Taus, Naomi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reynolds, James</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Truscott, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>P. Dassanayake, Rohana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>P. Knowles, Donald</creatorcontrib><title>Ovine Progressive Pneumonia Virus Is Transmitted More Effectively via Aerosol Nebulization than Oral Administration</title><title>Open journal of veterinary medicine (Irvine, CA)</title><description>A new method of experimental infection of ovine progressive pneumonia virus (OPPV), aerosol nebulization (Nb), was compared to intravenous (IV) and oral (PO) methods of experimental infection. Seven month old lambs were given 3.5 107 TCID50 of Dubois OPPV LMH19 isolate using IV, PO, or Nb methods and were monitored for infection using cELISA and OPPV quantitative (q) PCR for 35 weeks. Four out of four sheep in the IV group, six out of six sheep in the Nb group, but only two out of six sheep in the PO group became infected by OPPV; whereas the uninoculated controls (n = 2) and a sentinel control (n = 1) remained uninfected during the course of the study. The time to a cELISA or OPPV qPCR positive result in the Nb group was quicker and statistically different from the time to a cELISA or OPPV qPCR positive result in the PO group (cELISA P value = 0.0021 and OPPV qPCR P value = 0.0007). When the Nb and IV groups were compared, sheep became cELISA and OPPV qPCR positive at similar times (cELISA P value = 0.6 and OPPV qPCR P value = 0.1). In addition, sheep became OPPV qPCR positive prior to cELISA in both the IV and Nb groups (IV P value = 0.027 and Nb P value = 0.007). Aerosol nebulization is a more natural experimental method of transmitting OPPV and may be valuable for testing potential vaccines or specific host genetics.</description><subject>Ovine progressive pneumonia virus</subject><issn>2165-3356</issn><issn>2165-3364</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo9kD1PwzAQhiMEElXpzOqRJa0_Usceq6pApUIZCqvlJBdwldjFTiKVX4_bIm65V7pHJ71PktwTPM0o4zO3H9opxYROKcNEXiUjSvg8ZYxn1_95zm-TSQh7HCfPJWFilITtYCygN-8-PYRghpgt9K2zRqMP4_uA1gHtvLahNV0HFXpxHtCqrqHsIt0c0RDJBXgXXINeoegb86M74yzqvrRFW68btKhaY03o_Plwl9zUugkw-dvj5P1xtVs-p5vt03q52KQl4VimBRdQsgxTCXMmKM2zKquKHAvMNI4EEzIvKJaxCEDFOZFZUTOcC5FnEoCxcfJw-Xvw7ruH0KnWhBKaRltwfVAkY5ISKbiM6OyClrFH8FCrgzet9kdFsDoZVifD6mRYnQ2zXxcWb48</recordid><startdate>20120901</startdate><enddate>20120901</enddate><creator>M. Herrmann-Hoesing, Lynn</creator><creator>N. White, Stephen</creator><creator>E. Broughton-Neiswanger, Liam</creator><creator>C. Johnson, Wendell</creator><creator>M. Noh, Susan</creator><creator>A. Schneider, David</creator><creator>Li, Hong</creator><creator>S. Taus, Naomi</creator><creator>Reynolds, James</creator><creator>Truscott, Thomas</creator><creator>P. Dassanayake, Rohana</creator><creator>P. Knowles, Donald</creator><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>H94</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120901</creationdate><title>Ovine Progressive Pneumonia Virus Is Transmitted More Effectively via Aerosol Nebulization than Oral Administration</title><author>M. Herrmann-Hoesing, Lynn ; N. White, Stephen ; E. Broughton-Neiswanger, Liam ; C. Johnson, Wendell ; M. Noh, Susan ; A. Schneider, David ; Li, Hong ; S. Taus, Naomi ; Reynolds, James ; Truscott, Thomas ; P. Dassanayake, Rohana ; P. Knowles, Donald</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1609-b68ec34029e5382274d4db70803a01603897b209913eed66194bf30788749ee33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Ovine progressive pneumonia virus</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>M. Herrmann-Hoesing, Lynn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>N. White, Stephen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>E. Broughton-Neiswanger, Liam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>C. Johnson, Wendell</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>M. Noh, Susan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>A. Schneider, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Hong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>S. Taus, Naomi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reynolds, James</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Truscott, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>P. Dassanayake, Rohana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>P. Knowles, Donald</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Open journal of veterinary medicine (Irvine, CA)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>M. Herrmann-Hoesing, Lynn</au><au>N. White, Stephen</au><au>E. Broughton-Neiswanger, Liam</au><au>C. Johnson, Wendell</au><au>M. Noh, Susan</au><au>A. Schneider, David</au><au>Li, Hong</au><au>S. Taus, Naomi</au><au>Reynolds, James</au><au>Truscott, Thomas</au><au>P. Dassanayake, Rohana</au><au>P. Knowles, Donald</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Ovine Progressive Pneumonia Virus Is Transmitted More Effectively via Aerosol Nebulization than Oral Administration</atitle><jtitle>Open journal of veterinary medicine (Irvine, CA)</jtitle><date>2012-09-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>2</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>113</spage><epage>119</epage><pages>113-119</pages><issn>2165-3356</issn><eissn>2165-3364</eissn><abstract>A new method of experimental infection of ovine progressive pneumonia virus (OPPV), aerosol nebulization (Nb), was compared to intravenous (IV) and oral (PO) methods of experimental infection. Seven month old lambs were given 3.5 107 TCID50 of Dubois OPPV LMH19 isolate using IV, PO, or Nb methods and were monitored for infection using cELISA and OPPV quantitative (q) PCR for 35 weeks. Four out of four sheep in the IV group, six out of six sheep in the Nb group, but only two out of six sheep in the PO group became infected by OPPV; whereas the uninoculated controls (n = 2) and a sentinel control (n = 1) remained uninfected during the course of the study. The time to a cELISA or OPPV qPCR positive result in the Nb group was quicker and statistically different from the time to a cELISA or OPPV qPCR positive result in the PO group (cELISA P value = 0.0021 and OPPV qPCR P value = 0.0007). When the Nb and IV groups were compared, sheep became cELISA and OPPV qPCR positive at similar times (cELISA P value = 0.6 and OPPV qPCR P value = 0.1). In addition, sheep became OPPV qPCR positive prior to cELISA in both the IV and Nb groups (IV P value = 0.027 and Nb P value = 0.007). Aerosol nebulization is a more natural experimental method of transmitting OPPV and may be valuable for testing potential vaccines or specific host genetics.</abstract><doi>10.4236/ojvm.2012.23019</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2165-3356
ispartof Open journal of veterinary medicine (Irvine, CA), 2012-09, Vol.2 (3), p.113-119
issn 2165-3356
2165-3364
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1439219869
source EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects Ovine progressive pneumonia virus
title Ovine Progressive Pneumonia Virus Is Transmitted More Effectively via Aerosol Nebulization than Oral Administration
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-23T19%3A02%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Ovine%20Progressive%20Pneumonia%20Virus%20Is%20Transmitted%20More%20Effectively%20via%20Aerosol%20Nebulization%20than%20Oral%20Administration&rft.jtitle=Open%20journal%20of%20veterinary%20medicine%20(Irvine,%20CA)&rft.au=M.%20Herrmann-Hoesing,%20Lynn&rft.date=2012-09-01&rft.volume=2&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=113&rft.epage=119&rft.pages=113-119&rft.issn=2165-3356&rft.eissn=2165-3364&rft_id=info:doi/10.4236/ojvm.2012.23019&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1439219869%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1439219869&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true