0
To compare clinical, virologic, immunologic, and pathologic parameters in pigs each concurrently administered a porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV2) and a porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) vaccine from one of two commercial sources and challenged with field strains of both viruses.
One group of pigs administered concurrently PCV and PRRS vaccines from a commercial source and another group administered PCV and PRRS vaccines from another commercial source at study day -28 (21 days of age) were challenged with both viruses at study day 0 (49 days of age). Serum samples were tested for viremia by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and for antibodies by a commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and a virus neutralization test. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were tested for interferon-γ secreting cells (IFN-γ-SC) by enzyme-linked immunospot assay. Lung and lymphoid tissues were tested for lesions and viral antigen by histopathology and immunohistochemistry.
Significant differences were observed between vaccinated, challenged and unvaccinated, challenged groups in clinical (average weight gain and clinical signs), virologic (PCR testing), immunologic (antibodies, IFN-γ-SC, and interleukin-10), pathologic (lesions and viral antigen) outcomes. No significant differences were observed between the two vaccinated, challenged groups in clinical, virologic (except PCV2 viremia at day 14), immunologic, and pathologic outcomes.
Under the conditions of this study, it makes no difference to protection whether PCV2 and PRRSV vaccines are administered concurrently. Concurrent vaccination is efficacious for controlling co-infection with PCV2 and PRRSV.
Jeong J, Kang HS, Park C, et al. Comparative efficacy of concurrent administration of a porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV2) vaccine plus a porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) vaccine from two commercial sources in pigs challenged with both viruses. J Swine Health Prod. 2016;24(3):130–141.
