Subscribe Now Subscribe Today
Review Article
 

Advances in Studies on Vaccines of Foot-and-mouth Disease



Hua Tang, Xin-Sheng Liu, Yu-Zhen Fang, Li Pan, Zhong-Wang Zhang, Peng Zhou, Jian-Liang Lv, Shou-Tian Jiang, Wen-Fa Hu, Pan Zhang, Yong-Lu Wang and Yong-Guang Zhang
 
Facebook Twitter Digg Reddit Linkedin StumbleUpon E-mail
ABSTRACT

The Foot-and-mouth Disease (FMD), which is the most devastating disease of livestock husbandry, drastically hinders the development of stock raising. At present the main FMD vaccine is still traditional inactivated vaccine, as its good performance in protective activity and immune efficacy, it is widely used in the world for preventing and controlling this disease, especially in developing countries. However, people have realized many disadvantages of inactivated vaccine. In order to resolve these problems, the scientists are conducting some new research about novel FMD vaccine to seek for more secure and effective vaccines. Nowadays, with the rapid development of molecular biology, researchers are paying high emphasis on novel FMD vaccines, such as, synthetic peptide vaccine, epitope-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, chimeric vaccine and so on. There is no doubt that these new-type FMD vaccines will make great contribution to the prevention and control of FMD. This study reviewed the international research progress on the traditional vaccines and novel vaccines of FMD.

Services
Related Articles in ASCI
Search in Google Scholar
View Citation
Report Citation

 
  How to cite this article:

Hua Tang, Xin-Sheng Liu, Yu-Zhen Fang, Li Pan, Zhong-Wang Zhang, Peng Zhou, Jian-Liang Lv, Shou-Tian Jiang, Wen-Fa Hu, Pan Zhang, Yong-Lu Wang and Yong-Guang Zhang, 2012. Advances in Studies on Vaccines of Foot-and-mouth Disease. Asian Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 7: 1245-1254.

DOI: 10.3923/ajava.2012.1245.1254

URL: https://scialert.net/abstract/?doi=ajava.2012.1245.1254
 
Received: July 04, 2012; Accepted: September 11, 2012; Published: November 19, 2012



INTRODUCTION

Foot-and-mouth Disease (FMD) is an acute, highly contagious disease of cloven-hoofed animals and is endemic in many regions in Africa, Asia and South America (Cottam et al., 2008; Schumann et al., 2008; Shawky and Daoud 2005; Ahad et al., 2002). It is the most devastating disease of livestock husbandry (James and Rushton, 2002), has caused huge loss economically and drastically hinders the development of stock raising. Economic loss in Bangladesh because of calf mortality, milk yield reduction resulted from Foot-and-mouth Disease Virus (FMDV) infection would stand at US$ 163329 per year (Howlader et al., 2004).

It is caused by the Foot-and-mouth Disease Virus (FMDV), a member of the genus Aphthovirus of the family Picornaviridae, which is highly transmissible and can causes high morbidity outbreaks with moderate to low mortality in most cases. When a host is infected by FMDV, the host protein will be subverted and its function will also be altered to aid in virus replication (Chase and Semler, 2012). The disease occurs frequently during the winter season (Verma et al., 2008). In the mountainous area of Turkey, the FMD incidence in goat is 23% (Darcan et al., 2005).

There are seven serotypes of FMDV (A, O, C, Asia1, SAT1, SAT2 and SAT3) with multiple subtypes within each serotype (Paprocka, 2006). The harmfulness of FMD is conspicuous (Sumption et al., 2008; Gibbs, 2003; Sobrino et al., 2001) and there is no effective way to control this disaster (Mort et al., 2005). FMD is the most important animal disease limiting trade of animals and animal products (Rufael et al., 2008; Barasa et al., 2008; Perry and Rich, 2007). In spite of some clinical illness caused by FMDV infection such as mastitis are curable (Sharma, 2008), almost no effective drugs are currently available to cure this disease. Although vaccination is an effective way to limiting the spread of FMDV (Rizk et al., 2011), it is unlikely that a single vaccine approach will solve the many short comings of current vaccines (Rodriguez and Grubman, 2009). In this manuscript, based on the researches in our lab, we reviewed the international research progress on FMD vaccines. We hope it is helpful to the FMD vaccines researchers.

FMD VACCINES

FMD is devastating that it has a significant impact on world economies and prevails in many countries and areas throughout the world (James and Rushton, 2002). People have realized vacation is an effective measure to prevent and control FMD (Rodriguez and Gay, 2011). The current vaccines include conventional vaccines and novel vaccines, the conventional vaccines include attenuated vaccine and inactivated vaccine. And the new-type vaccines include recombinant protein and peptide vaccines, empty capsid vaccines, live attenuated vaccines and so on (Rodriguez and Grubman, 2009). They, respectively play different roles in the prevention and control of FMD in different epidemic areas and stages.

At present the main FMD vaccine is still traditional inactivated vaccine, as its good performance in protective activity and immune efficacy, it is widely used in the world for preventing and controlling this disease, especially in developing countries (Rodriguez and Gay, 2011). However, people have realized many disadvantages of traditional vaccine, such as, virulence recurrent, incomplete inactivation and even virus leak (Rodriguez and Gay, 2011). So many researchers have attempted to develop more effective and secure vaccines that may provide additional tools to help control FMD in the future.

Inactivated vaccine: Conventional inactivated vaccines were produced by these field virus stains which were disposed by inactivators and adjuvants after a series of amplifications. In 1931, Society for microbiology held for the first FMD academic conference in Berlin and laid the foundation for FMD vaccine research. In 1990, an international bank, which is based on concentrated FMDV preparations stored in the gaseous phase of liquid nitrogen, has been established at the Pirbright Laboratory of the AFRC Institute for Animal Health (Doel and Pullen, 1990). Frenkel (1951) described the procedures and facilities for mass production of FMDV vaccine. Some researchers inactivated FMDV by virion-associated endonuclease, the results showed endonuclease is equal to or better than formaldehyde or ethyleneimine in guinea-pig potency tests (Amadori et al., 1987).

Attenuated vaccine: Attenuated vaccine played a key role in controlling the FMD pandemic in Europe, however, it was discontinued because of various reasons. On the one hand, the weak phenotypes of these attenuated viruses were not always stable and the weak features were host specific, that is to say, one attenuated virus may showed its weak features to a certain animal. Further more, it may not able to stimulate inoculated animals to produce effective protective immune response as its excessive weakening. On the other hand, although FMD NSP ELISA was used to distinguish native infection from vaccinated (Raof et al., 2011; Hassanein et al., 2011), the animals which inoculated attenuated vaccine could also produce non-structure protein, so it is difficult to distinguish natural infection and vacation.

Genetic engineering live vector vaccine: Live vector vaccine is a kind of recombinant protein expressed by animals inoculated with such recombinant virus whose genome contains FMDV immunogenic genome and nonpathogenic virus vector genome. Live vector vaccine is more effective than inactivated vaccine because the inoculated animals can not only produce antibody against FMDV but also virus vector (Balamurugan et al., 2004). Many vectors have been developed, for instance, recombinant vaccinia virus (Berinstein et al., 2000), recombinant fowlpox virus (Zheng et al., 2006), recombinant pseudorabies virus (He et al., 2008), recombinant infectious bovine rhinotracheitis virus (Kit et al., 1991) and so on.

DNA vaccine: DNA vaccine is a kind of expression plasmid, containing virus antigen gene, which could stimulate the vaccinated animals to produce a protective immune response (Rawat et al., 2007; Liu, 2006). The animal has the ability of absorbing naked DNA molecules. And we could treat animals by transfecting target clone gene directly to them. Wang et al. (2011) reviewed the approaches to improve DNA vaccine efficacy and they demonstrated that improved target clone gene can not only increase the protective effects but also reduce vaccination doses and toxicity. In recent years, DNA vaccine is widely used to control FMD. Such as Benvenistia et al. (2001) used a FMDV expression constructs to protect pigs from FMDV infection. In addition Wang et al. (2008) found co-inoculating IL-15 construct with pcD-VP1 (FMDV DNA vaccine) to animals could enhance the Cell-mediated Immunity (CMI) compared to the pcD-VP1 alone.

Transgenic plant vaccines: Antigen gene was introduced into plants by the use of transgenic technology and then we could gain the transgenic plants which are able to express relevant protein. The extracts of transformed plant materials could induce immunological response (Aliahmadi et al., 2006). FMD transgenic plants vaccines was one of early and successful case. The use of transgenic plants as a biological reactor to expressed recombinant protein vaccine is a very attractive and cheap production system, it may replace the traditional high costing vaccine production system someday. Mice immunized with the leaf extracts of transformed plants which could express VP1 of FMDV, all mice were protected against FMDV challenge (Carrillo et al., 1998). And this is the first study showing protection against a viral disease by immunization with an antigen expressed in a transgenic plant. Wigdorovitz et al. (1999) immunized mice with the leaf extracts of transgenic alfalfa which could express the structural protein VP1 of FMDV and the immunized mice were protected against FMDV challenge. A transgenic alfalfa containing the genes encoding the polyprotein P1 and the protease 3C of FMDV was constructed by Dus Santos et al. (2005) and the immunized mice were completely protected when challenged with the virulent virus. Pan et al. (2006) used the VP1 production expressed by transformed solanum tuberosum to immune guinea pigs, it indicated that the expression product had immunogenicity and could effectively induce the specific antibodies against FMDV. Two years later, Pan et al. (2008) fond the production of transgenic tomato plants that express the structural polyprotein, P1-2A and protease, 3C of FMDV could also fully protect pigs from FMDV challenge.

Protein vector vaccine: FMD protein vector vaccine is some certain fusion protein made up with B\T cell epitope and macromolecular proteins or virus-like particles. This kind of vaccine could enhance cellular immune response as the antigen presentation of protein vehicle or virus-like particles. Many vectors have been developed, such as, KLH, BSA, MSA, MIM, MWS, AHJ, SWS, the heavy chain of IgG and some molecular chaperones. Pfaff et al. (1982) connected VP1 144-159aa of FMDV to BSA, KLH and cow parathyroid globulin and used them to inoculate rabbit, the results showed BSA is better than the other two. Guinea pigs inoculated with KLH-VP1 141-160aa could fully resist a challenge infection (Bittle et al., 1982). Zamorano et al. (1995) used BSA-VP1 135-160aa to inoculate mice, the mice could effectively induce the specific antibodies against FMDV.

Empty capsid vaccine: Empty capsid vaccine is a kind of new-style vaccine, which contains all antigenic epitopes while lacks of virus nucleic acid (Rodriguez and Grubman, 2009; Rowlands et al., 1975). As this kind of vaccine can not produce non-structural protein, so we can distinguish vacation from native infection (Fu et al., 2011). And this vaccine is more secure because of lacking nucleic acid. To some extent, empty capsid vaccine is live vector vaccine, however, if we use the extract of expression vector system to inoculate animal it is different from live vector vaccine. A recombinant silkworm Baculovirus Bm-P12A3C constructed by Li et al. (2008), which contain the intact P1-2A and 3C protease coding regions of FMDV Asia 1/HNK/CHA/05, could protect four out of five vaccination animals from homologous FMDV challenge.

Chimeric viral vaccines: With the help of reverse genetics technique the antigen coding areas of a known vaccine strain has been substituted with that from another serotype or epidemic isolates. Thus we gain a recombinant, called chimeric virus. And chimeric viral vaccine is made from this kind of new virus. Chimeric viral vaccine develops more quickly than traditional vaccine. A chimeric FMDV vaccines, in which the VP1 G-H loop had been substituted with that from another serotype, could fully protect cattle from challenge 21 days post-vaccination (Fowler et al., 2008). A cross-serotype chimeric virus engineered by Blignaut et al. (2011), could induce pigs to produce neutralizing antibodies and protect vaccination pigs against homologous FMDV challenge.

Epitope peptide vaccine: Epitope peptide vaccine is made from antigens amino acid sequence through artificial chemical synthesis or genetic engineering expression. At present, the key study of FMD epitope peptide vaccine lays on expression of antigens gene or adjuvant gene. OmpA fusion proteins inserted with the VP1 sequence of FMDV could elicit virus-specific immune responses in rabbits (Ruppert et al., 1994).

Synthetic peptide vaccine: Peptide vaccine is chemically synthetic peptides contain a number of B cell and T cell antigenic epitopes. The main difference between epitope peptide vaccine and synthetic peptide vaccine is that the epitope number of epitope peptide vaccine is larger than that of synthetic peptide vaccine. On the one hand, synthetic peptide vaccine costs too much and the technology of protein synthesis is limited. On the other hand, epitope peptide vaccine could add many other epitopes at the help of vector. Both of the two vaccines do not exist the problem of virulence recurrent or inactivated incompletely. They have great advantages in the control of FMD. Wang et al. (2002) designed a FMDV peptide-based vaccine for swine. The peptide immunogen has the VP1 G-H loop domain and a novel promiscuous T helper site. 20 out of 21 immunised pigs were protected from infectious challenge by FMDV O1 Taiwan. Rodriguez et al. (2003) designed a synthetic consensus peptide comprising the VP1 G-H loop region of FMDV type-O and a non-VP1 T-helper epitope. Although the synthetic peptide induced an antibody response in cattle, it failed to confer protection against FMDV challenge. Wiesmuller constructed a novel synthetic peptide vaccine P3CSS-FMDV-VP1 (135-154). The vaccine could induce a long-lasting high protection against FMDV and serotype-specific virus-neutralizing antibodies in guinea-pigs (Wiesmuller et al., 1989).

THE STUDY ON ANTIGENIC FMDV EPITOPES

As mentioned above, synthetic peptide vaccines, live vector vaccines, epitope peptide vaccines contain the antigenic epitopes, so the study on epitopes is crucial for the development of these novel vaccine. So far, many epitopes have been discovered, such as, VP1 144-159aa (Pfaff et al., 1982); VP1 25-41aa, 200-213aa (Bittle et al., 1982); VP4 20-35aa (Van Lierop et al., 1995; Blanco et al., 2000); 3A 11-25aa, 3A 21-35aa, 3C 166-180aa (Blanco et al., 2001); 3D 51-65aa, 3D 91-115aa, 3D 181-200aa, 3D 341-360aa, 3D 381-400aa (Garcia-Briones et al., 2004); 3D 301-315aa, 3D 326-340aa, 3D 346-360aa, 3D 351-365aa, 3D 356-370aa, 3D 406-420aa, 1A 62-76aa, 1A 67-81aa (Gerner et al., 2006); 3D 16-33aa (Yang et al., 2007); VP1 66-80aa (Gerner et al., 2007); VP1 106-115aa, 4-13aa (Liu et al., 2011); VP1 1-12aa, 17-29aa, 194-211aa, VP2 40-50aa, VP3 26-39aa, VP4 30-41aa (Zhang et al., 2010) and so on.

There is no doubt that the study on epitopes will greatly promote the development of novel vaccines. Thanks to the consecutive discovery of new epitopes, we could produce poly-vaccine containing epitopes of different serotypes (Hong et al., 2007) to overcome the MHC restriction more easily. It is obviously that epitope plays a key role in exploiting new-type FMDV vaccines.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, at the moment the main FMD vaccine is still traditional inactivated vaccine, especially in developing countries. In recent years, as the genome sequencing technology and protein peptide chemical synthesis technology become mature, especially the proposal of epitopic biology, more and more FMDV antigenic epitopes are revealed. Researchers take an interest in synthetic peptide vaccines in order to develop more effective and secure vaccines that may help control FMD in the future. As the production of multivalent vaccine is difficult due to the high diversity and variability of pathogenic microbes, people gradually pay more attention to polypeptide vaccine. The selected epitope sequences are highly conserved in different serotypes and this is the key guarantee of cross immune response of vaccine. The principle of synthetic peptide vaccine is based on the amino acid sequence which is an unique design idea that represents a new design direction of vaccine in recent years. Compared with traditional vaccine, synthetic peptide vaccine has many advantages: (1) it can be recognized and combined by many MHC of different genetic background, so it can be presented efficiently (2) it has unique superiority on cell-mediated immune (3) it is safer than attenuated vaccine and inactivated vaccine and (4) native infection can be distinguished by designing non-structural protein antigenic epitopes in chemical synthetic peptides.

Among the FMD new-style vaccines, most of them have intersection, such as, synthetic peptide vaccines, epitope peptide vaccine, protein vector vaccine are all based on antigenic epitopes; for another, DNA vaccine and live vector vaccine are both based on gene expression. Different kinds of vaccines play different role in different areas as well as in different epidemic stages. They are tuneable and coadjutant in the prevention of FMD.

A secure and effective vaccine should be able to expedite eradication through vaccination and could also minimize the need for control by culling. There is no doubt that the new-type vaccines will make great contribution to the prevention and control of FMD.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study was financially supported by the National High Technology Research and Development Program of China (863 Program) (No. 2011AA10A211) and Ministry of Agriculture' Special Funds for Scientific Research on Public Causes (No.201203039).

REFERENCES

1:  Ahad, A., K.N. Islam, M.M. Rahman, K.F. Parija and S. Begum, 2002. Experimental viremia in guineapigs against foot and mouth disease virus. Pak. J. Biol. Sci., 5: 1004-1005.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

2:  Aliahmadi, A., N. Rahmani and M. Abdollahi, 2006. Plant-derived human vaccines; An overview. Int. J. Pharmacol., 2: 268-279.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

3:  Balamurugan, V., R.M. Kumar and V.V. Suryanarayana, 2004. Past and present vaccine development strategies for the control of foot-and-mouth disease. Acta Virologica, 48: 201-214.
PubMed  |  Direct Link  |  

4:  Amadori, M., S. Barei, M. Melegari and G.F. Panina, 1987. Safety and efficacy of foot-and-mouth disease vaccines containing endonuclease-inactivated virions. Vaccine, 5: 219-222.
PubMed  |  

5:  Barasa, M., A. Catley, D. Machuchu, H. Laqua, E. Puot, D.T. Kot and D. Ikiror, 2008. Foot-and-mouth disease vaccination in South Sudan: Benefit-cost analysis and livelihoods impact. Transbound. Emerg. Dis., 55: 339-351.
PubMed  |  

6:  Benvenistia, L., A. Rogela, L. Kuznetzovaa, S. Bujanoverb, Y. Beckerb and Y. Stram, 2001. Gene gun-media DNA vaccination against foot-and-mouth disease virus. Vaccine, 19: 3885-3895.
CrossRef  |  

7:  Berinstein, A., C. Tami, O. Taboga, E. Smitsaart and E. Carrillo, 2000. Protective immunity against foot-and-mouth disease virus induced by a recombinant vaccinia virus. Vaccine, 18: 2231-2238.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  

8:  Bittle, J.L., R.A. Houghten, H. Alexander, T.M. Shinnick and J.G. Sutcliffe et al., 1982. Protection against foot-and-mouth disease by immunization with a chemically synthesized peptide predicted from the viral nucleotide sequence. Nature, 298: 30-33.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

9:  Blanco, E., M. Garcia-Briones, A. Sanz-Parra, P. Gomes and E. de Oliveira et al., 2001. Identification of T-cell epitopes in nonstructural proteins of foot-and-mouth disease virus. J. Virol., 75: 3164-3174.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

10:  Blanco, E., K. McCullough, A. Summerfield, J. Fiorini and D. Andreu et al., 2000. Interspecies major histocompatibility complex-restricted th cell epitope on foot-and-mouth disease virus capsid protein VP4. J. Virol., 74: 4902-4907.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  

11:  Blignaut, B., N. Visser, J. Theron, E. Rieder and F.F. Maree, 2011. Custom-engineered chimeric foot-and-mouth disease vaccine elicits protective immune responses in pigs. J. Gen. Virol., 92: 849-859.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  

12:  Carrillo, C., A. Wigdorovitz, J.C. Oliveros, P.I. Zamorano and A.M. Sadir et al., 1998. Protective immune response to foot-and-mouth disease virus with VP1 expressed in transgenic plants. J. Virol., 2: 1688-1690.
PubMed  |  Direct Link  |  

13:  Chase, A.J. and B.L. Semler, 2012. Viral subversion of host functions for picornavirus translation and RNA replication. Future Virol., 7: 179-191.

14:  Cottam, E.M., J. Wadsworth, A.E. Shaw, R.J. Rowlands and L. Goatley et al., 2008. Transmission pathways of foot-and-mouth disease virus in the United Kingdom in 2007. PLoS. Pathog. Vol. 4.

15:  Darcan, N., D. Budak and M. Kantar, 2005. Characterization of goat production in east mediterranean region of Turkey. J. Biological Sci., 5: 694-696.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

16:  Doel, T.R. and L. Pullen, 1990. International bank for foot-and-mouth disease vaccine: Stability studies with virus concentrates and vaccines prepared from them. Vaccine, 8: 473-478.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  

17:  Dus Santos, M.J., C. Carrillo, F. Ardila, R.D. Rios and P. Franzone et al., 2005. Development of transgenic alfalfa plants containing the foot and mouth disease virus structural polyprotein gene P1 and its utilization as an experimental immunogen. Vaccine, 23: 1838-1843.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

18:  Fowler, V.L., D.J. Paton, E. Rieder and P.V. Barnett, 2008. Chimeric foot-and-mouth disease viruses: evaluation of their efficacy as potential marker vaccines in cattle. Vaccine, 26: 1982-1989.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  

19:  Frenkel, H.S., 1951. Research on foot-and-mouth disease. III. The cultivation of the virus on a practical scale in explantation of bovine tongue epithelium. Am. J. Vet. Res., 12: 187-190.
PubMed  |  

20:  Fu, Y., Y. Cao, P. Sun, H. Bao and X. Bai et al., 2011. Development of a dot immunoblot method for differentiation of animals infected with foot-and-mouth disease virus from vaccinated animals using non-structural proteins expressed prokaryotically. J. Virol. Methods, 171: 234-240.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  

21:  Gibbs, P., 2003. The foot-and-mouth disease epidemic of 2001 in the UK: implications for the USA and the J. Vet. Med. Educ., 30: 121-132.
PubMed  |  

22:  Garcia-Briones, M.M., E. Blanco, C. Chiva, D. Andreu, V. Ley and F. Sobrino, 2004. Immunogenicity and T cell recognition in swine of foot-and-mouth disease virus polymerase 3D. Virology, 322: 264-275.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  

23:  Gerner, W., M.S. Denyer, H.H. Takamatsu, T.E. Wileman, K.H. Wiesmuller, E. Pfaff and A. Saalmuller, 2006. Identification of novel foot-and-mouth disease virus specific T-cell epitopes in c\c and d\d haplotype miniature swine. Virus Res., 121: 223-228.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  

24:  Gerner, W., B.V. Carr, K.H. Wiesmuller, E. Pfaff, A. Saalmuller and B. Charleston, 2007. Identification of a novel foot-and-mouth disease virus specific T-cell epitope with immunodominant characteristics in cattle with MHC serotype A31. Vet. Res., 38: 565-572.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  

25:  Hassanein, S.A., W.A. El-Wahab, M. Eweis and M.M. Mahmoud, 2011. Serodiagnosis of Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) virus for differentiation between naturally infected and vaccinated cattle and buffaloes. Int. J. Virol., 7: 198-203.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

26:  He, Y., P. Qian, K. Zhang, Q. Yao and D. Wang et al., 2008. Construction and immune response chaaracterization of a recombinant pseudorabies virus co-expressing capsid precursor protein(P1) and a multiepitope peptide of foot-and-mouth disease virusin swine. Virus Genes, 36: 393-400.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  

27:  Hong, Q., P. Qian, X.M. Li, X.L. Yu and H.C. Chen, 2007. A recombinant pseudorabies virus co-expressing capsid proteins precursor P1-2A of FMDV and VP2 protein of porcine parvovirus: A trivalent vaccine candidate. Biotechnol. Lett., 29: 1677-1683.
PubMed  |  

28:  Howlader, M.M.R., A.T.M. Mahbub-E-Elahi, S. Habib, M.J.U. Bhuyian, M.A.B. Siddique, M.A. Hai and M.G. Hossain, 2004. Foot and mouth disease in baghabari milk shed area and it's economic loss in Bangladesh. J. Biological Sci., 4: 581-583.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

29:  James, A.D. and J. Rushton, 2002. The economics of foot and mouth disease. Rev. Sci. Tech., 21: 637-644.
PubMed  |  Direct Link  |  

30:  Kit, M., S. Kit, S.P. Little, R.D. Di Marchi and C. Gale, 1991. Bovine herpesvirus-1 (infectious bovine rhinotracheitis virus)-based viral vector which expresses foot-and-mouth disease epitopes. Vaccine, 9: 564-572.
PubMed  |  

31:  Li, Z., Y. Yi, X. Yin, Z. Zhang and J. Liu, 2008. Expression of foot-and-mouth disease virus capsid proteins in silk wormbaculo virus expression system and its utilization as a subunit vaccine. Plos One, Vol. 3.
CrossRef  |  

32:  Liu, X.S., Y.L. Wang, Y.G. Zhang, Y.Z. Fang and L. Pan et al., 2011. Identification of H-2d restricted T cell epitope of foot-and-mouth disease virus structural protein VP1. Virol. J., Vol. 8.
CrossRef  |  

33:  Liu, Y., 2006. A device for the targeting delivery of particulate DNA vaccines. Biotechnology, 5: 42-48.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

34:  Mort, M., I. Convery, J. Baxter and C. Bailey, 2005. Psychosocial effects of the 2001 UK foot-and-mouth disease epidemic in a rural population: Qualitative diary based study. BMJ Vol. 331.

35:  Paprocka, G., 2006. Foot-and-mouth disease virus and its molecular structure. Med. Weter., 62: 753-756.

36:  Pan, L., Y.G. Zhang, Y.L. Wang, B.Q. Wang and Q.G. Xie, 2006. Protective immune response of guinea pigs against challenge with foot and mouth disease virus by immunization with foliar extracts from transgenic tomato plants expressing the FMDV structural protein VP1. Wei Sheng Wu Xue Bao, 46: 796-801.
PubMed  |  

37:  Pan, L., Y. Zhang, Y. Wang, B. Wang and W. Wang et al., 2008. Foliar extracts from transgenic to mato plants expressing the structural polyprotein, P1-A and protease, 3C, from foot-and-mouth disease viruselicit a protective response in huinea pigs. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol., 121: 83-90.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  

38:  Pfaff, E., M. Mussgay, H.O. Bohm, G.E. Schulz and H Schalleret, 1982. Antibodies against a preselected peptide recognize and neutralize foot and mouth disease virus. EMBO J., 1: 869-874.
Direct Link  |  

39:  Perry, B.D. and K.M. Rich, 2007. Poverty impacts of foot-and-mouth disease and the poverty reduction implications of its control. Vet. Rec., 160: 238-241.
PubMed  |  

40:  Rawat, M., D. Singh, S. Saraf and S. Saraf, 2007. An overview of biochemical aspects of DNA vaccines. Asian J. Biochem., 2: 208-223.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

41:  Raof, A.M.A., I.Y. Haleem, N.M. Aly, M.M. Garhy and G.A. Hosny, 2011. Epidemiological diagnosis of foot and mouth disease among cattle in Sharkia and Kafr El Sheikh governorates. Int. J. Virol., 7: 191-197.
CrossRef  |  

42:  Rizk, S.A., E.M. El-garf and A.A. Abeer, 2011. Enhancing effect of ginseng stem-leaf Saponins on the immune responses in vaccinated calves with FMD bivalent vaccine. Int. J. Virol., 7: 167-175.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

43:  Rodriguez, L.L., J. Barrera, E. Kramer, J. Lubroth, F. Brown and W.T. Golde, 2003. A synthetic peptide containing the consensus sequence of the G-H loop region of foot-and-mouth disease virus type-O VP1 and a promiscuous T-helper epitope induces peptide-specific antibodies but fails to protect cattle against viral challenge. Vaccine, 21: 3751-3756.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  

44:  Rodriguez, L.L. and C.G. Gay, 2011. Development of vaccines toward the global control and eradication of foot-and-mouth disease. Exp. Rev. Vaccines, 10: 377-387.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  Direct Link  |  

45:  Rodriguez, L.L. and M.J. Grubman, 2009. Foot and mouth disease virus vaccines. Vaccine, 27: D90-D94.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  

46:  Rowlands, D.J., D.V. Sangar and F. Brown, 1975. A comparative chemical and serological study of the full and empty particles of foot-and mouth disease virus. J. Gen. Virol., 26: 227-238.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  

47:  Ruppert, A., N. Arnold and G. Hobom, 1994. OmpA-FMDV VP1 fusion proteins: Production, cell surface exposure and immune responses to the major antigenic domain of foot-and-mouth disease virus. Vaccine. 12: 492-498.
PubMed  |  

48:  Rufael, T., A. Catley, A. Bogale, M. Sahle and Y. Shiferaw, 2008. Foot and mouth disease in the Borana pastoral system, southern Ethiopia and implications for livelihoods and international trade. Trop. Anim. Health Prod., 40: 29-38.
CrossRef  |  

49:  Schumann, K.R., N.J. Knowles, P.R. Davies, R.J. Midgley and J.F. Valarcher et al., 2008. Genetic characterization and molecular epidemiology of foot-and-mouth disease viruses isolated from Afghanistan in 2003-2005. Virus Genes, 36: 401-413.
PubMed  |  

50:  Sharma, N., 2008. Foot and mouth disease-mastitis cascade in dairy cattle: A field study. Int. J. Zool. Res., 4: 64-67.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

51:  Shawky, M.E. and A.M. Daoud, 2005. Standardization and optimization of a long distance PCR assay for foot-and-mouth disease virus. Int. J. Virol., 1: 39-39.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

52:  Sobrino, F., M. Saiz, M.A. Jimenez-Clavero, J.I. Nunez, M.F. Rosas, E. Baranowski and V. Ley, 2001. Foot-and-mouth disease virus: A long known virus, but a current threat. Vet. Res., 32: 1-30.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  

53:  Sumption, K., M. Rweyemamu and W. Wint, 2008. Incidence and distribution of foot-and-mouth disease in Asia, Africa and South America, combining expert opinion, official disease information and livestock populations to assist risk assessment. Transbound. Emerg. Dis., 55: 5-13.
PubMed  |  

54:  Van Lierop, M.J., J.P. Wagenaar, J.M. van Noort and E.J. Hensen, 1995. Sequences derived from the highly antigenic VP1 region 140 to 160 of foot-and-mouth disease virus do not prime for a bovine T-cell response against intact virus. J. Virol., 69: 4511-4514.
Direct Link  |  

55:  Verma, A.K., B.C. Pal, C.P. Singh, U. Jain, S.K. Yadav and Mahima, 2008. Studies of the outbreaks of foot and mouth disease in Uttar Pradesh, India, between 2000 and 2006. Asian J. Epidemiol., 1: 40-46.
CrossRef  |  Direct Link  |  

56:  Wang, C.Y., T.Y. Chang, A.M. Walfield, J. Ye and M. Shen et al., 2002. Effective synthetic peptide vaccine for foot-and-mouth disease in swine. Vaccine, 20: 2603-2610.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  Direct Link  |  

57:  Wang, G., L. Pan and Y. Zhang, 2011. Approaches to improved targeting of DNA vaccines. Hum. Vaccin, 7: 1271-1281.
PubMed  |  

58:  Wang, X., X. Zhang, Y. Kang, H. Jin and X. Du et al., 2008. Interleukin-15 enhance DNA vaccine elicited mucosal and systemic immunity against foot and mouth disease virus. Vaccine, 26: 5135-5144.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  

59:  Wigdorovitz, A., C. Carrillo, J.D. Santos, K. Trono and A. Peralta et al., 1999. Induction of a protective antibody response to foot and mouth disease virus in mice following oral or parenteral immunization with alfalfa transgenic plants expressing the viral structural protein VP1. Virology, 255: 347-353.
CrossRef  |  

60:  Wiesmuller, K.H., G. Jung, G. Hess, 1989. Novel low-molecular-weight synthetic vaccine against foot-and-mouth disease containing a potent B-cell and macrophage activator. Vaccine, 7: 29-33.
CrossRef  |  

61:  Yang, M., A. Clavijo, M. Li, K. Hole, H. Holland, H. Wang and M.Y. Deng, 2007. Identification of a major antibody binding epitope in the non-structural protein 3D of foot-and-mouth disease virus in cattle and the development of a monoclonal antibody with diagnostic applications. J. Immunol. Methods, 321: 174-181.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  

62:  Zamorano, P., A. Wigdorovitz, M. Perez-Filgueira, C. Carrillo, J.M. Escribano, A.M. Sadir and M.V. Borca, 1995. A 10-amino-acid linear sequence of VP1 of foot and mouth disease virus containing B-and T-cell epitopes induces protection in mice. Virology, 212: 614-621.
PubMed  |  

63:  Zhang, Z.W., Y.G. Zhang, Y.L. Wang, L. Pan and Y.Z. Fang et al., 2010. Screening and identification of B cell epitopes of structural proteins of foot-and-mouth disease virus serotype Asia1. Vet. Microbiol., 140: 25-33.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  

64:  Zheng, M., N. Jin, H. Zhang, M. Jin and H. Lu et al., 2006. Construction and immunogenicity of a recombinant fowlpox virus containing the capsid and 3C protease coding regions of foot-and-mouth disease virus. J. Virol. Methods, 136: 230-237.
CrossRef  |  PubMed  |  

©  2021 Science Alert. All Rights Reserved