Marina Bolzani Saad
Department of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Parana-UFPR, Curitiba, 80035-050, PR, Brazil
Tania Dello Monaco Martins Bona
Department of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Parana-UFPR, Curitiba, 80035-050, PR, Brazil
Clovis Augusto Versalli Serafini
Department of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Parana-UFPR, Curitiba, 80035-050, PR, Brazil
Francine Romani
Department of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Parana-UFPR, Curitiba, 80035-050, PR, Brazil
Joelma Moura Alvarez
Department of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Parana-UFPR, Curitiba, 80035-050, PR, Brazil
Mariana Camargo Lourenco
Department of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Parana-UFPR, Curitiba, 80035-050, PR, Brazil
Elizabeth Santin
Department of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Parana-UFPR, Curitiba, 80035-050, PR, Brazil
ABSTRACT
The effect of coccidiosis vaccine route on animal development and the efficiency of different routes to protect birds against different Eimeria challenges were evaluated. 135 Isa Brown® birds were used in two experimental phases. In the first phase, the birds were distributed in three treatments: non-vaccinated, vaccinated against coccidiosis by water and vaccinated by spray. In the second phase, these birds were challenged separately with different eimeria species oocysts (E. maximum, E. acervulina, E. tenella and E. necatrix). Weight gain, relative weight of Fabricius bursa, degrees of lesions in the intestines and counting of oocysts in the coproparasitological examination were evaluated. As a result, in most cases, birds challenged with different eimeria species and vaccinated against coccidiosis, by water or spray, showed better physical conditions, mainly by: best weight gain and lower intestinal lesions scores, compared to the birds challenged and non-vaccinated. Another interesting result refers to the different vaccine routes, showing no significant difference regarding the effectiveness of the vaccine and the vaccine reaction in animals.
PDF References Citation
How to cite this article
Marina Bolzani Saad, Tania Dello Monaco Martins Bona, Clovis Augusto Versalli Serafini, Francine Romani, Joelma Moura Alvarez, Mariana Camargo Lourenco and Elizabeth Santin, 2009. Evaluating Different Vaccine Routes Against Coccidiosis. International Journal of Poultry Science, 8: 980-984.
DOI: 10.3923/ijps.2009.980.984
URL: https://scialert.net/abstract/?doi=ijps.2009.980.984
DOI: 10.3923/ijps.2009.980.984
URL: https://scialert.net/abstract/?doi=ijps.2009.980.984
REFERENCES
- Chapman, H.D., T.E. Cherry, H.D. Danforth, G. Richards, M.W. Shirley and R.B. Williams, 2002. Sustainable coccidiosis control in poultry production: The role of live vaccines. Int. J. Parasitol., 32: 617-629.
CrossRefDirect Link - Johnson, J. and W.M. Reid, 1970. Anticoccidial drugs: Lesion scoring techniques in battery and floor-pen experiments with chickens. Exp. Parasitol., 28: 30-36.
CrossRefPubMedDirect Link - Joyner, L.P. and C.C. Norton, 1973. The immunity arising from continuos low-level infections with Eimeria tenella. Parasitology, 67: 907-913.
Direct Link - Vermeulen, A.N., D.C. Schaap and T.P.M. Schetters, 2001. Control of coccidiosis in chickens by vaccination. Vet. Parasitol., 100: 13-20.
CrossRefPubMedDirect Link - Williams, R.B., 1999. A compartmentalised model for the estimation of the cost of coccidiosis to the world's chicken production industry. Int. J. Parasitol., 29: 1209-1229.
CrossRefDirect Link - Williams, R.B., 1998. Epidemiological aspects of the use of live anticoccidial vaccines for chickens. Int. J. Parasitol., 28: 1089-1098.
PubMed