Monitoring for Mycoplasma

Similar documents
MG and MS Control in Layers

MS-H Vaccine Eyedrop Suspension

Interpretation and Application of Results Manual

Maximising the benefits of Serological Monitoring and Reporting

MYCOPLASMOSIS - A SERIOUS PROBLEM OF POULTRY INDUSTRY

Mycoplasma driving you crazy?

Keeping first class eggs flying high.

Ceva s offer to optimize performance Simpler vaccination and better safety

Vector Newcastle vaccine usage in Latin America. Luiz Sesti, Technical Services Latin America Ceva, Brazil

Suggestions to prevent / control Respiratory Disease Complex in poultry

VETERINARY SERVICES POLICY STATEMENT

ENVIRONMENT AND HEALTH

Current Situation with Avian Mycoplasmosis Prevention and Control

Field experience with vaccination in turkeys in Morocco. Taoufik RAWI M.C.I Santé Animale (Morocco)

SALMONELLA, MYCOPLASMA, AND AVIAN INFLUENZA MONITORING IN PARENT BREEDER FLOCKS

This paper is in two Sections (A and B) and instructions relating to the number of questions to be answered are given at the head of each Section.

An outbreak of a respiratory infection of multi-agents occurred in poultry flocks in Tripoli, Libya

Laboratory Diagnosis of Avian Influenza and Newcastle Disease

Seroprevalence of Mycoplasma synoviae in Dutch commercial poultry farms

CAUSATIVE AGENT. Bacterium Hemophilus paragallinarum.

Mexico H7N3 HPAI Summary

General context and objectives of the project. Public private partnership (PPP) in Veterinary Public Health. EVADOC project Bangladesh Jan-June 2015

OIE Situation Report for Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza

Etiology. Paramyxovirus type 1 = Newcastle disease.

Worldwide perspective on Infectious Bronchitis. Ruth Bouwstra, DVM, PhD Turkey February 2017

FALSE LAYERS UPDATE EGG & PULLET FARMERS WORKSHOP 2017 DAN VELDMAN

SOME UNIQUE THINGS ABOUT THE AUSTRALIAN POULTRY

U.S. Flock Trends and Projections

ESSENTIAL PROTECTION

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage:

OIE Situation Report for Avian Influenza

Moving beyond AI Case study from The Netherlands

Home News Chickens Turkeys Processing Other Poultry Regions Even

INCLUSION BODY HEPATITIS AND HYDROPERICARDIUM SYNDROME (ADENOVIRUS INFECTIONS)

Gumboro Disease: where are we with IBDV epidemiology. J.J. (Sjaak) de Wit, DVM, PhD, dipl ECPVS GD Deventer, The Netherlands

Infectious Bronchitis: how to maximize cross-protection. GD Animal Health - The Netherlands

Monitoring Broiler Breeder Flocks for Mycoplasma gallisepticum Infection after Vaccination with ts-11

Avian encephalomyelitis (AE) Epidemic tremor. Dr./ Wafaa Abd El-ghany Assistant Professor of poultry dis., Fac. Vet. Med., Cairo Univ.

Managing Salmonella Risk. Carl Heeder, DVM

Surviving an HPAI Outbreak

Flu Watch. MMWR Week 3: January 14 to January 20, and Deaths. Virologic Surveillance. Influenza-Like Illness Surveillance

Salmonella enteritidis (SE) Surveillance Program: Applications and Lessons Learned

Flu Watch. MMWR Week 4: January 21 to January 27, and Deaths. Virologic Surveillance. Influenza-Like Illness Surveillance

Research Article Isolation and Molecular Characterization of Mycoplasma gallisepticum and Mycoplasma synoviae in Chickens in Sudan

Control of mycoplasma infection of poultry by antibiotics

WPSA & WVPA Scientific Conference Roberto Soares, DVM, MAM, ACPV Regional Technical Manager - Poultry Ceva Animal Health APAC Malaysia

Mortality of Conventional and Cage Free Hens

G. W. WOOD J. C. MUSKETT and D. H. THORNTON MAFF, Central Veterinary Laboratory, New Haw, Weybridge, Surrey, U.K.

CLASSIFICATION OF AVIAN MYCOPLASMAS

Vaccines of today and products needed for the short-, intermediate- and longterm. OIE/FAO OFFLU Conference Beijing China December 4-6, 2013

DEVELOPMENT OF SALMONELLA VACCINATION STRATEGIES FOR THE AUSTRALIAN POULTRY INDUSTRY

Pathogenicity of various Mycoplasma gallisepticum strains in vaccinated and non-vaccinated breeders flocks chicken embryos

SCIENTIFIC DISCUSSION EMEA/V/C/036. Intervet International B.V., Wim de Körverstraat 35, 5831 AN Boxmeer, The Netherlands. N/a

OIE Situation Report for Avian Influenza

making LT protection safer and easier

Differential Diagnosis of Respiratory Disease in Broilers

TRUSTWORTHY POULTRY CEVAC CORYMUNE RANGE. Unique combination vaccines to protect against Coryza and Salmonella. Supported by CEVAC CORYMUNE 4K

OIE Situation Report for Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza

Immunity and Poultry Health (3)

Dr.Christophe Cazaban

How do markets respond to the Avian Influenza outbreaks? The differential impact on market participants: A Case study in Turkey

Modeling and Quantitative Risk Analyses to Support Business Continuity

Updations on the epidemiological situation of Avian Influenza (AI) in Libya. The 11 th JPC REMESA Algiers, Algeria 24-25November2015

Infectious Bursal Disease, Immunosuppression and the role of VAXXITEK HVT+ IBD

Poultry Disease Manual Characteristics And

TURKEY CORYZA SYNONYMS: "Alcaligenes Alcaligenes Rhinotracheitis Turkey Bordetellosis

Avian Infectious Bronchitis Vaccine, Inactivated

Objective 3. Develop new and improved diagnostic tools, vaccines, and novel management approaches

GLOBAL AND REGIONAL SITUATION OF AVIAN INFLUENZA

State of U.S. Egg Layer Health 2013 Annual Survey

OIE Situation Report for Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza

Molecular diagnosis of infectious bronchitis: recent developments. Richard Currie

WORLD OSTRICH ASSOCIATION UNDERSTANDING AND CONTROLING AVIAN INFLUENZA RISKS IN OSTRICH

OIE Situation Report for Avian Influenza

Salmonella Enteritidis Response Plan

Implications and implementation of dayold chick vaccination

Avian Reo-virus infections. Dr./ Wafaa Abd El-ghany Assistant Professor of poultry dis., Fac. Vet. Med., Cairo Univ.

Emerging Respiratory Infections NZ Amanda McNaughton Respiratory Physician CCDHB Wellington

Module 1: Overview of the National Poultry Improvement Plan

INCLUSION BODY HEPATITIS UPDATE: SEROTYPES, CONTROL AND PREVENTION

Research note. Merial S.A.S., 29 avenue Tony Garnier Lyon cedex 07 France 2

Eradication strategy of HPAI in France

Enhancing animal health security and food safety in organic livestock production

Innovations in the broiler sector

Rapid and Accuracy Diagnosis of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (H5N8) Virus used for the Control of the Outbreak in the Republic of Korea

2007 : Became Poultry Corporate Marketing Director. Ceva Sante Animale, France

Commercial chicken vaccination: part 1 spray and aerosol usage

Avian Influenza: Implications for Agriculture and Public Health. Faculty. Avian Influenza Orthomyxovirus (type A) - 15 (16) Hemagglutinin and 9

Vaccination to stop transmission

OIE Situation Report for Avian Influenza

Avian influenza in poultry, wild and captive birds (AI)

WELCOME TO POULTRY TECHNICAL MEET

ANNEX I SUMMARY OF PRODUCT CHARACTERISTICS

IMMUNOLOGICAL AND BACTERIOLOGICAL STUDIES ON ORNITHOBACTERIUM RHINOTRACHEALIS

Profile on TADs in Japan

Correlation of humoral and cellular immune responses induced by different IBV vaccination regime with the protection afforded against IBV Q1

High Path Avian Influenza. October 14, 2015 Reservoir Migrating Wild Waterfowl

AI surveillance of domestic birds in Vietnam. Under the OIE/Japan Trust Fund Project (JTF) for Strengthening HPAI Control in Asia,

Salt Intoxication in Commercial Broilers and Breeders a Clinical and Pathological Description

Transcription:

Monitoring for Mycoplasma in vaccinated and non-vaccinated Poultry flocks Dr. Bart van Leerdam, PhD

Prevention and Control Tactics of Mycoplasma spp. in Poultry 1. Maintaining flocks free of Mycoplasma through monitoring, strict Biosecurity, and Eradication 2. Antibiotic therapy, short term strategy and costly 3. Vaccination, long term strategy

Maintaining flocks free of Mycoplasma Non-vaccinated flocks, Serological monitoring is an effective tool to prevent spread of disease through early detection and control of infection. Only possible when starting with Mycoplasma negative flocks. Best chance for success is maintaining flocks on single age farms (all in-all out) with no other poultry farms nearby. Good biosecurity and an effective monitoring system are necessary for success.

Maintaining flocks free of Mycoplasma Serological monitoring ( ELISA, RPA) is commonly used for confirmation of negative status. Confirmatory testing of screening test positives (ELISA, RPA) done with PCR test Screening test used for monitoring should be both highly sensitive for early detection and highly specific for confirmation.

Specificity of BioChek MG MS kits 900 sera from US broiler breeder flocks were tested. Samples were collected at 10, 30, and 48 W of age. All samples were were confirmed negative for MG and MS by HI prior to testing with BioChek's MG/MS, MG, and MS ELISA kits. Table. Summary of BioChek Results Age No. Pos. Plate (weeks) No. Samples MG/MS MS MG 1 10 90 1 0 0 2 30 90 5 2 1 3 48 90 0 0 0 4 10 90 0 1 0 5 48 90 1 0 0 6 10 90 0 0 0 7 30 90 0 0 0 8 10 90 1 0 0 9 30 90 0 0 0 10 30 90 2 0 0 No. Positive 10 3 1 No. Tested 900 900 900 Specificity 98.9 99.7 99.9 Customers running more than 100,000 tests annually on the combination assay, MgMs, have confirmed that specificity of the test is 98.9% or better.

Sensitivity of BioChek MG MS kits The BioChek Mycoplasma assays will detect antibodies 7 14 days post-infection. Experimental data BioChek MG MG infected SPF layers % Positives Days P.I. HI MG MG/MS D00 0 0 D07 0 0 D14 0 20 D21 81 67 Samples Originated from PDRC (Dr Stan Kleven) HI testing done by PDRC (Athens, GA, USA) Data BioChek MS Data 2010 international PTS for Mycoplasma, AHS, Deventer, Holland % Laboratories Showing Positives Assay MS Field MS Field 7 d P.I 28 d P.I. BioChek MS 100% 100% BioChek MG/MS 100% 100% RPA MS 33% 100%

Results (MS WVU1853 Inoculated) % Positive 100 80 60 40 20 Mg/Ms(r) ELISA Mg/Ms (c) ELISA RPA (1&2) RPA (3) 0 0 7 9 14 16 Days Post-Challenge

Results (MS K5664 Inoculated) 100 % Positive 80 60 40 20 Mg/Ms(r) ELISA Mg/Ms (c) ELISA RPA (all 3) 0 0 7 9 14 16 Days Post-Challenge

Case History MS Hatching eggs (Yolk testing) and serum of parental BB flocks were found positive on BioChek MG/MS and BioChek MS ELISA. MG ELISA Negative. Shown are below are some examples of positive results

Case History MS False positives MGMS and MS ELISA? Confirmatory testing with RPA and another ELISA was performed on parental serum (80 samples). Results show that flocks test negative for Both RPA and another commercial MS ELISA see below: BioChek ELISA Brand X ELISA RPA MS POS NEG NEG Customer now contacts BioChek complaining on quality of BioChek tests showing massive false positives for MG/MS and MS ELISA on both yolk and serum samples.

Case History MS False positives MGMS and MS ELISA? Serum Samples (10 samples/house) and tracheal swabs (8 samples /house) were send to BioChek from MS BioChek positive houses for further testing. Serum samples were tested on BioChek ELISA and tracheal swabs tested on BioChek MGMS qpcr. Results shown on next slide

Case History MS Only BioChek ELISA and qpcr detected MS infection. RPA and other commercial ELISA tested negative!

MG: Vertical transmission PS - Broilers Case: Broiler chicks with acute Pneumonia and tracheal lesions. Embryo s also show tracheal lesions. Mortality during first week 10-15%. Parent stock (Non-vaccinated) also show positive serology from 28 weeks and onwards. Broilers at slaughter age display respiratory stress with air-sacculitis. H2 Broilers at 02D, 07D, 41D H3 Parent Stock 67W BR 02D PS 67W BR 07D BR 41D

Case of MS infection BB Case 1: fast seroconversion ELISA result (BioChek, Cutoff = 668) Phase 1: 12-21 days(1 st Ab) Phase 2: 1-21days(5-10%) Phase 3: 7-32days(90-95%) Phase 4: 3-19days(100%) From 23 to 93days 39weeks old 42 weeks old House 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 207 1 50 128 330 11,742 55 64 2 63 4 260 82 414 8,407 99 153 3 75 252 182 439 38 8,903 261 7 4 44 29 85 168 178 8,127 394 38 5 332 214 118 32 69 13,931 245 239 6 69 101 75 47 47 12,608 93 84 7 172 10 172 85 108 5,464 354 93 8 394 66 60 145 72 4,757 297 141 9 420 368 853 182 1 3,056 105 87 10 391 53 168 32 5 14,314 344 527 11 175 1,312 41 168 20 13,782 404 120 12 38 158 186 214 47 6,626 1 1 13 688 18 1 175 330 13,875 102 226 14 23 47 23 72 108 2,349 15 129 15 214 179 114 20 6,674 384 Positive 1/14 1/15 1/15 0/15 0/15 15/15 0/14 0/15 PCR Negative PCR Positive

2) Presumption of infection period Phase 1: 12-21 days(1 st Ab) Phase 2: 1-21days(5-10%) Phase 3: 7-32days(90-95%) Phase 4: 3-19days(100%) From 23 to 93days From 11 to 72days after 1 st Ab Between Aug,21 and Sep,1? Infection 1 st Ab detection Less than 21days 100% Positive PCR +ve, Oct,8 EsPk1UAF08 Aug,28 Sep,4 Sep,11 Sep,18 Sep,25 Oct,4 Oct,11

Case of MS infection BB Case 2: Slow seroconversion BioChek MS ELISA result 22 weeks old 26 weeks old 30 weeks old 33 weeks old House 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 94 10 10 6 2,713 10 5,947 784 551 481 2,315 373 2 10 10 10 10 2,063 10 4,056 4,003 336 507 755 969 3 53 10 74 12 930 10 633 1,618 518 4,331 809 341 4 75 10 10 167 407 10 374 944 138 1,503 350 672 5 10 741 10 9 1,604 10 273 755 41 1,731 7,061 429 6 10 203 10 38 1,136 10 5,185 485 1,126 4,243 6,700 318 7 12 259 10 10 6 10 981 1,049 711 274 2,012 944 8 10 10 10 4 569 86 148 792 198 1,149 2,012 1,019 9 71 10 10 610 497 10 303 4,356 268 1,597 5,559 304 10 113 10 10 10 10 10 1,101 1,980 10 2,336 5,914 1,166 11 10 45 10 10 2,890 10 205 956 2,517 993 5,789 1,435 12 10 29 10 10 6,382 10 237 842 804 186 6,193 1,197 13 10 10 10 10 1,107 3,153 84 534 1,513 1,167 12,842 745 14 10 10 59 10 4,758 99 2,263 1,087 1,019 1,002 2,418 354 15 10 10 10 48 493 40 1,265 142 1,990 1,807-2,864 Positive 0/15 1/15 0/15 0/15 8/15 1/15 7/15 12/15 7/15 11/15 13/14 9/15 % 0% 6.7% 0% 0% 53.3% 6.7% 46.7% 80.0% 46.7% 73.3% 92.8% 60.0%

2) Presumption of infection period Phase 1: 12-21 days(1 st Ab) Phase 2: 1-21days(5-10%) Phase 3: 7-32days(90-95%) Phase 4: 3-19days(100%) From 23 to 93days From 11 to 72days after 1 st Ab Between Nov,7 and 17? 1 st Ab detection 22wks old 77days (11weeks) 92.8% Positive 33wks old PCR +ve, B45/04 Infection Nov,7 Nov,17 Dec,8 Jan,5 Feb,2 Feb,23 Mar,24

Vaccination as a control tactic Vaccination against MG or MS an option in situations where maintaining flocks free of infection is not feasible An option when antibiotic treatment is too costly or ineffective due to acquired resistance and residue control. multi-age commercial Layer and Breeder farms.

Mycoplasma (MG, MS) Vaccines Live Vaccines. Inact. Vaccines (Bacterins).

Inactivated Bacterins Must be injected - can cause local reactions Do not protect well against tracheal colonization Relatively expensive Will not eliminate field strain from farms

Live Vaccines Protect vs. tracheal colonization as well egg drop and airsacculitis (CRD) Less expensive than inactivated bacterins May eliminate field strain from farm

Live Mycoplasma Vaccines Mg Vaccines: F strain (MSD) Mostly used in USA and Latin America & Asia TS/11 (Bioproperties/ Merial) 6/85 (MSD) Ms Vaccines: MS-H VaxSafe MS (Bioproperties/ Merial)

Vaccines for Mg Killed F 6/85 ts-11 Route s/c or i/m Various Spray Eye-drop Safety +++ ± +++ +++ Persistence - +++ - ++ Antibodies ++ ++ - ± Spread - ++ - ± Displacement - +++ + +

Vaccines for Ms Killed MS-H Route s/c or i/m Eye-drop Safety +++ +++ Persistence - ++ Antibodies ++ ++ Spread - + Displacement - +

Mycoplasma Vaccination Live Mycoplasma vaccines must be applied before a flock becomes infected with a field strain. Testing prior to vaccination will confirm negative status of the flock Do not administer live vaccines within 4 wks of the onset of lay or to laying birds. A minimum interval of 2 wks must be allowed between the use of live vaccines and other vaccines against diseases of the respiratory tract (ex. NDV, IB..).

Mycoplasma Vaccination Do not medicate birds with any antibacterial drugs, during the 5 days prior to or 2 wks following vaccination. Good management practices are recommended to reduce the exposure to MG for at least 3 weeks following vaccination

Baselines Live Mycoplasma vaccines Differentiation of Vaccination Serology vs. Field Challenge Serology based on evaluation mean flock titers with baselines and evaluating % positives. Flocks are suspect of infection when mean titers > baseline and 100% positive.

Mycoplasma Vaccination Still a need for biosecurity to keep challenge low. Lack of serological response does not mean birds are not protected. Live vaccines induce mostly mucosal immunity that cannot be measured by ELISA. There is a cumulative effect from vaccination on multiage farms The longer the vaccine is used then the greater the effect. Progressive Loss of serological (flat lining) response, could be a loss of field challenge due to displacement. Serological flatlining could be a sign of success rather than failure

Mycoplasma Vaccination High rising titers do not equal vaccination failure Vaccination failure is the occurrence of clinical signs not serological response High rising titers above baseline, without clinical symptoms, indicates field challenge and successful resistance

Mycoplasma Vaccination Diagnosis of apparent vaccine failures After C. Morrow, 2012

0 % POS BB vaccinated with 6/85 At 06W and 14w with atomist spray At 48W birds negative as expected 91 % POS At 56W serology positive with Mean titer 4932 and 91 % pos Serology indicates wild challenge, but birds resistent to colonization by wild strain as no clinical symptoms present. Suspect titers also indicate the need for enhanced biosecurity

Application of Mycoplasma ELISA Mycoplasma control program (negative population) Matrix: Serum: Parents & Offspring (01D) Eggs: Egg Yolk testing wk1,7,10,14,18,22,26,30 (4 weeks interval before production) wk 33,36,39,42,45,48,51,54,57,60,63 (3 weeks interval start production) Mycoplasma vaccination a) 1-2 wks pre-vaccination b) 6-12 wks post-vaccination SPF Farm c) BioChek breeder monitoring program wk 0, 10, 18-24, 40, 60 wk 0, 20 (before production) once every 4 wks start/after production Sampling size is 5% of the flock

Conclusions For non-vaccinated flocks, Mycoplasma monitoring is an effective tool to prevent spread of disease through early detection and control of infection. BioChek system can be used to monitor the success of live Mycoplasma vaccinations and to differentiate vaccinated flocks from those flocks undergoing a Mycoplasma challenge Suspect serology can only indicate the presence of a field challenge. Suspect serology with absence of clinical symptoms, might just indicate that the vaccinated birds were challenged, but displayed successful resistance to colonization with a field strain of Mycoplasma

Conclusions Infections with field strains can only be confirmed by differential culture / PCR techniques for wild type Mycoplasma. live vaccines may be viable tools for displacing and eradicating Mycoplasma field strains on multi-age poultry farms. The loss and exclusion of field challenge is indicated by a decrease in serological response to normal baselines, following prolonged use of live vaccines.

Acknowledgements The following persons have contributed to the presentation: Dr Chris Morrow Dr Herman Bosman Dr Peter Scott Dr Janet Bradbury