Dependence of the immune response to coccidiosis on the age of rabbit suckling
Language English Country Germany Media print-electronic
Document type Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- MeSH
- Lymphocyte Activation MeSH
- CD4-Positive T-Lymphocytes immunology MeSH
- CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes immunology MeSH
- Eimeria classification immunology isolation & purification pathogenicity MeSH
- Animals, Suckling immunology MeSH
- Coccidiosis immunology parasitology MeSH
- Rabbits MeSH
- Specific Pathogen-Free Organisms MeSH
- Antibodies, Protozoan blood MeSH
- Age Factors MeSH
- Animals MeSH
- Check Tag
- Rabbits MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Animals MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Names of Substances
- Antibodies, Protozoan MeSH
To study the immune response to coccidiosis, the suckling rabbits were inoculated with 2,000 oocysts of either Eimeria intestinalis or Eimeria flavescens at 19, 22, 25, 29, and 33 days of age (DA) and in the case of E. intestinalis at 14 and 16 DA as well and sacrificed 14 days later. Another group served as an uninfected control and the rabbits were killed at the same age as their infected counterparts. Unlike the antibody response, the parameters reflecting cellular immunity (total number of leukocytes in mesenteric lymph nodes, lymphocyte proliferation upon stimulation with specific antigen and the dynamics of CD4+ and CD8+ cell proportions in the intestinal epithelium at the specific site of parasite development) were significantly changed from about 25 DA onwards. In contrast to the rabbits infected with weakly immunogenic coccidium E. flavescens, the proportions of CD4+ and CD8+ lymphocytes in intraepithelial lymphocytes from the specific site of parasite development were considerably changed after infection with highly immunogenic species E. intestinalis. As the immune system of sucklings from about 25 DA reacts to the infection, this age may be considered in terms of vaccination against coccidiosis.
See more in PubMed
J Immunol. 1998 Nov 15;161(10):5347-56 PubMed
Parasitol Res. 1994;80(1):48-52 PubMed
J Immunol Methods. 1999 Apr 22;224(1-2):111-27 PubMed
Immunity. 1994 Nov;1(8):647-59 PubMed
Parasitol Res. 1990;76(3):192-8 PubMed
Vet Parasitol. 1998 Apr 30;76(4):261-7 PubMed
Parasitol Res. 2007 Oct;101(5):1435-7 PubMed
Parasitol Res. 2007 May;100(6):1331-40 PubMed
Vet Parasitol. 1995 Nov;60(1-2):27-35 PubMed
Vet Parasitol. 1999 Mar 31;82(2):93-9 PubMed
Parasitol Res. 2005 Sep;97(2):150-5 PubMed
Vet Parasitol. 2006 Apr 30;137(3-4):351-4 PubMed
Parasitol Res. 1993;79(3):186-90 PubMed
Folia Parasitol (Praha). 2008 Mar;55(1):1-6 PubMed
Vet Parasitol. 2003 Jan 2;110(3-4):181-95 PubMed
Parasitol Res. 2003 Oct;91(4):304-11 PubMed
Am J Vet Res. 1955 Apr;16(59):274-81 PubMed
Parasitol Res. 2006 Mar;98(4):310-6 PubMed
J Vet Med B Infect Dis Vet Public Health. 2005 Mar;52(2):93-7 PubMed
Avian Dis. 2002 Jan-Mar;46(1):10-6 PubMed
Vet Parasitol. 1997 May;69(3-4):197-201 PubMed
J Vet Med B Infect Dis Vet Public Health. 2002 May;49(4):176-80 PubMed
Immunol Rev. 1998 Apr;162:49-54 PubMed
Acta Vet Acad Sci Hung. 1969;19(4):453-62 PubMed
Parasitology. 1979 Oct;79(2):231-48 PubMed
Vet Parasitol. 1995 Jan;56(1-3):7-16 PubMed
Can J Comp Med. 1982 Jul;46(3):317-20 PubMed
