|Herrmann-hoesing, Lynn - Washington State University|
|Neiswanger-broughton, Liam - Washington State University|
|Johnson, W Carl - Carl|
|Dassanayake, Rohanna - Washington State University|
|Knowles, Donald - Don|
Submitted to: Open Journal of Veterinary Medicine
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: 8/10/2012
Publication Date: 9/8/2012
Publication URL: http://www.scirp.org/journal/ojvm
Citation: Herrmann-Hoesing, L.M., White, S.N., Neiswanger-Broughton, L.E., Johnson, W.C., Noh, S.M., Schneider, D.A., Li, H., Taus, N.S., Reynolds, J.O., Truscott, T.C., Dassanayake, R.P., Knowles Jr, D.P. 2012. Ovine progressive pneumonia virus is transmitted more effectively via aerosol nebulization than oral administration. Open Journal of Veterinary Medicine. 2(3):113-119.
Interpretive Summary: Previous work included characterizations of experimental infection with ovine progressive pneumonia virus (OPPV) through intravenous (IV) and oral (PO) routes. This study was designed to test and compare aerosol nebulization (Nb) to those alternatives. Four out of four sheep in the IV group, six out of six sheep in the Nb group, and only two out of six sheep in the PO group became infected by OPPV. Sheep became OPPV positive by serology and proviral concentration more quickly in the Nb group as compared to the PO group. When the Nb and IV groups were compared, sheep became OPPV positive by serology and proviral concentration at comparable times. In addition, sheep became OPPV positive by proviral concentration prior to serology in both the IV and Nb groups. Aerosol nebulization can be utilized as an efficient experimental OPPV infection route for testing potential vaccines or specific host genetics that might contribute to susceptibility to OPPV.
Technical Abstract: A new method of experimental infection of ovine progressive pneumonia virus (OPPV), aerosol nebulization (Nb), was compared to intravenous (IV) and oral (PO) methods of experimental infection. Seven month old lambs were given 3.5 × 107 TCID50 of Dubois OPPV LMH19 isolate using IV, PO, or Nb methods and were monitored for infection using cELISA and OPPV quantitative (q) PCR for 35 weeks. Four out of four sheep in the IV group, six out of six sheep in the Nb group, but only two out of six sheep in the PO group became infected by OPPV; whereas the uninoculated controls (n = 2) and a sentinel control (n = 1) remained uninfected during the course of the study. The time to a cELISA or OPPV qPCR positive result in the Nb group was quicker and statistically different from the time to a cELISA or OPPV qPCR positive result in the PO group (cELISA P value = 0.0021 and OPPV qPCR P value = 0.0007). When the Nb and IV groups were compared, sheep became cELISA and OPPV qPCR positive at similar times (cELISA P value = 0.6 and OPPV qPCR P value = 0.1). In addition, sheep became OPPV qPCR positive prior to cELISA in both the IV and Nb groups (IV P value = 0.027 and Nb P value = 0.007). Aerosol nebulization is a more natural experimental method of transmitting OPPV and may be valuable for testing potential vaccines or specific host genetics.