【作者】 程抱林；

【导师】 毕丁仁； 方友平；

【作者基本信息】 华中农业大学 ， 兽医， 2007， 硕士

【摘要】 猪瘟(Classical swine fever，CSF)，是由猪瘟病毒(classical swine fever virus，CSFV)引起的一种高度接触传染的病毒性疾病。口蹄疫(Foot-and-mouth disease，FMD)，是由口蹄疫病毒(Foot-and-mouth disease virus，FMDV)引起的偶蹄兽的一种急性、烈性、高度接触性人畜共患传染病。猪瘟、口蹄疫都被世界动物卫生组织(OIE)列为A类传染病，我国将这两种动物疫病列为一类动物疫病。至今尚无特效的治疗药物，疫苗预防仍是我国防治猪瘟、口蹄疫的主要手段，被列为强制免疫项目。但过去在进行猪瘟和口蹄疫强制免疫时，主要采用猪瘟和口蹄疫两种疫苗间隔7-10d分两次注射的不同步的免疫方法，防疫周期长、成本高，费时费工，防疫效果和防疫密度均得不到保证。本研究通过对猪瘟、口蹄疫疫苗同步免疫和分步免疫的免疫反应进行观测。结果发现，同步免疫有免疫不良反应的占23.3％，分步免疫有免疫不良反应的占21％，差异不显著。猪瘟、口蹄疫同步免疫时，在免疫后10d、20d、30d、40d、50d、60d对二病的平均抗体合格率分别为38％、78％、85％、45％、32％、25％；猪瘟、口蹄疫分步免疫时，在免疫后10d、20d、30d、40d、50d、60d对二病的平均抗体合格率分别为38％、80％、84％、41％、30％、23％，两种免疫方法免疫效果基本一致，有效保护时间均在30d左右。结果表明猪瘟、口蹄疫疫苗联合免疫无明显相互干扰作用。猪瘟、口蹄疫疫苗同步免疫后30d加强免疫一次，结果表明：首免后30d、60d、90d、120d、150d的平均抗体合格率分别为81％、86％、81％、69％、47％，二免后抗体维持时间长，有效保护时间至少在90d以上。二免对首免有加强作用，猪瘟、口蹄疫疫苗两次同步免疫比一次同步免疫效果好。对于同步免疫和加强免疫，不同免疫剂量的免疫效果表明：在进行猪瘟、口蹄疫疫苗同步免疫时，猪瘟疫苗首免2头份和二免2头份、口蹄疫疫苗首免1头份和二免1头份，免疫效果最好。本试验对猪瘟、口蹄疫疫苗同步免疫的免疫不良反应、免疫效果、加强免疫、免疫剂量进行了研究，为今后进一步开展猪瘟、口蹄疫疫苗与其他疫苗联合免疫研究奠定了基础。更多还原

【Abstract】 Classical swine fever (CSF) is a highly contagious viral disease, which is caused byclassical swine fever virus (CSFV). Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), is an acute, violentand highly contagious zoonosis, which is caused by the foot-and-mouth diseasevirus(FMDV) in cloven-hoofed animals. They were both enlisted as numbers on the ListA of contagious diseases by OIE and on the List I of animal diseases in our country. Atpresent, there is still no effective drug for the treatment of CSF and FMD, so vaccines areeffective method to prevent them and they have been listed as compulsory vaccinationprojects in our country. But for compulsory immunization of CSF and FMD in the past,the step-by-step immunization method was used, for which two vaccines were injectedwith an interval of 7-10d, respectively. This method have some disadvantages, such aslong immunization period, high cost, time-consuming, labor, and uncertain vaccinationdensity and prevention effect.In this study, the immune responses of synchronized and step-by-step immunizationof CSF and FMD vaccines were observed. The results showed that the side effect rate was23.3％for the synchronized immunization and 21％for the step-by-step immunization.The difference was not significant.For the synchronized immunization of CSF and FMD vaccines, the avergequalification rates of antibodies were 38％, 78％, 85％, 45％, 32％and 25％, and those forstep-by-step immunization of CSF and FMD vaccines were 38％, 80％, 84％, 41％, 30％and 23％at 10d, 20d, 30d, 40d, 50d and 60d after immunization, respectively. Theimmune efficacy was similar for two immunization methods. The effective protectiontime was an about 30d after immunization. And the results showed there was notobviously mutual interference between CSF and FMD vaccines for the synchronizedimmunization.At 30d after synchronized immunization of CSF and FMD vaccines, a strengthenedimmunization was performed. The results showed that the averge qualification rates ofantibodies were 81％, 86％, 81％, 69％and 47％at 30d, 60d, 90d, 120d and 150d after thefirst immunization, respectively. The antibody could keep longer time after the secondimmunization, and the effective protection period was more than 90d after the firstimmunization. The second immunization had a strengthened effect on the first one. Theeffect of synchronized immunization twice was better than that of once.For synchronized immunization and strengthened immunization, the immune effectsof different immune doses were compared. Double doses/pig for CSF vaccine and one dose/pig for FMD vaccine on both of the first and second immunization, showed the bestvaccination effect.In the study, some experiments about immune side effects, immune effects,strengthened immunization and immune doses for synchronized immunization ofvaccines were finished. Our data is useful to develop the combined immunizationresearches of CSF and FMD with other vaccines in the future.更多还原