Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Protective Efficacy of a Locally Prepared Bivalent Duck Viral Hepatitis “Serotypes 1 and 3” Inactivated Vaccine
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Protective Efficacy of a Locally Prepared Bivalent Duck Viral Hepatitis “Serotypes 1 and 3” Inactivated Vaccine
Do you wish to request the book?
Protective Efficacy of a Locally Prepared Bivalent Duck Viral Hepatitis “Serotypes 1 and 3” Inactivated Vaccine
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Protective Efficacy of a Locally Prepared Bivalent Duck Viral Hepatitis “Serotypes 1 and 3” Inactivated Vaccine
2024
Overview
The spread of duck hepatitis virus (DHV) in Egypt with its’ most prevalent genotypes (1 and 3) causes vast economic losses in the duck industry despite the regular vaccination with live attenuated vaccines. However, the use of live-vaccines is considered a potential risk for the non-vaccinated birds due to the viral shedding from vaccinated populations. The current study aimed to evaluate the protective efficacy and safety of two inactivated monovalent and one bivalent vaccines against DHV 1 and 3 genotypes. The inactivated monovalent (DHAV-1, DHAV-3) and bivalent (DHAV-1+3) vaccines were produced by using Montanide ISA 70 oil as an adjuvant. Three groups of 4-week-old ducklings (n=50) were vaccinated with one of the three vaccines, respectively. One group of ducklings was used as negative control (n=25). The immune-response of the vaccinated groups was measured by Virus Neutralization Test and expressed with Neutralizing Indices (NIs). The NIs for the bivalent vaccine group (5.6 and 5.4) were higher compared to the monovalent vaccine groups (5.0 and 4.7). In conclusion, the use of inactivated bivalent DHV vaccine could produce higher protective efficacy compared to the monovalent DHAV-1 and DHAV-3 vaccines.
Publisher
Sciendo,De Gruyter Brill Sp. z o.o., Paradigm Publishing Services,Ss.Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje
