猪瘟、猪口蹄疫、猪蓝耳病疫苗不同组合免疫效果的对比研究
[Abstract]:Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), (CSF) and highly pathogenic blue ear disease (HP-PRRS) are three major diseases in pigs. The Ministry of Agriculture lists three kinds of swine infectious diseases as compulsory immunizations, in order to ensure the immune effect of the three vaccines. All local pig farms have adopted immunization procedures of three kinds of vaccines, which not only increase the labor force of epidemic prevention personnel, but also increase vaccine immunization and the immune stress of pigs, thus affecting their production performance. Therefore, whether the three vaccines can be immunized at the same time has been a long-term concern and expectation of the pig industry. In order to detect and observe the effects of combined immunization of three vaccines on the antibody titers, side effects, daily gain and survival rate of piglets, 150 piglets aged 21-30 days were selected from a large scale pig farm and divided into five groups. Group A (three FMD,CSF,HP-PRRS vaccines were immunized in batches) (CSF PRRS was immunized in group B (CSF FMD in group C was immunized at the same time) (FMD PRRS in group D was immunized simultaneously) (CSF FMD PRRS in group E was immunized at the same time) (CSF FMD PRRS was immunized for the first time at 30 days of age and then was immunized twice after 30 days of age. The positive indirect hemagglutination test (IHA) was used to detect the CSF and FMD antibodies in the serum by Elisa, and the PRRS antibody in the serum was detected by Elisa at 30 days after the first immunization and 30 days after the second immunization. The daily gain and survival rate of piglets were calculated by weighing before first immunization and at each time of antibody detection. The results were as follows: 1. CSF and FMD vaccine were injected into group C after 21 days of HP-PRRS,7 immunization. The titers of CSF and FMD antibody were slightly lower in group A than those in group A but higher than those in group D at 30 and 60 days after the first immunization, and the titers of both antibodies were higher than those in group B and group D at 30 and 60 days after the first immunization. The results showed that the combined immunization of the two FMD vaccines did not affect the immune effect of the two vaccines. Group E was immunized with CSF FMD PRRS vaccine for 30 days after the first immunization. The titers of the three antibodies were slightly lower than those of the three vaccines alone (group A), and the titers of the three antibodies were slightly higher than those of group A on day 60 and 90, but the difference was not significant. The titers of the three kinds of antibodies in the combined immunization group were significantly higher than those in group B and group D (P0.05). The results showed that the three vaccines were immunized at the same time and their immune responses were not affected. The immune antibody level was the same as that of single immunization. The side effects, daily gain and survival rate of piglets in each immunized group were higher than those in other groups, and the proportion of side effects in group E was the lowest. The proportion of side effects in group E was higher than that in other groups, and that in group E was higher than that in other groups. The survival rate of FMD group and CSF FMD HP-PRRS group was higher than that of other groups (89.5% and 85.4%, respectively), and the daily gain of piglets in both groups was higher than that in other groups. The results showed that combined immunization of three vaccines could increase the proportion of side effects of immunized piglets, but had no effect on the daily gain and survival rate of immunized piglets. The results showed that the combined immunization of foot-and-mouth disease, hog fever and high pathogenic swine blue ear disease. Or advanced swine blue ear disease immunization with hog fever and foot-and-mouth disease combined immunization 7 days after immunization can make the piglets immune to produce a good antibody response, and do not affect its daily weight, save a large number of immunization manpower. The two procedures can be used for reference and reference in different scale pig farms.
【学位授予单位】:石河子大学
【学位级别】:硕士
【学位授予年份】:2015
【分类号】:S858.28
【相似文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 初秀;注意防制猪的蓝耳病[J];河北畜牧兽医;2004年07期
2 李晓勤 ,张景军;突发猪蓝耳病的应急办法[J];中国乡镇企业技术市场;2004年09期
3 于忠利;蓝耳病的防治[J];吉林畜牧兽医;2004年06期
4 耿韶磊;“国际蓝耳病专题论坛”将在京举行[J];中国牧业通讯;2004年23期
5 李秀华;与蓝耳病“和平相处”[J];农业新技术(今日养猪业);2004年01期
6 ;“国际蓝耳病专题论坛”在京召开[J];农业新技术(今日养猪业);2005年02期
7 李涛,刘敬顺;通过注射大量疫苗和维持猪群单向流动来清除蓝耳病的评估效果[J];农业新技术(今日养猪业);2005年02期
8 李丽;王书全;;猪蓝耳病感染的诊断与防治[J];中国畜牧兽医;2006年01期
9 Kazimierz Tarasiuk;;蓝耳病的清除策略[J];农业新技术(今日养猪业);2006年01期
10 张以藻;唐利;;有效控制猪蓝耳病暴发的新思路[J];湖北畜牧兽医;2006年12期
相关会议论文 前10条
1 周小兵;王劲松;吴宁;吴中彬;王顺林;李梅;;科学的饲养管理是控制蓝耳病的最佳办法[A];中国畜牧兽医学会养猪学分会2009年学术年会“回盛生物”杯全国养猪技术论文大赛论文集[C];2009年
2 周绪斌;丹尼;;猪蓝耳病的流行、控制和净化[A];2008年中国猪业进展[C];2008年
3 申祥科;;构建猪场蓝耳病稳态猪群的成功经验[A];“生泰尔”杯全国养猪技术征文大赛——中国畜牧兽医学会养猪学分会五届三次理事会暨生猪产业科技创新发展论坛论文集[C];2012年
4 张书存;李建铃;武革利;李春国;;蓝耳病的防控——路在何方?[A];“生泰尔”杯全国养猪技术征文大赛——中国畜牧兽医学会养猪学分会五届三次理事会暨生猪产业科技创新发展论坛论文集[C];2012年
5 张占行;;猪蓝耳病的防治[A];2010畜牧业与低碳经济科技论文集[C];2010年
6 桑学波;王丽;;猪蓝耳病变异毒株感染免疫系统病理变化及诊断[A];中国畜牧兽医学会兽医病理学分会第十五次、中国病理生理学会动物病生专业委员会第十四次学术讨论会论文集[C];2007年
7 王金宝;吴家强;李俊;任慧英;徐龙涛;温建新;周顺;禚宝山;张秀美;;山东地区猪蓝耳病遗传变异和防治技术研究[A];中国畜牧兽医学会家畜传染病学分会第七届全国会员代表大会暨第十三次学术研讨会论文集(上册)[C];2009年
8 张毅;;浅谈猪繁殖与呼吸综合征诊断与思考[A];第七届重庆市饲料工业发展战略研讨会暨第八届饲料工业协会会员大会论文集[C];2010年
9 丘宴明;;猪群蓝耳病及其他病毒的持续感染—“综合征”成因、趋向及对策[A];中国畜牧兽医学会动物传染病学分会第三届猪病防控学术研讨会论文集[C];2008年
10 陈丛琳;;猪蓝耳病诊断方法研究进展[A];中国畜牧兽医学会家畜传染病学分会第八届全国会员代表大会暨第十五次学术研讨会论文集[C];2013年
相关重要报纸文章 前10条
1 李丹;养殖密集区域净化蓝耳病不现实[N];中国畜牧兽医报;2012年
2 杨明 林礼广 何觅之;国内净化蓝耳病不再是个梦?[N];中国畜牧兽医报;2012年
3 定州市动物防疫监督站 贾火宝;冬防猪蓝耳病[N];河北科技报;2013年
4 山西恒丰强动物药业有限公司技术部 许艳芬;蓝耳病免疫的是是非非[N];中国畜牧兽医报;2005年
5 原琳;我国猪蓝耳病没有扩散蔓延[N];北京商报;2007年
6 记者 孟令坤;市政府紧急部署防控猪蓝耳病[N];常德日报;2007年
7 记者 王健生;农业部:猪蓝耳病不是引起猪肉涨价原因[N];中国改革报;2007年
8 展福生;即墨抓好猪蓝耳病防控工作[N];中国畜牧兽医报;2007年
9 特约记者 陈光然 通讯员 刘绍德;高度重视猪蓝耳病防治 切实做好当前各项工作[N];大理日报(汉);2007年
10 ;前五月“猪蓝耳病”致1.8万头猪死亡[N];第一财经日报;2007年
相关博士学位论文 前2条
1 翟成s,
本文编号:2230538
本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/yixuelunwen/dongwuyixue/2230538.html