4.6 Article

Engineering Foot-and-Mouth Disease Viruses with Improved Growth Properties for Vaccine Development

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 8, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0055228

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National High Technology Research and Development Program of China (863 Program) [2011AA10A211-1]
  2. High-level Technological Talent Program of Gansu province [1013JHTA008]
  3. China Agriculture Research System [CARS-39]
  4. International Atomic Energy Agency [16025/R0]
  5. EPIZONE project [FOOD-CT-2006-016236]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: No licensed vaccine is currently available against serotype A foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) in China, despite the isolation of A/WH/CHA/09 in 2009, partly because this strain does not replicate well in baby hamster kidney (BHK) cells. Methodology/Principal Findings: A novel plasmid-based reverse genetics system was used to construct a chimeric strain by replacing the P1 gene in the vaccine strain O/CHA/99 with that from the epidemic stain A/WH/CHA/09. The chimeric virus displayed growth kinetics similar to those of O/CHA/99 and was selected for use as a candidate vaccine strain after 12 passages in BHK cells. Cattle were vaccinated with the inactivated vaccine and humoral immune responses were induced in most of the animals on day 7. A challenge infection with A/WH/CHA/09 on day 28 indicated that the group given a 4-mu g dose was fully protected and neither developed viremia nor seroconverted to a 3ABC antigen. Conclusions/Significance: Our data demonstrate that the chimeric virus not only propagates well in BHK cells and has excellent antigenic matching against serotype A FMD, but is also a potential marker vaccine to distinguish infection from vaccination. These results suggest that reverse genetics technology is a useful tool for engineering vaccines for the prevention and control of FMD.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available