Assessment of immunological response to digital dermatitis pathogen derived antigens following infection, recovery, and reinfection
The ability to reliably induce bovine digital dermatitis (DD) in naive calves provides unique opportunities to evaluate immune responses of the calves to infection after disease induction, during healing, and after subsequent re-infection. Dairy calves infected in a previous induction trial were hel...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2024-11-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Veterinary Science |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fvets.2024.1487316/full |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850173993362915328 |
|---|---|
| author | John W. Coatney Adam C. Krull Patrick J. Gorden Jan Shearer Samuel Humphrey Samuel Humphrey Steven Olsen Steven Olsen Paul J. Plummer Paul J. Plummer Jennifer H. Wilson-Welder Jennifer H. Wilson-Welder |
| author_facet | John W. Coatney Adam C. Krull Patrick J. Gorden Jan Shearer Samuel Humphrey Samuel Humphrey Steven Olsen Steven Olsen Paul J. Plummer Paul J. Plummer Jennifer H. Wilson-Welder Jennifer H. Wilson-Welder |
| author_sort | John W. Coatney |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The ability to reliably induce bovine digital dermatitis (DD) in naive calves provides unique opportunities to evaluate immune responses of the calves to infection after disease induction, during healing, and after subsequent re-infection. Dairy calves infected in a previous induction trial were held until lesions resolved and were then re-infected in parallel with naïve calves. Humoral and cell-mediated responses were assessed via serum antibody titer and lymphocyte proliferation analysis with responses of previously infected calves compared with responses of the newly infected calves and naïve calves. In addition, feet of calves in both treatment groups were photographed and scored by a single blinded observer using a previously described induced lesion scoring system. All naïve calves developed lesions after initial infection whereas only 5 of 8 calves developed lesions consistent with DD after a second experimental infection. In the naïve group, lesions commensurate with DD occurred in 15 of 26 experimentally infected feet with 6 feet not included in the analysis due to bandage failure. In comparison, calves in the second infection group developed lesions in 10 of 25 infected feet. Humoral responses or cellular proliferative responses did not differ between the two treatment groups or between calves which developed or did not develop lesions after experimental infection. Our results indicate that resolution of lesions after DD infection, immunity only provides partial protection against reinfection. Further studies are needed to determine immune mechanisms that provide the observed partial protection against reinfection with DD. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-ff45b3fd92864af29bb70ddd9900c4d8 |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 2297-1769 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-11-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Veterinary Science |
| spelling | doaj-art-ff45b3fd92864af29bb70ddd9900c4d82025-08-20T02:19:44ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Veterinary Science2297-17692024-11-011110.3389/fvets.2024.14873161487316Assessment of immunological response to digital dermatitis pathogen derived antigens following infection, recovery, and reinfectionJohn W. Coatney0Adam C. Krull1Patrick J. Gorden2Jan Shearer3Samuel Humphrey4Samuel Humphrey5Steven Olsen6Steven Olsen7Paul J. Plummer8Paul J. Plummer9Jennifer H. Wilson-Welder10Jennifer H. Wilson-Welder11College of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United StatesCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United StatesCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United StatesCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United StatesNational Animal Disease Center, Agricultural Research Service (USDA), Ames, IA, United StatesUnited States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Washington, DC, United StatesNational Animal Disease Center, Agricultural Research Service (USDA), Ames, IA, United StatesUnited States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Washington, DC, United StatesCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United StatesCollege of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Knoxville, TN, United StatesNational Animal Disease Center, Agricultural Research Service (USDA), Ames, IA, United StatesUnited States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Washington, DC, United StatesThe ability to reliably induce bovine digital dermatitis (DD) in naive calves provides unique opportunities to evaluate immune responses of the calves to infection after disease induction, during healing, and after subsequent re-infection. Dairy calves infected in a previous induction trial were held until lesions resolved and were then re-infected in parallel with naïve calves. Humoral and cell-mediated responses were assessed via serum antibody titer and lymphocyte proliferation analysis with responses of previously infected calves compared with responses of the newly infected calves and naïve calves. In addition, feet of calves in both treatment groups were photographed and scored by a single blinded observer using a previously described induced lesion scoring system. All naïve calves developed lesions after initial infection whereas only 5 of 8 calves developed lesions consistent with DD after a second experimental infection. In the naïve group, lesions commensurate with DD occurred in 15 of 26 experimentally infected feet with 6 feet not included in the analysis due to bandage failure. In comparison, calves in the second infection group developed lesions in 10 of 25 infected feet. Humoral responses or cellular proliferative responses did not differ between the two treatment groups or between calves which developed or did not develop lesions after experimental infection. Our results indicate that resolution of lesions after DD infection, immunity only provides partial protection against reinfection. Further studies are needed to determine immune mechanisms that provide the observed partial protection against reinfection with DD.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fvets.2024.1487316/fulldigital dermatitislamenessbovineanimal modelimmune responsegamma-delta T-cell |
| spellingShingle | John W. Coatney Adam C. Krull Patrick J. Gorden Jan Shearer Samuel Humphrey Samuel Humphrey Steven Olsen Steven Olsen Paul J. Plummer Paul J. Plummer Jennifer H. Wilson-Welder Jennifer H. Wilson-Welder Assessment of immunological response to digital dermatitis pathogen derived antigens following infection, recovery, and reinfection Frontiers in Veterinary Science digital dermatitis lameness bovine animal model immune response gamma-delta T-cell |
| title | Assessment of immunological response to digital dermatitis pathogen derived antigens following infection, recovery, and reinfection |
| title_full | Assessment of immunological response to digital dermatitis pathogen derived antigens following infection, recovery, and reinfection |
| title_fullStr | Assessment of immunological response to digital dermatitis pathogen derived antigens following infection, recovery, and reinfection |
| title_full_unstemmed | Assessment of immunological response to digital dermatitis pathogen derived antigens following infection, recovery, and reinfection |
| title_short | Assessment of immunological response to digital dermatitis pathogen derived antigens following infection, recovery, and reinfection |
| title_sort | assessment of immunological response to digital dermatitis pathogen derived antigens following infection recovery and reinfection |
| topic | digital dermatitis lameness bovine animal model immune response gamma-delta T-cell |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fvets.2024.1487316/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT johnwcoatney assessmentofimmunologicalresponsetodigitaldermatitispathogenderivedantigensfollowinginfectionrecoveryandreinfection AT adamckrull assessmentofimmunologicalresponsetodigitaldermatitispathogenderivedantigensfollowinginfectionrecoveryandreinfection AT patrickjgorden assessmentofimmunologicalresponsetodigitaldermatitispathogenderivedantigensfollowinginfectionrecoveryandreinfection AT janshearer assessmentofimmunologicalresponsetodigitaldermatitispathogenderivedantigensfollowinginfectionrecoveryandreinfection AT samuelhumphrey assessmentofimmunologicalresponsetodigitaldermatitispathogenderivedantigensfollowinginfectionrecoveryandreinfection AT samuelhumphrey assessmentofimmunologicalresponsetodigitaldermatitispathogenderivedantigensfollowinginfectionrecoveryandreinfection AT stevenolsen assessmentofimmunologicalresponsetodigitaldermatitispathogenderivedantigensfollowinginfectionrecoveryandreinfection AT stevenolsen assessmentofimmunologicalresponsetodigitaldermatitispathogenderivedantigensfollowinginfectionrecoveryandreinfection AT pauljplummer assessmentofimmunologicalresponsetodigitaldermatitispathogenderivedantigensfollowinginfectionrecoveryandreinfection AT pauljplummer assessmentofimmunologicalresponsetodigitaldermatitispathogenderivedantigensfollowinginfectionrecoveryandreinfection AT jenniferhwilsonwelder assessmentofimmunologicalresponsetodigitaldermatitispathogenderivedantigensfollowinginfectionrecoveryandreinfection AT jenniferhwilsonwelder assessmentofimmunologicalresponsetodigitaldermatitispathogenderivedantigensfollowinginfectionrecoveryandreinfection |