Immunological tools for the assessment of both humoral and cellular immune responses in Foxes (Vulpes vulpes) using ovalbumin and cholera toxin B as an antigenic model

Comparable Long-Term Rabies Immunity in Foxes after IntraMuscular and Oral Application Using a Third-Generation Oral Rabies Virus Vaccine

The live genetically-engineered oral rabies virus (RABV) variant SPBN GASGAS induces long-lasting immunity in foxes and protection against challenge with an otherwise lethal dose of RABV field strains both after experimental oral and parenteral routes of administration. Induction of RABV-specific binding antibodies and immunoglobulin isotypes (IgM, total IgG, IgG1, IgG2) were comparable in orally and parenterally vaccinated foxes. Differences were only observed in the induction of virus-neutralizing (VNA) titers, which were significantly higher in the parenterally vaccinated group. The dynamics of rabies-specific antibodies pre- and post-challenge (365 days post vaccination) suggest the predominance of type-1 immunity protection of SPBN GASGAS. Independent of the route of administration, in the absence of IgG1 the immune response to SPBN GAGAS was mainly IgG2 driven. Interestingly, vaccination with SPBN GASGAS does not cause significant differences in inducible IFN-γ production in vaccinated animals, indicating a relatively weak cellular immune response during challenge. Notably, the parenteral application of SPBN GASGAS did not induce any adverse side effects in foxes, thus supporting safety studies of this oral rabies vaccine in various species.

Immunogenicity of Antigen Adjuvanted with AS04 and Its Deposition in the Upper Respiratory Tract after Intranasal Administration

Adjuvant system 04 (AS04) is in injectable human vaccines. AS04 contains two known adjuvants, 3-O-desacyl-4'-monophosphoryl lipid A (MPL) and insoluble aluminum salts. Data from previous studies showed that both MPL and insoluble aluminum salts have nasal mucosal vaccine adjuvant activity. The present study was designed to test the feasibility of using AS04 as an adjuvant to help nasally administered antigens to induce specific mucosal and systemic immunity as well as to evaluate the deposition of antigens in the upper respiratory tract when adjuvanted with AS04. Alhydrogel, an aluminum (oxy)hydroxide suspension, was mixed with MPL to form AS04, which was then mixed with ovalbumin (OVA) or 3× M2e-HA2, a synthetic influenza virus hemagglutinin fusion protein, as an antigen to prepare OVA/AS04 and 3× M2e-HA2/AS04 vaccines, respectively. In mice, AS04 enabled antigens, when given intranasally, to induce specific IgA response in nasal and lung mucosal secretions as well as specific IgG response in the serum samples of the immunized mice, whereas subcutaneous injection of the same vaccine induced specific antibody responses only in the serum samples but not in the mucosal secretions. Splenocytes isolated from mice intranasally immunized with the OVA/AS04 also proliferated and released cytokines (i.e., IL-4 and IFN-γ) after in vitro stimulation with the antigen. In the immunogenicity test, intranasal OVA/AS04 was not more effective than intranasal OVA/MPL at the dosing regimens tested. However, when compared to OVA/MPL, OVA/AS04 showed a different atomized droplet size distribution and more importantly a more favorable OVA deposition profile when atomized into a nasal cast that was 3-D printed based on the computer tomography scan of the nose of a child. It is concluded that AS04 has mucosal adjuvant activity when given intranasally. In addition, there is a reason to be optimistic about using AS04 as an adjuvant to target an antigen of interest to the right region of the nasal cavity in humans for immune response induction.

Prospects for immunocontraception in the European red fox (Vulpes vulpes)

The European red fox is an introduced pest species in Australia for which improved means of control are urgently needed. Research efforts have focussed recently on the development of novel biological control methods to reduce the serious impact this species continues to have on both native fauna and the sheep industry. The ultimate goal has been to generate an antifertility vaccine for use on foxes that relies on a process termed ‘immunocontraception’. A variety of proteins derived from sperm and oocytes, together with different delivery vectors, have been experimentally assessed for their ability to induce immunocontraceptive responses in foxes. Vaccine vectors screened have included Salmonella typhimurium, vaccinia virus and canine herpesvirus but suppression of fertility has yet to be achieved with any combination of antigen and delivery vector. Downregulation of fox mucosal antibodies during oestrus, lack of vector replication and low antibody responses to the target antigens have been the main constraints in successful fertility control. The fox is not well known as an experimental animal and the logistics of dealing with this difficult-to-handle species proved to be a major challenge when compared with other species, such as rabbits and mice. Despite these difficulties, research on fox immunocontraception has generated important insights into the reproductive biology, husbandry, biology and basic immunology of viral vectors in European red foxes. This information represents a valuable knowledge base should antifertility vaccination for foxes be revisited in the future.

Adjuvants modulating mucosal immune responses or directing systemic responses towards the mucosa

In developing veterinary mucosal vaccines and vaccination strategies, mucosal adjuvants are one of the key players for inducing protective immune responses. Most of the mucosal adjuvants seem to exert their effect via binding to a receptor/or target cells and these properties were used to classify the mucosal adjuvants reviewed in the present paper: (1) ganglioside receptor-binding toxins (cholera toxin, LT enterotoxin, their B subunits and mutants); (2) surface immunoglobulin binding complex CTA1-DD; (3) TLR4 binding lipopolysaccharide; (4) TLR2-binding muramyl dipeptide; (5) Mannose receptor-binding mannan; (6) Dectin-1-binding ss 1,3/1,6 glucans; (7) TLR9-binding CpG-oligodeoxynucleotides; (8) Cytokines and chemokines; (9) Antigen-presenting cell targeting ISCOMATRIX and ISCOM. In addition, attention is given to two adjuvants able to prime the mucosal immune system following a systemic immunization, namely 1alpha, 25(OH)2D3 and cholera toxin.

Cloning of fox (Vulpes vulpes) Il2, Il6, Il10 and IFNγ and analysis of their expression by quantitative RT-PCR in fox PBMC after in vitro stimulation by Concanavalin A

The immune response in the fox (Vulpes vulpes), despite the success of the oral rabies vaccine is not well characterised, and specific immunological tools are needed. A quantitative RT-PCR using SyBR Green to investigate fox cytokine expression after antigen PBMC in vitro re-stimulation is presented here. First, we cloned by homology with dog cytokine sequences the fox IL2, IL6, IL10, IFNgamma and a partial 18S sequence. Fox specific primers were then defined and used to set up a species-specific quantitative RT-PCR assay using SyBR Green and 18S housekeeping gene as internal standard. The technique was validated using total RNA from fox PBMC stimulated with a polyclonal activator, Concanavaline A.