Immunoblot examination of humoral response of chickens infected with Mycoplasma gallisepticum at various ages

Comparison of Experimental Infection of Normal and Immunosuppressed Chickens with Mycoplasma gallisepticum

Four different models of infection of chickens with Mycoplasma gallisepticum (MG) were evaluated. Normal or immunosuppressed chicks (10 days old) were infected with the MG R_low strain via eye and nasal drops or by direct air sac injection. Bacterial load in the lungs was quantified and air sac and tracheal lesion scores, tracheal mucosal thickness and humoral immune responses were assessed. Serum antibody responses were assessed by use of a serum plate agglutination test. Three days post infection (dpi), all immunosuppressed chicks had developed significant respiratory signs. Chicks infected via air sac injection had significant differences in serum antibody and gross lesion scores at 5 dpi. All chicks had developed pathological changes by 7 dpi. Air sac inoculation of immunosuppressed chicks produced more significant (P ≤0.05) lesions, and these birds had the highest bacterial load in the lungs compared with other groups.

Pathologic lesions caused by coinfection of Mycoplasma gallisepticum and H3N8 low pathogenic avian influenza virus in chickens

Chickens were infected under experimental conditions with Mycoplasma gallisepticum and low pathogenic avian influenza (LPAI) strain A/mallard/Hungary/19616/07 (H3N8). Two groups of chickens were aerosol challenged with M. gallisepticum strain 1226. Seven days later, one of these groups and one mycoplasma-free group was challenged with LPAI H3N8 virus; one group without challenge remained as negative control. Eight days later, the birds were euthanized and examined for gross pathologic and histologic lesions. The body weight was measured, and the presence of antimycoplasma and antiviral antibodies was tested before the mycoplasma challenge, before the virus challenge, and at the end of the study to confirm both infections. Chickens in the mycoplasma-infected group developed antibodies against M. gallisepticum but not against the influenza virus. Chickens of the group infected with the influenza virus became serologically positive only against the virus, while the birds in the coinfected group developed antibodies against both agents. The LPAI H3N8 virus strain did not cause decrease in body weight and clinical signs, and macroscopic pathological lesions were not present in the chickens. The M. gallisepticum infection caused respiratory signs, airsacculitis, and peritonitis characteristic of mycoplasma infection. However, the clinical signs and pathologic lesions and the reduction in weight gain were much more significant in the group challenged with both M. gallisepticum and LPAI H3N8 virus than in the group challenged with M. gallisepticum alone.

Antibody response detected by immunoblot in respiratory tract washings of chickens after infection with Mycoplasma gallisepticum

Two experiments were conducted to test the sensitivity of Western blotting for detection of M. gallisepticum antibodies in respiratory washings and sera of infected chickens by mouse monoclonal antibodies to chicken IgG, IgM and IgA. In the first experiment, birds infected at 10 days of age were examined 2 weeks later. In the respiratory washings, IgA antibodies reacted with eight polypeptides of M. gallisepticum, while IgM and IgG reacted with three. In the serum IgA antibodies were not detected but IgM antibodies reacted with eight polypeptides and IgG with 16. In the second experiment birds were infected at 3 weeks of age and a subgroup was examined every week for 3 weeks post-infection. In the respiratory washings IgA was the principle immunoglobulin detected in the first week and it reacted to six major polypeptides of M. gallisepticum (p72, p64-67, p60, p56, p45, p40). In serum IgM was predominant in the first week and reacted to nine polypeptides. From the second week IgG antibodies were the most important as they reacted to 13 polypeptides in respiratory washings and to 11 polypeptides in the serum, while they reacted to nine polypeptides in respiratory washings and to 13 in the serum in the third week.

Comparison of Culture, PCR, and Different Serologic Tests for Detection of Mycoplasma gallisepticum and Mycoplasma synoviae Infections

In this study, the technical performance of culture, two commercially available polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests, rapid plate agglutination (RPA) test, hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test, and eight commercially available enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) were compared for the detection of avian mycoplasma infections from 3 days postinfection (d.p.i.) through 35 d.p.i. The tests were carried out on samples from specified pathogen-free layers that were infected at 66 wk of age with recent Mycoplasma synoviae (MS) and Mycoplasma gallisepticum (MG) field strains, MS and MG ATCC strains, and Mycoplasma imitans (MIM), respectively. Results showed a high percentage of positive samples in the homologous infected groups and a high percentage of negative samples (100%) in the uninfected and heterologous infected groups during 35 d.p.i. of both culture and PCR tests. For the group infected with the MG 15302 ATCC strain, serology was more sensitive than bacteriology. All MG and MS tests, with the exception of MG ELISA kit D showed a lower percentage of positive samples during 35 d.p.i. for the detection of the MG and MS ATCC strain infection compared with that of the field strains. Also, the number of cross-reactions (false positives) in the serologic tests was lower after infection with an ATCC strain than after an infection with the MG or MS field strain. Contradictory to other studies, the ELISAs and the RPA test using undiluted serum showed a relatively high number of false-positive results. The MG ELISAs (except ELISA kit D) showed more false-positive results (up to 37%) in the MIM-infected group than in the MS-infected groups. This was not unexpected, as MIM and MG have a close antigenic relationship. The results of the serologic tests in this study showed that a certain level of false-positive results can be expected in about any serologic test. Although the level of false-positive results varied between several serologic tests, this study showed that it is not advisable to rely completely on one test (system) only.