牛病毒性腹泻的防控思路及诊断方法

牛病毒性腹泻病毒（BVDV）可引起牛病毒性腹泻，其广泛分布于世界各地。该病毒具有较大的变异性，根据病毒基因组结构特点分为2个基因型，即BVDV1和BVDV2。每个基因型包括多种基因亚型，每个基因型又有2个生物型，致细胞病变型和非致细胞病变型。病毒的这种特性造成各病毒株的抗原性和血清学特性的差异，给疫病的流行病学研究、诊断、疫苗研究和防控工作造成一定困难。     

2型牛病毒性腹泻/黏膜病流行病学及其疫苗的研究进展

正牛病毒性腹泻/黏膜病(BVD-MD)是在世界范围内对养牛业造成重大经济损失的疫病之一,主要能感染牛、羊、猪等多种经济动物,造成呼吸系统、消化系统和生殖系统疾病,在牛的病原学上具有很重要的地位,我国将该病列为三类动物疫病~([1])。目前,国际病毒分类委员会确定BVDV包括2种基因型,即BVDV1型和BVDV2型。该病广泛流行于全球     

牛病毒性腹泻的诊断与防控

牛病毒性腹泻病毒(BVDV)是引起牛病毒性腹泻--黏膜病的病原,该病毒具有较大的变异性,根据病毒基因组结构特点分为2个基因型,即BVDV1和BVDV2.牛病毒性腹泻病毒是造成奶牛生产性能下降、繁殖障碍、持续感染等的一个主要原因,并能给养牛业造成严重的经济损失.从牛病毒性腹泻的病原、发病机理、临床症状及诊治等方面进行阐述,以期为该病的综合防控提供参考.     

新疆某地牛病毒性腹泻病毒生物型的鉴定

从临床怀疑为牛病毒性腹泻病毒(BVDV)感染奶牛的血液中用RT-PCR方法检测BVDV,目的片段回收克隆测序,经Blast分析,与匈牙利疫苗致弱株同源性99%,并用PCR方法鉴定基因型,均为BVDV-Ⅰ型.用MDBK细胞鉴定生物型,不致细胞病变,为非致细胞病变(nCP)型.     

牛病毒性腹泻病毒间接ELISA方法的建立

持续性感染和免疫耐受是牛病毒性腹泻病的重要特征,也是该病的防控难点.本试验将2种生物型的牛病毒性腹泻病毒(BVDV):致细胞病变(CP)型(BVDV OregonC24株)和非致细胞病变(NCP)型(BVDV Yak株),灭活、浓缩作为抗原,分别免疫家兔制备高免血清.同时,使用BVDV全病毒蛋白作为包被原,建立了检测BVDV的间接ELISA检测方法.本试验利用该方法对高免血清进行检测,探讨CP型BVDV与NCP型BVDV抗原免疫原性差异.结果显示,CP型BVDV的高免血清效价均比NCP型BVDV高免血清的效价高,平均高35%.结果表明,CP型BVDV的免疫原性优于NCP型BVDV,且CP型BVDV与NCP型BVDV的血清效价具有明显差异.这为在实践中疫苗毒株筛选及生产提供了理论指导.     

梅花鹿牛病毒性腹泻病毒的分离及其RT-PCR鉴定

对梅花鹿的牛病毒性腹泻病毒(BVDV)分离培养及RT—PCR进行了研究。从腹泻鹿粪样中分离到了 与BVDV的C24V标准椿致细胞病变相同规律的BVDV病毒株,经RT—PCR扩增进一步证实其为牛病毒性腹 泻病毒。     

牛病毒性腹泻病毒致病机制研究进展

牛病毒性腹泻(bovine viral diarrhea,BVD)和黏膜病(mucosal disease,MD)均是由牛病毒性腹泻病毒(bovine viral diarrhea virus,BVDV)感染引发的传染病,严重威胁世界养牛业的发展。文章概述了BVDV分型及其分子生物学特征,并从急性感染、经胎盘或子宫感染、持续性感染和黏膜病4个方面总结了近期国内外BVDV致病机制的研究进展。根据序列保守性及是否致细胞病变可将BVDV分为两种基因型和两种生物型,其中,新发现的"HoBi"株归类为瘟病毒属。BVDV基因进化很快,基因组编码4种结构蛋白和8种非结构蛋白,编码蛋白在病毒的复制、翻译及在宿主致病过程中发挥重要作用。BVDV致病机制复杂,急性感染会造成病毒血症、繁殖障碍、免疫抑制等,急性感染牛发生腹泻的原因与BVDV感染胃肠道的肌层、黏膜下层并干扰肠道神经的正常功能相关,非致细胞病变型(NCP)BVDV是造成急性感染的病因。胚胎感染BVDV取决于病毒首次侵袭时胎儿在子宫内的生长阶段。NCP型BVDV具有抑制胎儿体内产生Ⅰ型干扰素的能力,致使该病毒在宿主中得以生存并形成持续性感染牛,当持续性感染牛再次感染与NCP型BVDV高度同源的致细胞病变型(CP)毒株时直接诱发黏膜病。两种生物型的产生是发生持续性感染和黏膜病的重要因素,NCP型可向CP型BVDV进行转化。本综述有助于发现控制BVD-MD传播的新途径,为消灭该病和新型疫苗的研制提供参考。     

鹿源牛病毒性腹泻病毒JZ05-4株的分型鉴定

为研究牛病毒性腹泻病毒(BVDV) JZ05-4毒株生物型、基因型及遗传背景,本研究将其在MDBK细胞上进行传代培养并观察细胞培养特性,利用荧光抗体染色和RT-PCR的方法对其进行基因型鉴定研究.试验结果证明,BVDV/JZ05-4毒株为CPE生物型、BVDV-2基因型.     

牛病毒性腹泻/黏膜病毒敏感MDBK细胞克隆与鉴定

研究采用有限稀释法将MDBK细胞进行克隆,并放大培养。将2种生物型(致细胞病变型和非致细胞病变型)的牛病毒性腹泻/黏膜病毒混匀,接种克隆的MDBK细胞并收获毒液。采用间接免疫荧光技术检测病毒含量,筛选BVDV敏感细胞。试验成功获得4株单克隆细胞,其中C3株对病毒高度敏感且产毒稳定,确定为BVDV敏感细胞株。     

牛病毒性腹泻病毒致病机制研究进展

牛病毒性腹泻（bovine viral diarrhea,BVD）和黏膜病（mucosal disease,MD）均是由牛病毒性腹泻病毒（bovine viral diarrhea virus,BVDV）感染引发的传染病,严重威胁世界养牛业的发展。文章概述了BVDV分型及其分子生物学特征,并从急性感染、经胎盘或子宫感染、持续性感染和黏膜病4个方面总结了近期国内外BVDV致病机制的研究进展。根据序列保守性及是否致细胞病变可将BVDV分为两种基因型和两种生物型,其中,新发现的"HoBi"株归类为瘟病毒属。BVDV基因进化很快,基因组编码4种结构蛋白和8种非结构蛋白,编码蛋白在病毒的复制、翻译及在宿主致病过程中发挥重要作用。BVDV致病机制复杂,急性感染会造成病毒血症、繁殖障碍、免疫抑制等,急性感染牛发生腹泻的原因与BVDV感染胃肠道的肌层、黏膜下层并干扰肠道神经的正常功能相关,非致细胞病变型（NCP）BVDV是造成急性感染的病因。胚胎感染BVDV取决于病毒首次侵袭时胎儿在子宫内的生长阶段。NCP型BVDV具有抑制胎儿体内产生Ⅰ型干扰素的能力,致使该病毒在宿主中得以生存并形成持续性感染牛,当持续性感染牛再次感染与NCP型BVDV高度同源的致细胞病变型（CP）毒株时直接诱发黏膜病。两种生物型的产生是发生持续性感染和黏膜病的重要因素,NCP型可向CP型BVDV进行转化。本综述有助于发现控制BVD-MD传播的新途径,为消灭该病和新型疫苗的研制提供参考。     

猪瘟病毒和牛病毒性腹泻病毒双重RT-PCR方法的建立和初步应用

根据GenBank上已发表的猪瘟病毒(CSFV)和牛病毒性腹泻病毒(BVDV)的全基因序列,进行对比分析,分别设计合成两对能特异性扩增CSFV、BVDV的引物。经过条件优化后,建立了检测CSFV和BVDV的双重RT-PCR方法,扩增两种病毒的片段,大小分别为938、650 bp。应用该方法对11批牛睾丸细胞、7批胎牛血清、60个批次的猪瘟细胞苗、10份全血样及10份组织样进行检测。通过试验证明,所建立的方法具有良好的特异性和敏感性,为防止猪瘟细胞苗的污染及进行CSFV和BVDV鉴别诊断提供了有效方法。     

The live attenuated bovine viral diarrhea virus components of a multi-valent vaccine confer protection against fetal infection

Fetal infection with bovine virus diarrhea virus (BVDV) causes severe economic loss and virus spread in cattle. This study investigated the ability of modified live BVDV I and II components of a commercially available modified live virus (MLV) vaccine (Breed-Back FP 10, Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica Inc.) to prevent fetal infection and abortion, and therefore the birth of persistently infected animals. Heifers immunized with vaccine 4-8 weeks before insemination showed no adverse effects. All vaccinated animals had seroconverted to BVDV 4 weeks after immunization. Pregnant heifers were divided into two vaccination and two control groups and challenged with type I or II BVDV on days 60-90 of gestation. Seroconversion, clinical signs, immunosuppression, viremia, mortality, abortion rate, and fetal infection were studied. Post-challenge, 6/11 (type I challenged) and 8/11 (type II challenged) vaccinated heifers were free from clinical signs of BVD. Post-challenge clinical signs noted in the vaccinated groups were mild to moderate, while all unvaccinated controls had clinical signs ranging from moderate to severe. Viremia was not detected post-challenge in any of the vaccinated heifers. However, 100% of the controls were BVDV viremic on at least 1 day post-challenge. One of 22 vaccinated heifers had transient leukopenia, whereas 2/8 and 6/7 unvaccinated heifers in control groups I and II, respectively, had transient leukopenia. Type II BVDV infection led to abortion or death in 86% of unvaccinated heifers. The corresponding vaccinated group showed no deaths or abortions. All control group fetuses were infected with BVDV. The test vaccine gave 91% (type I BVDV challenged) and 100% (type II BVDV challenged) protection from fetal infection. This vaccine is safe and effective against fetal infection, abortion (type II BVDV) and the birth of persistently infected animals.     

The immune response to bovine viral diarrhea virus: a constantly changing picture.

Bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) is one of the major immuno-suppressive viruses of cattle. The effect on the innate and acquired immune system is unique and results in dramatic immune dysfunction. BVDV infection also has the ability to cause persistent infection (PI) in the developing fetus. This Pl syndrome creates a requirement for high levels of BVDV immunity from vaccines to prevent these infections. BVDV vaccines and their future development continue to be an enigma in the control of BVDV.     

Failure to spread bovine virus diarrhoea virus infection from primarily infected calves despite concurrent infection with bovine coronavirus

Previous reports on the spread of bovine virus diarrhoea virus (BVDV) from animals primarily infected with the agent are contradictory. In this study, the possibility of transmission of BVDV from calves simultaneously subjected to acute BVDV and bovine coronavirus (BCV) infection was investigated. Ten calves were inoculated intranasally with BVDV Type 1. Each of the 10 calves was then randomly allocated to one of two groups. In each group there were four additional calves, resulting in five infected and four susceptible calves per group. Virulent BCV was actively introduced in one of the groups by means of a transmitter calf. Two calves, susceptible to both BVDV and BCV, were kept in a separate group, as controls. All ten calves actively inoculated with BVDV became infected as shown by seroconversions, and six of them also shed the virus in nasal secretions. However, none of the other eight calves in the two groups (four in each) seroconverted to this agent. In contrast, it proved impossible to prevent the spread of BCV infection between the experimental groups and consequently all 20 study calves became infected with the virus. Following infection, BCV was detected in nasal secretions and in faeces of the calves and, after three weeks in the study, all had seroconverted to this virus. All calves, including the controls, showed at least one of the following clinical signs during days 3-15 after the trial started: fever (> or =40 degrees C), depressed general condition, diarrhoea, and cough. The study showed that BVDV primarily infected cattle, even when co-infected with an enteric and respiratory pathogen, are inefficient transmitters of BVDV. This finding supports the principle of the Scandinavian BVDV control programmes that elimination of BVDV infection from cattle populations can be achieved by identifying and removing persistently infected (PI) animals, i.e. that long-term circulation of the virus without the presence of PI animals is highly unlikely.     

Limited BVDV transmission and full protection against CSFV transmission in pigs experimentally infected with BVDV type 1b

Bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) in pigs may interfere with the detection and epidemiology of classical swine fever virus (CSFV). To investigate the importance of BVDV infections in pigs, first we studied the transmission dynamics of a recent BVDV field isolate. Subsequently, the protection of BVD antibodies against transmission and clinical disease of CSF virus was studied. Only limited transmission of BVDV occurred (R = 0.20), while no CSFV transmission occurred in pigs with BVDV antibodies. We concluded that BVDV transmission among pigs is possible, but seems to be limited and thus the virus should disappear from a population if no new introductions occur. Furthermore, the presence of BVD antibodies may completely prevent the transmission of CSFV and therefore could protect pigs against classical swine fever. It was also noticed that double infections with BVDV and CSFV were incorrectly diagnosed using the neutralization peroxidase linked assay (NPLA), which is the golden standard for antibody detection. This might hamper the diagnosis of CSF in herds with a high BVD prevalence.     

Airborne transmission of BHV1, BRSV, and BVDV among cattle is possible under experimental conditions

To control the diseases caused by bovine herpesvirus 1 (BHV1), bovine respiratory syncytial virus (BRSV), and bovine virus diarrhoea virus (BVDV), it is crucial to know their modes of transmission. The purpose of this study was to determine whether these viruses can be transmitted by air to a substantial extent. Calves were housed in two separate isolation stables in which a unidirectional airflow was maintained through a tube in the wall. In one stable, three of the five calves were experimentally infected with BHV1 and later with BRSV. In the BVDV experiment, two calves persistently infected with BVDV (PI-calves) instead of experimentally infected calves, were used as the source of the virus. In all the calves infections were monitored using virus and antibody detection. Results showed that all the three viruses were transmitted by air. BHV1 spread to sentinel calves in the adjacent stable within three days, and BRSV within nine days, and BVDV spread to sentinel calves probably within one week. Although airborne transmission is possibly not the main route of transmission, these findings will have consequences for disease prevention and regulations in control programmes.     

牦牛病毒性腹泻病研究进展

牦牛感染牛病毒性腹泻病毒(Bovine viral diarrhea virus,BVDV)后常发生胃肠炎等消化系统疾患和呼吸系统疾患、繁殖障碍,造成机体损伤,给牦牛产业发展造成一定影响。基于5"-UTR的差异将BVDV分为BVDV-I和BVDV-II两种基因型,牦牛源BVDV的主要基因型为BVDV-1型;根据BVDV对宿主细胞的致病性,分为致细胞病变型(Cy-topathogenic,CP)和非致细胞病变型(Non-cytopathogenic,NCP)两个生物型,牦牛源BVDV既有CP型又有NCP型,且这两种生物型能相互转化。牦牛生活的高原地区风、鸟类的迁徙等因素可能都会导致牦牛BVD传播范围广泛,牛群中大量的BVDV携带者和牦牛特殊而又复杂的生态系统导致了BVDV种间传播的巨大潜力,影响着牦牛产业的健康发展和养殖经济收益。针对本病在牦牛群中的感染流行等情况未发现相关详细的研究报道,笔者就牦牛BVD病原学、流行病学调查、实验室诊断、综合防治等方面研究进展情况进行整理,供同仁在研究和防控中参考借鉴。     

Origination and consequences of bovine viral diarrhea virus diversity.

The potential consequences of BVDV genetic and antigenic diversity are far ranging. The complexity of clinical presentations associated with BVDV likely arises from factors encoded by the virus genome. More importantly,prevention and control of BVDV may be complicated by diagnostic and immunization failure resulting from virus diversity. Evolutionary pressures will continue to drive further diversity, making control of BVDV challenging. Current and the potential for future BVDV strain diversity should be considered when designing BVDV control programs both at the individual farm and national herd level.     

Vaccination of cattle against bovine viral diarrhoea

This brief review describes types and quality (efficacy and safety) of bovine viral diarrhoea virus (BVDV) vaccines that are in the market or under development. Both conventional live and killed vaccines are available. The primary aim of vaccination is to prevent congenital infection, but the few vaccines tested are not highly efficacious in this respect, as shown in vaccination-challenge experiments. Vaccination to prevent severe postnatal infections may be indicated when virulent BVDV strains are prevalent. Live BVDV vaccines have given rise to safety problems. A complication for the development of BVDV vaccines is the wide antigenic diversity among wild-type BVDV. There is ample room for improvement of both the efficacy and safety of BVDV vaccines, and it may be expected that better vaccines, among which marker vaccines, will be launched in the future.     

Bovine viral diarrhoea virus infections and its control. A review

Infections with bovine viral diarrhoea virus continue to plague the cattle industry worldwide. The wish to control the negative effects of the virus has lead to the development of numerous vaccines, but also of eradication schemes. In this paper, a comprehensive overview on BVDV is given: the virus and its clinical manifestations, its occurrence and economic impact, the different routes of transmission, as well as diagnostic methods and objectives. Furthermore, the two major options for BVDV control--eradication and vaccination--are discussed as well as the risk for reintroduction of BVDV after eradication.