Background: Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) is a transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) of cattle. Classical BSE is associated with ingestion of BSE-contaminated feedstuffs. H- and ...L-type BSE, collectively known as atypical BSE, differ from classical BSE by displaying a different disease phenotype and they have not been linked to the consumption of contaminated feed. Interestingly, the 2006 US H-type atypical BSE animal had a polymorphism at codon 211 of the bovine prion gene resulting in a glutamic acid to lysine substitution (E211K). This substitution is analogous a human polymorphism associated with the most prevalent form of heritable TSE in humans, and it is considered to have caused BSE in the 2006 US atypical BSE animal. In order to determine if this amino acid change is a heritable trait in cattle, we sequenced the prion alleles of the only known offspring of this animal, a 2-year-old heifer. Principal Findings: Sequence analysis revealed that both the 2006 US atypical BSE animal and its 2-year-old heifer were heterozygous at bovine prion gene nucleotides 631 through 633 for GAA (glutamic acid) and AAA (lysine). Both animals carry the E211K polymorphism, indicating that the allele is heritable and may persist within the cattle population. Conclusions: This is the first evidence that the E211K polymorphism is a germline polymorphism, not a somatic mutation, suggesting BSE may be transmitted genetically in cattle. In the event that E211K proves to result in a genetic form of BSE, this would be the first indication that all 3 etiologic forms of TSEs (spontaneous, hereditary, and infectious) are present in a non-human species. Atypical BSE arising as both genetic and spontaneous disease, in the context of reports that at least some forms of atypical BSE can convert to classical BSE in mice, suggests a cattle origin for classical BSE.
The gene constellation of the 2009 pandemic A/H1N1 virus is a unique combination from swine influenza A viruses (SIV) of North American and Eurasian lineages, but prior to April 2009 had never before ...been identified in swine or other species. Although its hemagglutinin gene is related to North American H1 SIV, it is unknown if vaccines currently used in U.S. swine would cross-protect against infection with the pandemic A/H1N1. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of inactivated vaccines prepared with North American swine influenza viruses as well as an experimental homologous A/H1N1 vaccine to prevent infection and disease from 2009 pandemic A/H1N1. All vaccines tested provided partial protection ranging from reduction of pneumonia lesions to significant reduction in virus replication in the lung and nose. The multivalent vaccines demonstrated partial protection; however, none was able to prevent all nasal shedding or clinical disease. An experimental homologous 2009 A/H1N1 monovalent vaccine provided optimal protection with no virus detected from nose or lung at any time point in addition to amelioration of clinical disease. Based on cross-protection demonstrated with the vaccines evaluated in this study, the U.S. swine herd likely has significant immunity to the 2009 A/H1N1 from prior vaccination or natural exposure. However, consideration should be given for development of monovalent homologous vaccines to best protect the swine population thus limiting shedding and the potential transmission of 2009 A/H1N1 from pigs to people.
There is extensive research underway on development of chemical immunomodulators for use in humans. This research is primarily driven by the need for therapeutic immunomodulators for use in patients ...with cancer or AIDS. Currently, there are no chemicals approved as immunomodulators by the Food and Drug Administration for use in domestic food animals. There is considerable potential for applying the rapid advances in immunomodulation research to benefit domestic animals. In domestic food animals, immunomodulators have the greatest potential for prevention and perhaps therapy in early stages of infectious diseases associated with immunosuppression. There are many different causes for immunosuppression and many different molecular mechanisms responsible for defective function of immune cells. It is unlikely that any one immunomodulator will be capable of preventing or reversing all of these various causes of immunosuppression. Therefore, research is needed to understand the mechanisms of immunosuppression and the mechanism of action of immunomodulators so that rational approaches can be developed for their prophylactic and therapeutic use. Without this information and information on effective dosages and duration of action, attempts to use immunomodulators clinically are likely to produce discouraging results.
