July

• Top publications | July
• M.N. Almeida, M. Zhang, J.J. Zimmerman, D.J. Holtkamp, D.C.L. Linhares

The aim of this study was to compare the detection of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) in due-to-wean litters in commercial swine breeding herds using family oral fluids (FOF) vs. individual piglet serum samples. FOF and piglet serum samples were collected in 199 due-to-wean litters on six farms containing 2177 piglets. All samples were individually tested for PRRSV RNA by RT-rtPCR. A litter was considered PRRSV-positive when PRRSV RNA was detected in ≥ 1 piglet serum sample or the FOF sample. Mixed effect logistic regression with farm as a random effect was used 1) to evaluate the probability of obtaining a PRRSV RNA positive FOF as a function of the proportion of viremic piglets in a litter and 2) the effect of litter size and parity on the probability that a litter would test PRRSV RNA positive in FOF. A Bayesian prevalence estimation under misclassification (BayesPEM) analysis was used to calculate the PRRSV prevalence and 95 % credible interval given the condition that all samples (FOF and serum) tested negative. In total, 34 of 199 litters (17.1 %) contained ≥ 1 viremic piglet(s), and 28 of 199 litters (14.1 %) were FOF positive. When all piglet serum samples within a litter tested negative, 1 of 165 FOF (0.6 %) tested PRRSV RNA positive. The probability of a PCR-positive FOF sample from litters with 10 %, 20 %, 30 %, 40 %, and 50 % within-litter PRRSV prevalence was 3.5 %, 35.1 %, 88.8 %, 99.2 %, and >99.9 %, respectively. The odds of a PCR-positive FOF in a first parity litter were 3.36 times (95 % CI: 2.10–5.38) that of a parity ≥ 2 litter. The odds of a positive FOF result in a litter with ≤ 11 piglets were 9.90 times (95 % CI: 4.62–21.22) that of a litter with > 11 piglets. FOF was shown to be an efficacious sample type for PRRSV detection in farrowing rooms. A risk-based approach for litter selection combined with FOF collection can be used to improve on-farm PRRSV detection with a limited sample size, compared to sampling multiple individual pigs. Finally, the BayesPEM analysis showed that PRRSV may still be present in breeding herds when all samples (serum and FOF) test PRRSV RNA negative, i.e., negative surveillance results should be interpreted with caution.

• Top publications | July
• Georges Saade, Céline Deblanc, Juliette Bougon, Corinne Marois-Créhan, Christelle Fablet, Gaël Auray, Catherine Belloc , Mily Leblanc-Maridor, Carl A. Gagnon, Jianzhong Zhu, Marcelo Gottschalk, Artur Summerfield, Gaëlle Simon, Nicolas Bertho and François

Understudied, coinfections are more frequent in pig farms than single infections. In pigs, the term “Porcine Respiratory Disease Complex” (PRDC) is often used to describe coinfections involving viruses such as swine Influenza A Virus (swIAV), Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus (PRRSV), and Porcine CircoVirus type 2 (PCV2) as well as bacteria like Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae, Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae and Bordetella bronchiseptica. The clinical outcome of the various coinfection or superinfection situations is usually assessed in the studies while in most of cases there is no clear elucidation of the fine mechanisms shaping the complex interactions occurring between microorganisms. In this comprehensive review, we aimed at identifying the studies dealing with coinfections or superinfections in the pig respiratory tract and at presenting the interactions between pathogens and, when possible, the mechanisms controlling them. Coinfections and superinfections involving viruses and bacteria were considered while research articles including protozoan and fungi were excluded. We discuss the main limitations complicating the interpretation of coinfection/superinfection studies, and the high potential perspectives in this fascinating research field, which is expecting to gain more and more interest in the next years for the obvious benefit of animal health.

• Top publications | July
• He Zhang, Wenjie Ma, Zhi Sun, Changkang Zhu, Gebremeskel Mamu Werid, Yassein M. Ibrahim, Wenli Zhang, Yu Pan, Dongfang Shi, Hongyan Chen, Yue Wang

Increasing evidence shows that gut microbiota plays a critical role in host immune system development and immune regulation, thus the composition of gut microbiota may affect how individuals respond to immunizations. Currently, little evidence is available on the correlation between porcine gut microbiota and vaccine immune response. Here, we investigated the influence of gut microbiota on immune response in pigs to porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) vaccine. Based on the antibody levels for PRRSV, the immunized pigs were divided into three groups (high, low, and others), and followed by virulent PRRSV challenge. The comprehensive analysis of microbial composition revealed that gut microbiota was similar in the richness and diversity among different groups before immunization. After immunization, the richness and di- versity of gut microbial community in the high group were still similar to the low group, although there was a decrease in community diversity overtime. Interestingly, the antibody titer was positively correlated with the abundance of Lactobacillus in gut microbiota in immunized pigs. Further analysis indicated that gut microbial composition might be correlated to the clinical parameters such as body weight and rectal temperature after virus challenge. Taken together, our findings suggest that certain specific members of gut microbiota, such as Lactobacillus may serve as a mechanism for regulating the immune response following immunization in pigs.