Two of the most frequent methods to immunise gilts are:
A) Inoculation/contact of live-resident virus:
Immunisation with live-resident virus is usually performed by using contact to presumably infected material, such as feces or animals, or by sera inoculation from a viremic piglet. Both strategies are potentially dangerous and the outcome is unpredictable.
- Unknown quality of the product:
Pathogenic agents beyond PRRS virus could be found in the material/animal used. - Unknown quantity of PRRS virus in the product:
The amount of PRRS virus in the material/animal used to immunise are usually not measured.
If measured, the amount is usually low or insufficient to infect and to induce an immune response in all animals at the same time. - Risk of introduction of infected gilts in breeding herd:
Due to the insufficient concentration of transmissible virus in the material, some gilts could not get infected at first chance, but by contact from those initially infected lately.
When this happens, the infection time is unknown, so it can not be guaranteed when infection has really occurred.
Consequently, gilts could be introduced to the breeding herd being still viraemic and/or shedding virus. It is important to note that immunisation is done with a virulent strain and therefore, introducing a shedding gilt in the breeding herd is extremely dangerous. - More than one strain could circulate in the farm:
Inoculation or contact with live-resident virus aims to immunise gilts with the strain circulating in the farm to afford homologous protection.
However, more than one strain could be circulating in the farm. Under these circumstances, the material used to immunise gilts could not contain the most important strain in the farm in terms of clinical or prevalence.
B) Vaccination with MLV vaccines:
The immunity afforded by commercial vaccines is always heterologous –due to the high genetic variability of PRRS virus, all field infections should be considered as heterologous-.
However, if supplier guidelines are followed, vaccines provide clear advantages compared to inoculation/contact of live-resident virus:
- Known quality of the product:
Commercial vaccine contains only PRRS virus. - Known quantity of PRRS virus in the product:
Pharmaceutical companies guarantee the concentration of PRRS virus that can be found in a commercial vaccine. This information is always stated in the label. - No risk of introduction of infected gilts in breeding herd:
The time zero of immunisation is known –gilt are immunised when they receive the shot-, therefore the risk to introduce a viremic gilt in the breeding herd is negligible.
More importantly, live vaccines are based on attenuated virus that can induce viremia and can be excreted but are non-virulent. - The product remains constant:
Unlike inoculation/contact of live-resident virus, the commercial vaccine composition is constant and guaranteed by the pharmaceutical company.
Whatever the chosen method, seroconversion by ELISA (appearance of antibodies) should be checked in gilts 2-3 weeks later in order to assess that they have been truly immunised.
In case of inoculation/contact of live-resident virus, viraemia or presence of virus in oral fluid should be also analyzed before introducing gilts in breeding herds.
Nevertheless, if inoculation/contact is used, long acclimation times are strongly recommended in order to minimise the introduction of shedding gilts in the breeding herd.
Vaccination is the easiest and safest way to immunise gilts and sows
Immunisation of sows:
Vaccines induce only partial immunity against heterologous challenge but they are effective to reduce abortions, mortality of new-born piglets and other reproductive disorders related to PRRS virus infection in sows.
Regarding virological parameters, vaccines helps to reduce transmission of the infection, since they can contribute to reduce viraemia and shedding.
As result, vaccines are a useful tool to stabilize the herd -to cease vertical transmission from sows to fetuses- and to minimise the impact of an outbreak:
- Minimising the impact of an outbreak:
It is usually achieved vaccinating animals in the breeding herd with a live vaccine, all at same time.
Vaccine will not have an effect in already infected animals, but in this case the final goal is to induce immunity to those animals that have not been infected yet. - Recall vaccinations:
There are several vaccination protocols to immunise sows against PRRS virus.
All of them seek to maintain the immunity reached when gilts and to avoid the existence of negative subpopulations. Recall vaccination can be done using MLV or IV.
Currently, the most common protocol applied is based on 3-4 vaccinations/year, usually in a blanket vaccination strategy (all animals at the same time).
Examples of protocols based on vaccines to immunise gilts and sows:
- Protocol 1
Gilts: Vaccination (and revaccination) with MLV before introducing to the breeding herd.
Sows: Recall vaccinations with MLV (2-4 times/year) in a blanket vaccination strategy.
- Protocol 2
Gilts: Vaccination with MLV. Revaccination with IV before introducing to the breeding herd.
Sows: Recall vaccinations with IV (2-4 times/year) in a blanket vaccination strategy.
- Protocol 3
Gilts: Vaccination (and revaccination) with MLV before introducing to the breeding herd.
Sows: Recall vaccinations with MLV using 6-60 strategy (at 6 days after farrowing and at 60 days of gestation)
- Protocol 4
Gilts: Vaccination and revaccination with IV before introducing to the breeding herd.
Sows: Recall vaccinations with IV (2-3 times/year) in a blanket vaccination strategy.
- Protocol 5
Gilts: Vaccination (and revaccination) with MLV before introducing to the breeding herd.
Sows: Recall vaccinations with MLV at the beginning of gestation and with IV 90 days later.
- Protocol 6 for PRRS negative farm
If vaccination is chosen, use preferably IV.
Compliance of vaccination can be done by testing antibodies using ELISA since it should be expected all vaccinated animals will be positive.
Nevertheless, from time to time swine practitioners in Europe and North-America report that multiple vaccinated sows yield negative results in ELISA.
Obviously, this creates uncertainty about the real status of the sows and the performance of the ELISAs. Please, see point 9 “Monitoring” in the “Diagnostic and monitoring” section for more data.
© Laboratorios Hipra, S.A. 2023. All Rights Reserved.
No part of this website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied, modified or adapted, without the prior written consent of HIPRA.
- Bautista EM, Molitor TW. Cell-mediated immunity to porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus in swine. Viral Immunol. 1997, 10: 83-94.
- Bautista EM, Molitor TW. IFN gamma inhibits porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus replication in macrophages. Arch Virol. 1999, 144:1191-200.
- Butler JE, Lager KM, Golde W, Faaberg KS, Sinkora M, Loving C, Zhang YI. Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS): an immune dysregulatory pandemic. Immunol Res. 2014, 59:81-108.
- Darwich L, Díaz I, Mateu E. Certainties, doubts and hypotheses in porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus immunobiology. Virus Res. 2010, 154:123-32.
- Díaz I, Darwich L, Pappaterra G, Pujols J, Mateu E. Different European-type vaccines against porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus have different immunological properties and confer different protection to pigs. Virology. 2006, 351:249-59.
- Díaz I, Gimeno M, Darwich L, Navarro N, Kuzemtseva L, López S, Galindo I, Segalés J, Martín M, Pujols J, Mateu E. Characterization of homologous and heterologous adaptive immune responses in porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus infection. Vet Res. 2012, 19:43:30.
- Dwivedi V, Manickam C, Binjawadagi B, Linhares D, Murtaugh MP, Renukaradhya GJ. Evaluation of immune responses to porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus in pigs during early stage of infection under farm conditions. Virol J. 2012, 9:45.
- Kimman TG, Cornelissen LA, Moormann RJ, Rebel JM, Stockhofe-Zurwieden N. Challenges for porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) vaccinology. Vaccine. 2009, 27:3704-18.
- Labarque GG, Nauwynck HJ, Van Reeth K, Pensaert MB. Effect of cellular changes and onset of humoral immunity on the replication of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus in the lungs of pigs. J Gen Virol. 2000, 81:1327-34.
- Lopez OJ, Osorio FA. Role of neutralizing antibodies in PRRSV protective immunity. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2004, 102:155-63.
- Lowe JE, Husmann R, Firkins LD, Zuckermann FA, Goldberg TL. Correlation of cell-mediated immunity against porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus with protection against reproductive failure in sows during outbreaks of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome in commercial herds. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2005, 226:1707-11.
- Lunney JK, Benfield DA, Rowland RR. Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus: an update on an emerging and re-emerging viral disease of swine. Virus Res. 2010, 154:1-6.
- Lunney JK, Fang Y, Ladinig A, Chen N, Li Y, Rowland B, Renukaradhya GJ. Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV): Pathogenesis and Interaction with the Immune System. Annu Rev Anim Biosci. 2016, 4:129-54
- Martelli P, Gozio S, Ferrari L, Rosina S, De Angelis E, Quintavalla C, Bottarelli E, Borghetti P. Efficacy of a modified live porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) vaccine in pigs naturally exposed to a heterologous European (Italian cluster) field strain: Clinical protection and cell-mediated immunity. Vaccine. 2009, 27:3788-99.
- Martínez-Lobo FJ, Díez-Fuertes F, Simarro I, Castro JM, Prieto C. Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus isolates differ in their susceptibility to neutralization. Vaccine. 2011, 29:6928-40.
- Mateu E, Diaz I. The challenge of PRRS immunology. Vet J. 2008, 177:345-51.
- Meier WA, Galeota J, Osorio FA, Husmann RJ, Schnitzlein WM, Zuckermann FA. Gradual development of the interferon-gamma response of swine to porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus infection or vaccination. Virology. 2003, 309:18-31.
- Mengeling WL, Lager KM, Vorwald AC, Koehler KJ. Strain specificity of the immune response of pigs following vaccination with various strains of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. Vet Microbiol. 2003, 93:13-24.
- Miranda J, Torrents D, Busquet M, Fenech M, Mateu E, Díaz I. Heterologous cell-mediated immune responses against PRRS virus in gilts vaccinated intramuscularly and intradermally with UNISTRAIN® PRRS. 2015, 7th International Symposium on Emerging and Re-emerging Pig Diseases.
- Murtaugh MP, Xiao Z, Zuckermann F. Immunological responses of swine to porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus infection. Viral Immunol. 2002, 15:533-47.
- Murtaugh MP, Genzow M. Immunological solutions for treatment and prevention of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS). Vaccine. 2011, 29:8192-204.
- Murtaugh MP, Stadejek T, Abrahante JE, Lam TT, Leung FC. The ever-expanding diversity of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. Virus Res. 2010, 154:18-30.
- Rose N, Renson P, Andraud M, Paboeuf F, Le Potier MF, Bourry O. Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSv) modified-live vaccine reduces virus transmission in experimental conditions. Vaccine. 2015, 33:2493-9.
- Pileri E, Gibert E, Soldevila F, García-Saenz A, Pujols J, Diaz I, Darwich L, Casal J, Martín M, Mateu E. Vaccination with a genotype 1 modified live vaccine against porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus significantly reduces viremia, viral shedding and transmission of the virus in a quasi-natural experimental model. Vet Microbiol. 2015, 175:7-16.
- Prieto C, Alvarez E, Martínez-Lobo FJ, Simarro I, Castro JM. Similarity of European porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus strains to vaccine strain is not necessarily predictive of the degree of protective immunity conferred. Vet J. 2008, 175:356-63.
- Roca M, Gimeno M, Bruguera S, Segalés J, Díaz I, Galindo-Cardiel IJ, Martínez E, Darwich L, Fang Y, Maldonado J, March R, Mateu E. Effects of challenge with a virulent genotype II strain of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus on piglets vaccinated with an attenuated genotype I strain vaccine. Vet J. 2012, 193:92-6.
- Royaee AR, Husmann RJ, Dawson HD, Calzada-Nova G, Schnitzlein WM, Zuckermann FA, Lunney JK. Deciphering the involvement of innate immune factors in the development of the host response to PRRSV vaccination. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2004, 102:199-216.
- Scortti M, Prieto C, Martínez-Lobo FJ, Simarro I, Castro JM. Effects of two commercial European modified-live vaccines against porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome viruses in pregnant gilts. Vet J. 2006, 172:506-14.
- Weesendorp E, Morgan S, Stockhofe-Zurwieden N, Popma-De Graaf DJ, Graham SP, Rebel JM. Comparative analysis of immune responses following experimental infection of pigs with European porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus strains of differing virulence. Vet Microbiol. 2013, 163:1-12.
- Yoon KJ, Wu LL, Zimmerman JJ, Platt KB. Field isolates of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) vary in their susceptibility to antibody dependent enhancement (ADE) of infection. Vet Microbiol. 1997, 55:277-87.
- Zimmerman JJ, Benfield DA, Dee SA, Murtaugh MP, Stadejek T, Stevenson GW, Torremorell M. Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (porcine arterivirus). In: 10th ed. Diseases of swine, Ed. Wiley-Blackwell. 2012, 31:463-86.