Construction of a recombinant duck enteritis virus (DEV) expressing hemagglutinin of H5N1 avian influenza virus based on an infectious clone of DEV vaccine strain and evaluation of its efficacy in ducks and chickens
© Wang et al. 2015
Received: 23 December 2014
Accepted: 29 July 2015
Published: 13 August 2015
Highly pathogenic avian influenza virus (AIV) subtype H5N1 remains a threat to poultry. Duck enteritis virus (DEV)-vectored vaccines expressing AIV H5N1 hemagglutinin (HA) may be viable AIV and DEV vaccine candidates.
To facilitate the generation and further improvement of DEV-vectored HA(H5) vaccines, we first constructed an infectious clone of DEV Chinese vaccine strain C-KCE (DEVC-KCE). Then, we generated a DEV-vectored HA(H5) vaccine (DEV-H5(UL55)) based on the bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) by inserting a synthesized HA(H5) expression cassette with a pMCMV IE promoter and a consensus HA sequence into the noncoding area between UL55 and LORF11. The immunogenicity and protective efficacy of the resulting recombinant vaccine against DEV and AIV H5N1 were evaluated in both ducks and chickens.
The successful construction of DEV BAC and DEV-H5(UL55) was verified by restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis. Recovered virus from the BAC or mutants showed similar growth kinetics to their parental viruses. The robust expression of HA in chicken embryo fibroblasts infected with the DEV-vectored vaccine was confirmed by indirect immunofluorescence and western blotting analyses. A single dose of 106 TCID50 DEV-vectored vaccine provided 100 % protection against duck viral enteritis in ducks, and the hemagglutination inhibition (HI) antibody titer of AIV H5N1 with a peak of 8.2 log2 was detected in 3-week-old layer chickens. In contrast, only very weak HI titers were observed in ducks immunized with 107 TCID50 DEV-vectored vaccine. A mortality rate of 60 % (6/10) was observed in 1-week-old specific pathogen free chickens inoculated with 106 TCID50 DEV-vectored vaccine.
We demonstrate the following in this study. (i) The constructed BAC is a whole genome clone of DEVC-KCE. (ii) The insertion of an HA expression cassette sequence into the noncoding area between UL55 and LORF11 of DEVC-KCE affects neither the growth kinetics of the virus nor its protection against DEV. (iii) DEV-H5(UL55) can generate a strong humoral immune response in 3-week-old chickens, despite the virulence of this virus observed in 1-week-old chickens. (iv) DEV-H5(UL55) induces a weak HI titer in ducks. An increase in the HI titers induced by DEV-vectored HA(H5) will be required prior to its wide application.
Duck enteritis virus (DEV), also known as duck plague, is an important pathogen of ducks, which causes an acute infectious disease with a very high mortality, reaching up to 100 % in birds such as ducks, geese, and wild waterfowls in the order Anseriformes [1, 2]. DEV cases have been reported in many countries, including the United states and China [3, 4]. DEV, also called anatid herpesvirus 1, is a member of the Mardivirus genus in the Alphaherpesvirinae subfamily of the Herpesviridae family in the order Herpesvirales. The whole genomes of attenuated and virulent strains of DEV have been sequenced and annotated, which are approximately 158 kbp in length and contain 78 predicted open reading frames (ORFs) of putative proteins [5, 6].
Bacterial artificial chromosomes (BACs) of a few herpesviruses have been previously established [7–9]. Several mutant viruses have been generated by the BAC mutagenesis protocol to study their pathology or their potency as vectors [10–14]. The first DEV BAC was constructed based on a virulent strain (V2085) isolated from the dead ducks in an outbreak in Germany [2, 9]. A DEV-vectored vaccine harboring the hemagglutinin (HA) of the highly pathogenic avian influenza virus (AIV) subtype H5N1 was generated based on this BAC, and robust expression of HA was confirmed in the infected cells . However, the safety of this vaccine remains questionable owing to its development from a virulent parental strain. Nevertheless, this proof-of-principle study clearly demonstrated the potency of a DEV-vectored vaccine expressing AIV HA as a candidate vaccine against AIV.
The AIV H5N1 has attracted considerable attention worldwide owing to its high morbidity and mortality and its potential to mutate into a highly pathogenic form [15–19]. Birds are the main hosts of AIV, but human infections of some strains have been reported. Migratory birds are suspected to play an important role in the transmission of AIV and have been related to several AI outbreaks [20–22]. As the main reservoir of AIV H5N1, ducks may serve as a constant source of viral transmission to chickens and other poultry . Therefore, effective control of AIV H5N1 infection in ducks is critical for AI control in poultry and the prevention of human infections.
Live virus-vectored vaccines based on herpesviruses have been studied for decades, and their ability to induce both robust cellular and humoral immunity has been documented [24–27]. Furthermore, several herpesvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed and are widely used in some countries [28, 29]. In addition to an early study on the DEV V2085 strain-vectored HA (H5N1) , another DEV-vectored H5 vaccine (rDEV-us78HA) has been constructed with the cosmid system using four overlapping DNAs of the DEV genome, which provided strong protection against both duck plague and highly pathogenic AIV H5N1 despite eliciting a weak hemagglutination inhibition (HI) titer [30, 31]. In this study, we generated an infectious clone of DEV vaccine strain C-KCE (DEVC-KCE) and constructed a DEV-vectored HA (AIV H5N1) vaccine based on the BAC through the En Passant method . This DEV-vectored vaccine was constructed by inserting a synthesized HA gene with consensus sequences from the most recently updated AIV H5N1 strains into the noncoding area between UL55 and LORF11. The stability and safety of the DEV-vectored vaccine and its immunogenicity against duck plague and AIV H5N1 were studied in both ducks and chickens.
Results and discussion
Generation of recombinant DEV attenuated strain harboring mini-F plasmid sequences
Generation of an infectious clone of pDEVC-KCE
Generation of pDEVC-KCE-H5(UL55)
Rescue of recombinant DEV from BAC and generation of DEV mutants
After co-transfection of DNA from pDEVC-KCE and a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) fragment that was amplified using DEVC-KCE DNA as template and a pair of primers (DEV-HOMO1-for and DEV HOMO2-rev) , nonfluorescent plaques were observed under UV light (488 nm). A homogeneous population of viruses was isolated by three rounds of picking and plating purification. The expected 3923 bp band was amplified by PCR with primers (DEV gC flanking F and DEV gC flanking R) and sequencing results showed that the complete glycoprotein C (gC) gene was recovered from the same place as in the parental virus. The resulting gC-recovered DEV virus was termed DEVC-KCEgCR.
Primers for PCR and sequencing
Kan ins’ H5(HA) F
Kan ins’ H5(HA) R
DEV ins H5 casse UL55 F
DEV ins H5 casse UL55 R
DEV gC flanking F
DEV gC flanking R
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq F1
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq F2
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq F3
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq F4
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq F5
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq F6
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq F7
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq F8
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq F9
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq F10
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq R1
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq R2
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq R3
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq R4
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq R5
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq R6
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq R7
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq R8
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq R9
DEV H5(UL55) casse seq R10
Stability and growth kinetics of mutant or gC-recovered DEV
The DEV mutant with HA insertion, DEV-H5(UL55), was replicated serially on CEFs for 20 passages (F20). To test the stability of this virus, a fragment of approximately 3360–3390 bp was amplified with F20 virus DNA as a template and a pair of primers (DEV ins H5 casse UL55 F and DEV ins H5 casse UL55 R). The HA expression cassette sequences were confirmed by sequencing, indicating that the inserted HA expression cassette was stable for at least 20 passages.
The titers of viruses released from infected cells were determined after three freeze–thaw cycles. Results revealed a slightly lower titer of the gC revertant viruses (DEVC-KCEgCR and DEV-H5(UL55)) compared with that of the parental virus (DEVC-KCE). However, these differences were not significant between DEV-H5(UL55) and DEVC-KCE (p = 0.094 and p = 0.154 at 48 h and 72 h p.i., respectively) or between DEVC-KCEgCR and DEVC-KCE (p = 0.164 and p = 0.322 at 48 h and 72 h p.i., respectively) (Fig. 4b). These results prove that the DEVC-KCE BAC clone is a whole genome clone of the parental virus and the genetic manipulation of DEV-vectored HA during the En Passant recombination did not affect the integrity of the genome. The results also show that the insertion of a foreign gene expression cassette between the noncoding area of UL55 and LORF11 did not affect either the growth kinetics of the virus or the stability of the inserted sequences. These findings support the development of the constructed DEV-H5(UL55) as a live vector vaccine candidate.
Expression of AIV HA by recombinant DEV-H5(UL55)
Safety and immunogenicity of DEV-H5(UL55) in ducks
This phenomenon was also observed in a previous study on a DEV-vectored HA(H5N1) vaccine (rDEV-us78HA), which was generated with the insertion of a HA expression cassette, composed of the SV40 promoter and the HA from H5N1 AIV AH/1, into the noncoding area between ORF US7 and US8. An HI titer of as low as 3 ~ 4 log2 was detected in specific pathogen-free (SPF) ducks inoculated with two doses of rDEV-us78HA vaccine separated by a 3-week interval at 4 weeks after inoculation; however, 100 % protection was observed in a challenge test with a highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 subtype virulent strain (HB/49) . In our study, DEV-H5(UL55) was constructed with the insertion of a pMCMV promoter and a consensus HA sequence into the noncoding area between LORF11 and UL55. Although it was demonstrated that the protective potency of rDEV-us78HA was not related to the HI titer elicited by inoculation of the vaccine , the low HI titer will seriously hinder the wide application of the DEV-vectored H5N1 AIV vaccine because the surveillance system for the outcome of vaccination strategy depends largely on the examination of HI titer. Further studies will be needed to improve this DEV-vectored vaccine in order to elicit much higher HI titers in ducks in advance of intensive challenge tests with H5N1 AIV.
Safety and immunogenicity of DEV-H5(UL55) for chickens
While the induction of high HI titers in chickens inoculated with DEV-H5(UL55) provides strong evidence for its ability to activate humoral immunity, the high HI titers induced in ducks vaccinated with an inactivated AIV vaccine exclude the possibility that ducks have an inherently low reaction to AIV HA as an antigen. A possible explanation for the extremely weak HI titers in ducks inoculated with DEV-H5(UL55) might be that DEV interferes with duck immunity. It is known that some herpesvirus proteins can interfere with the host immune reaction. This interference is an important mechanism of interaction between viruses, such as Marek’s disease virus and herpes simplex virus, and their hosts during evolution [33, 34]. This phenomenon might also hold true for DEV-vectored vaccines. Furthermore, the vaccination strategy for control of AIV H5N1 in many countries, including China, depends on a reliable detection method to evaluate the efficacy of vaccination. The improved ability of DEV-H5(UL55) to induce a much higher HI titer in ducks is a prerequisite for the wide application of this DEV-vectored vaccine. Future studies might include deletion or modification of suspected immune interference related genes in the DEV-vectored vaccine.
In this study, an infectious clone of DEV vaccine strain C-KCE was successfully constructed with the insertion of mini-F sequences in lieu of gC. Growth kinetics, RFLP, and animal tests of gC-recovered viruses or BACs were performed to show that this clone consists of the whole C-KCE strain genome. Further, a DEV-vectored vaccine harboring a synthesized HA expression cassette between the ORF of UL55 and LORF11 was efficiently generated through the En Passant protocol based on this infectious clone. Additionally, animal tests showed that this DEV-vectored vaccine was safe in ducks and that one dose of the vaccine provided 100 % protection against duck plague. Although one dose of the vaccine induced high HI titers (8.3 log2) against AIV H5N1 in 3-week-old commercial layer chickens, it only stimulated weak HI titers in commercial ducks. Moreover, the DEV-vectored vaccine was virulent in young chickens. Future studies that include the deletion or modification of genes associated with immune regulation and virulence will be required prior to any wide application of the DEV-vectored HA(H5) vaccine. Once this vaccine has been modified to induce a higher HI titer, challenge tests to evaluate its ability to protect against AI will be carried out with homogeneous or heterogeneous viruses of AIV H5N1.
Viruses and plasmids
A DEV attenuated strain (C-KCE strain, DEVC-KCE), the widely used commercial vaccine strain attenuated by serial passaging in SPF chicken embryonated eggs, was isolated from a batch of commercial vaccine provided by the Nanjing Tech-bank Bio-industry Co., Ltd. (Nanjing, China) and then purified through three rounds of plaque picking. DEV virulent virus was obtained from the China Veterinary Culture Collection Management Center. All DEV strains were propagated on primary or secondary CEFs. Virus stocks were prepared from CEF cultures, which were infected with viruses at a multiplicity of infection (MOI) of 0.01 and cultured for 72 h. Viruses were released by three freeze-th–w cycles (−70 °C and 37 °C) and stored at −70 °C for further use. Pfu or TCID50 titers were determined on CEFs according to the standard titration method [9, 31]. The BAC transfer vector plasmid pDEVgc-pHA2 was kindly provided by professor Niklaus Osterrieder from the Free University of Berlin . The HA expression cassette containing a pMCMV IE promoter and a consensus HA gene (GenBank: KP019932) was synthesized and cloned into T-Vector pMD19 (Simple; Takara, Otsu, Japan) with slight modification to generate the plasmid pDEV-H5(UL55). Briefly, the HA gene was artificially synthesized based on a consensus sequence of the most updated HA genes of AIV clade 18.104.22.168 (GenBank: AB700635.1; JN986881.1; JN986882.1; JN646713.1; JN646716.1; HQ020376.1; CY098758.1; and JF975561.1) with a deletion of four basic amino acids at the cleavage site, as described previously . The promoter pMCMV IE included a sequence complementary to the sequence between site 184336 and 182946 in the MCMV genome of (GenBank: GU305914.1) followed by a Kozak sequence. The plasmid pDEV-H5(UL55) KANin containing the HA expression cassette and a kanamycin resistance gene inserted at the Sac I restriction site was constructed by cutting and ligating for further En Passant recombination (Fig. 3).
Cells, viral DNA extraction, and transfection
CEFs were propagated in Earle’s minimal essential medium (EMEM; Gibco, Los Angeles, CA USA) supplemented with 10 % newborn calf serum (NBCS; Gibco), 100 U/ml penicillin, and 100 μg/ml streptomycin at 37 °C under a 5 % CO2 atmosphere. Viral DNA was purified from infected cells by sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS)-proteinase K extraction as described previously . The transfection of DNA from plasmids, viruses, or BACs was achieved by calcium phosphate precipitation . Briefly, approximately 200 ng DNA was mixed with water, and then 62 μl 2 M CaCl2 was added dropwise to a total volume of 500 μl. The transfection mixture was incubated over night at 4 °C followed by the addition of 500 μl cold 2 × HEPES-bufftered saline(HBS) solution dropwise. The medium in each well was replaced with 500 μl of fresh EMEM without NBCS or antibiotics and incubated with the transfection mixture at 37 °C for 3–4 h. Media were discarded and the plate was washed twice with PBS. 1.5 ml 15 % glycerol HBS solution was added to each well and the plate was incubated for 2 min. The transfection solution was replaced with EMEM supplemented with 10 % NBCS and antibiotics, after washing twice with PBS, for culture at 37 °C in an incubator with 5 % CO2.
Multi-step growth kinetics
The growth characteristics of viruses were tested on primary or secondary CEFs with an MOI of 0.01 as described previously with a slight modification . Briefly, the virus titers of the supernatant- and cell-associated viruses were checked at 0, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 h p.i. for parental virus and mutants. For cell-associated viruses, infected cells were washed twice with PBS at each indicated time point and resuspended in 2 ml of EMEM for three freeze–thaw cycles to release viruses. Virus titers were tested following the standard pfu titration method  after removal of cellular residue by centrifugation at 500 × g for 10 min. To measure the titer of viruses in the supernatants, the supernatants of infected cell cultures were sampled at the indicated time points and titrated after removal of cellular debris by centrifugation. The growth kinetics curve was established based on data in three independent experiments, and the differences of titers at 48 h and 72 h p.i. were statistically analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (SPSS software package) .
Electrocompetent E. coli cells were obtained from a commercial supplier (DH10B, Invitrogen) or prepared in our lab following previously described protocols  and GS1783, which was kindly provided by professor Nikolaus Osterrieder . Electroporation was conducted exactly as described previously [36, 37]. Commercial chemical-competent E. coli cells DH5α (Takara) were used for chemical transformation of plasmid DNA as previously described . DNA from the BAC or plasmid was prepared with a PureLink® Quick Plasmid Miniprep Kit (Invitrogen) and a Large–Construct Kit for midi-prep (Qiagen) according to the manufacturer’s instructions.
PCR, restriction analysis, and sequencing
For the insertion of a kanamycin resistance gene into plasmid pDEV-H5(UL55), a pair of specific primers (Kan ins’ H5(HA) F and Kan ins’ H5(HA); Table 1) were designed with two Sac I restriction sites added to both terminals for cutting and ligation. The construct was examined by digestion with Hind III to check the correct insertion of the kanamycin resistance gene. Another pair of primers (DEV ins H5 casse UL55 F and DEV ins H5 casse UL55 R; Table 1) were used for insertion of the HA cassette into the DEV BAC clone through the En Passant protocol. To repair the gC genes of the gC-negative virus, a pair of primers (DEV gC flanking F and DEV gC flanking R; Table 1) were used to amplify a fragment that included the gC gene and two homologous 1 kpb flanking sequences of gC. The construct was sequenced using 20 specific primers (Table 1) to verify the sequence of the inserted HA expression cassette. The BACs and mutants were subjected to RFLP analysis with EcoR I and BamH I, performed as described previously .
Generation of a DEVC-KCE infectious clone
A DEVC-KCE infectious clone was generated with a method modified from the generation of BAC from the DEV 2085 strain . Briefly, co-transfection of DNA from DEVC-KCE and pDEVgc-pHA2 was conducted on primary CEFs (24 h) to allow for an insertion of mini-F sequences in lieu of gC. After green plaques were observed under UV light (488 nm), a homogeneous population of mini-F recombinant DEVC-KCE (DEVC-KCE-miniF) was obtained by three rounds of picking and plating on CEFs and transferred into E. coli DH10B competent cells (Invitrogen) by electroporation. Positive clones with chloramphenicol resistance were examined through RFLP with EcoR I and BamH I to select a clone of DEVC-KCE, which was then electroporated into E. coli GS1783  for further genetic manipulation of the DEV genome. The resulting clone (pDEVC-KCE) was confirmed through RFLP. Next, gC was restored by homologous recombination as described previously . A homogenous population of gC-recovered virus (DEVC-KCEgCR) was purified by picking and plating of the nonfluorescent plaques under UV light (488 nm) and verified by PCR and sequencing using a pair of primers (DEV gC flanking F and DEV gC flanking R; Table 1).
Construction of a DEV-vectored HA
An HA expression cassette was inserted into the noncoding area between the ORFs UL55 and LORF11 in the DEV BAC clone pDEVC-KCE genome to replace the nucleotide fragments between sites 263 and 291 (GenBank ID: EU082088.2) through the En Passant method  with minor modifications. Briefly, PCR was performed using plasmid pDEV-H5(UL55) KANin DNA as a template, and a pair of primers (DEV ins H5 casse UL55 F and DEV ins H5 casse UL55 R) to amplify the HA cassette with 40 bp homologous sequences flanking both terminals. After digestion with Dpn I to get rid of possible plasmid pollution, the PCR product was electroporated into competent pDEVC-KCE cells to generate the first recombination with the cassette at the indicated sites. The target recombinant pDEVC-KCE-H5(UL55)-vectored HA clone was generated by deletion of the kanamycin resistance gene by the second recombination (Fig. 3). Selected clones without kanamycin resistance were confirmed by RFLP with EcoR I and BamH I. The DEVC-KCE-vectored HA, termed DEV-H5(UL55), was generated with gC recovered in a way similar to that of DEVC-KCEgCR. The DEVC-KCE-H5(UL55) HA expression cassette was amplified by PCR (primers: DEV ins H5 casse UL55 F and DEV ins H5 casse UL55 R) and confirmed by sequencing with 20 specific sequencing primers (Table 1). DEV-H5(UL55) was subsequently cultured on CEFs for 20 generations to check the stability of the recombinant virus. F20 virus DNA was isolated for sequencing the HA expression cassette.
IIF and western blotting
The expression DEV-vectored HA was examined by IIF and western blotting as previously described . For IIF, DEV-H5(UL55) F20 was inoculated onto primary or secondary CEFs with a ratio of 50–100 pfu per well on a six-well plate. At 48 h after inoculation, the infected cells were fixed with cold fixing solution (ethanol (96 %): acetone = 3:1) for 20 min at −20 °C. The fixing solution wad discarded, and the cells were washed once with PBS and then permeabilized in PBS with 0.1 % Triton X-100 for 5 min. After fixation, a PBS solution with 3 % BSA was added to block the sample wells for 1 h or overnight. A mixture of monoclonal antibodies against AIV H5N1 HA (Genescript, Nanjing, China) was added and the samples were incubated for 1 h at room temperature. Each well was washed three times with PBS, a 1:2000 solution of goat-anti-mouse IgG antibodies conjugated with Alexa488 (Invitrogen) was added, and the samples were incubated for 1 h, then observed under UV light (488 nm).
For western blotting, CEFs were infected with F5 or F20 DEV-H5(UL55) viruses with an MOI of 0.01. Infected cells were lysed and cell lysates were denatured by heating at 95 °C for 10 min. Proteins were separated by SDS-10 % polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE), and then transferred to nitrocellulose membranes (Merck) as described previously . A mixture of H5 monoclonal antibodies (Genescript) was used as the primary antibodies for western blotting and a 1:10,000 dilution of goat-anti-mouse IgG (ABcom) was used as the secondary antibody. DEVC-KCE-infected CEFs were used as a control. Samples were detected with enhanced chemiluminescence (Sigma-Aldrich).
Safety and immunogenicity of DEV-vectored HA in ducks and chickens
Groups of animals tested to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and immunogenicity of DEV-H5(UL55)
Vaccine or PBS
1 × 106 TCID50, 0.2 mL
1 × 106 TCID50, 0.2 mL
1 × 107 TCID50, 0.2 mL
1 × 106 TCID50, 0.2 mL
1 × 105 TCID50, 0.2 mL
Inactivated AI(H5N1) Re-6 vaccine
0.5 mL and 1 mL at 2w and 5w respectively
1 × 107 TCID50, 0.2 mL
1 × 106 TCID50, 0.2 mL
1 × 105 TCID50, 0.2 mL
Inactivated AI(H5N1) Re-6 vaccine
1 × 107 TCID50, 0.2 mL
1 × 106 TCID50, 0.2 mL
1 × 105 TCID50, 0.2 mL
Inactivated AI(H5N1) Re-6 vaccine
To assess the immunogenicity of the DEV-vectored HA against AIV in ducks, 50 ducks (2 weeks old) were randomly divided into five groups: A-AI(2D), B-AI(2D), C-AI(2D), D-AI(2D), and E-AI(2D) (Table 2). Ducks in groups A-AI(2D), B-AI(2D), and C-AI(2D) were vaccinated intramuscularly with DEV-H5(UL55) at a dose of 1 × 107, 1 × 106, and 1 × 105 TCID50, respectively. Ducks in group D-AI(2D) were inoculated subcutaneously with 0.5 ml and 1 ml inactivated AIV H5N1 Re-6 vaccine from a commercial supplier (QYH, Zhengzhou, China) at 2 and 5 weeks of age, respectively. Ducks in the control group E-AI(2D) were inoculated with 0.2 ml of PBS. Serum samples from all ducks were collected prior to inoculation and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 weeks post-immunization to test the HI titers with kits (HWBD, Harbin China) following the manufacturer’s instructions.
To evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of the DEV-vectored HA against AIV for chickens, the HI antibody levels were assessed in 50 1-week-old SPF chickens and 50 3-week-old commercial layer chickens (Table 2). SPF chickens were randomly divided into five groups: A-AI(1C), B-AI(1C), C-AI(1C), D-AI(1C), and E-AI(1C). Commercial layer chickens were also divided into five groups: A-AI(3C), B-AI(3C), C-AI(3C), D-AI(3C), and E-AI(3C). In groups A-AI(1C)/A-AI(3C), B-AI(1C)/B-AI(3C), and C-AI(1C)/C-AI(3C), chickens were vaccinated intramuscularly with DEV-H5(UL55) at a dose of 1 × 107, 1 × 106, and 1 × 105 TCID50, respectively. Chickens in groups D-AI(1C)/D-AI(3C) were inoculated subcutaneously with 0.3 ml of inactivated AIV H5N1 Re-6 vaccine (QYH) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Chickens in control groups E-AI(1C)/E-AI(3C) were inoculated with 0.2 ml of PBS. Serum samples from all chickens were collected prior to inoculation and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 weeks post-vaccination and the HI titers of these samples were measured. All birds were monitored for clinical signs throughout the experiments.
All animal studies were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee and were conducted following the guidelines of the Institutional Biosafety Committee at the Jiangsu Academy of Agriculture Sciences. Experiments involving virulent DEV were conducted under Biosafety Level 2+ containment.
This study was supported by the special fund for agro-scientific research in the public interest (201303046), the natural science funds of Jiangsu province (BK20131334), and independent innovation funds for agricultural sciences of Jiangsu province (CX(12)3061 and CX(14)2084).
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
- Jansen J, Wemmenhove R. Duck plague in domesticated geese (Anser anser). Tijdschr Diergeneeskd. 1965;90:811–5.Google Scholar
- Kaleta E, Kuczka A, Kühnhold A, Bunzenthal C, Bönner B, et al. Outbreak of duck plague (duck herpesvirus enteritis) in numerous species of captive ducks and geese in temporal conjunction with enforced biosecurity (in-house keeping) due to the threat of avian influenza A virus of the subtype Asia H5N1. Dtsch Tierarztl Wochenschr. 2001;114:3–11.Google Scholar
- Jansen J, Kunst H. The reported incidence of duck plague in Europe and Asia. Tijdschr Diergeneeskd. 1964;89:765–9.Google Scholar
- Converse K, Kidd G. Duck plague epizootics in the United States, 1967–1995. J Wildl Dis. 2001;37:347–57.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Li Y, Huang B, Ma X, Wu J, Li F, et al. Molecular characterization of the genome of duck enteritis virus. Virology. 2009;391:151–61.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wang J, Höper D, Beer M, Osterrieder N. Complete genome sequence of virulent duck enteritis virus (DEV) strain 2085 and comparison with genome sequences of virulent and attenuated DEV strains. Virus Res. 2011;160(1–2):316–25.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hall RN, Meers J, Fowler E, Mahony T. Back to BAC: the use of infectious clone technologies for viral mutagenesis. Viruses. 2012;4(2):211–35.PubMed CentralPubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Adler H, Messerle M, Koszinowski U. Cloning of herpesviral genomes as bacterial artificial chromosomes. Rev Med Virol. 2003;13(2):111–21.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wang J, Osterrieder N. Generation of an infectious clone of duck enteritis virus and generation of a vectored DEV expressing hemagglutinin of H5N1 avian influenza virus. Virus Res. 2011;159(1):23–31.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Warden C, Tang Q, Zhu H. Herpesvirus BACs: past, present, and future. J Biomed Biotechnol. 2011;2011:124595.PubMed CentralPubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Seyboldt C, Granzow H, Osterrieder N. Equine herpesvirus 1 (EHV-1) glycoprotein M: effect of deletions of transmembrane domains. Virology. 2000;278:477–89.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Spatz S, Smith L, Baigent S, Petherbridge L, Nair V. Genotypic characterization of two bacterial artificial chromosome clones derived from a single DNA source of the very virulent gallid herpesvirus-2 strain C12/130. J Gen Virol. 2011;92(Pt 7):1500–7.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Silva R, Dunn J, Cheng H, Niikura M. A MEQ-deleted Marek’s disease virus cloned as a bacterial artificial chromosome is a highly efficacious vaccine. Avian Dis. 2010;54(2):862–9.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Gu Z, Dong J, Wang J, Hou C, Sun H, et al. A novel inactivated gE/gI deleted pseudorabies virus (PRV) vaccine completely protects pigs from an emerged variant PRV challenge. Virus Res. 2014;14:00371–2.Google Scholar
- Cardona C, Xing Z, Sandrock C, Davis C. Avian influenza in birds and mammals. Comp Immunol Microbiol Infect Dis. 2009;32(4):255–73.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Loeffelholz M. Avian influenza A H5N1 virus. Clin Lab Med. 2010;30(1):1–20.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Neumann G, Chen H, Gao G, Shu Y, Kawaoka Y. H5N1 influenza viruses: outbreaks and biological properties. Cell Res. 2010;20:51–61.PubMed CentralPubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Richard M, de Graaf M, Herfst S. Avian influenza A viruses: from zoonosis to pandemic. Future Virol. 2014;9(5):513–24.PubMed CentralPubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wang C, Yu H, Horby PW, Cao B, Wu P, et al. Comparison of patients hospitalized with influenza A subtypes H7N9, H5N1, and 2009 pandemic H1N1. Clin Infect Dis. 2014;58(8):1095–103.PubMed CentralPubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ito T. Highly pathogenic avian influenza and wild birds. Uirusu. 2009;59(1):53–8.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Shi J, Gao L, Zhu Y, Chen T, Liu Y, et al. Investigation of avian influenza infections in wild birds, poultry and humans in Eastern Dongting Lake, China. PLoS One. 2014;9(4):e95685.PubMed CentralPubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Cappelle J, Zhao D, Gilbert M, Nelson MI, Newman SH, et al. Risks of avian influenza transmission in areas of intensive free-ranging duck production with wild waterfowl. Ecohealth. 2014;11(1):109–19.PubMed CentralPubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kim J, Negovetich N, Forrest H, Webster R. Ducks: the “Trojan horses” of H5N1 influenza. Influenza Other Respi Viruses. 2009;3:121–8.PubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Chen P, Liu J, Jiang Y, Zhao Y, Li Q, et al. The vaccine efficacy of recombinant duck enteritis virus expressing secreted E with or without PrM proteins of duck tembusu virus. Vaccine. 2014;32(41):5271–7.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Choi Y, Chang J. Viral vectors for vaccine applications. Clin Exp Vaccine Res. 2013;2(2):97–105.PubMed CentralPubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kim SH, Chen S, Jiang X, Green KY, Samal SK. Newcastle disease virus vector producing human norovirus-like particles induces serum, cellular, and mucosal immune responses in mice. J Virol. 2014;88(17):9718–27.PubMed CentralPubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Tripp R, Tompkins S. Virus-vectored influenza virus vaccines. Viruses. 2014;6(8):3055–79.PubMed CentralPubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Meeusen E, Walker J, Peters A, Pastoret P, Jungersen G. Current status of veterinary vaccines. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2007;20(3):489–510.PubMed CentralPubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Rahaus M, Augustinski K, Castells M, Desloges N. Application of a new bivalent Marek’s disease vaccine does not interfere with infectious bronchitis or Newcastle disease vaccinations and proves efficacious. Avian Dis. 2013;57(2 Suppl):498–502.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Liu J, Chen P, Jiang Y, Wu L, Zeng X, et al. A duck enteritis virus-vectored bivalent live vaccine provides fast and complete protection against H5N1 avian influenza virus in ducks. J Virol. 2011;85(21):10989–98.PubMed CentralPubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Liu J, Chen P, Jiang Y, Deng G, Shi J, et al. Recombinant duck enteritis virus works as a single-dose vaccine in broilers providing rapid protection against H5N1 influenza infection. Antiviral Res. 2013;97(3):329–33.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Tischer B, Smith G, Osterrieder N. En passant mutagenesis: a two step markerless red recombination system. Methods Mol Biol. 2010;634:421–30.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Barcy S, Corey L. Herpes simplex inhibits the capacity of lymphoblastoid B cell lines to stimulate CD4+ T cells. J Immunol. 2001;166(10):6242–9.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Yu Z, Teng M, Sun A, Yu L, Hu B, et al. Virus-encoded miR-155 ortholog is an important potential regulator but not essential for the development of lymphomas induced by very virulent Marek’s disease virus. Virology. 2014;448:55–64.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Morgan R, Cantello J, McDermott C. Transfection of chicken embryo fibrob-lasts with Marek’s disease virus DNA. Avian Dis. 1990;34(2):345–51.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Schumacher D, Tischer B, Fuchs W, Osterrieder N. Reconstitution of Marek’s disease virus serotype 1 (MDV-1) from DNA cloned as a bacterial artificial chromosome and characterization of a glycoprotein B-negative MDV-1 mutant. J Virol. 2000;74:11088–98.PubMed CentralPubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Tischer B, von Einem J, Kaufer B, Osterrieder N. Two-step red-mediated recombination for versatile high-efficiency markerless DNA manipulation in Escherichia coli. Biotechniques. 2006;40:191–7.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar