Impact of Different Foot and Mouth Disease Vaccine Schemes in Cross-Neutralization Against Heterologous Serotype O Strains in Cattle

Figures

• 

  Figure 1. Time course of the total FMDV antibodies measured by LPBE. Seven different FMD vaccines were administered to groups of cattle (n = 3), as detailed in Table 1. Animals received three vaccinations at 0, 28, and 56 days (indicated by vertical arrows). Serum samples were taken at different times post-primary vaccination (dpv) and studied for total anti-FMDV antibodies using LPBE against the 01/Campos (A), C3/Indaial (B), A24/Cruzeiro (C), and A/Arg/2001 (D) FMDV strains. Each line depicts the mean antibody titers registered for each experimental group at the different time points + SD. Dotted lines in each chart indicate EPP75 corresponding to that strain by LPBE.

• 

  Figure 2. NAb responses against the O1/Campos strain. (A) Time course of the nAb titers in each experimental group; each line depicts mean antibody titers registered for each experimental group at the different time points. The dotted line denotes the EPP75 corresponding to the O1/Campos strain by VNT. Vaccination times are indicated by vertical arrows. (B) Overall neutralizing performance expressed as the mean AUC ± SD for each experimental group. Letters in the chart indicate significant differences between groups (1-way ANOVA p < 0.05; a > c, p < 0.01; a > d: p < 0.0001; b > d: p < 0.0001).

• 

  Figure 3. NAb responses against the O/ECU/46/2010 strain. (A) Time course of the nAb titers in each experimental group. Each line depicts mean antibody titers registered for each experimental group at the different time points against the O/ECU/46/2010 strain. The dotted line denotes the EPP75 corresponding to the O1/Campos strain by VNT. Vaccination times are indicated by vertical arrows. (B) Overall neutralizing performance expressed as the mean AUC ± SD for each experimental group against the O/ECU/46/2010 strain. Letters in the chart indicate significant differences between groups (1-way ANOVA p < 0.05; a > d: p < 0.001; b > d: p > 0.01).

• 

  Figure 4. NAb responses against the O/Taiwan/1997 and O/SKR/84/YDM strains. (A,C) Time course of nAb titers in each experimental group. Each line depicts mean antibody titers registered for each experimental group at the different time points against the O/Taiwan/1997 (A) or O/SKR/84/YDM (C) strains. Dotted lines denote the EPP75 corresponding to the O1/Campos strain by VNT. Vaccination times are indicated by vertical arrows. (B,D) Overall neutralizing performance expressed as the mean AUC ± SD for each experimental group against the O/Taiwan/1997 (B) or O/SKR/84/YDM (D) strains. Letters in the chart indicate significant differences between groups (1-way ANOVA p < 0.05; a > c, p < 0.0001; a > d, p < 0.0001; b > c, p < 0.001; c > d: p < 0.01; e > g, 0.001; e > h, 0.0001; g > h, 0.001).

• 

  Figure 5. Effect of number of doses in the neutralizing activity of the immune sera against different serotype O FMDV strains. Bars indicate mean VNT titers obtained for each experimental group (n = 3) ± SD after the first (28 dpv), second (56 dpv), and third vaccination (70 dpv). Antibodies were measured against the O1/Campos (A), O/ECU/46/2010 (B), O/Taiwan/1997 (C), or O/SKR/84/YDM (D) FMDV strains. Data sets were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA, and significant differences are indicated as asterisks (* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01 and *** p < 0.001).

• 

  Figure 6. Effect of the formulation in the neutralizing activity of the immune sera against different serotype O FMDV strains. (A–P) Each chart shows significant differences existing in the induced mean VNT titers between each formulation in the first column (in bold) compared with the rest of the formulations indicated in the first row. Corresponding virus strains and post-vaccination time points are indicated at the top of each graph. Significant differences are indicated in shaded boxes, and the significance level is denoted as asterisks (1-way ANOVA; * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01 and *** p < 0.001).